Date Approved


Embargo Period


Document Type


Degree Name

Ed.D. Educational Leadership


Educational Services and Leadership


College of Education


Campbell, Robert B.

Committee Member 1

Graber, Jeffrey

Committee Member 2

Raivetz, Mark


action research, administrator, assessment, evaluation, mixed methods, school leader


School principals--Rating of


Educational Methods


This action research study was conducted for purposes of changing the formal evaluation for school administrators to one constructed around the Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC) 2008 standards, inclusive of multifaceted components aimed to increase the active participation of both the evaluator and the individual being evaluated. The previous instrument assessed leaders' performance on a set of generic indicators. There were no requirements for pre-evaluation conferences, nor did the school leader have formal opportunity for self-reflection. Outcomes were not linked to district goals, to individual or district professional growth plans, nor to standards or criteria-based process of leadership assessment.

The research design consisted of sequential mixed methods to include multiple stages of data collection and analysis. A quantitative approach was employed as the primary mechanism of analysis and a qualitative component assisted with further examination of participants' perceptions and preferences regarding the development of a new school leader evaluation instrument and process. Quantitative research occurred as three distinct survey questionnaires to ascertain how administrators perceived the prior and new instruments. Qualitative methods consisted of observation, interview, and artifact review to obtain data relative to the prior and a newly development instrument.

Results suggested an overall preference for a more contemporary administrator evaluation instrument comprised of multiple measures of performance assessment. Respondents indicated favorable perceptions associated with increased participation in the evaluation process and reciprocity between them and the evaluator. An unanticipated but welcome outcome was the degree to which the post-conferences were enhanced by the self-assessment component. This was further enhanced by administrators' concomitant obligation to provide evidence perceived as important and relevant to the evaluation process.