Draft Principal
Evaluation
Process:
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




Not completed for everyone
Retrospective versus prospective





Doesn’t consider experience, skills of principal
Doesn’t consider the school context
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
and staff
gathers input from school council
(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