View
4
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Leadership Evaluation,
Feedback, and Growth
Matthew Clifford, Principal Researcher February 2015
Copyright © 2015 American Institutes for Research and Council of Chief State School Officers. All rights reserved.
Discuss how principals support students’ equitable access
to excellent teachers as well as access to appropriate
learning programs.
Identify strategies for supporting principals’ work.
Consider how states and districts can support equitable
distribution within school through advanced principal
evaluation practices.
Session Goals
2
Inequitable distribution of educator talent is an important
educational policy issue, affecting student learning now and
in the future.
2002 Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act (ESEA)
2006 Highly Qualified Teacher State Plans
2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
2015 State Plans to Ensure Equitable Access to Excellent
Educators
National Focus
3
Research indicates that low-performing and high-poverty
schools are staffed at higher rates by teachers that are:
Inexperienced
Underqualified, in terms of certification and school rank
Less effective
Less likely to stay
Less research is available on school principal distribution,
but the available research indicates parallel trends in
principal distribution.
National Focus
4
Research on teacher distribution: Clotfelter et al. (2007); DeAngeles et al. (2005); Glazerman and Max (2011); Ingersoll
and Perda (2009); Lankford, Loeb, And Wychoff (2002).
Research on principal distribution: Gates et al. (2003, 2006); Loeb et al. (2011). Papa et al. (2002); Punswick et al. (2007).
Further, research all indicates that within schools lower
performing students, students with histories of behavioral
challenges, younger students are taught by teachers that are:
Less experienced
Underqualified
National Focus
Source: Beteille, Kalogrides, and Loeb (2009)
5
Principals Are Key: Changing Roles
Task Diversification and Distribution
Disciplinarian
Manager
Isolated
Disciplinarian
Manager
Community engaged
Disciplinarian
Manager
Instructional leader
6
Principals Are Key: Influence
7
Direct Outcomes Indirect Outcomes
Leadership
Practice
School
Conditions
Community
Contexts
Teacher
Effectiveness
Instructional
Quality
Student
Learning
Adapted from Clifford, Sherratt, and Fetters (2012); Clifford and Ross (2012)
At your table, consider this question:
What can principals do to improve equitable distribution?
Principals Are Key: District Actions
8
Source: Sherratt and Clifford (2010)
At your table, consider this question:
What can principals do to improve equitable distribution?
Rethink teacher assignment
Improve teacher induction
Improve school image and reputation
Connect teachers with strong professional learning
Evaluate teachers and use teacher effectiveness data
Advocate for involvement in teacher hiring
Improve school culture and school safety
Provide clear instructional support
Distribute responsibility
Principals Are Key: District Actions
9
Source: Sherratt and Clifford (2010)
Principals Are Key: Influence
10
Direct Outcomes Indirect Outcomes
Leadership
Practice
School
Conditions
Community
Contexts
Teacher
Effectiveness
Instructional
Quality
Student
Learning
Source: Ikemoto Taliaferro, Fenton, & Davis (2014)
State
and
district
support
At your table, consider this question:
What can we do, in our positions, to support principals in
this work?
Principals Are Key: State Support
11
At your table, consider this question:
What can we do, in our positions, to support principals in
this work?
The policy levers for principal effectiveness:
Professional development and networking
Administrative oversight (compliance)
Performance standards
Performance evaluation
Principals Are Key: State Support
12
Principal Evaluation:
A Three-Pronged Strategy
13
Improved
equitable
distribution
Improved
principal
evaluation
Principal
focus on
equitable
distribution
Principal
retention
Improved
principal
performance
Performance Evaluation for
Accountability and Growth
14
Principal Evaluation
15
Source: Jacques, Clifford, and Hornung (2012)
AK
MT
WY ID
WA
OR
NV UT
CA
AZ
ND
SD
NE
CO
NM
TX
OK
KS
AR
LA
MO
IA
MN WI
IL IN
KY
TN
MS AL GA
FL
SC
NC
VA WV
OH
MI NY
PA
CT
ME VT
NH
50 states + 2 territories
with new principal
evaluation policies
“Principal evaluation must
accelerate from 0 to 100
miles an hour. Unlike
teacher evaluation, states
and districts have little
experience systematically
evaluating principals.”
