Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Principal Evaluation in the United States

  • Chapter
International Handbook of Educational Evaluation

Part of the book series: Kluwer International Handbooks of Education ((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).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 749.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 949.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 949.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • 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 

  • Alkin, M.C., Daillak, R., & White, P. (1979). Using evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, B. (1995). Portfolio use in educational leadership programs: From theory to practice. Innovative Higher Education, 19, 197–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Blase, J. (1987).Dimensions of effective school leadership: The teacher’s perspective. American Educational Research Journal, 24(4), 589–610.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Brown, G., & Irby, B. (1998). Seven policy considerations for principal approval. School Administrator, 55(4), 10–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, G., Irby, B., & Neumeyer, C. (1998). Taking the lead: One district’s approach to principal evaluation. NASSP Bulletin, 82(602), 18–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callahan, R.E. (1962). Education and the cult of efficiency. Chicago: University of Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darling-Hammond, L. (1994). Performance-based assessment and educational equity. Harvard Educational Review, 64(1), 5–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Dornbush, S. (1975). Evaluation and the exercise of authority. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duke, D., & Iwanicki, E. (1992). Principal assessment and the notion of “fit.” Peabody Journal of Education, 68(1), 25–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duke, D., & Stiggins, R. (1985). Evaluating the performance of principals: A descriptive study. Educational Administration Quarterly, 21(4), 71–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Education Week. (January 25, 1995). Cincinnati links administrators’pay, performance, 1, 6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellett, C. (1978). Understanding and using the Georgia principal assessment system (GPAS). CCBC Notebook, 7(2), 2–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher, T., & Mclnerney, W. (1995). Principal performance assessment and principal evaluation. ERS Spectrum, 13(4), 16–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fontana, J. (1994). Principal assessment: A staff developer’s idea for a complete overhaul. NASSP Bulletin, 78(565), 91–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gale, L., & McCleary, L. (1972). Competencies of the secondary school principal: A needs assessment study. RIEOCT73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrett, R., & Flanigan, J. (1991). Principal evaluation: A definitive process. Journal of School Leadership, 1(1), 74–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ginsberg, R., & Berry, B. (1990). The folklore of principal evaluation. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 3(3), 205–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ginsberg, R., & Thompson, T. (1992). Dilemmas and solutions regarding principal evaluation. Peabody Journal of Education, 68(1), 58–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glasman, N.S. (1979). A perspective on evaluation as an administrative function. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 1(5), 33–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glasman, N.S. (1983). Increased centrality of evaluation and the school principal. Administrator’s Notebook, 30(7), 1–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glasman, N.S. (1986). Evaluation-based leadership. New York: SUNY.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glasman, N.S. (1992). Toward assessing the test score-related actions of principals. Peabody Journal of Education, 68(1), 108–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glasman, N.S. (1995). Generating information for the evaluation of school principals’ engagement in problem solving. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 21, 401–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glasman, N.S. (1997). (Ed.) New ways of training for school leadership. Peabody Journal of Education, 2(2).

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • Glasman, N.S., & Marten, P.A. (1993). Personnel evaluation standards: The use of principal assessment systems. Peabody Journal of Education, 68(2), 47–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glasman, N.S., & Nevo, D. (1988). Evaluation in decision making. Boston, MA: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Gorton, R.A., & Snowden, R.E. (1993). School leadership and administration. Madison, WI: Brown & Benchmark.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Hart, A. (1992). The social and organizational influence of principals: Evaluating principals in context. Peabody Journal of Education, 68(1), 37–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heck, R. (1995). Organizational and professional socialization: Its impact on the performance of new administrators. The Urban Review, 27(1), 31–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heck, R., & Glasman, N.S. (1993). Merging evaluation and administration. Peabody Journal of Education, 68(2), 132–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heck, R., & Marcoulides, G. (1992). Principal assessment: Conceptual problem, methodological problem, or both? Peabody Journal of Education, 68(1), 124–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heck, R., & Marcoulides (1996). The assessment of principal performance: A multilevel Evaluation Approach. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 10, 11–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hess, C. (1991) School restructuring, Chicago style. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoy, W., & Miskel, C. (1982). Educational administration: Theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.). New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Jerald, C., & Boser, U. (Jan. 11, 1999). Taking stock. Education Week, 28(17), 81–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation. (1988). The personnel evaluation standards. Newbery Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • Marcoulides, G., & Heck, R. (1992). Assessing instructional leadership with “g” theory. International Journal of Educational Management, 6(3), 4–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • National Commission for the Principalship (1990). Principals for our changing schools: Preparation and certification. Fairfax, VA: National Policy Board for Educational Administration.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newman (1985). Staff appraisal in the South Midlands and the South West. Educational Management and Administration, 14, 197–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patton, (1978). Utilization focused evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Provus, M. (1971). Discrepancy evaluation. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Razik, T.A., & Swanson, A.D. (1995). Fundamental concepts of educational leadership and management. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Merrill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richard, A. (Feb. 2, 2000). Principals approve new contract in New York City. Education Week, 29(21), 5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sack, J. (May 2, 2000). Del. ties school job reviews to student tests. Education Week, 19(34), 24, 27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sergiovani, T. (1990). Value-added leadership: How to get extraordinary performance in schools. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seyfarth, J.T. (1991). Personnel management for effective schools. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Smylie, M., & Crowson, R. (1993). Principal assessment under restructured governance. Peabody Journal of Education, 68(2), 64–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stufflebeam, D. (1972). The relevance of the CIPP evaluation model for educational accountability. SRIS Quarterly, 5, 3–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stufflebeam, D., & Nevo, D. (1993). Principal evaluation: New directions for improvement. Peabody Journal of Education, 68(2), 24–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • Thomson, S. (Ed.), (1993). Principals for our changing schools: The knowledge and skill base. Fairfax, VA: National Policy Board for Educational Administration.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Tyack, D., & Cuban, L. (1995). Tinkering toward Utopia: A century of public school reform. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, R. (1950). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ubben, G., & Hughes, L. (1997). The principal. Boston, MA: Ally & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Zwoll, J.A. (1964). School personnel administration. New York: Appleton-Century-Crafts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walters, D. (1980). The measurement of principal competencies. Phi Delta Kappan, 61(6), 423–425.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb, L.D., Greer, J.T., Montello, P.A., & Norton, M.S. (1987). Personnel administration in education. Columbus, OH: Merrill.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, K. (Jan. 11, 1999). Keeping the doors wide open. Education Week, 38(17), 12–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, J., & Pantili, L. (1992). A meta-analytic model of principal assessment. Journal of School Leadership, 2(3), 256–279.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wirt, F., & Kirst, M. (1989). Schools in conflict (2nd ed.). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wong, K., & Rollow, S. (1990). A case study of the recent Chicago school reform. Administrator’s Notebook, 34(5-6), 1–4.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of California at Santa Barbara, CA, USA

    Naftaly S. Glasman

  2. University of Hawaii at Manoa, HI, USA

    Ronald H. Heck

Authors
  1. Naftaly S. Glasman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ronald H. Heck
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Educational Research Centre, St. Patrick’s College, Dublin, Ireland

    Thomas Kellaghan

  2. The Evaluation Center, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI, USA

    Daniel L. Stufflebeam

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2003 Kluwer Academic Publishers

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Glasman, N.S., Heck, R.H. (2003). Principal Evaluation in the United States. In: Kellaghan, T., Stufflebeam, D.L. (eds) International Handbook of Educational Evaluation. Kluwer International Handbooks of Education, vol 9. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0309-4_37

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0309-4_37

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-0849-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-010-0309-4

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation