A growing number of school districts鈥攊ncluding large ones like those in Chicago, Dallas, Los Angeles, and Hawaii鈥攈ave become recent converts to new principal-evaluation systems that tie school leaders鈥� appraisals to student test scores.
As of this school year, student achievement accounts for 40 percent to 50 percent of principals鈥� evaluations in each of those school systems, while district leaders in a number of other places are preparing to make similar changes in coming school years.
The switch to the new-breed evaluation systems comes on the heels of efforts nationwide to incorporate student-achievement measures into teachers鈥� evaluations. For principals, the move is being prompted by U.S. Department of Education grant programs such as Race to the Top, which requires states or districts to tie principal effectiveness 鈥渋n significant part鈥� to growth in student achievement, and by No Child Left Behind waivers, which allow states flexibility on some requirements of the federal law in exchange for adopting certain policies, including revamped educator-evaluation procedures.
Test scores are generally one of several measures of student achievement used in new principal evaluations, which also look at school climate surveys and improvements in teachers鈥� effectiveness, among other gauges.
鈥淭here鈥檚 this collective realization that it鈥檚 more complex than just a single test score,鈥� said Dick Flanary, the deputy executive director of programs and services at the , a professional group based in Reston, Va. But both the NASSP and the Alexandria, Va.-based , which released recommendations about principal evaluations last fall, say that making 40 percent or more of a principal鈥檚 evaluation dependent on student-achievement measures is inappropriate, even if that chunk of the review relies on more than just state test scores.
Meanwhile, researchers and district leaders hope the new systems will help clarify needs and expectations for school leaders.
鈥淲e know that teachers have the biggest impact on outcomes for children鈥攁nd right behind that is the principal,鈥� said Jeannine French, the deputy superintendent of the 25,000-student Pittsburgh district, which is also revamping its evaluation system to include student growth. 鈥淚t鈥檚 not just an evaluation tool. ... It鈥檚 about making sure principals have the information they need about practice so they can very specifically improve so we get better results for our children.鈥�
Though there is less research on principal evaluations than on teacher evaluations, the changes represent a step in the right direction, said Matthew Clifford, a senior research scientist at the American Institutes for Research, in Washington, who is working on evaluation guidelines for districts in Illinois and Maine. 鈥淢any places have systems for evaluating principals that are not systematic and aren鈥檛 tied to standards right now, often based on reputation and on anecdotal evidence. Now, we鈥檙e building an evaluation system that鈥檚 more systematic.鈥�
Half and Half?
Thirty-four states have passed laws involving principal evaluation in the past five years, and 22 will be implementing new systems within the next two years, said Mr. Clifford. None of the relevant federal Education Department programs specifies what percentage of a school leader鈥檚 evaluation needs to be tied to test scores, and states differ in how they do that, he said.
In Florida, for instance, where evaluations were initially tied mainly to state standardized tests, the system was adjusted to factor in nontested subjects such as reading and mathematics, said Mr. Clifford. Some states, including Washington and Minnesota, require student achievement to count for 35 percent, while in Louisiana and Colorado, it鈥檚 50 percent. The national principals鈥� associations call for student growth to account for between 25 percent and 35 percent of a principal鈥檚 evaluation, which they say more closely reflects how much a principal can actually affect test scores.
For more on districts are striving to ensure fairness and accuracy in evaluations, see 鈥淣ew Evaluations for Principals, New Equity Issues,鈥� March 6, 2013.
The remainder of principals鈥� evaluations generally deal with measures of practice and behavior. 鈥淭he percent thing is more politically based than research-based,鈥� said P. Fred Storti, the executive director of the Minnesota Elementary School Principals鈥� Association. Test scores are an important part of the principal鈥檚 role, he said, 鈥渂ut there鈥檚 a lot you can鈥檛 boil down to a test score.鈥�
Still Experimenting
Though the changes to evaluations are picking up speed, states have generally dedicated less time to working out and implementing principal evaluations than they have to teacher evaluations, said Benjamin Fenton, the co-founder of New Leaders, a New York-based nonprofit focused on school leadership. 鈥淚 think that鈥檚 going to be a place of bigger focus,鈥� he said.
As a rule, 鈥渟tates and districts are looking at student outcomes to be a heavier weight or a larger official weight in evaluations,鈥� Mr. Fenton said.
Even so, principals鈥� evaluations have stirred less controversy than teachers鈥�, perhaps because principals are fewer in number鈥攏ationwide, there are about 95,000 principals as compared with 3.5 million teachers鈥攁nd mostly not unionized, Mr. Clifford said.
Principals are also used to being held accountable for the performance of their schools, said John Youngquist, the director of principal talent development in the 84,000-student Denver district, which plans to tie student test scores to evaluations starting next year. 鈥淚t鈥檚 empowering to principal managers and principals when there鈥檚 an agreed-upon set of understandings.鈥�
Context and Support
In Dallas, where student achievement will now account for 40 percent of school leaders鈥� evaluations, Superintendent Michael Miles said the new evaluations mirror district priorities. 鈥淲e value student-achievement results, we value high-quality instruction, we value parental engagement, we value positive and supportive school cultures,鈥� he said.
The evaluation system there goes hand in hand with new principal-recruitment and professional-development programs, Mr. Miles said, and with more support and training for evaluators. Each evaluator is now responsible for fewer principals鈥�10 to 12鈥攊n hopes that the appraisals will be more in-depth and accurate.
The superintendent said that while Dallas initially planned to have a system based half on student achievement and half on principal practice, feedback from principals led him to shift the balance toward practice. Mr. Miles said that a survey of the district鈥檚 principals showed them evenly split among those who approved of, disapproved of, and were neutral toward the new system. 鈥淲henever you have more-rigorous evaluation systems, there鈥檚 going to be some anxiety,鈥� he said. But 鈥淚 think that most are at least willing to give it a try.鈥�
In Hawaii, as in Chicago and Los Angeles, student achievement accounts for half of principals鈥� evaluations, said Ronn Nozoe, the deputy superintendent of Hawaii鈥檚 education department, which is the single statewide district responsible for 180,000 students. The student-achievement component will be based partly on schoolwide median growth on the state test and partly on a measure chosen from a list that includes ACT scores and graduation rates.
Mr. Nozoe said that developing the system had been a collaborative effort with the state principals鈥� union and Hawaii is also focused on providing professional development aligned with the new requirements. 鈥淪upporting principals to support their teachers and support their students is by far the most important work we can do,鈥� Mr. Nozoe said.
