Current articles on formal superintendent evaluation suggest that evaluations are beneficial for superintendents. A critical evaluation, however can cause numerous problems for school board members. In this case study, the author shows how school board members resolved a major community crisis precipitated by a critical superintendent evaluation. Issues are analyzed through four major frameworks: symbolic, political, human resources, and structural.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BippusS. L.1985. “A Full, Fair and Formal Evaluation Will Help Your Superintendent to Excel,”American School Board Journal, 172(4): 42–43.
2.
BolmanL., and DealT.1984. Modern Approaches to Understanding and Managing Organizations, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
3.
BolmanL., and DealT.1991. Reframing Organizations: Artistry, Choice, and Leadership, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
4.
BraddomC. L.1986. “Prescription for Improvement: Make Certain Your School Board's System of Evaluating the Superintendent is Fair, Fast, Factual, and Frequent,”American School Board Journal, 173(8): 28–29.
5.
DillonR., and HalliwellJ.1991. “Superintendents’ and School Board Presidents’ Perceptions of the Purposes, Strengths and Weaknesses of Formal Superintendent Evaluations,”Journal of School Leadership1(4): 328–337.
6.
FirstP.1990. “How to Effectively Evaluate a Superintendent,”Thrust, 19(6): 40–43.
7.
HaydenJ. G.1986. “Crisis at the Helm: Superintendents and School Boards in Conflict,”The School Administrator.43(10): 17–19.
8.
JamesA.1990. Board irked by computer deal. The Post Standard, (January 30): A–4.
9.
McCurdyJ.1992. Buildings Better Board – Administrator Relations: A critical review evaluating the significance of local school leadership and the board – superintendent relationship as the driving force behind it. (Critical Issues Report No. 26). Arlington, VA: American Association of School Administrators.
10.
NelisK.1990. …, Board agree to resolve differences. The Post Standard. (February 22): A-10.
11.
NelisK.1990. …, Urged business leaders to enter fray. The Post Standard. (March 12): A-4.
12.
New York State Education Department.1985. Part 100 of the Commissioner's Regulations, quoted in Dillon, R. and J. Halliwell, 1991. “Superintendents’ and School Board Presidents’ Perceptions of the Purposes, Strengths and Weaknesses of Formal Superintendent Evaluations,”Journal of School Leadership, 1(4): 328–337.
13.
RobinsonG. E., and BickersP. M.1990. Evaluation of Superintendents and School Boards.Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service.
