Do states require student growth data to be included in principal evaluations?
Yes: AZ, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, LA, MD, MA, MI, MN, MO, NV, NJ, NY, OH, PA, RI, SC, TN, UT, VA, WA, WV
No: AL, AK, AR, CA, DC, IN, IA, KS, KY, ME, MS, MT, NE, NH, NM, NC, ND, OK, OR, SD, TX, VT, WI, WY
Footnotes
AK Districts may incorporate "student learning data" into the evaluation process.
DE New DPAS II, effective July 1, 2023
MS The most recent guidebook says future measures will include teacher impact (to be implemented in SY 2020-21); however, there is no indication that this has occurred.
NE Measures of student growth are required in Nebraska's state model, but adopting the model is optional for districts.
NV For the 2021-2022 school year, student growth shall account for zero percent of a principal's evaluation. Student growth shall account for 15% of a principal's evaluation "for each academic year beginning with the school year 2022-2023."
NC Principals are rated on school growth targets however, this is not factored into a principal's overall effectiveness rating.
OH High quality student data (student growth and achievement) will be used in 2022-2023 and in subsequent years. Student growth is considered as part of a principal's holistic rating, there is no scoring rubric.
TN For the 2020-21 school year, assessments administered to, "assess student readiness for postsecondary education, including, but not limited to, the ACT, must be excluded from the evaluation criteria required for school principals."
VT State's Guidelines for Teacher and Leader Effectiveness are recommendations, not requirements.
Do states explicitly link principal evaluations to teacher effectiveness and/or instructional leadership?
Yes: AL, AZ, AR, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, KS, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, NE, NV, NJ, NY, NC, OH, OR, PA, RI, SC, TN, UT, VA, WA, WV, WI
No: AK, CA, DC, IN, IA, KY, LA, ME, MO, MT, NH, NM, ND, OK, SD, TX, VT, WY
Footnotes
CO One measure must be the percentage/number of teachers rated effective, highly effective, partially effective, and ineffective and the number/percentage of teachers improving their performance.
CT Teacher effectiveness outcomes must count for 5% of a principal's evaluation rating.
DE New DPAS II, effective July 1, 2023.
VT State's Guidelines for Teacher and Leader Effectiveness are recommendations, not requirements.
Do states require principals with less-than-effective ratings to be placed on improvement plans?
Yes: AL, AK, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, IN, LA, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, NJ, NY, OH, PA, RI, VA, WV
No: AZ, AR, CA, DC, ID, IL, IA, KS, KY, ME, MD, MT, NE, NV, NH, NM, NC, ND, OK, OR, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, WA, WI, WY
Footnotes
AK Districts must provide support for rating of basic on two or more content standards or other criteria, unless the district is "non retaining" the principal.
AR Principals with patterns of ineffective leadership practices may be placed in "intensive support" status.
CA Placement of those with an unsatisfactory rating in a "program designed to improve appropriate areas of performance" is optional.
CO All principals must be provided with a professional performance plan.
DE New DPAS II, effective July 1, 2023
NE Although the state does not base improvement plans on evaluation ratings, written communication is provided to "...the evaluated certificated-employee specifying all noted deficiencies, specific means for the correction of the noted deficiency, and an adequate timeline for implementing the concrete suggestions for improvement."
NV Although Nevada does not utilize improvement plans, state statute indicates that evaluations systems must include, "Recommendations for improvements in the performance of the administrator and a description of the action that will be taken to assist the administrator…"
SC All principals are required to develop professional development plans based on evaluations.
VT State's Guidelines for Teacher and Leader Effectiveness are recommendations, not requirements.
Do states facilitate the use of surveys (teacher, parent, student, peer, etc.) in principal evaluations?
Yes. State requires surveys.: CO, CT, MA, MI, MS, TN, UT, WV
Yes. State explicitly allows surveys.: AK, DE, FL, HI, ID, KS, MN, MO, NV, NC, OR, PA, RI, SC, TX, VT, VA, WA, WI, WY
No. State explicitly prohibits surveys.: NY
No. State is silent regarding surveys.: AL, AZ, AR, CA, DC, GA, IL, IN, IA, KY, LA, ME, MD, MT, NE, NH, NJ, NM, ND, OH, OK, SD
Footnotes
CO Teacher Surveys: Teacher input is required as part of a principal's evaluation.
DE New DPAS II, effective July 1, 2023.
GA Student Surveys: 10% of score is based on the CCRPI School Climate Star Rating, which shows how well a school is fostering an atmosphere where students feel welcomed, safe, and respected.
