1. Outcomes-Based Superintendent Evaluation Pilot for a Comprehensive, Transparent, Continuous superintendent evaluation process WSSDA Conference - Nov 2013 1

2. Why Superintendent Evaluation?  Legal obligation – RCW 28A.405 (5) Every board of directors shall establish evaluative criteria and procedures for all superintendents, principals, and other administrators…  Individual Effectiveness & Personal Growth  Organizational Effectiveness – both ends and means Desired Results (ends) Expectations (means)  Organizational Improvement 2 Why Pilots

3. Why Superintendent Evaluation Pilots? New Teacher Evaluation System – federal interest (RTTP)/ state mandate (RCW 28A.405) for new system beginning 2013-14 New Principal Evaluation System – federal interest (RTTP)/ state mandate (RCW 28A.405) for new system beginning 2013-14 Next? [Either you are at the table, or on the menu.] WASA/WSSDA conversations – WSSDA Initiative 3 Pilots

4. WSSDA Pilots Competency-based (NWESD) ISLLC/PESB standards for supt program Road-map (360) System Approach (SW WA) 4-Step (Eastern WA) Outcomes-based Focus on district performance 4 Agenda

5. Thinking differently Purpose of the pilot Evaluation in context Doing the work Defining organizational success Other deliverables Initial steps/looking ahead 5 Purpose

6. Purpose of this Pilot Collaboratively explore the merits of an approach to superintendent evaluation characterized by:  Focus primarily on school district performance (primarily results for students) - secondarily on personal performance and/or competencies  Year-round systematic process  One subject at a time  6 Cycles: Set Criteria-Review Evidence vs. Criteria-Board Judgment (Response)-Revise 6 Pilot Outcomes

7. Product outcomes for ea district: 2 sets Criteria - results for students 4 sets Criteria - board expectations 1 Monitoring schedule 6 Reports of data gathered & Board response documents 1 End-of-year evaluation Product outcome for the pilot: 1 Consolidated Report 7 Participant Characteristics

8. Collaborate on and develop local implementation of a superintendent evaluation process, with… Emphasis on the system (vs. the individual) Common view of  Beliefs about superintendents and boards  The evaluation process Commitment to share outcomes and experiences from local efforts 8 Beliefs Supts

9. Beliefs About Superintendents The Superintendent: Takes responsibility for: Organizational success (all that the district does or fails to do) His/her own professional growth Benefits from effective feedback 9 Feedback

10. Effective Feedback Regular – expected/routine Specific – actionable Criterion-based – expectations stated before-hand Timely – near to the action described Future-oriented – impact future (ongoing) performance 10 Beliefs Boards

11. Beliefs About Boards Boards are NOT superintendent-preparation institutions, nor mentors of superintendents …they are not inherently able to judge superintendent competencies (knowledge and skills) that lead to success Boards ARE able to judge if the district is: …making reasonable progress toward student learning goals …in compliance with board guidance 11 Framing the Q

12. Framing the Question We should not be asking: “How do we teach/coach/critique the Superintendent?” [in knowledge/skills we might not ourselves possess] Instead, we should ask: “How did the District do, compared with expectations?” [criteria in strategic plan, policy, other guidance] 12 Accountability

13. System Accountability Q: Reasonable progress toward outcomes desired? (the what) Q: Meets expectations? (the how) 13 Change Perspective

14. Change the subject Limit the scope Extend the conversation 14 Change Subject

15. Change the Subject District is the subject District results – what is to be achieved District criteria for how those results are achieved Strictly [district] business Less intensely personal than the end-of-year closed door feedback on individual behaviors/traits/skills 15 Scope

16. Limit the Scope Compare Performance against Pre-Stated Expectations Key Question: Is the Superintendent… Achieving expected results? [Criteria stated in strategic plan or other document] Operating within parameters ? [Criteria stated in policy or other published expectations] Criteria Put in Writing – in Advance 16 Extend

17. Extend the Conversation START OF YEAR Put expectations in writing & schedule monitoring ONGOING DURING THE YEAR For each area, a monitoring cycle (gather data & respond) END OF YEAR ‘Assign’ evaluation - accumulation of board judgments 17 4 Step Cycle

18. For Each Area Monitored 4-step cycle repeated throughout the year: 1.Establish goals/guidance in writing [plans/policy] 2.Gather evidence (monitoring reports/inspections) Data corresponding to criteria 3.Compare evidence w/criteria, and make judgment (written) as to reasonable progress…compliance 4.Review/revise guidance for next cycle 18 Account. Cycle

19. Example Accountability Cycle Set/ Review Guidance ‘The Work’ Gather Evidence Make Judgment 19 For Each Area 1 – Write Plans/Policies 2 – Report/Inspect Results or ‘The Work’ 3 Compare Evidence w/Criteria Review/Revise – 4 Monitor Sched Staff does the work throughout the year with guidance written in plans (criteria for expected results) or policies (criteria for performance)

20. Pilot Monitoring Schedule ResultsPrograms July August September a October b November December January c February d March April e May f June Cum 20 Cycle of Cycles

21. JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec EL-8,11,12 EL-13,14 EL-18 EL-9,10 EL-1,3,4,7 EL-2,6 EL-15 EL-5,160 EL-17 E-2 E-3 E-1 E-4 Handout EOY Eval Evaluation

22. 22 End-of-Year District Evaluation Document Evidence compared w/criteria [multiple times, multiple areas throughout the year] Judgments accumulate ‘Conversation’ is extensive All year long Structured In-depth Not a single event or an after-thought Work of Pilot

23. Agenda Thinking differently Purpose of the pilot Evaluation in context Doing the work Defining organizational success Other deliverables Initial steps/looking ahead 23 Criteria

24. Criteria - Defining Success 1. In order for the district to achieve success… Q: What student outcomes must the Superintendent achieve? Criteria? 2. Even if those results are achieved… Q: What else would still be necessary? Criteria? 24 Results

25. Develop – For Each Desired Result Area Results Area Operational Criteria to assess district success in achieving desired results.

26. Criteria to assess district adherence to written operational guidance. Develop – For Each Operational/Program Area Operational Guidance Process

27. Format for monitoring data; Protocol for evaluation discussion; Review evidence/board response Develop – Process Routines Deliverables

28. For each participating district: 2 – Sets of criteria - Results Areas 4 – Sets of criteria - Operational Areas 1 – Monitoring schedule 6 – Monitoring reports & 6 Board responses (one for ea report) 2 results areas (1 academic) 4 operational areas (1 budget/finance) 1 – Summative evaluation 1 – District input to the pilot report 28 To Participate

29. Initial Board Action Concur with perspective and general process Commit to participation Staff Work Prepare reports (results and operational areas) Board Work Respond to monitoring (results/operational areas) 29 Questions

30. Initial Steps Initial Activity Meetings (May 2013, June 2013, July 2013) Initial Products Framework Academic results monitoring 30 Questions

31. Looking Ahead Meetings Nov 2013; Feb 2013; Apr 2013; May 2013 Products Other results reports/response Other means reports/response Annual report (1 st year) 31 Questions

32. Questions? Rick Maloney, University Place SD rick.maloney@highlineschools.org rick.maloney@highlineschools.org Patti Banks, University Place SD pbanks@upsd.wednet.edu pbanks@upsd.wednet.edu Handouts can be found at: http://www.wssda.org/Events/AnnualConference/ http://www.wssda.org/Events/AnnualConference/ Superintendent evaluation initiative website: http://www.wssda.org/Resources/WASuperintende ntEvaluationInitiative.aspx http://www.wssda.org/Resources/WASuperintende ntEvaluationInitiative.aspx 32