School board studies how to evaluate administrators

Who watches the watchmen?

The pertinent ancient Roman question was at the heart of the Administrator Evaluation Plan presented to the Board of Education on Monday night.

Karen Dewing, the district’s director of personnel, gave an overview of the plan, breaking down the guidelines into two equally weighted indicators — practice and outcomes — and four categories.

Practice indicators would be graded in two categories — leadership practice and stakeholder feedback, which would be weighted 40% and 10%, respectively.

Leadership practice is defined by the state’s six performance expectations: vision, mission and goals; teaching and learning; ethics and integrity; organizational systems and safety; families and stakeholders; and the educational system. Ridgefield would use “Core 8” guidelines within these performance expectations.

“All six of these performance expectations contribute to successful schools, but research shows that some have bigger impact than others,” a draft of the plan states. “In particular, improving teaching and learning is at the core of what effective educational leaders do. As such, teaching and learning comprises half of the leadership practice rating and the other five performance expectations are equally weighted.”

Similar to the Teachers Evaluation Plan, which Ms. Dewing presented last week, the performance level would be graded in four distinct levels: distinguished, effective, basic, and unsatisfactory.

To determine stakeholder feedback, three different surveys would be implemented to set “one target for growth on a selected measure.”

The surveys would be based on leadership practice, school practice and school climate.

Outcomes indicators would be broken down into student learning and teachers’ student learning objectives (SLO), which would be weighted 45% and 5%, respectively.

Student learning would be assessed in equal weight by a student’s performance on the learning measures in the state’s accountability system for schools, or the school performance index, and on locally determined measures such as student learning objectives.

The proposed plan would evaluate the district’s assistant superintendent, director of personnel, director of special education, and all of its principals. In addition, supervisors of special education and assistant principals would be evaluated.

The board did not act on the proposal.

About author

By participating in the comments section of this site you are agreeing to our Privacy Policy and User Agreement

© HAN Network. All rights reserved. The Ridgefield Press, 16 Bailey Avenue, Ridgefield, CT 06877

Designed by WPSHOWER

Powered by WordPress