leadership evaluation, feedback and growthmcrel balanced leadership x learning-centered leadership x...

Leadership Evaluation,

Feedback, and Growth

Matthew Clifford, Principal Researcher February 2015

Copyright © 2015 American Institutes for Research and Council of Chief State School Officers. All rights reserved.

Discuss how principals support students’ equitable access

to excellent teachers as well as access to appropriate

learning programs.

Identify strategies for supporting principals’ work.

Consider how states and districts can support equitable

distribution within school through advanced principal

evaluation practices.

Session Goals

2

Inequitable distribution of educator talent is an important

educational policy issue, affecting student learning now and

in the future.

2002 Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary

Education Act (ESEA)

2006 Highly Qualified Teacher State Plans

2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act

2015 State Plans to Ensure Equitable Access to Excellent

Educators

National Focus

3

Research indicates that low-performing and high-poverty

schools are staffed at higher rates by teachers that are:

Inexperienced

Underqualified, in terms of certification and school rank

Less effective

Less likely to stay

Less research is available on school principal distribution,

but the available research indicates parallel trends in

principal distribution.

National Focus

4

Research on teacher distribution: Clotfelter et al. (2007); DeAngeles et al. (2005); Glazerman and Max (2011); Ingersoll

and Perda (2009); Lankford, Loeb, And Wychoff (2002).

Research on principal distribution: Gates et al. (2003, 2006); Loeb et al. (2011). Papa et al. (2002); Punswick et al. (2007).

Further, research all indicates that within schools lower

performing students, students with histories of behavioral

challenges, younger students are taught by teachers that are:

Less experienced

Underqualified

National Focus

Source: Beteille, Kalogrides, and Loeb (2009)

5

Principals Are Key: Changing Roles

Task Diversification and Distribution

Disciplinarian

Manager

Isolated

Disciplinarian

Manager

Community engaged

Disciplinarian

Manager

Instructional leader

6

Principals Are Key: Influence

7

Direct Outcomes Indirect Outcomes

Leadership

Practice

School

Conditions

Community

Contexts

Teacher

Effectiveness

Instructional

Quality

Student

Learning

Adapted from Clifford, Sherratt, and Fetters (2012); Clifford and Ross (2012)

At your table, consider this question:

What can principals do to improve equitable distribution?

Principals Are Key: District Actions

8

Source: Sherratt and Clifford (2010)


What can principals do to improve equitable distribution?

Rethink teacher assignment

Improve teacher induction

Improve school image and reputation

Connect teachers with strong professional learning

Evaluate teachers and use teacher effectiveness data

Advocate for involvement in teacher hiring

Improve school culture and school safety

Provide clear instructional support

Distribute responsibility

Principals Are Key: District Actions

9

Source: Sherratt and Clifford (2010)

Principals Are Key: Influence

10

Direct Outcomes Indirect Outcomes

Leadership

Practice

School

Conditions

Community

Contexts

Teacher

Effectiveness

Instructional

Quality

Student

Learning

Source: Ikemoto Taliaferro, Fenton, & Davis (2014)

State

and

district

support


What can we do, in our positions, to support principals in

this work?

Principals Are Key: State Support

11


What can we do, in our positions, to support principals in

this work?

The policy levers for principal effectiveness:

Professional development and networking

Administrative oversight (compliance)

Performance standards

Performance evaluation

Principals Are Key: State Support

12

Principal Evaluation:

A Three-Pronged Strategy

13

Improved

equitable

distribution

Improved

principal

evaluation

Principal

focus on

equitable

distribution

Principal

retention

Improved

principal

performance

Performance Evaluation for

Accountability and Growth

14

Principal Evaluation

15

Source: Jacques, Clifford, and Hornung (2012)

AK

MT

WY ID

WA

OR

NV UT

CA

AZ

ND

SD

NE

CO

NM

TX

OK

KS

AR

LA

MO

IA

MN WI

IL IN

KY

TN

MS AL GA

FL

SC

NC

VA WV

OH

MI NY

PA

CT

ME VT

NH

50 states + 2 territories

with new principal

evaluation policies

“Principal evaluation must

accelerate from 0 to 100

miles an hour. Unlike

teacher evaluation, states

and districts have little

experience systematically

evaluating principals.”