–Master principal
Coherence
Clifford and Ross (2012)
What Principals Want
Useful
Created by and for principals
Flexible and relevant
Accurate multiple measures
Part of a support system
Principal Evaluation
16
Feedback Performance
Evaluation
Practice Assessment
Outcomes Assessment
Principal Evaluation: Components
Standards-driven
Evidence-based
Fair and accurate
Practice-aligned
Growth-oriented
Fair and accurate
17
Depersonalized
Reflective
Linked to PD
Standards-driven
Principal Evaluation: Practice
18
ISLLC 2008
Vision, Mission, and Goals
Teaching and Learning
Managing Organizational
Systems and Safety
Collaborating With Families
and Stakeholders
Ethics and Integrity
Influencing Contexts
Council of Chief State School Officers (2008)
Evidence-based
Principal Evaluation: Practice
19
Competency-based framework
describing performance levels
Aligned measures include:
• Portfolio review
• Observation
• 360-degree survey
• Principal growth plan
• Other measures (?)
Practice Assessment
Practice-aligned, growth-oriented
Principal Evaluation: Practice
20
Student learning gains
• Student learning objectives
• Value-added measures
School culture improvement
Student engagement and
behavior improvement
Other school measures
Outcomes Assessment
Reflective, Linked to professional development
Principal Evaluation: Practice
21
Evidence-based
Performance-oriented
Sponsors reflection
Linked to individualized
professional learning plans
Feedback
Done well, principal evaluation….
Principal Evaluation
• Communicates priorities.
• Establishes common language.
• Drives growth.
• Supports policy compliance.
22
Feedback Performance
Evaluation
Practice Assessment
Outcomes Assessment
In triads, consider these questions.
How, if at all, does your state’s principal evaluation system(s)
address roles in improving equitable access to excellent
teachers in schools through its....
• Framework?
• Practice measures (e.g., observation, portfolio)?
• Outcomes measures?
Principal Evaluation
23
Principal Evaluation:
Strategy for Supporting
Teacher Equitable Distribution
24
Principal Evaluation:
Strategies From the Field
25
For more information, visit www.educatortalent.org.
AK
MT
WY ID
WA
OR
NV UT
CA
AZ
ND
SD
NE
CO
NM
TX
OK
KS
AR
LA
MO
IA
MN WI
IL IN
KY
TN
MS AL GA
FL
SC
NC
VA WV
OH
MI NY
PA
CT
ME VT
NH
Rural and suburban schools
Strong, local control
Not Race to the Top states
“Grow-your-own” emphasis
Talent distribution priorities
U.S. Virgin Islands
• Our engagement with partnership emphasizes:
• Framework that prioritizes data use, talent development
• Observation to reinforce teacher feedback and data use
• Policy-relevant, standards-aligned portfolio review
• Principal supervisor training for evaluation and coaching
• Change management
• State-level systems review and improvement
Principal Evaluation:
Strategies From the Field
26
Principal Frameworks:
Communicating Competencies
and Priorities
27
Principal Evaluation: How Frameworks
Address Talent Management
28
Frameworks are high-level rubrics that
• Describe competencies
• Articulate performance levels
• Communicate priorities
• Foster reflection Competencies describe habits of
action and thoughts of strong
principals exhibit. Competency-
based evaluation has been
associated with improved practices
and outcomes in psychological and
workplace studies.
See Clifford, 2014; Steiner & Hassel, forthcoming
Principal Evaluation: How Frameworks
Address Talent Management
29
Framework Addresses Talent
Management
Stronge and associates X
New Leaders X
McREL Balanced Leadership X
Learning-centered leadership X
AIR X
University of Washington’s Center for Educational
Leadership
X
In addition to state and district-developed frameworks, the following are
examples of national principal evaluation frameworks.
Principal Evaluation: How Frameworks
Address Talent Management
30
Standard or
Competency
Learning
progression
AIR’s Five Essential Practices of
School Leadership: A Framework
for Assessing Practice
Written by and for principals
Content validated
Emphasizes instructional
leadership, talent management
Principal Evaluation: How Frameworks
Address Talent Management
31
Principal Evaluation: How Frameworks
Address Talent Management
32
Five Essential Practices
ISLLC standards Build shared
purpose
Focus on
learning
Manage
organizational
systems
Collaborate
with
community
Lead with
integrity
Mission, vision, and goals
Teaching and learning
Managing organizational
systems and safety
Collaborating with
community
Ethics and integrity
Influencing contexts
Cumulative Structure
The behaviors “accumulate” across the levels—a principal must demonstrate
evidence for the preceding performance levels in order to score at any given level.
