Principal Evaluation in the United States

  • Naftaly S. Glasman
  • Ronald H. Heck
Chapter
Part of the Kluwer International Handbooks of Education book series (SIHE, volume 9)

Abstract

Evaluation is an administrative function in education (Glasman, 1979; Razik & Swanson, 1995; Stufflebeam & Webster, 1988). It is one of several that include decision making, problem solving, and instructional supervision. The evaluation of school principals is a personnel administrative function (Seyfarth, 1991). It is also one of several others such as the selection and induction of school principals and other personnel, compensation, staff development, and reassignment (Van Zwoll, 1964). Personnel administration as a whole figures prominently in education because education is a labor-intensive industry (Webb, Greer, Montello, & Norton, 1987). While the institutional nature of schools has often resisted change (Tyack & Cuban, 1995), over the past several decades, the role of personnel evaluation has become central to policymakers’ efforts aimed at promoting academic improvement and long-term school effectiveness. Consequently, the evaluation of school principals has become increasingly prominent in personnel administration because principals are pivotal in schools and because the evaluation of principals reveals where schools are and where they are going (Glasman & Nevo, 1988).

Keywords

Student Achievement School Principal School Leadership Evaluation Purpose School Improvement 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adams, J.E., & Kirst, M.W. (1999). New demands and concepts for educational accountability: Striving for results in an era of excellence. In J. Murphy & K. Seashore-Lewis (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational administration (2nd ed.) (pp. 463–490). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  2. Alkin, M.C., Daillak, R., & White, P. (1979). Using evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  3. Ballou, D., & Podgursky, M. (1995). What makes a good principal: How teachers assess the performance of principals. Economics of Education Review, 14(3), 243–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barnett, B. (1995). Portfolio use in educational leadership programs: From theory to practice. Innovative Higher Education, 19, 197–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bartell, C. (1994, April). Preparing future administrators: Stakeholder perceptions. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  6. Blase, J. (1987).Dimensions of effective school leadership: The teacher’s perspective. American Educational Research Journal, 24(4), 589–610.Google Scholar
  7. Brookover, W, & Lezotte, L. (1977). Changes in school characteristics coincident with changes in student achievement (Occasional Paper #17). East Lansing, MI: University Institute for Research on Teaching.Google Scholar
  8. Brown, G., & Irby, B. (1998). Seven policy considerations for principal approval. School Administrator, 55(4), 10–11.Google Scholar
  9. Brown, G., Irby, B., & Neumeyer, C. (1998). Taking the lead: One district’s approach to principal evaluation. NASSP Bulletin, 82(602), 18–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Callahan, R.E. (1962). Education and the cult of efficiency. Chicago: University of Chicago.Google Scholar
  11. Clayton-Jones, L., McMahon, J., Rodwell, K., Skehan, J., Bourke, S., & Holbrook, A. (1993). Appraisal of school principals in an Australian department of education. Peabody Journal of Education, 68(2), 110–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Darling-Hammond, L. (1994). Performance-based assessment and educational equity. Harvard Educational Review, 64(1), 5–29.Google Scholar
  13. Davis, S. (1998). Superintendents’ perspectives on the involuntary departure of public school principals: The most frequent reasons why principals lose their jobs. Educational Administration Quarterly, 34(1), 58–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dillard, C. (1995). Leading with her life: An African American feminist (re)interpretation of leadership for an urban high school principal. Educational Administration Quarterly, 31(4), 539–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Donmoyer, R. (1995, April). The very idea of a knowledge base. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  16. Dornbush, S. (1975). Evaluation and the exercise of authority. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  17. Duke, D., & Iwanicki, E. (1992). Principal assessment and the notion of “fit.” Peabody Journal of Education, 68(1), 25–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Duke, D., & Stiggins, R. (1985). Evaluating the performance of principals: A descriptive study. Educational Administration Quarterly, 21(4), 71–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Education Week. (January 25, 1995). Cincinnati links administrators’pay, performance, 1, 6.Google Scholar
  20. Ellett, C. (1978). Understanding and using the Georgia principal assessment system (GPAS). CCBC Notebook, 7(2), 2–14.Google Scholar
  21. Fletcher, T., & Mclnerney, W. (1995). Principal performance assessment and principal evaluation. ERS Spectrum, 13(4), 16–21.Google Scholar
  22. Fontana, J. (1994). Principal assessment: A staff developer’s idea for a complete overhaul. NASSP Bulletin, 78(565), 91–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gale, L., & McCleary, L. (1972). Competencies of the secondary school principal: A needs assessment study. RIEOCT73.Google Scholar
  24. Garrett, R., & Flanigan, J. (1991). Principal evaluation: A definitive process. Journal of School Leadership, 1(1), 74–86.Google Scholar
  25. Ginsberg, R., & Berry, B. (1990). The folklore of principal evaluation. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 3(3), 205–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ginsberg, R., & Thompson, T. (1992). Dilemmas and solutions regarding principal evaluation. Peabody Journal of Education, 68(1), 58–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Glasman, N.S. (1979). A perspective on evaluation as an administrative function. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 1(5), 33–44.Google Scholar
