Draft Principal EvaluationProcess:
A Growth Focused Approach
The Legislative Requirements
113 (2) A School Council May (g) direct the superintendent to evaluate a teacher,
principal or other staff member and to provide a report to the Council of the evaluation, which report shall be returned to the superintendent immediately after the Council has reviewed and considered it;
105 (1) A principal shall be on probation for two years from the date of appointment.
(5) A principal who is on probation shall be evaluated during the first year of probation and shall be evaluated in the second year of probation on or
before March 31 of that year.
Current Practice Evaluations in the two probationary years
completed by March 31st Evaluation on the request of the School Council
Input from school councils and staff provided through a checklist survey
Inconsistent evaluation of experienced principals Some principals using a growth plan model Summative report provides a determination of
satisfactory or less than satisfactory
Current Practice: Why it’s not ideal
One size fits all approach Doesn’t consider experience, skills of principal Doesn’t consider the school context
Not completed for everyone Retrospective versus prospective
Not growth/improvement-oriented Significantly different from other YG employee
evaluation process Need to separate egregious discipline from regular
evaluation No role for school councils until “after the fact” Ethical concerns over anonymous staff survey
approach
Principal Evaluation Working Group Led by Judy Arnold Includes:
Urban and rural principal representatives AYSA representative One Superintendent One representative of School Councils
Objective: to recommend a principal/vice-principal evaluation process that addresses the deficiencies of the current practice and that results in better outcomes for the education system
Proposed Practice Evaluations in two probationary years completed by
March 31st
Evaluation on the request of the School Council
Experienced principles evaluated every third year
All principals using a growth focused model With the exception of those requiring Department
disciplinary action
Summative report provides a determination of satisfactory or less than satisfactory
Input By School Council and Staff Proposed Practice Using the School Review Inquiry Framework
Principal gathers input before writing the proposed performance plan
Principal shares professional goals Superintendent gather input before writing the
summative evaluation report
Over view of The Evaluation Process Reviewing the Graphic Handouts (Document 1)
Step 1 Step 2 (See document 2: Performance Plan Working document)
Principal gathers input from school council and staff (See document 3: Principal Evaluation Input Process)
Step 3 Step 4
Superintendent gathers input from school council and staff (See document 3: Principal Evaluation Input Process)
Summative Report- (See Document 4: report format)
Satisfactory or Less than satisfactory
Summary of Council Role Notified of upcoming principal evaluation
in June Input into context and areas of focus in
September Goals shared with Council and staff Superintendent gathers input from
Councils before writing summative report Council can request to the
Superintendent that their principal be evaluated for a given year
Council can refer disciplinary situations to Superintendent at any time.
Implementation September 2012/13 for new principals
Hired for 2012/13 school year Hired for 2011/12 school year
Notification in June 2012 Meetings with impacted Councils in
September Significant Superintendent involvement