Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The university of British Columbia
[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]
School superintendents in British Columbia (directors of education or chief superintendents in other jurisdictions) are the chief executive officers employed by boards of education to ensure smooth, efficient, and effective operation of school districts. Evaluating their performance is a challenging task for many school boards. They often lack the basic information needed for such evaluations: data about student performance and the superintendent’s compliance with board policies.
In jurisdictions like British Columbia, where mandated data collection and reporting exist, the task is somewhat easier. BC’s Framework for Enhancing Student Learning (FESL) requires school boards to report on the intellectual, social, and career development of students. While improvements in data sources are necessary, the framework provides essential data for evaluating superintendent performance. The central evaluative question is whether the school district is making reasonable progress toward the goals established in the FESL framework.
Superintendents are responsible for both student performance improvement and compliance with board policies. However, the multiplicity of policies many school boards have complicates this task. Effective monitoring of policy compliance requires established evaluation and feedback mechanisms, robust data systems, and clear communication strategies.
School boards operate with limited resources, making it challenging to track and manage compliance metrics for numerous policies. Miscommunication can lead to discrepancies in policy implementation and monitoring. The principal reason for the numerous policies is often the board’s desire to constrain the superintendent’s actions, which at times can lead to an unmanageable policy framework.
It is likely obvious that I favor a lean policy framework. Having one is advantageous because it enhances compliance and reduces employee confusion. A lean policy framework makes for a more agile and resilient organization, one that is focused on performance and its priorities.
Boards should focus on setting clear objectives and performance metrics, involving stakeholders in the evaluation process, and providing professional development based on evaluation outcomes. Regular review and adaptation of policies, leveraging technology and data analytics, and maintaining effective communication can enhance the evaluation process.
Boards
that take their responsibility to evaluate the superintendent seriously should
operate with a lean policy framework. Without it, evaluating the superintendent
is challenging, leading some boards to either avoid evaluation altogether or
use irrelevant and indefensible standards.