  28. Glasman, N.S. (1983). Increased centrality of evaluation and the school principal. Administrator’s Notebook, 30(7), 1–4.Google Scholar
  29. Glasman, N.S. (1986). Evaluation-based leadership. New York: SUNY.Google Scholar
  30. Glasman, N.S. (1992). Toward assessing the test score-related actions of principals. Peabody Journal of Education, 68(1), 108–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Glasman, N.S. (1995). Generating information for the evaluation of school principals’ engagement in problem solving. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 21, 401–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Glasman, N.S. (1997). (Ed.) New ways of training for school leadership. Peabody Journal of Education, 2(2).Google Scholar
  33. Glasman, N.S., & Glasman, L. (1990). Evaluation: Catalyst for or response to change. In S.B. Bacharach (Ed.), Education reform (pp. 392–399). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  34. Glasman, N.S., & Heck, R. (1992). The changing leadership role of the principal: Implications for principal assessment. Peabody Journal of Education, 68(1), 5–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Glasman, N.S., & Heck, R.H. (1996). Role-based evaluation of principals: Developing an appraisal system. In K. Leithwood, J. Chapman, D. Corson, P. Hallinger, & A. Hart (Eds.), International handbook of educational leadership and administration (pp. 369–394). London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  36. Glasman, N.S., Killait, B.R., & Gmelch, W. (1975). Evaluation of instructors in higher education. Santa Barbara, CA: Regents of the University of California.Google Scholar
  37. Glasman, N.S., & Marten, P.A. (1993). Personnel evaluation standards: The use of principal assessment systems. Peabody Journal of Education, 68(2), 47–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Glasman, N.S., & Nevo, D. (1988). Evaluation in decision making. Boston, MA: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  39. Goertz, M., & Duffy, M. (2000, April). Variations on a theme: What is performance-based accountability? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  40. Gorton, R.A., & Snowden, R.E. (1993). School leadership and administration. Madison, WI: Brown & Benchmark.Google Scholar
  41. Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. (1996). Reassessing the principal’s role in school effectiveness: A review of the empirical research, 1980-1995. Educational Administration Quarterly, 32(4), 5–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. (1999). Can leadership enhance school effectiveness? In T. Bush et al., (Eds.) Educational management: Redefining theory, policy, and practice (pp. 178–190). London: Paul Chapman Publishing.Google Scholar
  43. Hart, A. (1992). The social and organizational influence of principals: Evaluating principals in context. Peabody Journal of Education, 68(1), 37–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Heck, R. (1995). Organizational and professional socialization: Its impact on the performance of new administrators. The Urban Review, 27(1), 31–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Heck, R. (2000). Examining the impact of school quality on school outcomes and improvement: A value-added approach. Educational Administration Quarterly, 36(4), 513–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Heck, R., & Glasman, N.S. (1993). Merging evaluation and administration. Peabody Journal of Education, 68(2), 132–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Heck, R., & Marcoulides, G. (1992). Principal assessment: Conceptual problem, methodological problem, or both? Peabody Journal of Education, 68(1), 124–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Heck, R., & Marcoulides (1996). The assessment of principal performance: A multilevel Evaluation Approach. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 10, 11–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Hess, C. (1991) School restructuring, Chicago style. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  50. Hoy, W., & Miskel, C. (1982). Educational administration: Theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.). New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  51. Hoyt, D.P. (1982). Evaluating administrators. In R.E Wilson (Ed.), Designing academic profession barriers. New directions in higher education, No. 37, 10(1), 89–100.Google Scholar
  52. Jerald, C., & Boser, U. (Jan. 11, 1999). Taking stock. Education Week, 28(17), 81–97.Google Scholar
  53. Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation. (1988). The personnel evaluation standards. Newbery Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  54. Leithwood, K., & Duke, D. (1999). A century’s quest to understand school leadership. In J. Murphy & K. Seashore-Lewis (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational administration (2nd ed.) (pp. 45–72). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  55. Lessinger, L.M. (1971). The powerful notion of accountability in education. In L. Bowder (Ed.), Emerging patterns of administrative accountability (pp. 62–73). Berkeley, CA: McCatelan.Google Scholar
  56. Marcoulides, G. (1988). From hands-on measurement to job performance: The issue of dependability. The Journal of Business and Society, 2(1), 132–143.Google Scholar
  57. Marcoulides, G., & Heck, R. (1992). Assessing instructional leadership with “g” theory. International Journal of Educational Management, 6(3), 4–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Marcoulides, G., & Heck, R. (1993). Examining administrative leadership behavior: A comparison of principals and vice principals. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 7, 81–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. McCarthy, M. (1999). The evolution of leadership preparation programs. In J. Murphy & K, Seashore-Lewis (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational administration (2nd Edition) (pp. 119–140). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  60. Murphy, J. (1988). Methodological, measurement, and conceptual problems in the study of instructional leadership. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11(2), 117–134.Google Scholar
