Principal Evaluation and Observation:
Massachusetts
Teacher and Principal Evaluation Policy
Note
The data and analysis on this page is from 2019. View and download the most recent policy data and analysis on Principal Evaluation and Observation in Massachusetts from the State of the States 2022: Teacher and Principal Evaluation Policies report.
Analysis of Massachusetts's policies
Evaluation Frequency: Massachusetts requires all principals to be evaluated at least annually.
Observation/Site Visit Requirements:
Massachusetts requires "observations and artifacts of professional practice, including unannounced observations of practice of any duration."
Evaluator Training: Massachusetts state policy requires evaluator training; however, the state does not require evaluator certification or a process that would ensure inter-rater reliability.
Recommendations for Massachusetts
Require all principal evaluators to be both trained and certified.
All principal evaluators in Massachusetts should be trained and certified to conduct teacher evaluations on systems that include objective measures. Ensuring that all principals are appropriately trained and certified in conducting teacher evaluations will help ensure that all principals are able to provide their teachers with fair and valid evaluations.
State response to our analysis
Massachusetts recognized the factual accuracy of this analysis. The state added that its Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (ESE) is committed to providing a comprehensive set of resources for districts. To that end, ESE has developed two comprehensive training programs that support educator evaluation implementation: Training Modules for Evaluators and Training Workshops for Teachers. These resources provide an overview of the statewide evaluation framework. Massachusetts noted that it believes it is best for districts to implement evaluation systems that are grounded in local context. Therefore, districts have the option to supplement or adapt these materials to align with local priorities and local evaluation systems.
Further, Massachusetts pointed out that it has expended a great number of resources to support calibration activities. "This type of professional learning helps both evaluators and educators norm their expectations and ensure that all educators experience a meaningful evaluation experience. Evaluators want to deliver high-quality, actionable feedback just as much as educators want to receive it. Calibrating expectations for educator practice and deepening collective knowledge of strategies that can help educators grow is integral to sustaining an evaluation process that will strengthen educator practice and improve student learning."
Updated: December 2017
-
Massachusetts
Select another topic
General Teacher Preparation
- Program Entry
- Teacher Shortages and Surpluses
- Program Performance Measures
- Program Reporting Requirements
- Student Teaching/Clinical Practice
- Teaching Methods
Elementary Teacher Preparation
Secondary Teacher Preparation
- Middle School Content Knowledge
- Middle School Licensure Deficiencies
- Adolescent Literacy
- Secondary Content Knowledge
- Secondary Licensure Deficiencies
Special Education Teacher Preparation
Alternate Routes
Hiring
- Requirements for Out-of-State Teachers
- Provisional and Emergency Licensure
- Licensure for Substitute Teachers
- Supporting New Teachers
Teacher and Principal Evaluation
Teacher Compensation
Retaining Effective Teachers
Early Childhood Preparation
How we graded
7H: Principal Evaluation and Observation
- Annual Evaluations: The state should require that all principals be evaluated annually.
- Observations: The state should require that all principals receive multiple observations over the course of the school year.
- Certified Evaluators: The state should require that all principal evaluators be trained and certified.
One-quarter of the total goal score is earned based on the following:
- One-quarter credit: The state will earn one-quarter of a point if it requires that all principals are evaluated annually.
One-half of the total goal score is earned based on the following:
- One-half credit: The state will earn the full one-half of a point if it requires that all principals receive multiple observations annually.
- One-quarter credit: The state will earn one-quarter of a point if it requires all principals to be annually observed but does not require multiple observations.
One-quarter of the total goal score is earned based on the following:
- One-quarter credit: The state will earn one-quarter of a point it requires principal evaluators to be trained and certified.
Research rationale
Research demonstrates that there is a clear link between school leadership and school outcomes.[1] Principals foster school improvement by shaping school goals, policies and practices, and social and organizational structures.[2] Principals vary significantly in their effectiveness, and research suggests that high-quality principals positively affect student achievement, in-school discipline, parents' perceptions of schools, and school climates.[3] Further, principals affect teacher retention and recruitment;[4] effective principals are more adept at retaining effective teachers and removing ineffective teachers.[5] The time principals spend on organizational management, instructional programming, and teacher evaluation is critically important for positive effects on teachers and students.[6] Because principals are an essential component of creating successful schools, their effectiveness should be regularly evaluated by trained evaluators on systems that include objective measures. Such systems will help to ensure that all principals receive the feedback and support necessary to improve their practice and, ultimately, student and school outcomes.
[1] Clifford, M., Hansen, U. J., & Wraight, S. (2014). Practical guide to designing comprehensive principal evaluation systems: A tool to assist in the development of principal evaluation systems. Center on Great Teachers and Leaders.; Rice, J. K. (2010). Principal effectiveness and leadership in an era of accountability (Brief 8). National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research.; Glasman, N. S., & Heck, R. H. (1992). The changing leadership role of the principal: Implications for principal assessment. Peabody Journal of Education, 68(1), 5-24.
[2] Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. H. (1998). Exploring the principal's contribution to school effectiveness: 1980-1995. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 9(2), 157-191.
[3] Branch, G. F., Hanushek, E. A., & Rivkin, S. G. (2012). Estimating the effect of leaders on public sector productivity: The case of school principals (No. w17803). National Bureau of Economic Research.; Louis, K. S., Leithwood, K., Wahlstrom, K. L. Anderson, S. E., Michlin, M., & Mascall, B. (2010). Learning from leadership: Investigating the links to improved student learning. Center for Applied Research and Educational Improvement/University of Minnesota and Ontario Institute for Studies in Education/University of Toronto, 42, 50.; Clark, D., Martorell, P., & Rockoff, J. (2009). School principals and school performance (No. w17803). National Bureau of Economic Research.; Leithwood, K., Louis, K. S., Anderson, S., & Wahlstrom, K. (2004). How leadership influences student learning: A review of research for the Learning from Leadership Project. New York: The Wallace Foundation.
[4] Boyd, D., Grossman, P., Ing, M., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2011). The influence of school administrators on teacher retention decisions. American Education Research Journal, 48(2), 303-333; Kimball, S. (2011). Strategic talent management for principals. Strategic management of human capital in education: Improving instructional practice and student learning in schools (pp. 133-152). New York, NY: Routledge Publishing; Rice, J. K. (2010). Principal effectiveness and leadership in an era of accountability (Brief 8). National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research.; Clark, D., Martorell, P., & Rockoff, J. (2009). School principals and school performance (No. w17803). National Bureau of Economic Research.
[5] Beteille, T., Kalogrides, D., Loeb, S. (2009). Effective schools: Managing the recruitment, development, and retention of high-quality teachers (Working Paper 37). National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research.
[6] Grissom, J. A., & Loeb, S. (2011). Triangulating principal effectiveness: How perspectives of parents, teachers, and assistant principals identify the central importance of managerial skills. American Educational Research Journal, 48(5), 1091-1123.; Horng, E. L., Klasik, D., & Loeb, S. (2010). Principal's time use and school effectiveness. American Journal of Education, 116(4), 491-523.; Catano, N., & Stronge, J. H. (2007). What do we expect of school principals? Congruence between principal evaluation and performance standards. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 10(4), 379-399.