Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Superintendent Evaluation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Consultant outlines annual superintendent evaluation process, timelines and targeted feedback option
Summary
Consultant Kristen Miles reviewed the board’s superintendent evaluation cycle — midyear check-in completed; self‑evaluation due in March; executive session to draft one‑voice summary in late April; public adoption in late May — and described a targeted feedback (360‑style) survey aligned to COSA/OSBA standards.
Kristen Miles, the consultant leading the superintendent evaluation orientation, walked Hillsboro School District board members through the evaluation cycle, timeline and tools the board will use to evaluate the superintendent.
Process and timeline - Midyear check‑in: The superintendent already presented a midyear update and the board provided direction. Ms. Miles said the superintendent will complete a self‑evaluation and submit evidence by March; the board will receive the self‑evaluation and have most of April to complete OSBA booklets and prepare for executive session. - Executive session and one‑voice report: In late April the board will meet in executive session to draft a one‑voice summary report and ratings. Ms. Miles offered to compile individual board responses into themes beforehand if members send their materials to her. - Summative and public adoption: The board is expected to finalize and adopt the evaluation summary in late May at a public meeting; following adoption the board should adopt the tool, process and timeline for the next cycle publicly.
Targeted feedback (360) option - Ms. Miles described a “targeted feedback” approach (aligned to COSA/OSBA standards) that gathers tailored surveys from staff and community members who have direct experience with the superintendent’s work. She said the district previously ran broader 360 surveys but narrowed the approach to curated audiences and standardized questions to avoid unfocused complaint submissions. - The targeted survey includes standard questions aligned to each evaluation standard (more for staff than community), with two open‑ended questions (what the superintendent does well; what needs improvement). Ms. Miles said boards can include a small number of additional questions tied to the superintendent’s goals.
Legal and policy context - The board noted a policy and state law expectation that the superintendent is evaluated annually; Ms. Miles said the district’s OSBA/COSA evaluation workbook has not changed since 2020 and recommended consistency in evaluation standards year to year while allowing goals to change.
Board discussion Board members debated whether annual evaluations create “evaluation fatigue.” Speakers noted the legal/policy requirement for annual reviews but suggested options such as deeper every‑other‑year reviews or lighter interim check‑ins. Ms. Miles and the superintendent said evaluation is a professional growth tool that can be made less burdensome by setting clear expectations at the start of the cycle and by using consistent instruments.
Speakers also asked about the cost and audience for targeted feedback; Ms. Miles said her group can provide an outline and cost estimate and that many districts use targeted feedback surveys to inform evaluations.
