This article focuses on two major steps by which the Management Profile has been refined as a tool for assessing the leadership and management skills that school administrators display on the job. The first step, the identification of criteria for standards of principal performance, was accomplished by the Texas A&M University Principals’ Center at the request of the NASSP Commission on Standards for the Principalship. The second step, also performed by the TAMU Principals’ Center, was the standardization of decision rules for assessing performance of the Management Profile and the completion of the initial edition of an assessor's manual.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AtkinsonJ.1990. The Management Profile Assessor's Manual.College Station, TX: Texas A&M University Principals’ Center.
2.
BrushD. H., and MannersG. E.1979. “The Nature of the Managerial Role: A New Conception,” EIMT Research Report 3–79, Troy, NY, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.
3.
BrushD. H., and SchoenfeldtL. F.1980. “Identifying Managerial Potential: An Alternative to Assessment Centers,”Personnel, 57(3): 68–76.
4.
ErlandsonD. A., AtkinsonN., and AllenS. D.1990. The Management Profile: A Handbook for the Development of Management Skills.College Station, TX: Texas A&M University Principals’ Center Press.
5.
ErlandsonD. A., LacyV. L., and WilmoreB. E.1990. “The Management Profile,” in The Principalship in the 1990s and Beyond: Current Research on Performance-Based Preparation and Professional Development, Witters-ChurchillL. J., and ErlandsonD. A. eds., Tempe, AZ: University Council for Educational Administration.
6.
KeefeJ. W., ClarkD. C., NickersonN. C., and ValentineJ.1983. The Middle Level Principalship, Volume II: The Effective Middle Level Principal.Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary School Principals.
7.
McClearyL. E., and ThomsonS. D.1979. The Senior High School Principalship, Volume II: The Summary Report.Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary School Principals.
8.
MclntyreK. E., and GrantE. A.1980. “How Principals, Teachers and Superintendents View the Principalship,”NASSP Bulletin, 64(433): 44–49.
9.
PetersS., and BagenstosN. T.1988. “State-Mandated Principal Evaluation: A Report on Current Practice,” paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA, ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 292 889.
10.
SchoenfeldtL. F.1979. “Some Possible Applications for Knowledge of the Manager's Role,” EIMT Research Report 4–79 Troy, NY, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.
11.
SchoenfeldtL. F.1980. “The Development of a Validated System for the Early Identification of Supervisory Potential,” EIMT Research Report 5–80 Troy, NY, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.
12.
StegerJ. A., MannersG., BernsteinA. J., and MayR.1975. “The Three Dimensions of the R&D Manager's Job,”Research Management, 18(3): 32–37.
13.
WilmoreB. E.1988. “The Establishment of Criteria for Standards of Principal Performance,” unpublished dissertation, Texas A&M University.
