1 / 63

Evaluating the Superintendent and the District

Evaluating the Superintendent and the District. A Public Process That Yields a Public Document. A Public Document That Focuses on Results. Your Observations, Please. Please discuss with a neighbor: With regard to superintendent evaluation…

phila
Download Presentation

Evaluating the Superintendent and the District

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Evaluating the Superintendentand the District A Public Process That Yields a Public Document A Public Document That Focuses on Results

  2. Your Observations, Please Please discuss with a neighbor: With regard to superintendent evaluation… • Past - What potential problems or areas of sensitivity have you either experienced, read, or heard about? • Present - What concerns or interests do you have about this topic? 1 2 Agenda

  3. Agenda • Role of the superintendent • Problems for boards to avoid • An approach to consider • Our strategy – policy governance Supt Role

  4. The Superintendent Role Cuban (1998) - Superintendents are expected to succeed at 3 roles: • Instructional • Managerial • Political I Improve Student Achievement OperateEfficiently M Deal w/Multiple Stakeholders P Standards

  5. Standards AASA (1993) Professional Standards for the Superintendency • Leadership and District Culture • Policy and Governance • Communications and Community Relations • Organizational Management • Curriculum Planning and Development • Instructional Management • Human Resources Management • Values and Ethics of Leadership Sort

  6. Standards AASA (1993) Professional Standards for the Superintendency • Curriculum Planning and Development • Instructional Management • Organizational Management • Human Resources Management • Communications and Community Relations • Policy and Governance • Leadership and District Culture • Values and Ethics of Leadership I M P Age of Acct

  7. Under Accountability In an age of accountability, superintendents are in danger of being… “…preoccupied with shoring up their political base and thus unlikely to take the bold steps needed for transforming schools.” - Lashway (2002) Role shift

  8. I I M M P P Under Accountability • Superintendent role shift • Greater focuson student learning • From Manager to InstructionalLeader Challenge

  9. Challenge for Boards • How do we ensure the instructional gets top priority for supt time? • How do we avoid a preoccupation with the managerial/political? • How do we maintain balance? I M P Not this way

  10. Not This Way The “blame game” Priorities

  11. Board Priorities Have Impact • Lead in the political realm • Supt in supporting role • Support managerial • Delegate/check • Scrutinize theinstructional • Obsess onresults I M P Can we?

  12. Your Observations, Please Please discuss with a neighbor: With regard to Cuban’s description of the superintendent’s role… • How can board priorities support the superintendent in the political realm? • How can board priorities reduce managerial distractions? Questions

  13. Questions to Consider • In superintendent evaluation, what could possibly go wrong? • Let’s run through a (non-scientific) Letterman-style ‘top ten’ list… Community

  14. Community 10. Community values/priorities/voice missing – confidential vs public • The law… • The board… • The superintendent… • The community… All have expectations Subjective

  15. Subjectivity 9. Feedback that is subjective • Dialogue, unguided, tends toward the subjective • e.g. ‘style’ • Even checklist criteria that, on paper, appear objective, are often subjective in practice Time

  16. Time & Timing 8. Board focus gets limitedtimeand is affected by the timingof the evaluation process • Limited time scheduled/available • Timing of annual conversation • Recent events color the tone • “What have you done (for me) lately?” Past

  17. The Past 7. Past vs. future mindset • Punish past peccadilloes…“Let the flogging begin” • Thinking about the cup as “half-empty” vs.what is needed to fill it • The past cannot be changed, but the future can be built Alignment

  18. Alignment 6. Various district elements affecting evaluation are not aligned • Superintendent Job Description • Superintendent Contract • Policies and Procedures • Strategic Plan • Annual District Report Card • Budget Expectations

  19. Expectations 5. The Superintendent is judged accordingto criteria that the Board has not statedor not clarified • Imagine a teacher publicly announcing a grading policy that says: “Guess what it takes to get an A” • Now imagine not announcing that policy Voice

  20. Voice(s) 4. Failing to speak with one voice • Blurred message - multiple sources • Individual agendas • ‘Stray zinger’ effect Traits

  21. Traits 3. Standards that emphasize approved traits or behaviors rather than district results • Most evaluation checklists describe standards & focus on what the superintendent does • How much is based on what the district does? Dialogue

  22. Dialogue 2. Failing to really communicate;Evaluation that is not serious • Annual ritual – going thru motions • Just do it and get it over with • Skirting around important issues Nike

  23. Not Nike 1. Failing to “Just Do It!” -Evaluation that is not done • ~20-25% of all districts • Waiting for the next crisis • How does this compare with just going thru the motions? Summary

  24. 10. Community 9. Subjectivity 8. Time & Timing 7. The Past 6. Alignment 5. Expectations 4. Voice(s) 3. Traits 2. Dialogue 1. Not Nike Our List Which

  25. Your Observations, Please Please discuss with a neighbor: With regard to this list… • Which of these ten is it most important that we avoid? Why? 1 5. Expectations 4. Voice(s) 3. Traits 2. Dialogue 1. Not Nike 10. Community 9. Subjectivity 8. Time & Timing 7. The Past 6. Alignment Given