–Master principal

Coherence

Clifford and Ross (2012)

What Principals Want

Useful

Created by and for principals

Flexible and relevant

Accurate multiple measures

Part of a support system


16

Feedback Performance

Evaluation

Practice Assessment

Outcomes Assessment

Principal Evaluation: Components

Standards-driven

Evidence-based

Fair and accurate

Practice-aligned

Growth-oriented

Fair and accurate

17

Depersonalized

Reflective

Linked to PD

Standards-driven

Principal Evaluation: Practice

18

ISLLC 2008

Vision, Mission, and Goals

Teaching and Learning

Managing Organizational

Systems and Safety

Collaborating With Families

and Stakeholders

Ethics and Integrity

Influencing Contexts

Council of Chief State School Officers (2008)

Evidence-based


19

Competency-based framework

describing performance levels

Aligned measures include:

• Portfolio review

• Observation

• 360-degree survey

• Principal growth plan

• Other measures (?)

Practice Assessment

Practice-aligned, growth-oriented


20

Student learning gains

• Student learning objectives

• Value-added measures

School culture improvement

Student engagement and

behavior improvement

Other school measures

Outcomes Assessment

Reflective, Linked to professional development


21

Evidence-based

Performance-oriented

Sponsors reflection

Linked to individualized

professional learning plans

Feedback

Done well, principal evaluation….


• Communicates priorities.

• Establishes common language.

• Drives growth.

• Supports policy compliance.

22

Feedback Performance

Evaluation

Practice Assessment

Outcomes Assessment

In triads, consider these questions.

How, if at all, does your state’s principal evaluation system(s)

address roles in improving equitable access to excellent

teachers in schools through its....

• Framework?

• Practice measures (e.g., observation, portfolio)?

• Outcomes measures?


23


Strategy for Supporting

Teacher Equitable Distribution

24


Strategies From the Field

25

For more information, visit www.educatortalent.org.

AK

MT

WY ID

WA

OR

NV UT

CA

AZ

ND

SD

NE

CO

NM

TX

OK

KS

AR

LA

MO

IA

MN WI

IL IN

KY

TN

MS AL GA

FL

SC

NC

VA WV

OH

MI NY

PA

CT

ME VT

NH

Rural and suburban schools

Strong, local control

Not Race to the Top states

“Grow-your-own” emphasis

Talent distribution priorities

U.S. Virgin Islands

http://www.educatortalent.org/

• Our engagement with partnership emphasizes:

• Framework that prioritizes data use, talent development

• Observation to reinforce teacher feedback and data use

• Policy-relevant, standards-aligned portfolio review

• Principal supervisor training for evaluation and coaching

• Change management

• State-level systems review and improvement


Strategies From the Field

26

Principal Frameworks:

Communicating Competencies

and Priorities

27

Principal Evaluation: How Frameworks

Address Talent Management

28

Frameworks are high-level rubrics that

• Describe competencies

• Articulate performance levels

• Communicate priorities

• Foster reflection Competencies describe habits of

action and thoughts of strong

principals exhibit. Competency-

based evaluation has been

associated with improved practices

and outcomes in psychological and

workplace studies.

See Clifford, 2014; Steiner & Hassel, forthcoming



29

Framework Addresses Talent

Management

Stronge and associates X

New Leaders X

McREL Balanced Leadership X

Learning-centered leadership X

AIR X

University of Washington’s Center for Educational

Leadership

X

In addition to state and district-developed frameworks, the following are

examples of national principal evaluation frameworks.



30

Standard or

Competency

Learning

progression

AIR’s Five Essential Practices of

School Leadership: A Framework

for Assessing Practice

Written by and for principals

Content validated

Emphasizes instructional

leadership, talent management



31



32

Five Essential Practices

ISLLC standards Build shared

purpose

Focus on

learning

Manage

organizational

systems

Collaborate

with

community

Lead with

integrity

Mission, vision, and goals

Teaching and learning

Managing organizational

systems and safety

Collaborating with

community

Ethics and integrity

Influencing contexts

Cumulative Structure

The behaviors “accumulate” across the levels—a principal must demonstrate

evidence for the preceding performance levels in order to score at any given level.

Basic

Intermediate

Proficient

Distinguished

Planning

Managing

Reacting

Monitoring

Implementing

Anticipating

Improving

Distributing

Integrating

Modeling

Advocating

Coaching

Below basic means principals do not

do one or more things at the basic level.



33

Review the Five Essential Practices framework, specifically

Practice 2 (Focus on learning)

Practice 4 (Manage organizational systems)

Consider this question:

How does the framework address principals’ role in supporting

equitable distribution?

