Board discusses criteria for Lisenbee principal tier; raises equity and implementation questions

Board members discussed proposed criteria for the Lisenbee principal tier — the career-ladder step for principals — during a consultation session, raising questions about evaluation standards, who in local education agencies determines readiness, and what induction requirements should look like.

Kelly, an MSDE staff member, opened the item by noting that the first criterion for moving to the Lisenbee principal tier is meeting administrator licensure requirements and that some criteria are statutory. The board reviewed the list the work group proposed for consideration, which included holding an advanced professional administrator license (or being a National Board Certified Teacher at level 3), having an effective evaluation, local determination that the candidate is ready to assume additional responsibilities, completion of a principal induction program within a year of assignment, and other local requirements.

Members debated whether the evaluation standard should be “effective” (the statutory language) or “highly effective.” Several board members warned that local evaluation systems vary and some LEAs rarely use the highest rating, which could unintentionally exclude qualified candidates if the standard required a "highly effective" rating. Board participants discussed the need for statewide guardrails or guidance so that evaluation labels mean roughly the same thing across jurisdictions while preserving LEA autonomy.

On the question of who determines readiness at the LEA level, participants noted the statute names teacher leaders, other licensed principals and distinguished principals as sources of a list of qualified candidates to send to the superintendent. Board members raised concerns about what that process looks like in practice and whether MSDE or the Accountability and Implementation Board (AIB) would provide technical assistance and review. MSDE staff said technical assistance is part of MSDE’s role and that joint guidance for LEA career-ladder submissions (due by July 1, 2025) and AIB approval will be part of implementation.

The group also discussed principal induction programs as a possible criterion, including whether completion should be required within a year of assignment and the fact that requiring induction without funding would be an unfunded mandate. The board did not adopt final language and requested further work and clarification, including sample processes and technical assistance for LEAs, before returning to the item at a future meeting.

Kelly said she would draft a memorandum capturing the board’s recommendations to be sent to the State Board of Education. No formal vote was taken during this consultation item.