Evaluating School Principal Effectiveness Why We Need to Evaluate Principals and Use Principal Evaluation as a Tool for Professional Improvement October 4, 2011. Webinar Logistics. Everyone is muted Use the chat function to make a comment or ask a question
Evaluating School Principal EffectivenessWhy We Need to Evaluate Principals and Use Principal Evaluation as a Tool for Professional ImprovementOctober 4, 2011
Everyone is muted
Use the chat function to make a comment or ask a question
You may chat privately with individuals on your team
If you have problems, you may send William Bentgen a message via the chat function or an email at [email protected]
To provide an objective, research-based overview of what an effective principal evaluation system should include.
To provide SCEE Teams a Framework for Principal Evaluation Tool.
Who is assessed
The purposes of assessment
What is assessed
What sources of evidence are used
How the assessment is conducted
How evidence is valued
Implementation, organization, and support of evaluation
Evaluation of the system’s effectiveness
How “principal” is defined
To include all school building leaders, or just principals
To include district leaders or not
To differentiate based on years of experience, time in current building assignment, and levels of responsibility
Summative—for consequential decisions
Formative—for professional growth
Organizational change—cohesive system
Evaluation systems differ based on which purposes are incorporated and to what degree.
School, community, district and state context
District priorities for practice (e.g. teacher evaluation practices)
Span of authority and control in whether leaders can perform the practices
Indirect influence on student achievement through influence on:
Student achievement progress
Progress on other student outcomes, such as graduation rates and reduced dropout rates
Progress on other broader school effectiveness goals, such as improved learning for ELLs and special education students
Improved safety and security
Parent and community expectations
Other district and state policies
Perceptions of actions and behaviors
Perceptions of working conditions, school climate
Student performance data
Subordinate staff (teachers, other professionals, support staff)
Peers (other principals)
Supervisors (central office and superintendent)
See: Principal Score Card (Milanowski, 2009)
Start with purpose
Build in an evaluation of the system from the start
Involve critical stakeholders to engage, educate and create buy-in
Keep it simple, easy to use, and easy to understand
Assistant State Superintendent for the Maryland Division of Certification and Accreditation
Prince Georges County: Aligned with the Danielson model – All principals & 100 teachers in 38 schools. Data systems and measures are progressing.
Queen Anne’s County: 7 principals & 126 teachers are exploring cost effective methods for aligning data, validating student growth measures and delivering PD.
Sarah Brown Wessling
National Teacher of the Year 2010
English Teacher, Johnston High School,
Join the Evaluation Discussion Group
On the Collaboration Site Home Page select Evaluation
If you are not already a member, request an invitation
Participants respond to questions regarding the framework tool—we’ll pose three questions
Participants ask questions of the experts
We will post the Q&A on the webinars page at the conclusion of this event
Find the Chat in the bottom right side of your screen.
To make the Chat appear larger on your screen, click on the triangle next to the Participants list to minimize it.
Questions and comments sent to All Participants are visible to everyone.
To offer an anonymous question or comment privately, click on Circe Stumbo’s name in the list of Chat recipients or email her at [email protected]
For technical assistance find William Bentgen in the Chat box or email him at [email protected]
Which elements of the Framework for Principal Evaluation generated the most discussion with your team?
In Maryland, framework elements most discussed: The difference between how to measure highly effective and effective.
2.If you have a Principal Evaluation Model in place, who are you evaluating (“Who is assessed”)?
In Maryland, principals are included in the evaluation/assessment – We are discussing whether the same model could be used for all levels of administrators, e.g., assistant principals and supervisors.
3.Which elements of the Framework for Principal Evaluation should be the highest priority for SCEE to attend to with future technical assistance (TA)?
In MD, we would like TA to address validity, reliability, and how to use student growth data.
Please complete the webinar evaluation that you will receive by email.
Brown-Sims, M. (2010). Evaluating School Principals. Tips & Tools. Washington, DC: National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality.
Calabrese, R. L., & Zepeda, S. J. (1999). Decision-making assessment: Improving principal performance. The International Journal of Educational Management, 13(1), 6.
Catano, N., & Stronge, J. H. (2006). What are principals expected to do? congruence between principal evaluation and performance standards. NASSP Bulletin, 90(3), 221-237.
Goldring, E., Porter, A. C., Murphy, J., Elliot, S. N., & Cravens, X. (2007). Assessing learner-centered leadership: Connections to research, professional standards and current practices. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University.
Hessel, K., & Holloway, J. (2001). School leaders and standards: a vision for leadership. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2008). Linking leadership to student learning: The contributions of leader efficacy. Educational administration quarterly, 44(4), 496-528.
Marzano, R. J., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. A. (2005). School leadership that works: From research to results. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervison and Curriculum Development.
McREL. (2010). McREL's Principal Evaluation System.
Milanowski, A., & Schuermann, P. (2009). Principal evaluation (powerpoint slides), Teacher Incentive Fund Grantee Meeting. Bethesda, MD: Center for Educator Compensation Reform.
Murphy, J., Elliott, S. N., Goldring, E., & Porter, A. C. (2006). Learning-centered leadership: A conceptual foundation. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University.
Porter, A. C., Goldring, E., Murphy, J., Elliot, S. N., & Cravens, X. (2006). A framework for the assessment of learning-centered leadership. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University.
Portin, B., Feldman, S., & Knapp, M. S. (2006). Purposes, Uses, and Practices of Leadership Assessment in Education Seattle, WA: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy, University of Washington.
Reeves, D. B. (2004). Assessing educational leaders. Thousand Oaks, CA.: Corwin Press.
Rhode Island Department of Education. (November 9, 2010 ). Working draft. Rhode Island Model. building administrator professional practice framework. Providence, RI: Rhode Island Department of Education.
Robinson, V. M. J., Lloyd, C. A., & Rowe, K. J. (2008). The impact of leadership on student outcomes: An analysis of the differential effects of leadership types. Educational administration quarterly, 44(5), 635-674.