  61. National Commission for the Principalship (1990). Principals for our changing schools: Preparation and certification. Fairfax, VA: National Policy Board for Educational Administration.Google Scholar
  62. Newman (1985). Staff appraisal in the South Midlands and the South West. Educational Management and Administration, 14, 197–202.Google Scholar
  63. Patton, (1978). Utilization focused evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  64. Pitner, N., & Hocevar, D. (1987). An empirical comparison of two-factor versus multifactor theories of principal leadership: Implications for the evaluation of school principals. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 1(1), 93–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Provus, M. (1971). Discrepancy evaluation. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.Google Scholar
  66. Rallis, S.F., & Goldring, E.B. (1993). Beyond the individual assessment of principals: School-based accountability in dynamic schools. Peabody Journal of Education, 68(2), 3–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Razik, T.A., & Swanson, A.D. (1995). Fundamental concepts of educational leadership and management. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Merrill.Google Scholar
  68. Richard, A. (Feb. 2, 2000). Principals approve new contract in New York City. Education Week, 29(21), 5.Google Scholar
  69. Sack, J. (May 2, 2000). Del. ties school job reviews to student tests. Education Week, 19(34), 24, 27.Google Scholar
  70. Sergiovani, T. (1990). Value-added leadership: How to get extraordinary performance in schools. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Publishers.Google Scholar
  71. Seyfarth, J.T. (1991). Personnel management for effective schools. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  72. Sirotnik, K., & Durden, P. (1996). The validity of administrator performance assessment systems: The ADI as a case-in-point. Educational Administration Quarterly, 32(4), 539–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Smrekar, C.E., & Mawhinney, H.B. (1999). Integrated services: Challenges and linking schools, families, and communities. In J. Murphy & K. Seashore-Lewis (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational administration (2nd ed.) (pp. 443–463). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  74. Smylie, M., & Crowson, R. (1993). Principal assessment under restructured governance. Peabody Journal of Education, 68(2), 64–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Smylie, M., & Hart, A. (1999). School leadership for teacher learning and change: A human and social capital development perspective. In J. Murphy & K. Seashore-Lewis (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational administration (2nd ed.) (pp. 421–442). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  76. Snyder, J., & Ebmeier, H. (1992). Empirical linkages among principal behaviors and intermediate outcomes: Implications for principal evaluation. Peabody Journal of Education, 68(1), 75–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Stufflebeam, D. (1972). The relevance of the CIPP evaluation model for educational accountability. SRIS Quarterly, 5, 3–6.Google Scholar
  78. Stufflebeam, D., & Nevo, D. (1993). Principal evaluation: New directions for improvement. Peabody Journal of Education, 68(2), 24–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Stufflebeam, D., & Webster, W.J. (1988). Evaluation as an administrative function. In N.J. Boyan (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational administration (pp. 569–602). au]New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  80. Sykes, G. (1999). The “new professionalism” in education: An appraisal. In J. Murphy & K. Seashore-Lewis (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational administration (2nd ed.) (pp. 227–250). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  81. Thomson, S. (Ed.), (1993). Principals for our changing schools: The knowledge and skill base. Fairfax, VA: National Policy Board for Educational Administration.Google Scholar
  82. Tryneski, J. (1993). Requirements for certification of teachers, counselors, librarians, and administrators for elementary and secondary schools 1993-4. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  83. Tyack, D., & Cuban, L. (1995). Tinkering toward Utopia: A century of public school reform. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  84. Tyler, R. (1950). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  85. Ubben, G., & Hughes, L. (1997). The principal. Boston, MA: Ally & Bacon.Google Scholar
  86. Van Zwoll, J.A. (1964). School personnel administration. New York: Appleton-Century-Crafts.Google Scholar
  87. Walters, D. (1980). The measurement of principal competencies. Phi Delta Kappan, 61(6), 423–425.Google Scholar
  88. Webb, L.D., Greer, J.T., Montello, P.A., & Norton, M.S. (1987). Personnel administration in education. Columbus, OH: Merrill.Google Scholar
  89. White, K. (Jan. 11, 1999). Keeping the doors wide open. Education Week, 38(17), 12–13.Google Scholar
  90. Williams, J., & Pantili, L. (1992). A meta-analytic model of principal assessment. Journal of School Leadership, 2(3), 256–279.Google Scholar
  91. Wirt, F., & Kirst, M. (1989). Schools in conflict (2nd ed.). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.Google Scholar
  92. Wong, K., & Rollow, S. (1990). A case study of the recent Chicago school reform. Administrator’s Notebook, 34(5-6), 1–4.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Naftaly S. Glasman
    • 1
  • Ronald H. Heck
    • 2
  1. 1.University of California at Santa BarbaraUSA
  2. 2.University of Hawaii at ManoaUSA

Personalised recommendations