Policy Guidance Resources. Policy The purpose of this policy is to ensure schools satisfy their duty of care in supervising students. Details Principals must: arrange for student supervision according to school needs ensure staff are aware of their responsibilities to supervise students during school times as well as before and after school. When making supervision arrangements schools must consider reasonably foreseeable risks of injury including hazards that: are known could have been foreseen and prevented.
School students cannot be used as supervision staff. Recess and lunch times Students must be supervised during recess and lunch. Cross age tutoring Principals decide how much supervision to provide for formal cross-age tutoring programs based on: the age and maturity of students size of the group nature of the activities the location within the school.
Excursions Schools must ensure appropriate levels of supervision are planned for all student excursions, including local excursions. Swimming pools Students must always be supervised while using a swimming pool including if a swimming pool is owned by a school, privately or by the municipal council.
More supervision may be required: before or after school, based on local circumstances for primary students, particularly prep students.
Additional supervisory considerations at the beginning and end of the school day School entry and exit points Principals may organise supervision of entry and exit points that considers: any entry or exit points that are in use road traffic conditions designated pick up and drop off areas whether any entry or exit points should be: locked designated as out of bounds supervised.
Principals: must arrange supervision of the arrival and departure of school contract buses that takes into account the: number of students age of students times of the arrival and departure proximity of the pick-up and drop-off points in relation to the school grounds behaviour of students on the bus and when boarding or alighting.
One-teacher schools Teachers at one-teacher schools have the same responsibility as all other schools, to take reasonable steps to prevent the risk of reasonable foreseeable harm to students. Teachers must: supervise students during recess and lunch times or make other appropriate supervision arrangements obtain permission from their regional director, on an annual basis, to leave the school regularly during lunch time. Absence arrangements Principals of one-teacher schools, in consultation with the teacher: are responsible for ensuring absence plans are made, communicated to the teacher, and recorded in writing, for teacher absence are encouraged to work with their regional office to make these arrangements should also consult with their school council in regards to these arrangements, as a means of consulting with the school community.
Yes it can. This legal obligation produces a dilemma for school management. Do we lock the gates and refuse entry until ten minutes before school starts? To do so could expose pupils to the danger of passing traffic or to the inclement weather.
It is, alas, a dilemma which holds little sway with the courts who will argue that it is a practice known to the school for parents to leave pupils before hours or collect them after hours, and in that acceptance is the obligation to provide supervision.
Where, in such circumstances, legal liability attaches to the Board, cover is provided under the Allianz Policy. As we have said, this is a dilemma which offers little relief for the school. However, there is some. We recommend that a note is sent to all parents at the beginning of term advising them of the hours at which the school can accept responsibility for their children.
This is in the nature of a disclaimer which we have discussed earlier in Chapter 4 - Safety in the School. A recommended wording is as follows:.
No responsibility is accepted for pupils arriving before that time. Classes will commence each day at 9. No pupils should arrive later than 9. Classes will end each day at 3. Parents who wish to have their children escorted home should make their own arrangements to have them met at the school gate and the person to escort them should be at the school not later than 3.
NOTE: The times shown are for the purposes of example only. When issuing such a circular you should insert the actual times which are in operation for your school. Schools are not party to the School Transport System and the fact that the pupils are conveyed to or from school by bus does not impose any additional obligations on the school or teachers. As we have stated, it is important that parents are aware that no arrangement exists for the supervision of their children who arrive at the school, whether by school bus or otherwise, before the official opening time.
A similar situation arises in respect of pupils who remain after school hours awaiting collection by the school bus. In situations where teachers voluntarily adopt the practice of escorting pupils to and from school or the bus, they could be held to be liable if, having established the practice, they miss out for some reason or another or fail to do so in a careful manner.
In the interests of both pupils and the school, a letter along the lines as suggested above and adapted as appropriate to meet particular circumstances, should be sent to all parents at the beginning of each term. In respect of the School Transport System it is suggested that the letter should include the following paragraph:. Parents who feel that their children may need to be escorted in these circumstances should make arrangements to ensure that some escort is provided.
The simple answer is no. In providing an escort, the school is accepting responsibility for the pupils from the time of escort. As it is organised by the Board it is a School Related Activity and receives the full protection of the policy. We would recommend that escorts are vetted in accordance with procedures and in addition they should receive full instruction and training in the performance of their duties. There should also be a contingency plan to provide substitute escorts who should also be vetted and trained should the escort be unavailable on a particular day or days.
The normal laws of negligence apply, i. To avoid liability, Boards will have to address two key areas: planning and supervision. Proper planning of a trip involves choosing an appropriate venue, mode of transport and type of activity having regard to the age and capacity of the pupils.
