Reviewing the Research and PEAC Recommendations around Principal Evaluation

Uploaded on

Presentation made by Benjamin Fenton, Chief Strategy and Knowledge Officer and Co-Founder of New Leaders for New Schools at the IASA sponsored workshop on November 18, 2011 at the Triple I Conference.

Presentation made by Benjamin Fenton, Chief Strategy and Knowledge Officer and Co-Founder of New Leaders for New Schools at the IASA sponsored workshop on November 18, 2011 at the Triple I Conference.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
No Downloads


Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds



Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

    No notes for slide
  • Slide 3 – Ben does overview and asks key questions – whether in-service support (for all principals or at least first-year principals) is part of their vision.  Is pipeline development from teacher to teacher leader ahead of the pre-service program part of the design vision? ---- We tend to think about a Principal Development Program as encompassing some component of Pipeline Development & aligned Pre-Service Training, culminating in some form of in-service support – all aligned to evaluation and management systems. Unifying framework is the shared vision of school leadership: this is made concrete through the development of Principal Performance Standards & Practice Rubrics – work DCPS has done through the principal Impact Framework. Key next step in thinking about leader development: the trajectory of skill & competency development from high potential through “ready now” for the Principalship – and any variations for school level and type. DCPS has many of these pieces in place, or is working on implementing them – a lot to build from.
  • New survey and detailed research on link from principal effectiveness to teacher effectiveness IF WE ARE GOING TO MAKE TEACHER EVALUTION SYSTEMS ALSO ABOUT DEVELOPMENT AND RETENTION – WE MUST FOCUS ON PRINCIPAL EFFECTIVENESS Not surprising feedback from teachers on importance of principal role (give case study of Charlotte in terms of attracting teachers to turnaround schools) CALDER Center – more in-depth – saw specific differences for most effective principals: Differential retention – Selected teachers that were more effective on average Some demonstration of greater growth, though this finding was not as detailed
  • From our community research on principals making largest gains in student achievement – we identify from public data but also from value added data – did comparison study Are these VISIBLE, SEEN AS A PRIORITY, CHANGE CONCEPTION OF ROLE Not surprising – instructional leader – though we found much deeper work on curriculum alignment, consistent routines and practices, and data driven instruction in the highest-gaining schools. Important to create more detailed expectations and rubrics for these areas Human capital manager – all in service of teacher effectiveness – relentless hiring and recruiting, clear expectations and evaluations, professional learning structures and protocols, building and developing an effective instructional leadership team (who can also do all of the instructional leadership roles) – often principals feel they don’t have these freedoms School Culture – not strongly enough mentioned in many standards – often only a sub-area, or only focused on “safety or discipline” – building beliefs about what students can do, develop a deep and consistent set of values and code of conduct