  26. Given • Given what can be wrong about superintendent evaluation, and… • Given a desire to focus on instruction and student outcomes… • How should the board approach the evaluation process? What v How

  27. What & How • Evaluating outcomes • Object: Bottom line (summative evaluation) • Evaluating how the superintendentgoes about getting there • Object: Guide and shape (formative evaluation) Summative

  28. Should We ‘Just Do it’ Like This? The ‘Drive by’ Summative Evaluation: • Meet annually to review results • Only one agenda item… • Motion: Retain the Superintendent? • If the motion passes, annual eval is ‘Satisfactory’…See you next year… • End of story • If the motion fails…Supt search… • End of story Formative

  29. Or Like This? The ‘Dissection’ Formative Evaluation: • Superintendent develops a detailed portfolio • Members of the public respond to a detailed opinion survey on superintendent performance… • Central office and principals provide an upwardassessment of the superintendent… • Trained evaluator uses surveys/interviews to assess professional superintendent standards… • Each board member fills out an assessment checklist False choice

  30. False Choice “Drive by” evaluation • Too little…Baby Bear “Dissection” evaluation • Too much…Papa Bear • … Mama Bear? Another way

  31. How About Another Way? • Limit the scope • Increase attention on WHAT • Reduce emphasis on HOW • Get more value from the process • Increase time • Most important/critical issues… Issues we are better qualified to judge Simplify

  32. Simplify the Job Description • The board’s job is to assure, on behalf of the community, that the district ‘works’ • The superintendent’s jobis to ensure that the district… • Achieves what is desired • Avoids what is unacceptable • Evaluation involves the board doing its job by judging whether the superintendent is doing his/her job as written in policy If we follow

  33. If We Follow This Third Option… First we fulfill our policymaking role by: • Writing (in policy) what the board’s job is in regard to evaluation • Writing (in policy) the superintendent’s job: • Achieve desired district end results* • Avoid unacceptable conditions* * both described in detail • Writing criteria (in policy) for judging whether the job is done Follow policy

  34. If We Follow This Third Option… Then we follow our policy by: • Monitoring for criteria: • Achievement of prescribed ends • Avoidance of unacceptable means • Judging whether the district has made: • Progress toward ends • Compliance with limitations Focus

  35. Evaluation Focus & Process • Focus on the DistrictExpectations – Organizational Results • Process of Continuous MonitoringResults compared against criteria written in policy; written response accumulates throughout the year Continuous

  36. Performance Oriented& Continuous Process • Expectations written into policyIf expectations change…so do policies • Organizational performance monitored systematically throughout the year • Performance data compared w/ criteria • Board makes judgments about whether criteria are met • If not met, Board judges whether there is reasonableprogress 6-10

  37. Performance Oriented& Continuous Process • Board judgments written in “monitoring response documents” • Adjustments then made in policy based on monitoring/judgments • Compilation of board response to monitoring constitutes the ongoing district evaluation • The district’s annual evaluation becomes the superintendent’s evaluation • Reduced sensitivity, because… Business

  38. It’s not personal… …it’s strictly business.” Can it be?

  39. Your Observations, Please Please discuss with a neighbor: With regard to a theory that superintendent evaluation is “strictly business”… • Can this hold true in practice? 1 PG

  40. Policy Governance • A strategy that • Focuses on district ends, • Provides limits on district means, and • Evaluates based on district criteria • Offers a narrowly focused approach to superintendent evaluation but devotes more board time to it • It’s strictly [district] business Bd Job

  41. Under PG Our Board’s Job Is to ensure: • Linkage with the Community Determine community expectations & values that are to be written in policy • Written Policy That prescribes ‘What’ & proscribes ‘How’ • District Performance By comparing results against expectations written in policy Supt Job

  42. The Superintendent’s Job • IS NOT: • Education/curricular knowledge/skill • Demonstration of political skills • Demonstration of leadership skills • Demonstration of management skills • Intelligence – Sociability – Charm • IS: District Performance in the form of 2 ‘Job Products’…the district • Achieves what it should achieve • Avoids conditions it should avoid Supt Eval

  43. Superintendent Evaluation Comparison of Job Performance vs Pre-Stated Expectations Is the Superintendent… • Achieving What is Expected*? • Avoiding What is Not Acceptable*? *As described in written policy Public

  44. Public Process • Open Public Meetings • Linkage that shapes expectations • Board response to linkage • Monitoring of ‘achieves’ (board agenda) • Monitoring of ‘avoids’ (consent agenda) • Board response to monitoring • Accumulation of district evaluation • Executive Session • Addendum - personnel file (if needed) Schedule

  45. Scheduling the Evaluation E-2

  46. UPSD Ends Policy

  47. Monitoring UPSD Ends 7th gr WASL

  48. Monitoring UPSD Ends Bd Response

  49. Board Response to Monitoring Response Ends

  50. Response Ends

More Related