Basic
Intermediate
Proficient
Distinguished
Planning
Managing
Reacting
Monitoring
Implementing
Anticipating
Improving
Distributing
Integrating
Modeling
Advocating
Coaching
Below basic means principals do not
do one or more things at the basic level.
Principal Evaluation: How Frameworks
Address Talent Management
33
Review the Five Essential Practices framework, specifically
Practice 2 (Focus on learning)
Practice 4 (Manage organizational systems)
Consider this question:
How does the framework address principals’ role in supporting
equitable distribution?
How, if at all, are the actions/ideas adaptable to your framework?
Share-out
Principal Evaluation: How Frameworks
Address Talent Management
34
Principal Observation:
Feedback for Principals,
Support for Teachers
35
Measures
Practices
Build Shared Purpose
Focus on Learning
Manage Organizational
Systems
Connect with Community
Lead with Integrity
Principal Portfolio
Principal Observation
360-Degree Survey
Principal Growth Plan
Principal Observation: Supporting
Teacher Growth With Feedback
36
Principal observation, like teacher observation, is a formal,
systematic method of gathering performance evidence on
routine tasks.
Observation-based feedback is very powerful for shaping
practice.
AIR’s Instructional Feedback Observation Tool is used
to observe the quality of feedback delivered by school
administrators to teachers during postobservation
conferences, a skill that many principals struggle to do well
and an important skill for teacher growth.
Principal Observation: Supporting
Teacher Growth With Feedback
37
Conditions for Fair, Accurate
Observation What We do
Observation process is transparent We are train principals and supervisors.
Observation is accurate AIR master coaches co-observe with
supervisors and co-rate practice.
Observations occur in controlled
conditions
We select postobservation sessions.
Multiple observations result in a
score
A minimum of two observations will
contribute to an observation score, but
more tend to be scheduled.
Principal Observation: Supporting
Teacher Growth With Feedback
38
The Instructional Feedback
Observation support includes
two publications:
The Guidebook outlines a
transparent procedure.
The Toolbox includes forms to
be completed by supervisors
and principals.
Principal Observation: Supporting
Teacher Growth With Feedback
39
Domain What It Measures Evidence
Evidence use Centers conversation on observation evidence
Accurately aligns data to teacher framework
Observation
Professional
interactions
Focused attention
Appropriate communication
De-personalized comments
Observation
Differentiated questions Asks reflective questions
Leading conversations Sets goals for the meeting
Paces conversation
Defines next steps with the teacher
Observation
Written feedback Completes forms
Connects to teacher framework
Document
review
Principal Observation: Supporting
Teacher Growth With Feedback
40
Prepare (and schedule)
Collect
Analyze Gather Evidence
Plan
Principal observations
must be scheduled to
correspond to teacher
post-observation
conferences. (November)
Observation evidence can
be collected by scripting
or video.
Observation results can
be shared at the mid-year
check-in meeting.
(December)
Principal Observation: Supporting
Teacher Growth With Feedback
41
What’s inside the Guidebook?
Take 10 minutes to read pages 2–10 of the Guidebook.
Meet in small groups
What was interesting or surprising?
What do you need more information about?
What points are important to highlight?
Report out.
Principal Observation: Supporting
Teacher Growth With Feedback
42
Activity: You Are the Observer
Make notes when watching this short
video of a teacher post-observation
conference.
Rate performance according to the
Observation Rubric (pp. 4–6 of the
Toolkit).
Discuss your overall impressions of the
feedback session at your table:
• What does the principal do well?
• How could the principal improve?
Share out key reflections: How does
this support principals work to grow
teacher talent?
Measuring Practice:
Leader Observation
43
http://tpep-wa.org/trainingpd/pre-and-
post-observation-examples/
Challenges and Possibilities
44
Wrapping Up: Questions,
Challenges, Possibilities
45
Wrapping Up: Team Focus
46
Beteille, T., Kalogrides, D., & Loeb, S. (2009). Effective schools: Managing the
recruitment, development, and retention of high-quality teachers (Working
Paper 37). CALDER Center. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute. Retrieved
from http://www.urban.org/uploadedpdf/1001428-effective-schools.pdf
Clifford, M. (2013). Instructional feedback observation tool. Washington, DC:
American Institutes for Research.
Clifford, M., Behrstock-Sherratt, E., & Fetters, J. (2012). The ripple effect: A
synthesis of research on principal influence to inform performance
evaluation design. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research.
