necessary for evaluation to serve the
needs of individuals and schools
(Stronge, 1995). In the current era of
accountability, a practice-only view of
evaluation is no longer valid; instead,
we need a practice-plus-results perspective. What the principal knows,
values, and does is important, but so
is his or her ability to achieve specific, observable outcomes (Clifford,
Behrstock-Sherratt, & Fetters, 2012;
U.S. Department of Education, 2011).
High-quality performance evaluation
for principals—as well as for teachers—
must become the standard and not the
Fetters, J. (2012). The ripple effect: A
synthesis of research on principal influence
to inform performance evaluation design.
Washington, DC: American Institutes for
Growth without accountability can easily
become merely advice; accountability
without growth is pointless.
exception. In this era of accountability,
we must focus on growth-based,
evidence-supported, results-driven evaluation systems that identify, support,
and help sustain effective principals.
This is our gold standard. EL
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. (2013).
Ensuring fair and reliable measures of
effective teaching: Culminating findings
from the MET Project’s three-year study.
Seattle, WA: Author. Retrieved from
Boris-Schacter, S., & Merrifield, S. (2000).
Why particularly good principals don’t
quit. Journal of School Leadership, 10,
Catano, N., & Stronge, J. H. (2006). What
are principals expected to do? Congruence between principal evaluation and
performance standards. NASSP Bulletin,
90( 3), 221–237.
Clifford, M., Behrstock-Sherratt, E., &
Hallinger, P., & Heck. R. H. (1996). Reas-
sessing the principal’s role in school effec-
tiveness: A review of empirical research.
Educational Administration Quarterly,
32( 1), 5–44.
James H. Stronge ( email@example.com) is
Heritage Professor in the Educational
Policy, Planning, and Leadership Area
at the College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, Virginia. He is the author of
Principal Evaluation: Standards, Rubrics,
and Tools for Effective Performance