.Nameplate February 2013 Issue
State of the Superintendency                        Page 6


Job Evaluation

 State of the Superintendency graphic

Knowing the factors used in the annual performance evaluation of superintendents is foundational to building a more effective process. The accompanying graph, based on AASA’s decennial survey of the field, shows how superintendents rank seven response options about the conduct of their own assessments by school boards.

Critics claim current evaluation practices are plagued by ambiguous purposes, unrealistic expectations, uneven and subjective processes, and invalid outcomes. The overall quality of superintendent evaluations suffers from the variation in the bases of assessments and the number and competence of the evaluators.

The limited application of national standards (such as those published by AASA in 1993) and state superintendent association guidelines is especially disturbing because such documents should include essential and validated job requirements. Greater uniformity in evaluation criteria, within and across states, would be a step toward ensuring more purposeful and objective outcomes.


Source of data: "The American School Superintendent: 2010 Decennial Study" (2011) published by Rowman & Littlefield Education and co-sponsored by AASA and Pearson. Analysis by Theodore J. Kowalski, study lead author and professor of educational administration, University of Dayton. 





Give your feedback

Share this article

Order this issue