How, if at all, are the actions/ideas adaptable to your framework?

Share-out



34

Principal Observation:

Feedback for Principals,

Support for Teachers

35

Measures

Practices

Build Shared Purpose

Focus on Learning

Manage Organizational

Systems

Connect with Community

Lead with Integrity

Principal Portfolio

Principal Observation

360-Degree Survey

Principal Growth Plan

Principal Observation: Supporting

Teacher Growth With Feedback

36

Principal observation, like teacher observation, is a formal,

systematic method of gathering performance evidence on

routine tasks.

Observation-based feedback is very powerful for shaping

practice.

AIR’s Instructional Feedback Observation Tool is used

to observe the quality of feedback delivered by school

administrators to teachers during postobservation

conferences, a skill that many principals struggle to do well

and an important skill for teacher growth.



37

Conditions for Fair, Accurate

Observation What We do

Observation process is transparent We are train principals and supervisors.

Observation is accurate AIR master coaches co-observe with

supervisors and co-rate practice.

Observations occur in controlled

conditions

We select postobservation sessions.

Multiple observations result in a

score

A minimum of two observations will

contribute to an observation score, but

more tend to be scheduled.



38

The Instructional Feedback

Observation support includes

two publications:

The Guidebook outlines a

transparent procedure.

The Toolbox includes forms to

be completed by supervisors

and principals.



39

Domain What It Measures Evidence

Evidence use Centers conversation on observation evidence

Accurately aligns data to teacher framework

Observation

Professional

interactions

Focused attention

Appropriate communication

De-personalized comments

Observation

Differentiated questions Asks reflective questions

Leading conversations Sets goals for the meeting

Paces conversation

Defines next steps with the teacher

Observation

Written feedback Completes forms

Connects to teacher framework

Document

review



40

Prepare (and schedule)

Collect

Analyze Gather Evidence

Plan

Principal observations

must be scheduled to

correspond to teacher

post-observation

conferences. (November)

Observation evidence can

be collected by scripting

or video.

Observation results can

be shared at the mid-year

check-in meeting.

(December)



41

What’s inside the Guidebook?

Take 10 minutes to read pages 2–10 of the Guidebook.

Meet in small groups

What was interesting or surprising?

What do you need more information about?

What points are important to highlight?

Report out.



42

Activity: You Are the Observer

Make notes when watching this short

video of a teacher post-observation

conference.

Rate performance according to the

Observation Rubric (pp. 4–6 of the

Toolkit).

Discuss your overall impressions of the

feedback session at your table:

• What does the principal do well?

• How could the principal improve?

Share out key reflections: How does

this support principals work to grow

teacher talent?

Measuring Practice:

Leader Observation

43

http://tpep-wa.org/trainingpd/pre-and-

post-observation-examples/

http://tpep-wa.org/trainingpd/pre-and-post-observation-examples/












Challenges and Possibilities

44

Wrapping Up: Questions,

Challenges, Possibilities

45

Wrapping Up: Team Focus

46

Beteille, T., Kalogrides, D., & Loeb, S. (2009). Effective schools: Managing the

recruitment, development, and retention of high-quality teachers (Working

Paper 37). CALDER Center. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute. Retrieved

from http://www.urban.org/uploadedpdf/1001428-effective-schools.pdf

Clifford, M. (2013). Instructional feedback observation tool. Washington, DC:

American Institutes for Research.

Clifford, M., Behrstock-Sherratt, E., & Fetters, J. (2012). The ripple effect: A

synthesis of research on principal influence to inform performance

evaluation design. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research.

Retrieved from

http://www.air.org/sites/default/files/downloads/report/1707_The_Ripple_Effe

ct_d8_Online_0.pdf

Clifford, M., Fetters, J., & Yoder, N. (2014). The five essential practices of school

leadership: A framework for principal evaluation and growth. Washington,

DC: American Institutes for Research.

References

47

http://www.urban.org/uploadedpdf/1001428-effective-schools.pdf






http://www.air.org/sites/default/files/downloads/report/1707_The_Ripple_Effect_d8_Online_0.pdf



Clifford, M., & Ross, S. (2012). Rethinking principal evaluation: A new paradigm

informed by research and practice. Alexandria, VA: National Association of

Elementary School Principals; Reston, VA: National Association of

Secondary School Principals. Retrieved from

http://www.naesp.org/sites/default/files/PrincipalEvaluationReport.pdf

Clotfelter, C. T., Ladd, H. F., Vigdor, J. L., & Wheeler, J. (2007). High poverty

schools and the distribution of teachers and principals (Working Paper 1).

