Feedback for Principals—and Us

School Administrator, Oct, 1998

When The School Administrator adopted its current design last fall, we added a biographical note about the author of each article at the end of his or her piece. This note includes contact information--a mailing address and the lead author's electronic mail address, when possible.

We made this change in order to encourage greater interaction between our readers and those whose writing appears in the magazine. We recognize the limitations that a modest-size monthly has in allowing its writers to provide all the significant details they ordinarily want to share. Fortunately, most writers are willing to answer questions or send additional material about their subject, upon request.

This month's issue, which should be of interest to any superintendent or deputy who shoulders the responsibility of evaluating site administrators, offers several such opportunities for followup contact. We have assembled several informative articles on the process of assessing the performance of building principals, beginning with the decision of what sort of evaluation instrument to use.

In particular, we call your attention to the two contributions from practitioners. Libby Gil, whose 35 building administrators report to her as superintendent in Chula Vista, Calif., offers an overview of a peer evaluation process that is raising expectations for all, while providing professional remediation for those performing at subpar levels.

Rod Paige, superintendent in Houston, and two colleagues detail their use of two-year renewable performance contracts that allow the district to act more quickly to make changes in site leadership.

We hope you will let these school leaders and others who write for The School Administrator know what you think of their work. And don't forget to send a copy of your correspondence to me. It helps us appreciate what our readers find useful--and what they don't.

Jay P. Goldman

Voice: 703-875-0745

E-mail: jgoldman@aasa.org