Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Matthew Clifford, Ph.D
American Institutes for Research
Steven Ross, Ph.D.
Johns Hopkins University
NAESP Webinar
November 20, 2012
Introduce Yourselves via Poll
Poll Question 1: Please let us know who you are.
A. District superintendent
B. Principal
C. NAESP or NASSP state representative
D. State Education Agency staff
E. Other state-level representative
Renewed Focus on Principal Performance Evaluation
• Education Waivers
• Race to the Top and other federal initiatives
• State Policy Design
• No Child Left Behind
Jacques, Clifford & Hornung, 2012 www.tqsource.org
Renewed Focus on Principal Performance Evaluation
Jacques, Clifford & Hornung, 2012 www.tqsource.org
Poll Question 2: When will you be implementing a new principal
evaluation system in your district or state?
A. Within the next 6 months
B. Within the next year
C. Between 1 and 2 years
D. Two or more years
E. Don’t know.
Why Principals Matter: According to Numbers
98,706 public schools
3 million public school
teachers
55 million PK-12 public
school students
90,000 public school principals
Why Principals Matter: According to the Research
Clifford, Sherratt & Fetters, 2012
Direct Indirect
Principal Practice Quality
School Conditions
District and Community
Contexts
Teacher Quality
Instructional Quality
Student Achievement
Coherent Integrated
Principal Evaluation: Current Practice
American Institutes for Research, 2012 www.educatortalent.org
Principal Evaluation: Current Practice
• Research provides little evidence that principal evaluation has impact.
• Principals view evaluation as having little influence on their work.
• Principals are held accountable to outcomes that they do not directly
control and that provide little guidance on how to improve their work.
• Performance assessments are:
– Inconsistently administered;
– Not always aligned with professional standards or standards for
personnel evaluation;
– May not use instruments lacking adequate evidence and testing; and
– Not practical for evaluators or principals
Available studies of
principal evaluation
practice indicate principal
evaluation lacks
consistency, fairness,
and value for improving
leadership.
Clifford & Ross, 2011; Davis, et al., 2011; Orr, 2011; Goldring, et al., 2008
Rethinking Principal Evaluation:
Guidelines for Better Practice
www.naesp.org www.nassp.org Background on the publication
Collaborative effort between NAESP
and NASSP
Engaged highly experienced principals
from across the United States with
researchers
Rethinking Principal Evaluation:
Guidelines for Better Practice
www.naesp.org www.nassp.org The Six Domains
• Professional growth and learning,
• Student growth and achievement,
• School planning and progress,
• School culture,
• Professional qualities and instructional
leadership, and
• Stakeholder support and engagement.
Rethinking Principal Evaluation:
Guidelines for Better Practice
www.naesp.org www.nassp.org Domain 1: Professional Growth and
Learning
Professional growth plan
Measure the application of learning
Where to go for more information:
• NAESP
• NASSP
• Wallace Foundation
Rethinking Principal Evaluation:
Guidelines for Better Practice
www.naesp.org www.nassp.org Domain 2: Student growth and learning
Multiple outcomes measures
• State test results
• District test results
• Student learning objectives
accomplishment
• Level-appropriates measures (e.g.
graduation rates).
Where to go for more information:
• Ohio principal evaluation
• Indiana principal evaluation
• Rhode Island principal evaluation
• Wisconsin principal evaluation
Rethinking Principal Evaluation:
Guidelines for Better Practice
www.naesp.org www.nassp.org Domain 3: School planning and progress
School improvement plan objectives
• School-developed
• Aligned with district improvement plan
• Aligned with federal initiatives (as
applicable)
• Peer or district reviewed
Rethinking Principal Evaluation:
Guidelines for Better Practice
www.naesp.org www.nassp.org Domain 4: School culture
Survey-based measures
• Student surveys
• Staff surveys
School audits
School walkthroughs
Where to go for more information: http://www.air.org/files/school_climate2.pdf
Rethinking Principal Evaluation:
Guidelines for Better Practice
www.naesp.org www.nassp.org Domain 5: Professional qualities and
practice
Staff surveys
Principal observations
Artifact review
Where to go for more information:
• http://www.air.org/files/Measuring_Princi
pal_Performance.pdf
• Hillsborough County School District
• Round Rock School District
• www.educatortalent.org
• www.niet.org
Rethinking Principal Evaluation:
Guidelines for Better Practice
www.naesp.org www.nassp.org Domain 6: Stakeholder support and
engagement
Parent surveys
Community provider surveys
Artifact review
Rethinking Principal Evaluation:
What this means for next generation evaluations
Local principal evaluation design
Focus on feedback quality
Creating a rational, feasible process
Rethinking principal supervision and support
Raising individual accountability for outcomes attainment and practice
development
Developing stronger professional learning opportunities and human
capital systems
Advancing data systems
Steven Ross, Ph.D.
Johns Hopkins University
Matthew Clifford, Ph.D
American Institutes for Research
Educator Talent Management: www.educatortalent.org
American Institutes for Research: www.air.org
NAESP: www.naesp.org
NASSP: www.nassp.org
• Clifford, M. (2012). Hiring quality school leaders: Challenges and emerging
practices. Naperville, IL: American Institutes for Research. Retrieved February 22,
2012, from http://www.air.org/files/Hiring_Quality_School_Leaders.pdf
• Clifford, M., Hanson, U., Lemke, M., Wraight, S., Menon, R., Brown-Sims, M. &
Fetters, J. (2012). Practical Guide to Designing Comprehensive School Principal
Evaluation Systems. Washington, D.C.: National Comprehensive Center for Teacher
Quality.
• Clifford, M., Menon, R., Gangi, T., Condon, C. & Hornung, K. (2012). Measuring
school climate: A review of survey validity and reliability for use in principal
evaluation design. Washington, D.C.: American Institutes for Research.
• Clifford, M. & Ross, S. (2011). Designing principal evaluation: Research to guide
decision-making. Washington , D.C.: National Association of Elementary School
Principals.
• Condon, C., & Clifford, M. (2010). Measuring principal performance: How rigorous
are commonly used principal performance assessment instruments? Naperville, IL:
Learning Point Associates.
• Center for Educator Compensation Reform: //www.cecr.ed.gov/
• 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 February 22, 2012, from
http://www.ccsso.org/
Documents/2008/Educational_Leadership_Policy_Standards_2008.pdf
• Davis, S., Kearney, K., Sanders, N., Thomas, C., & Leon, R. (2011). The policies
and practices of principal evaluation: A review of the literature. San Francisco:
WestEd.
• Goldring, E., Carvens, X., Murphy, J., Porter, A., Elliott, S., & Carson, B. (2009).
The evaluation of principals: What and how do states and urban districts assess
leadership? Elementary School Journal, 110(1), 19–39.
• Kimball, S.M., Milanowski, A., McKinney, S. (2009). Assessing the promise of
standards-based performance evaluation for principals: Results from a randomized
trial. Leadership and Policy in Schools.
• Marzano, R., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. (2005). School Leadership that Works:
From Research to Results. New York: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.
• New Leaders for New Schools (2010)Evaluating principals. www.nlns.org
• Stronge, J., Richard, H. & Catano, N. (2008). Qualities of Effective Principals. New
York: Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development.
• Wallace papers: www.wallacefoundation.org
