Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
MSBA walks board through four-stage superintendent evaluation tool; recommends focused indicators and staged check-ins
Summary
MSBA presenters Catherine Whitaker and Lisa Nieder outlined a four-stage superintendent-evaluation process for the MAPLEWOOD-RICHMOND HEIGHTS School Board, urging boards to pick 2–3 performance indicators, use clear evidence, hold periodic check-ins (often closed-session), and compile collective summative feedback.
MSBA presenter Catherine Whitaker told the MAPLEWOOD-RICHMOND HEIGHTS School Board the association nd partner agencies developed a four-stage superintendent evaluation tool intended to help boards be objective and focus on measurable growth. "We recommend 4 stages. The 1st stage is determining indicators, evidence, baseline rating," Whitaker said, and described stages that lead from setting indicators through growth planning, check-ins and a final summative evaluation.
Whitaker said Stage 1 sets the foundation: the board and superintendent collaboratively select performance indicators that tie to district strategic priorities and student learning, then identify 2' specific pieces of evidence to show progress. "If you pick something that the superintendent is already doing well, it's kind of just jumping through hoops," she said, urging selection of indicators where growth is plausible and measurable.
Lisa Nieder described the growth guide rubric-based booklet that structures performance across four levels (learning, developing, proficient, accomplished) and suggested possible evidence such as teacher surveys, meeting schedules and program artifacts. Nieder recommended boards generally select only a couple of areas to focus on per cycle so that the superintendent nd board—an track meaningful progress.
Board members raised practical questions about evidence and timing. Several members asked how to handle state APR data that arrive after evaluation calendars; presenters recommended using internal benchmark data when state data lag, and noted that a district may list APR results as a multi-year indicator if the board decides to carry a goal forward.
On Stage 3 check-ins, presenters advised periodic progress conversations that can be informal or formal and often occur in closed session because they relate to personnel evaluation. Whitaker said the summative Stage 4 should result in unified, board-produced feedback and that contract decisions should follow legal counsel review.
MSBA staff emphasized the association's materials and facilitation options are available: the full process manual, growth guide and forms are on MSBA's website for districts to self-direct, and MSBA can facilitate any or all stages on request.
What happens next: the board heard the presentation and asked clarifying questions about evidence, timelines and data sources; no formal adoption of the tool was recorded in the meeting minutes. The presenters offered to support the district's Stage 1 facilitation if the board chooses outside assistance.
