Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Copyright © 20XX American Institutes for Research. All rights reserved.
Emerging Trends in Principal Evaluation: The Changing Policy LandscapeMatthew Clifford, Ph.D.
Developing Leaders for Our Nation’s Schools
September 26, 2013
American Institutes for Research (AIR) is a non-profit, non-partisan organization focused on the development of rigorous social and behavioral sciences research and the application of research to issues affecting the education, health, and work of youth and adults, particularly the disadvantaged.
.
American Institutes for Research: Our Emphasis
2
The mission of the Center on Great Teachers and Leaders (GTL Center) is to foster the capacity of vibrant networks of practitioners, researchers, innovators, and experts to build and sustain a seamless system of support for great teachers and leaders for every school in every state in the nation.
Center on Great Teachers and Leaders Mission
3
Comprehensive Centers Program2012–2017 Award Cycle
4
Why Principals Matter: Research on Influence
5
• Leadership is the second most influential school-level factor in student learning
• Principals are a strong influence on teachers professional decisions
• Principals set school improvement and program implementation.
• Principals influence policy success.
Why Principals Matter: Policy Implementation
6
Common Core State Standards
College and Career ReadinessTeacher Evaluation
Financial Challenges
School Security
Social and Emotional Learning
7
Common Core State Standards
College and Career ReadinessTeacher Evaluation
Financial Challenges
School Security
Social and Emotional Learning
School Principals will determine whether multiple policy agendas take hold. --Council of Chief State Officers
Successful policy implementation is contingent upon the understanding and actions of school principals. -- Spillane, Reiser & Reimer
Why Principals Matter: Policy Implementation
8
The Current State of Principal Evaluation
• Emphasizes compliance, not learning;
• Does not influence principals’ work;
• Holds principals accountable to outcomes they do not control;
• Poorly aligns with state/national standards;
• Is not consistently administered; and
• Is impractical, given supervisor and school leader demands on time.
Clifford & Ross, 2012; Goldring et al. , 2007; NAESP & NASSP, 2012; NAESP, 2013
The current evaluation system in my district is no system at all. -- Principal
With principal evaluation, we are moving from 0 to 100 miles per hour -- State superintendent
Principal Evaluation: The National Education Policy Landscape
Principal Evaluation: The National Education Policy Landscape
Coherent
Improving the principal workforce “pipeline” with better performance evaluations
• Master principal evaluation• Current principal evaluation• Pre-service evaluation• Teacher-leader evaluation
10
Principal Evaluation: The National Education Policy Landscape
50 states have adopted or adapted ISLLC 2008
AK
MT
WYID
WA
OR
NVUTCA
AZ
ND
SD
NE
CO
NM
TX
OK
KS
AR
LA
MO
IA
MNWI
IL IN
KY
TN
MS AL GA
FL
SC
NC
VAWV
OH
MINY
PA
MDDENJ
CTRI
MA
MEVT
NH
HI
11
Principal Evaluation: The National Education Policy Landscape
50 states have passed legislation or created administrative rules to improve principal evaluation
AK
MT
WYID
WA
OR
NVUTCA
AZ
ND
SD
NE
CO
NM
TX
OK
KS
AR
LA
MO
IA
MNWI
IL IN
KY
TN
MS AL GA
FL
SC
NC
VAWV
OH
MINY
PA
MDDENJ
CTRI
MA
MEVT
NH
HI Source: Jacques, Clifford & Hornung, 2012
12
6 states require principals to demonstrate effectiveness in order to renew their licenses
Source: Briggs, et al. (2013)
Principal Evaluation: The National Education Policy Landscape
13
22 states collection of post-preparation program job placement data
Source: Briggs, et al. (2013)
Principal Evaluation: The National Education Policy Landscape
14
Principal Evaluation: Challenges Raised by States and Districts
Three to Highlight
1. The approach toward principal evaluation
2. Renegotiating the role of states and districts for educator support
3. Measurement development and diversification
15
Technical Problems
• Can be fixed by experts and by implementation of best practices.
• Easily identified and quickly solved.
Adaptive Challenges• Disrupt organizational relationships• Require new ways of working• Departs from past practices• Solutions involve experiments,
innovations and new learning. • Can take longer to implement.
“I[T]he single most common source of leadership failure we’ve been able to identify…is that people, especially those in positions of authority, treat adaptive challenges like technical problems.”
—Heifetz & Linsky (2002)
Principal Evaluation Challenge 1: The Approach
16
Renegotiating state and district roles for principal and other educator evaluation.
• Race to the Top: States implementing teacher and principal evaluation systems despite challenges. (Government Accounting Office, 2013)
• Preparing a pipeline of effective principals: A legislative approach. (National Conference of State Legislatures, 2012)
• State policies on principal evaluation: A changing landscape. (Jacques, Clifford & Hornung, 2012)
Principal Evaluation Challenge 2: Renegotiating the Roles
17
• State-level System
• Elective State System (Hybrid)
• District System with State Parameters
State Oversight
Local Control
Clifford, Hansen & Wraight,2011; General Accounting Office, 2013
Principal Evaluation Challenge 2: Renegotiating the Roles
18
Factors for Selecting Approach
• History of state-district relationships• Legislative requirements for monitoring• Purpose of system• Use of data• Presence of existing evaluation systems
Principal Evaluation Challenge 2: Renegotiating the Roles
19
Direct Outcomes Indirect Outcomes
Leadership Practice
School Condition
s
Community Contexts
Teacher Effectiveness
Instructional Quality
Student Learning
Clifford, Sherratt & Fetters, 2012 available at www.educatortalent.org
Principal Evaluation Challenge 3: Measurement Development and Diversification
20
Direct Outcomes Indirect Outcomes
Leadership Practice
School Condition
s
Community Contexts
Teacher Effectiveness
Instructional Quality
Student Learning
Principal Evaluation Challenge 3: Measurement Development and Diversification
Outcomes MeasuresPractice Measures
21
Principal Evaluation Challenge 3: Measurement Development and Diversification
Factors to Consider in Measures Selection
1. Reliability2. Validity3. Utility4. Fidelity and Support5. Cost
22
Student growth (VAM) 50%
360-degree survey50%
Principal Evaluation Challenge 3: Measurement Development and Diversification
Was (and often still is)….
23
Observation20%
360 survey20%
Artifact review20%
SLO results15%
VAM results15%
School factors 5%
District flex 5%
Principal Evaluation Challenge 3: Measurement Development and Diversification
Is moving toward…
24
Principal Evaluation Challenge 3: Measurement Development and Diversification
Domain Principal Measures Examples from the Field
Practice • Observations• 360 degree and other surveys• Professional learning and progress reports• Artifact review
Instructional quality • Student surveys• School audits
School Conditions • School climate survey• School walk-throughs or instructional rounds results• School improvement plan reports
Student Learning and Conditions
• School-level SLO attainment• School-level value added measures• Graduation rates• Social-emotional learning measures
25
Questions and Closing Remarks
Advancing state efforts to grow, respect, and retain great teachers
and leaders for all students
Presenter NameMatthew [email protected]
1000 Thomas Jefferson Street NWWashington, DC [email protected]
26
