Showing 1 – 3 of 3 results.
Self-published
District principal evaluation policies and superintendent sensemaking (ICPSR 128221)
Released/updated on: 2020-12-04
Time period: 2016-09-01--2018-12-31
Almost every state in the U.S. has revamped their principal evaluation policies since 2009, yet we know little about how they are implemented. Based on interviews and document analysis in 21 small and medium-sized school districts, we found that superintendents’ sensemaking shaped their implementation of policy. Drawing on their beliefs about principals and evaluation and their understanding of their district context, superintendents in lower-performing districts reported that they complied with the processes specified in state principal evaluation policies but strayed from state guidelines regarding maintaining a focus on instructional leadership during evaluation. In contrast, superintendents of higher-performing districts reported that they implemented evaluation processes loosely but adhered to their state’s policy emphasis on instructional leadership. Our findings raise questions about whether the implementation of principal evaluation policies disadvantages principals in lower-performing districts. We thus caution against attaching high-stakes consequences such as incentive pay or sanctions to these policies.
Curated
School Board and School Superintendent Study, 1968 (ICPSR 7353)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-18
Geographic coverage: United States
This study surveyed board members of the public schools included in the STUDENT-PARENT SOCIALIZATION STUDY, 1965 (ICPSR 7286) (Part 1) and superintendents of the same school districts (Part 3). These original samples were supplemented with members of 13 big city boards of education and the superintendents of those districts in order to provide complementarity with AMERICAN NATIONAL ELECTION STUDY, 1968 (ICPSR 7281). Shorter versions of the questionnaire were administered to the supplementary samples, and responses of both the regular and the supplementary samples to these common questions are presented in Parts 2 and 4. Variables probed respondents' attitudes toward their jobs, personnel policies, and the relationships between the school district and the community. Demographic data include sex, race, level of education, college attended, family income, home ownership, and political preference. Information is also included on the characteristics of the school districts covered by the survey.
Self-published
Tennessee School Board Member and Superintendent Perspectives on Prohibited Concepts Laws (ICPSR 209663)
Released/updated on: 2024-10-15
Geographic coverage: Tennessee, United States
This is a selection of data taken from a statewide survey of Tennessee school board members and superintendents in Spring 2023. This data addresses respondent perspectives on the Prohibited Concepts Law and Curriculum Control. It also includes their location by Congressional District and their political party (for school board members only).