Abstract
The goals for this mixed methods study were to examine superintendents’ perceptions regarding their own supervision and evaluation of principals in a rural state. Five research questions guided the mixed methods inquiry. An online survey tool was used to gather perceptions from superintendents regarding their own evaluation and supervision of principals. Participants solicited included all 48 superintendents from a rural Mountain West state. Out of the participants solicited 23 superintendents agreed to participate (48% response rate). Results from this study provided implications for those who train superintendents and those who supervise and evaluate principals. Keywords: superintendents, principal supervision, principal evaluation, principals
Highlights
The goals for this quantitative study were to examine superintendents’ perceptions regarding their own supervision and evaluation of principals in a rural state
There are a variety of studies supporting instructional leadership for superintendents (Bjork,1993; Petersen, 2002) and the role is emerging from a curriculum based leadership model (Belden, Russonello, & Stewart, 2005; Bredeson & Kose, 2007) to one where supervising and evaluating principals is a critical factor (Corcoran, Casserly, Price-Baugh, Walston, Hall, & Simon, 2013)
Many urban and rural superintendents are involved in similar facets of district leadership including instructional leadership (Tobin, 2016), rural superintendents rarely have the option to assign district personnel or principals supervisors to account for the supervision and evaluation of principals and frequently are required to wear different “hats” and serve different district roles (Copeland, 2013)
Summary
The goals for this quantitative study were to examine superintendents’ perceptions regarding their own supervision and evaluation of principals in a rural state. There are a variety of studies supporting instructional leadership for superintendents (Bjork,1993; Petersen, 2002) and the role is emerging from a curriculum based leadership model (Belden, Russonello, & Stewart, 2005; Bredeson & Kose, 2007) to one where supervising and evaluating principals is a critical factor (Corcoran, Casserly, Price-Baugh, Walston, Hall, & Simon, 2013). A central tenet of this initiative to improve the instructional leadership of superintendents is improving the capability of principal supervisors by reducing the number of principals to supervise and requiring accountability for the academic progress of schools (Corcoran, Casserly, Price-Baugh, Walston, Hall, & Simon, 2013). With these multiple roles and challenges, it would be important for rural superintendents to continue to focus on their instructional leadership by supervising and evaluating principals
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
