Linking Instructional Supervision to Teacher Performance in the Context of School Management

Authors

  • Agus Setiana STAI Miftahul Ulum Tasikmalaya

Keywords:

instructional supervision, teacher performance, instructional leadership, performance management, educational administration

Abstract

This study investigates the effects of instructional supervision on teacher performance in public primary schools in Pulaupanggung District, Tanggamus Regency. Instructional supervision is conceptualized as a multidimensional process comprising planning, implementation, and follow-up activities aimed at improving instructional quality. Using a quantitative, non-experimental ex post facto design, data were collected from 75 teachers selected through cluster random sampling across 32 schools. A structured questionnaire with a four-point Likert scale was employed to measure instructional supervision and teacher performance in lesson planning, instructional implementation, and learning evaluation. Data were analyzed using simple linear regression techniques. The results indicate that instructional supervision planning does not have a significant effect on teacher performance across all instructional dimensions. In contrast, the implementation of instructional supervision shows a significant influence on teacher performance in lesson planning and learning evaluation, while follow-up supervision demonstrates a significant effect specifically on learning evaluation. However, neither implementation nor follow-up supervision significantly affects instructional implementation. These findings suggest that the effectiveness of instructional supervision depends more on direct supervisory engagement and continuous feedback than on formal planning procedures. The study contributes to the literature by integrating perspectives from educational administration and performance management, emphasizing the importance of supervision as a managerial–pedagogical mechanism. Practically, the results highlight the need for school leaders to prioritize meaningful supervision implementation and systematic follow-up to enhance teacher performance. Despite its contributions, the study is limited by its correlational design and reliance on self-reported data, indicating opportunities for future research using mixed-methods approaches.

References

Aguinis, H. (2019). Performance management (4th ed.). Chicago Business Press.

Arikunto, S. (2010). Prosedur penelitian: Suatu pendekatan praktik. Rineka Cipta.

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education (8th ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315456539

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.

DeVellis, R. F. (2017). Scale development: Theory and applications (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Field, A. (2018). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Glickman, C. D., Gordon, S. P., & Ross-Gordon, J. M. (2018). SuperVision and instructional leadership: A developmental approach (10th ed.). Pearson.

Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. H. (2010). Collaborative leadership and school improvement: Understanding the impact on school capacity and student learning. School Leadership & Management, 30(2), 95–110. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632431003663214

Robinson, V. M. J., Lloyd, C. A., & Rowe, K. J. (2014). The impact of leadership on student outcomes: An analysis of the differential effects of leadership types. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(5), 635–674. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X08321509

Sugiyono. (2012). Metode penelitian kuantitatif, kualitatif, dan R&D. Alfabeta.

Zepeda, S. J. (2017). Instructional supervision: Applying tools and concepts (4th ed.). Routledge.

Chyung, S. Y., Roberts, K., Swanson, I., & Hankinson, A. (2017). Evidence-based survey design: The use of a midpoint on the Likert scale. Performance Improvement, 56(10), 15–23. https://doi.org/10.1002/pfi.21727

Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. Learning Policy Institute. https://doi.org/10.54300/122.311

DeNisi, A. S., & Smith, C. E. (2014). Performance appraisal, performance management, and firm-level performance. Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 127–179. https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520.2014.873178

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis in behavioral research. Journal of Multivariate Analysis, 169, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmva.2018.12.001

Hoque, K. E., Bt. Kenayathulla, H. B., & Islam, R. (2020). Teacher supervision practices and their impact on teacher performance. International Journal of Educational Management, 34(5), 805–820. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-11-2018-0363

Kraft, M. A., & Gilmour, A. F. (2017). Revisiting the widget effect: Teacher evaluation reforms and the distribution of teacher effectiveness. Educational Researcher, 46(5), 234–249. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X17718797

Taherdoost, H. (2016). Sampling methods in research methodology: How to choose a sampling technique. International Journal of Academic Research in Management, 5(2), 18–27.

Downloads

Published

2024-08-31

How to Cite

Setiana, A. (2024). Linking Instructional Supervision to Teacher Performance in the Context of School Management. BRIDGE : The Multidisciplinary Research Portal, 2(2), 167–175. Retrieved from https://jurnal.sttnlampung.ac.id/index.php/bridge/article/view/167

Issue

Section

Articles