Neil Shipman remembers when he first became a principal. At age 26, he came face-to-face with the challenges that accompany running a school. "A lot of people didn't take me seriously because I was 'too young,'" he says. "But the biggest challenge I faced [was] trying to keep my focus on teaching and learning at a time when others were pressuring principals to become managers." Today Shipman directs the Interstate School Leaders Licen-sure Consortium (ISLLC) for the Council of Chief State School Officers.
Shipman's difficulties were not unique. Many principals today face the same pressures to be both a manager and educator, but in an era of tighter budgets and greater expectations they are also held accountable for building management, student achievement, and many other things. With so much in the balance, the qualities separating a successful principal from an unsuccessful one have become increasingly complicated, and the need to evaluate a principal's performance has become increasingly important.
Evaluating whether a school administrator is effective is critical to ensuring a school's success. Ironically, however, while sound procedures are often in place for evaluating teachers, the processes for evaluating principals tend to vary widely.
"The systems for evaluating teachers are better in most cases than they are for evaluating principals," Shipman says. The tools and approaches people use are "just all over the map." In many school systems, the responsibility of evaluating the principal falls to the superintendent. In larger systems, however, the task is simply beyond the capacity of one individual. Where there are several schools within a district, the evaluation is either delegated to assistants or given over to a committee.
These differences in who conducts the evaluation, however, are not nearly as significant as the ways in which the evaluation itself is implemented. "School districts in most states have the autonomy to determine what principal evaluation will look like and who will carry it out," says Pete Reed, the administrator of leadership and development assessment at the National Association of Secondary School Principals (NASSP). "Some states do have legislation that provides guidance in what will be evaluated as well as some suggested models, but I don't know of anyone right now who has a mandated model for principal evaluation."
One system that a number of states have begun to turn to was developed by ISLLC, the Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (see box). Developed in 1996, the program outlines a series of standards that can be recognized by states for licensure.
Consistency such as the ISLLC standards provide, experts say, is essential for reforming the way some principal evaluations are conducted. "I know places where the associate superintendent comes in with a one-page checklist and [sits] down and has a 30-minute conversation . . . and that's the evaluation," Reed says. "Other places have gone to portfolios with a wide variety of outcome indicators in different categories, and there [are] reflections on what has happened with each one of those." Good performance appraisals should be the product of time and effort, Reed says, but too often those responsible for carrying out evaluations are overburdened and feel they simply don't have the time.
Weighing Test Scores in the Balance
Complicating the evaluation issue, many principals today find that they are being assessed not only by how well they address their own challenges but also by how well their students address theirs.
"There's an incredible amount of pressure on principals to be held accountable for kids' progress in schools," Shipman says. This pressure, he notes, has led many systems to place what he regards as undue emphasis on student test scores and achievement. "I don't have a problem with principals being tested," he says. "But I do have a problem with kids' test scores being used as the major factor in a principal's or teacher's evaluation." One school system, Shipman noted, even went so far as to base 65 percent of a principal's evaluation on student test scores alone. "I think [in cases like that] we've gone too far," Shipman concludes.
Still, the greater push for standards and its impact on evaluations is not likely to diminish soon. "[Student test scores] are a factor in how schools are being evaluated and how districts are being evaluated," says Richard DuFour, the superintendent of Adlai E. Stevenson School District in Lincolnshire, Ill. "We can hang our heads about that and complain about it, but it's not going to go away."
Rather than question the validity of such measurements, DuFour urges principals and officials to keep the scores in mind when thinking about how best to shape their schools. "If this is a criterion for how my school is going to be evaluated or perceived, then part of my job is to put my school in a position where it can do the best it possibly can," he says. "My advice to principals is to figure out what [they] can do to support teachers in their efforts to improve student performance on tests."
He uses a sports analogy to illustrate: "When basketball went to the three-point rule in the NBA, there were purists who felt it wasn't a good rule . . . but basketball coaches didn't say, 'Well, I'm going to ignore it.' This is how the game is being played in schools. Test scores are going to be a factor, and if you're going to be successful in the game, you had better learn how to help your school perform well."
Finding a Mentor
This challenge of finding ways to improve student performance has left many school systems struggling to define what the responsibilities of the principal should be.
"The role of the principal has become increasingly complex," says Reed. "The scope of the job has broadened incredibly as schools, school systems, and principals have been called upon to address the needs of all the children in our society." This added complexity, Reed and others suggest, has made the job of being a principal all the more challenging, particularly for those with comparatively little experience in the day-to-day stresses that come with running a school.
To solicit the kind of constructive criticism that will help them earn positive evaluations, Reed and other experts urge new principals to seek out a mentor with whom they can work closely during that first critical year. Some state systems provide a mentoring program to help new administrators ease into their role, but many do not orchestrate the program in a way that is helpful to a new principal.
"Some people just see it as a buddy system," Reed says. "'If you get into trouble, call me and I'll see if I can help bail you out' [is the philosophy] as opposed to 'Let's have a relationship in which we'll focus on your professional growth during this year that's going to be very difficult for you professionally.' " The goal should be to do more than just make it, he says. The new principal should be able to grow as a professional and at the same time have a positive influence on what happens in the school.
Shipman echoes Reed's sentiments. "Either [find a mentor] through the central office or find one yourself," he advises. "Get together periodically and tell war stories and offer suggestions to each other." This sharing of experiences, experts say, can help new principals not only develop during their first year but also improve and ultimately flourish in their roles.
The Future of the Principalship
Though the challenges and responsibilities of the principalship are not likely to lessen in the years to come, many experts see the future of the principalship as one of opportunity and challenge. The changing nature of the position, they feel, will give the principal of tomorrow a unique role in both the school system and business community, as well as the chance to address issues not even conceivable 20 or 30 years ago.
"We're going to see a much stronger emphasis on the use of technology in the future," Shipman says. "There will be, and there should be, a much stronger emphasis on a total community involvement with the school, wherein the parents have a real say in the decision making in the school and where business communities are much more involved." Principals of the future will be expected not only to work within the school system but also to serve as "ambassadors to the community" when managing their schools.
As principals adapt to their new roles, the evaluation of principals also will need to adapt, experts say. But one thing will remain constant—the need to evaluate principals in ways that are fair and constructive and that, ultimately, help ensure school and student success.
What Is ISLLC?
In the past, the standards for licensing school administrators were complex and varied widely. What defined a qualified candidate in one state or district might not hold true in another.
In an effort to establish greater consistency and provide a more common frame of reference, the Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC) was formed in 1994. The alliance involves 32 education agencies and 13 education administrative associations, including ASCD. ISLLC establishes a way that states can "develop and implement model standards, assessments, professional development, and licensing procedures for school leaders and address the challenges confronting school leaders." Currently, 35 states have either adopted or adapted the ISLLC Standards.
To learn more about ISLLC or to find out about the standards developed for principal evaluation, visit the consortium's Web site at http://www.ccsso.org /isllc.html or call 202-336-7038.