Washington, DC: National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in

Education Research.

Council of Chief State School Officers. (2008). Educational leadership policy

standards: ISLLC 2008 (as adopted by the National Policy Board for

Educational Administration). Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from

http://www.ccsso.org/Documents/2008/Educational_Leadership_Policy_Stan

dards_2008.pdf

References

48

http://www.naesp.org/sites/default/files/PrincipalEvaluationReport.pdf

http://www.ccsso.org/Documents/2008/Educational_Leadership_Policy_Standards_2008.pdf



DeAngelis, K. J., Presley, J. B., & White, B. R. (2005). The distribution of teacher

quality in Illinois (IERC 2005-1). Edwardsville, IL: Illinois Education Research

Council.

Gates, S., Kalogrides, D., Loeb, S., & Beteille, T. (2011). Power play? Teacher

characteristics and class assignments. Palo Alto, CA: Center for the Analysis

of Longitudinal Data in Education Research.

Gates, S.M., Ringel, J.S., Santibañez, L., Guarino, C., Ghosh-Dastidar, B., &

Brown, A. (2006). Mobility and turn-over among school principals.

Economics of Education Review 25(3), 289-302.

Gates, S.M., Ringel, J.S., Santibañez, L., Ross, K.E. & Chung, C.H. (2003). Who

is leading our schools? An overview of school administrators and their

careers. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.

References

49

Glazerman, S., & Max, J. (2011). Do low income students have equal access to

the highest-performing teachers? Washington, DC: Institute of Education

Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional

Assistance. Retrieved from

http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pubs/20114016/pdf/20114016.pdf

Ikemoto, G., Taliaferro, L., Fenton, B., & Davis, J. (2014). Great leaders at scale:

Creating district conditions that enable all principals to be effective.

Washington, DC: New Leaders and George W. Bush Institute.

Ingersoll, R., & Perda, D. (2009). The mathematics and science teacher

shortage: Fact and myth (CPRE Research Report #RR-62). Philadelphia,

PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.

Jacques, C., Clifford, M., & Hornung, K. (2012). State policies on principal

evaluation: Trends in a changing landscape. Washington, DC: Center on

Great Teachers and Leaders.

References

50

http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pubs/20114016/pdf/20114016.pdf

Kalogrides, D., Loeb, S., & Beteille, T. (2011). Power play? Teacher characteristics

and class assignments. Palo Alto, CA: Center for the Analysis of Longitudinal

Data in Education Research.

Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2002). Teacher sorting and the plight of

urban schools. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(1), 37–62.

Loeb, S., Kalogrides, D., & Horng, E. L. (2010). Principal preferences and the

uneven distribution of principals across schools. Educational Evaluation and

Policy Analysis 32(2), 205–229.

Papa, F. C., Jr., Lankford, H., & Wyckoff, J. (2002). The attributes and career

paths of principals: Implications for improving policy. Albany, NY: Teacher

Policy Research. Retrieved from

www.teacherpolicyresearch.org/portals/1/pdfs/career_paths_of_principals.pdf

Punswick, E., Belt, C., Baker, B. (2007). School leadership stability, principal

moves, and departures: Evidence from Missouri. Presented at the University

Council on Educational Administration Annual Conference, Arlington, VA

References

51

http://www.teacherpolicyresearch.org/portals/1/pdfs/career_paths_of_principals.pdf

Punswick, E., Belt, C., Baker, B., (2008) Principals’ backgrounds and school

leadership stability: Evidence from fly-over country. Presented at the annual

conference of the American Education Finance Association, Denver, CO,

Sherratt, E., & Clifford, M. (2010). Ensuring the equitable distribution of teachers:

Strategies for schools, districts, and states. Washington DC: National

Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality.

References

52

www.facebook.com/gtlcenter

www.twitter.com/gtlcenter

Advancing state efforts to grow, respect, and retain great teachers and

leaders for all students

Matthew Clifford

630-689-8017

[email protected]

Center on Great Teachers and Leaders

1000 Thomas Jefferson Street NW

Washington, DC 20007-3835

877-322-8700

www.gtlcenter.org | www.air.org

53