Few naturalistic studies exist that take an in-depth look at the lifeworlds of consultants and supervisors. This single case study describes and interprets the practical knowledge of an exemplary Fine Arts Supervisor. In this study, the investigator acted as a participant-observer while "shadowing" Ruth Britten (a pseudonym) over a four month period. Data were derived through field research techniques, and were subjected to data analysis and interpretation. Drawing upon a body of literature dealing with the nature of practical knowledge, this study concludes that a supervisor's practical knowledge is different from a teacher's practical knowledge in two important ways. First, curriculum implementation replaces curriculum development in the five commonplaces found in teacher practical knowledge: self, instruction, curriculum development, subject matter, and milieu. Second, the political knowledge context forms a major addition to the five orientations defined by Elbaz regarding teacher practical knowledge: theoretical, social, personal, situational, experiential. A third conclusion underlies the above: Elbaz's conceptual framework for a teacher's practical knowledge proved to be a useful starting point in determining a supervisor's practical knowledge. Practical knowledge is constructed upon rules of practice, practical principles, and images. In this study, these forms revealed the dialectical nature of much of Ruth's practical knowledge. Two constructs or landscapes of imagery became apparent, one being the empowerment and power of teachers, and the other, bureaucratic power and control and educational stability. Analysis of Ruth's style as a supervisor examined further dialectical relationships, as she continuously resolved contraries while implementing fine arts curricula. The findings suggest that among other requirements, supervisors need to develop a unique form of practical knowledge geared to the political context of curriculum implementation. Therefore, School Boards should consider tenure contracts for supervisors rather than limited term contracts, and should promote special training for supervisors in curriculum change strategies rather than assume that master teacher practical knowledge is sufficient. / Education, Faculty of / Curriculum and Pedagogy (EDCP), Department of / Graduate

Throughout the history of theological education there have been many articles written about field education and the need for effective supervision, but few works describe research on the role functions of the supervisory conference. Studies have suggested that examining the supervisory process is complex and not easily researched. For accreditation, the Association of Theological Schools requires field education and supervision as an integral part of the Master of Divinity degree. The purpose of this study was to further the understanding of supervision from the perspectives of supervisors and students engaged in the process of theological field education. An exploratory field research methodology was used. Previous research in theological field education supervision proved inadequate for hypotheses testing. The specific purpose of the study was to search for answers to two questions. First, how do supervisors and students describe the role functions of the supervisory conference? And second, what are the relationships between the role functions of the supervisory conference and conceptual level, constructive openness, orientation to supervision, personality type, age, gender, educational level, and experience? Interviews of supervisors and students were the source of data for the study. The interviews included asking demographic information, asking the role functions of the supervisory conference, and administering four instruments: the Paragraph Completion Test, the Preactive Behavior Instrument, the Supervisory Beliefs Inventory, and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. The role functions were content analyzed and correlated with age, gender, experience, educational level, conceptual level, constructive openness, orientation to supervision, and personality types. Analyses were performed on the aggregated groups of supervisors and students, and on nine individual supervisor/student pairs. The results of the study indicated general agreement between the field education supervisors and their students in understanding the role functions of the supervisory conference. The mean scores on conceptual level for supervisors and students were not significantly different. Supervisors rated themselves higher in constructive openness than their students. Students estimated their supervisors to be more directive than the supervisors believed themselves to be. The personality types of supervisors and students were similar on the perceiving and judging preferences. When the data were examined by supervisor/student pairs, a more precise description of the supervisory interaction became apparent. For example, the effects of different conceptual levels and personality types became evident in the supervisory relationship. This finding suggests that future research in supervision should use individual pairs instead of aggregated groups. Two important role function themes mentioned least often by students were "relating of religious traditions and values to the human and social needs which have been identified in the ministry placement" and the "linking of theology with the practice of ministry." These two themes represent key strategies for those preparing for future ministry, and should play an integral part in field education. This study has raised several questions for future research: Is the supervisor the key element in the learning of the student? Or is the context of field education the key to learning? What does the student learn from the supervisory conference and the field placement? And finally, is the articulation of the supervisor's own theology and experience an essential component in the supervisory process, and therefore, a component in supervisor training programs? / Education, Faculty of / Educational Studies (EDST), Department of / Graduate

This research examined the reasons for participation in continuing professional education (CPE) and the predictive relationship of those motivational reasons to the perceived leadership effectiveness of first-line supervisors. For this study, 105 first-line supervisors were surveyed from four electric utility companies. Input was also collected from each supervisor's subordinate employees. Using the five motivational reasons for participation, collected via the Participation Reasons Scale and the effectiveness score collected using the Leader Behavior Analysis II®, regression techniques were used to asses the data. The five participation reasons of the PRS were regressed individually against the effectiveness scores to determine the extent to which leader effectiveness could be predicted by the participation reasons. In each case, the null hypothesis failed to be rejected. Regression of the five PRS reasons collectively on leader effectiveness also failed to reject the null, producing a p value of .800 and an R2 value of .023. An "all possible subsets" regression was conducted to determine whether a smaller subset of the five predictor variables might improve the predictive value of the participation reasons. No subset improved the predictive value. This study concludes that motivation to participate in CPE does not predict leader effectiveness. Thus, training organizations do not need to attempt to determine leader effectiveness based on underlying reasons individuals are motivated to participate, but rather should focus on the more traditional aspects of determining effectiveness most often associated with rigorous training evaluation processes. This study focused on the job role of first-line supervisor. Future research could be performed using: (a) populations of individuals from other traditional job roles including front-line employees (both unionized and non-unionized), mid-level managers, and executives; (b) leaders with and without prior training in situational leadership; and (c) effectiveness measure over time (i.e., a time-series method).