For example, a rock climbing expedition for 8 year olds would place too rigorous physical demands on the pupils exposing them to risk of injury irrespective of the level of supervision and would well constitute negligence. Adequate supervision is vital. Children will be more exuberant outside the confines of the school environment and consequently will be harder to control. Therefore, a greater level of supervision will be required than that which is required on the school premises.
In the literature, these developments are often included in the larger theme of teacher leadership. Along with this trend comes an increasing differentiation in the available options by which teacher supervision may be conducted, thus leaving the more formal assessment for experienced teachers to once every four or five years. Whatever form supervision takes, it has been substantially influenced by the focus on student learning and on the test performances that demonstrate this learning , and by the need to make sure that attention is given to the learning of all students.
Thus, the supervisory episode tends to focus more on an analysis of teaching activity only in relation to, rather than independent of, evidence of student learning.
This focus on student learning in supervision is further influenced by the trend to highlight the learning of previously underserved students, namely those with special needs and consistently low-performing students. Supervisors and teachers are expected to take responsibility for high quality learning for all students, a responsibility that necessarily changes how they approach their work together. Finally, all of these trends are combined in the large trend of focusing on schoolwide renewal.
This means attending not only to instructional and curriculum issues, but also to structural and cultural issues that impede student learning. There are a variety of issues in the field of supervision that need resolution—or at least significant attention. To confront the large agenda of school renewal in which schools are required to respond to state-imposed curriculum standards or guidelines , systems of supervision at the state level, the district level, and the school level need to coordinate goals and priorities.
The politics of school renewal tend to lend a punitive, judgmental edge to supervision at the state level, and to some degree at the district level, and that impression poisons supervision at the school level. Test-driven accountability policies, and the one-dimensional rhetoric with which they are expressed, need to take into account the extraordinarily complex realities of classrooms and neighborhood communities, as well as the traditionally underresourced support systems that are needed to develop the in-school capacity to carry out the renewal agenda.
If state and district policies call for quality learning for all students, then schools have to provide adequate opportunities for all students to learn the curriculum on which they will be tested. Supervisors are caught in a crossfire. On the one hand, parents and teachers complain that a variety of enriched learning opportunities for children who have not had an opportunity to learn the curriculum are not available; on the other, district and state administrators complain about poor achievement scores on high-stakes tests, while ignoring the resources needed to bring the schools into compliance with reform policies.
Another issue needing attention is the divide between those supervisors who accept a functionalist, decontextualized, and oversimplified realist view of knowledge as something to be delivered, and those who approach knowledge as something to be actively constructed and performed by learners in realistic contexts—and as something whose integrity implies a moral as well as a cognitive appropriation. Assumptions about the nature of knowledge and its appropriation, often unspoken, substantially affect how supervisors and teachers approach student learning and teaching protocols.
This is an issue about which all players in the drama of schooling will only gradually reach some kind of consensus. A related issue concerns the degree to which schools and classrooms will accommodate cultural, class, gender, racial, and intellectual diversity. Supervisors cannot ignore the implications of these necessary accommodations for the work of teaching and curriculum development.
Perhaps the biggest controversy in the field is whether supervision as a field of professional and academic inquiry and of relatively unified normative principles will continue to exist as a discernable field.
More than a few scholars and practitioners have suggested that supervisory roles and responsibilities should be subsumed under various other administrative and professional roles.
For example, principals, acting as "instructional leaders," could simply include a concern for quality learning and teaching under the rubric of instructional leadership and eliminate the use of the word supervision from their vocabulary.
Similarly, teacher leaders could engage in collegial inquiry or action research focused on improving student learning and teaching strategies, and similarly eliminate the use of the word supervision from their vocabulary—terms like mentoring, coaching, professional development, and curriculum development could instead be used.
Many professors whose academic specialization has been devoted to research and publication in the field of supervision oppose this relinquishing of the concept of supervision, not only because of the vitality of its history, but also because of the fact that the legal and bureaucratic requirements for supervision will surely remain in place.
Having a discernible, professional field of supervision, they contend, will prevent the bureaucratic and legal practice of supervision from becoming a formalistic, evaluative ritual.
Keeping the professional growth and development aspect of supervision in dynamic tension with the evaluative side of supervision can best be served, they maintain, by retaining a discernible and robust field of scholarship that attends to this balance. These trends, issues, and controversies will likely keep the field of supervision in a state of dynamic development.
However, a lack of attention to the implications of these issues will most certainly cause the field to atrophy and drift to the irrelevant fringes of the schooling enterprise.
Jeffrey Glanz and Robert F. Clinical Supervision: Coaching for Enhanced Performance. Lancaster, PA: Technomic Publications. Berkeley: McCutcheon. Clinical Supervision. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin. Handbook of Research on School Supervision.
0コメント