MI "Student feedback" and "parent feedback"
MS Student and Parent Surveys: The most recent guidebook says future measures will include student surveys (to be implemented in SY 2020-21); however, there is no indication that this has occurred.
RI Principals may survey parents and teachers for informational purposes only.
UT Peer Surveys: Peer observations are allowed.
WI Teacher Surveys: Staff surveys are allowed.
VT State's Guidelines for Teacher and Leader Effectiveness are recommendations, not requirements.
Updated: November 2022
Select another topic
Teacher Preparation
- Program Entry
- Teacher Shortages and Surpluses
- Program Performance Measures
- Program Reporting Requirements
- Student Teaching/Clinical Practice
Elementary Teacher Preparation
Secondary Teacher Preparation
- Middle School Content Knowledge
- Middle School Licensure Requirements
- Secondary Content Knowledge
- Secondary Licensure Requirements
Special Education Teacher Preparation
Alternate Routes
Teacher Diversity
Hiring
Teacher and Principal Evaluation
Teacher Compensation
Early Childhood Preparation
Retaining Effective Teachers
Research rationale
Research demonstrates that there is a clear link between school leadership and school outcomes.[1] Principals foster school improvement by shaping school goals, policies and practices, and social and organizational structures.[2] Principals vary significantly in their effectiveness, and research suggests that high-quality principals positively affect student achievement, in-school discipline, parents' perceptions of schools, and school climates.[3] Further, principals affect teacher retention and recruitment;[4] effective principals are more adept at retaining effective teachers and removing ineffective teachers.[5] The time principals spend on organizational management, instructional programming, and teacher evaluation is critically important for positive effects on teachers and students.[6] Because principals are an essential component of creating successful schools, their effectiveness should be regularly evaluated by trained evaluators on systems that include objective measures. Such systems will help to ensure that all principals receive the feedback and support necessary to improve their practice and, ultimately, student and school outcomes.
[1] Clifford, M., Hansen, U. J., & Wraight, S. (2014). Practical guide to designing comprehensive principal evaluation systems: A tool to assist in the development of principal evaluation systems. Center on Great Teachers and Leaders.; Rice, J. K. (2010). Principal effectiveness and leadership in an era of accountability (Brief 8). National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research.; Glasman, N. S., & Heck, R. H. (1992). The changing leadership role of the principal: Implications for principal assessment. Peabody Journal of Education, 68(1), 5-24.
[2] Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. H. (1998). Exploring the principal's contribution to school effectiveness: 1980-1995. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 9(2), 157-191.
[3] Branch, G. F., Hanushek, E. A., & Rivkin, S. G. (2012). Estimating the effect of leaders on public sector productivity: The case of school principals (No. w17803). National Bureau of Economic Research.; Louis, K. S., Leithwood, K., Wahlstrom, K. L. Anderson, S. E., Michlin, M., & Mascall, B. (2010). Learning from leadership: Investigating the links to improved student learning. Center for Applied Research and Educational Improvement/University of Minnesota and Ontario Institute for Studies in Education/University of Toronto, 42, 50.; Clark, D., Martorell, P., & Rockoff, J. (2009). School principals and school performance (No. w17803). National Bureau of Economic Research.; Leithwood, K., Louis, K. S., Anderson, S., & Wahlstrom, K. (2004). How leadership influences student learning: A review of research for the Learning from Leadership Project. New York: The Wallace Foundation.
[4] Boyd, D., Grossman, P., Ing, M., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2011). The influence of school administrators on teacher retention decisions. American Education Research Journal, 48(2), 303-333; Kimball, S. (2011). Strategic talent management for principals. In Strategic management of human capital in education: Improving instructional practice and student learning in schools (pp. 133-152). New York, NY: Routledge Publishing; Rice, J. K. (2010). Principal effectiveness and leadership in an era of accountability (Brief 8). National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research.; Clark, D., Martorell, P., & Rockoff, J. (2009). School principals and school performance (No. w17803). National Bureau of Economic Research.
[5] Beteille, T., Kalogrides, D., Loeb, S. (2009). Effective schools: Managing the recruitment, development, and retention of high-quality teachers (Working Paper 37). National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research.
[6] Grissom, J. A., & Loeb, S. (2011). Triangulating principal effectiveness: How perspectives of parents, teachers, and assistant principals identify the central importance of managerial skills. American Educational Research Journal, 48(5), 1091-1123.; Horng, E. L., Klasik, D., & Loeb, S. (2010). Principal's time use and school effectiveness. American Journal of Education, 116(4), 491-523.; Catano, N., & Stronge, J. H. (2007). What do we expect of school principals? Congruence between principal evaluation and performance standards. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 10(4), 379-399.