Retrieved from
http://www.air.org/sites/default/files/downloads/report/1707_The_Ripple_Effe
ct_d8_Online_0.pdf
Clifford, M., Fetters, J., & Yoder, N. (2014). The five essential practices of school
leadership: A framework for principal evaluation and growth. Washington,
DC: American Institutes for Research.
References
47
Clifford, M., & Ross, S. (2012). Rethinking principal evaluation: A new paradigm
informed by research and practice. Alexandria, VA: National Association of
Elementary School Principals; Reston, VA: National Association of
Secondary School Principals. Retrieved from
http://www.naesp.org/sites/default/files/PrincipalEvaluationReport.pdf
Clotfelter, C. T., Ladd, H. F., Vigdor, J. L., & Wheeler, J. (2007). High poverty
schools and the distribution of teachers and principals (Working Paper 1).
Washington, DC: National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in
Education Research.
Council of Chief State School Officers. (2008). Educational leadership policy
standards: ISLLC 2008 (as adopted by the National Policy Board for
Educational Administration). Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from
http://www.ccsso.org/Documents/2008/Educational_Leadership_Policy_Stan
dards_2008.pdf
References
48
DeAngelis, K. J., Presley, J. B., & White, B. R. (2005). The distribution of teacher
quality in Illinois (IERC 2005-1). Edwardsville, IL: Illinois Education Research
Council.
Gates, S., Kalogrides, D., Loeb, S., & Beteille, T. (2011). Power play? Teacher
characteristics and class assignments. Palo Alto, CA: Center for the Analysis
of Longitudinal Data in Education Research.
Gates, S.M., Ringel, J.S., Santibañez, L., Guarino, C., Ghosh-Dastidar, B., &
Brown, A. (2006). Mobility and turn-over among school principals.
Economics of Education Review 25(3), 289-302.
Gates, S.M., Ringel, J.S., Santibañez, L., Ross, K.E. & Chung, C.H. (2003). Who
is leading our schools? An overview of school administrators and their
careers. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
References
49
Glazerman, S., & Max, J. (2011). Do low income students have equal access to
the highest-performing teachers? Washington, DC: Institute of Education
Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional
Assistance. Retrieved from
http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pubs/20114016/pdf/20114016.pdf
Ikemoto, G., Taliaferro, L., Fenton, B., & Davis, J. (2014). Great leaders at scale:
Creating district conditions that enable all principals to be effective.
Washington, DC: New Leaders and George W. Bush Institute.
Ingersoll, R., & Perda, D. (2009). The mathematics and science teacher
shortage: Fact and myth (CPRE Research Report #RR-62). Philadelphia,
PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
Jacques, C., Clifford, M., & Hornung, K. (2012). State policies on principal
evaluation: Trends in a changing landscape. Washington, DC: Center on
Great Teachers and Leaders.
References
50
Kalogrides, D., Loeb, S., & Beteille, T. (2011). Power play? Teacher characteristics
and class assignments. Palo Alto, CA: Center for the Analysis of Longitudinal
Data in Education Research.
Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2002). Teacher sorting and the plight of
urban schools. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(1), 37–62.
Loeb, S., Kalogrides, D., & Horng, E. L. (2010). Principal preferences and the
uneven distribution of principals across schools. Educational Evaluation and
Policy Analysis 32(2), 205–229.
Papa, F. C., Jr., Lankford, H., & Wyckoff, J. (2002). The attributes and career
paths of principals: Implications for improving policy. Albany, NY: Teacher
Policy Research. Retrieved from
www.teacherpolicyresearch.org/portals/1/pdfs/career_paths_of_principals.pdf
Punswick, E., Belt, C., Baker, B. (2007). School leadership stability, principal
moves, and departures: Evidence from Missouri. Presented at the University
Council on Educational Administration Annual Conference, Arlington, VA
References
51
Punswick, E., Belt, C., Baker, B., (2008) Principals’ backgrounds and school
leadership stability: Evidence from fly-over country. Presented at the annual
conference of the American Education Finance Association, Denver, CO,
Sherratt, E., & Clifford, M. (2010). Ensuring the equitable distribution of teachers:
Strategies for schools, districts, and states. Washington DC: National
Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality.
References
52
www.facebook.com/gtlcenter
www.twitter.com/gtlcenter
Advancing state efforts to grow, respect, and retain great teachers and
leaders for all students
Matthew Clifford
630-689-8017
mclifford@air.org
Center on Great Teachers and Leaders
1000 Thomas Jefferson Street NW
Washington, DC 20007-3835
877-322-8700
www.gtlcenter.org | www.air.org
53
Recommended