Educational Leadership

progress standard is so highly valued by policymakers, legislators, and the general public that it alone has come to encompass as much as 50 percent of the total evaluation of a principal in some states and districts—even though various studies point to the principal’s influence as accounting for about 10 percent or less of the variability in student learning (Waters, Marzano, & McNulty, 2003).

Yet the 50 percent figure is not without some basis in reality. Some researchers—including John Hattie (2008)—estimate that teacher behaviors account for as much as 30 percent of student learning. And who hires, inducts, supports, and evaluates teachers? Of course, it’s the principal. Thus, the principal’s effect on student learning in the school is far greater than her or his own direct influence. I think it safe to surmise that schools cannot rise above the quality of their principals. Moreover, if teachers are held accountable for student learning— with 30–50 percent of their evaluations based on student learning gains—then it is fair and reasonable to hold principals similarly accountable.

Because the connection between principal quality and student achievement isn’t an exact science—but is rather based on some blend of evidence, policy, public opinion, and politics—I think we may see this 50 percent figure refined over time. Recent findings from a large-scale, three-year study by the MET project recommended that 33–50 percent of teacher evaluation be based on measures of student progress (Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, 2013). I suspect that we will see principal evaluation follow this same pattern and eventually settle into a percentage that is equivalent to that of teachers— a substantial portion of the principal’s evaluation, but not necessarily 50 percent.

Applying the Principal Evaluation Standards How can we accurately measure the seven research-based standards for principal performance discussed here and use the results for ongoing principal and school improvement? We must begin by providing a comprehensive, authentic portrait of the principal’s work through multiple data sources.

Documenting Principal Performance

Valid, fair principal evaluation systems use multifaceted sources of information to document job performance, including self-evaluation, observations and school site visits, document logs, surveys, and goal setting.

No single source or assessment
method can adequately capture the
complexities of a school leader’s work.
The proper use of multiple data sources
can dramatically improve the usefulness
of the evaluation system (for example,
by providing broader and more diverse
feedback). It also enhances the validity
and reliability of the process, providing
a more defensible basis for evaluation
decisions.

Using Evaluation Results for Growth
and Accountability

Once these multiple data sources are identified and the information is collected and analyzed, effective principal evaluation systems use the results to focus on improvement. Supporting principals is not only essential to the success of schools but also fair to the principals themselves.

To ensure that evaluation is a value-driven and growth-oriented learning process, I suggest organizing the practice around a set of guiding tenets, including the following:

Numbers alone don’t matter. Simply applying a numerical score to principal evaluation is sterile. The value in evaluation will come from what we do with the results.

Evaluation is designed for 100 percent of principals, not the 3–5 percent who may be failing. Without a doubt, we must deal with ineffective principals. However, evaluation is best when we grow and support all principals. This means that evaluation should be designed to provide valid, constructive feedback for the vast majority of capable, competent, committed principals in our schools.

Evaluation must balance growth and accountability. Some claim that growth and accountability are incompatible. I disagree. In fact, unless the two are inextricably tied, they tend not to work well. Growth without accountability can easily become merely advice; accountability without growth is pointless.