  • 2. Who we are In 2000, New Leaders was founded to confront the nation’s growing achievement gap and to work toward high quality education for all students.
    • Since our founding, the New Leaders’ community has grown from 13 leaders trained in two cities to more than 800 leaders trained in twelve urban areas.
    • Nationwide, our leaders currently serve a quarter of a million students in:
    Baltimore, MD Prince George’s County, MD New Orleans, LA Jefferson Parish, LA Charlotte, NC Newark, NJ Chicago, IL New York, NY Memphis, TN The Bay Area, CA Milwaukee, WI Washington, D.C.
  • 4. A leadership effectiveness strategy starts with a shared vision of leadership and uses levers throughout the span of principals’ careers to ensure quality across the district. The foundation for Principal Effectiveness Shared Vision of Leadership Pipeline Development Pre-Service Training Evaluation and Management Selection and School Match Retention, Rewards, Dismissal In-Service Support District and Data Support Systems Successful District District Governance and Principal Autonomy
  • 5. Principal Effectiveness
  • 6. Principal link to teacher effectiveness Principal Effectiveness Teacher Effectiveness Student Outcomes
    • Scholastic National Teacher Survey:
    • 96% say quality leaders are necessary to retain good teachers.
    • 91% say leadership quality has an important impact on student achievement.
    • Key Principal Roles:
    • Select and assign effective teachers
    • Create strong professional learning structures
    • Develop staff and student cultures that support instruction and teacher retention
    • Conduct rigorous evaluations and connect to development and career decisions
  • 7. Principles for use of student outcomes
    • Focus more on growth than attainment
    • Value all students, not just those approaching proficiency
    • Set targets that close in-school or cross-school achievement gaps
    • Include “on track” to college non-test measures
    • Use multiple years of data for high stakes consequences
    • Ensure alignment to other state/LEA accountability systems for principals and schools
  • 8. Measures of student growth
      • Options:
        • Growth measures using state assessments, district-developed assessments, or off-the-shelf assessments.
        • Other school-level student outcome measures, including graduation rates, student retention/progression rates, and college acceptance rates for high school.
        • Consistent state-wide measures versus locally developed measures/targets.
      • Key Issues:
        • Do measures cover all grades/subjects in a school?
        • Are assessments aligned with those used in teacher evaluations?
        • Are measures aligned to school/district performance goals?
        • Do data systems exist to collect these measures?
      • Principal Evaluation:
  • 9. CCSSO Performance Expectations – Implementing the ISLLC Standards
    • Vision, Mission, and Goals
    • Teaching and Learning ( priority expectation )
    • Managing Organizational Systems and Safety
    • Collaborating with Families and Stakeholders
    • Ethics and Integrity
    • The Education System ( broader advocacy )
  • 10. Field Research - Key Principal Practices Human Capital Manager Culture Developer
    • Hire aligned staff
    • Provide frequent feedback & learning structures for staff
    • Manage staff performance
    • Build a strong Instructional leadership team
    • Align rigorous curriculum
    • Implement consistent classroom practices
    • Use data to drive instructional improvement
    • Establish common instructional planning
    • Build adult responsibility for student success
    • Define expected behaviors aligned to school values
    • Implement a school-wide code of conduct
    • Insist on high aspirations
    • Engage families and community in student learning
    Instructional Leader All supported by effective management of systems and operations, especially use of resources and time
  • 11. Tools for Principal Practice Evaluation Principal Practice Standards Principal Practice Rubric School Observation Tools Staff, Community, Student Surveys Non-Achievement School Data We recommend rolling up staff/community surveys and non-achievement data into the overall rating of principal practice Including clear examples of evidence
  • 12. Recommendations from PEAC Principal Evaluation Sub-Committee
  • 13. PERA Requirements for Principal Evaluation
    • Each principal must be evaluated every year
    • Evaluation must be completed by March 1 every year
    • The summative evaluation must:
        • Consider the principal’s specific duties, responsibilities, management, and competence as a principal
        • Specify the principal’s strengths and weaknesses, with supporting evidence
        • Include student growth as a significant factor in the evaluation
        • Rate the principal’s performance as:
          • Excellent
          • Proficient
          • Needs Improvement
          • Unsatisfactory
  • 14. Recommendations on model elements
    • Minimum of 50% focused on principal practice ratings
    • Define “significant factor” for student growth to be at least 30% of evaluation
    • Remaining 20% to be defined by local district, could include:
      • Increased weight on principal practice
      • Increased weight on student growth
      • Other student outcomes (graduation, attendance, AP courses)
      • Other School Improvement Plan or growth goals
  • 15. Principal Practice Requirements
    • Standards must align to the IL Standards for Principal Evaluation (used to create state model rubric, aligned to ISLLC)
    • Can use the state model rubric, or create/select your own rubric, as long as it has at least 4 levels of performance
    • If using a rubric other than the state model, the district must provide training to all evaluators and principals around the standards, rubric, and expectations of performance
  • 16. IL Standards for Principal Evaluation
    • Living a Vision and Mission for Results
    • Leading and Managing Systems Change
    • Improving Teaching and Learning
    • Building and Maintaining Collaborative Relationships
    • Leading with Integrity and Professionalism
    • Creating a Culture of High Expectations
  • 17. Process for Practice Evaluation
    • At least 2 “formal” observations – school site visits - for each principal (scheduled in advance, clear focus of visit) with feedback to the principal within 10 work days
    • No limit to the number of informal (not scheduled in advance) school visits and observations, as long as the evidence from those observations is captured in writing as part of the final evaluation
    • All other data gathering options (staff and community surveys, artifact reviews, other data gathering) are decided on by local district
    • Meeting at least once a year to review evaluation results, confirm areas for growth, and confirm student outcome assessments and metrics for the year (committee recommends more meetings, but only wanted to put one meeting in rules)
  • 18. Student Growth Requirements
    • Requires “academic” assessments – aligned to any area of IL standards
    • Multiple assessments – have to use at least two different tests for each annual evaluation
    • May include current state tests (ISAT for K-8) as one of the assessments used (different from teacher evaluation recommendations)
    “ Student growth” means a demonstrable change in a student’s or group of students’ knowledge or skills, as evidenced by gain and/or attainment on two or more assessments, between two or more points in time.
  • 19. “Student Growth” versus AYP Sets a hard cut-off date to control for student mobility Requires that same student was in the school for at least two testing experiences on same assessment Looks only at the change in percentage of students at “meets and exceeds” Includes growth across the spectrum – students moving from Below Basic to Basic, or from Meets to Exceeds Compares this year’s 4 th graders to last year’s 4 th graders Looks at same students over time – how a group of students performed in 3 rd grade and in 4 th grade Adequate Yearly Progress Student Growth
  • 20. First-Year Principals and Assistant Principals Assistant Principals
    • Evaluated against same practice rubrics as principals and on same timeline
    • Can use a broader definition of student growth – including looking at student attendance or discipline data if matched to AP role and responsibilities
    • No change in rules and requirements for first-year principals
    • Requires evaluator to identify at least two assessments that return data between start of year and February 1
    First-Year Principals
  • 21. Implementation Recommendations
  • 22. Principal Practice Suggestions
    • Focus on training and capacity building – not rubric writing
      • Adopt state model rubric and benefit from state-provided training
      • Adopt an alternate rubric from a provider with good tools/services for training (look at NY State list of approved rubrics)
    • Begin aligning all principal professional learning experiences to this rubric language starting as soon as possible
    • Set up opportunities for evaluators to discuss observations and ratings (within larger districts, across smaller districts) – especially sharing tips and tools for doing effective site visits
    • Identify any tools for gathering input from staff and parents and align to selected rubric (examples include state-wide learning climate survey, VAL-ED, CALL assessment)
    • Revise principal hiring criteria and process to match new practice expectations
  • 23. Student Growth Options
    • % of students staying at same performance band or increasing to next level from year to year
    • Increase in % of students at “meets” and % of students at “exceeds”
    • % of students that meet or exceed the “predicted” score on an assessment (such as MAP/NWEA or EPAS)
    • % of students in particular sub-groups that stay at same performance level or improve from year to year
  • 24. Other Elements of Principal Evaluation
    • Retention of effective teachers
    • AP course taking and passing rates
    • Reduction of achievement gaps within the school
    • Completion of professional growth plan activities
    • Completion of school improvement plan goals
    Strongly Recommended
    • Student attendance
    • Graduation or “on track” measures (secondary schools)
    Additional Examples