Measuring Principals' Effectiveness: Results from New Jersey's First Year of Statewide Principal Evaluation
Publisher: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Mid-Atlantic
Aug 30, 2016
- Nearly all principals received effective or highly effective overall ratings. Variation in the overall ratings was limited, with 99 percent of principals rated as effective or highly effective.
- The percentage of principals who received highly effective overall ratings was lower for principals who were evaluated on school median student growth percentiles than for principals who were not evaluated on this measure. When school median student growth percentiles were not available, principal goals factored more heavily into the overall rating, and most principals received higher ratings on principal goals than on school median student growth percentiles.
- Principal practice instrument ratings and school median student growth percentiles had moderate to high year-to-year stability. But school median student growth percentiles changed more across years in smaller schools than in larger ones.
- Several component measure ratings—school median student growth percentile ratings, teachers’ student growth objective ratings, and principal practice instrument ratings—as well as the overall rating, had low, negative correlations with student socioeconomic disadvantage. This suggests that these ratings are biased against principals of schools with more disadvantaged students or that less effective principals are serving schools with more disadvantaged students.
- Principals’ ratings on component measures had low to moderate positive correlations with each other. This suggests that the components measure distinct dimensions of overall principal performance.
You may also like...