I have researched many resources and am providing this annotated
bibliography of the best for new, experienced, and aspiring
superintendents who want to enhance their effectiveness in the topics
related to this module.
Council of Chief State School Officers. (2008). Educational leadership policy standards: ISLLC 2008. Retrieved from
In 2008, the National Policy Board for Educational Administration
(NPBEA) adopted CCSSO’s newly republished ISLLC standards in response to
calls from educational leaders and other stakeholders for updated
leadership standards. While the ‘footprint’ of the standards remains the
same, ISLLC 2008 standards are intended to be explicitly
policy-oriented and designed to be used for policy creation and the
lifelong career development and support of education leaders.
DiPaola, M. (2010). Evaluating the superintendent: a white paper from
the American Association of School Administrators. Retrieved from http://www.aasa.org/content.aspx?id=13094&terms=white+paper
This white paper is provided by the American Association of School
Administrators as a useful reference to new and experienced
superintendents and to school boards about the various aspects of the
superintendent evaluation process in an era of heightened focus on
educator performance and evaluation. The report emphasizes the
importance of building an evaluation system on a foundation of clearly
described performance standards with observable performance indicators.
There is a list on page 13 of the report of the twelve states that have
agreed-upon superintendent standards and/or competencies for performance
DiPaola, M. (2007). Revisiting superintendent evaluation. The School Administrator, 64 (6). Retrieved from http://www.aasa.org/SchoolAdministratorArticle.aspx?id=6672&term
In this article, DiPaola notes that a logical first step in the
development of an effective superintendent evaluation system is to
specify the performance standards that will serve as the expectations of
the job. He notes the importance of using multiple sources of data in
the evaluation of a superintendent including, but not limited to student
DiPaola, M. & Strong, J. (2001). Credible evaluation: not yet
state-of-the-art. The School Administrator, 58 (2). Retrieved from http://www.aasa.org/SchoolAdministratorArticle.aspx?id=11186&term
The authors take a broad look at the state of superintendent evaluation
systems across the country after collecting and analyzing superintendent
evaluation procedures, guidelines, and instruments issued by state
departments of education. DiPaola and Stronge note that assessment
criteria are often weak and that few comprehensive evaluation models
exist. They also stresses the importance of basing evaluation systems on
agreed-upon performance standards and corresponding competencies.
Hessel, K. M., & Holloway, J. (2002). A framework for school
leaders: linking the ISLLC standards to practice. Upper Saddle River,
NJ: Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall.
This book provides a comprehensive look at the implementation of the
ISLLC standards, linking them to the practice of school leaders. It
includes an overview of the ISLLC framework and a history of the
evolution of school leadership over time.
Hoyle, J. R., Bjork, L. G., Collier, V., & Glass, T. (2005). The
superintendent as CEO: Standards-based performance. Thousand Oaks, CA:
The authors use the AASA Professional Standards for Superintendents as a
lens through which they examine standards-based performance
expectations of superintendents as school district CEOs. They chose to
use the AASA standards over ISLLC citing weaknesses in ISLLC including
limited scope and significantly different skill sets required of
building level leaders as compared to district level leaders. They
included enlightening case study scenarios and discussion questions at
the end of each chapter.
Klauke, Amy. (1988). Performance standards for school superintendents. ERIC Digest Series (Number EA34). Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno-ED301970
In this question-and-answer formatted article, Klauke notes several
benefits to establishing a set of performance expectations for
superintendent evaluations including cost effectiveness, crisis
management reduction, and setting and maintaining direction.
Kowalski, T. J. (2011). The American school superintendent: 2010
decennial study. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield Education.
Chapter 6 of the study is devoted to various aspects of superintendents’
interactions with school boards including primary board expectations
and performance evaluation. Kowalski found that most superintendents’
evaluations consist of checklists or rating scales focused on traits,
skills, knowledge, and style. He also notes that only 13% of respondents
said they were evaluated in a formative process, more than once each
year. The author concurred that defined performance criteria should
serve as the basis of the evaluation.
Lewis, T., Rice, M., & Rice, Jr., R. (2011). Superintendents’
beliefs and behaviors regarding instructional leadership standards
reform. The International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation,
6 (1). Retrieved from http://cnx.org/content/m36715/1.3/
This research study examines the perceptions of superintendents
regarding various aspects of the Alabama superintendent performance
standards system. The authors chronicle the development of the Alabama
standards and share data collected from superintendents about their
implementation and impact. Some notable beliefs on the part of
superintendent respondents include: (1) Alabama superintendents
identified teaching and learning as the most important for increasing
student achievement and (2) most participants ranked face-to-face
workshops as the preferred professional development delivery method. The
authors note, however, that professional development for
superintendents must include an integration of emerging technology
delivery options with the desired face-to-face interaction.
Marzano, R. & Waters, T. (2009). District leadership that works: Striking the balance. Bloomington, IN:Solution Tree Press.
In this book, Marzano and Waters explore the impact of district-level
leadership on student learning. They employed a meta-analysis
methodology to synthesize available research across the topic of school
district leadership. Their stated goal was to uncover the construct
relationship between the actions of district leadership and student
achievement. The results of their study are presented as chapters in the
book devoted to those leadership actions and behaviors that are most
directly correlated to student achievement.
North Carolina State Board of Education. (2007). North Carolina standards for superintendents. Retrieved from http://www.ncpublicschools.org/docs/educatoreffect/ncees/standards/superintendent-standards.pdf
The North Carolina standards were used in the development of the
Kentucky Next-Gen Superintendent Effectiveness Standards pilot. The
seven standards were adapted from a Wallace Foundation study and reflect
McREL’s work on the effect of superintendent leadership on student
achievement. These standards were among the standards used as the source
for the pilot KY superintendent effectiveness standards.
Petersen, G. J., & Young, M. D. (2004). The No Child Left Behind Act
and its influence on current and future district leaders. Journal of
Law and Education, 33(3), 343 - 363.
The authors take a comprehensive look at the influence of No Child Left
Behind on the work of current and future superintendents. They emphasize
that, because of external accountability, the role of superintendent as
instructional leader is more important than ever before; therefore,
superintendent preparation programs and professional development
programs must change in order to ensure that superintendents are
prepared to support the success of all children. They also stress the
need for supporting new superintendents toward that goal through
induction, mentoring, and networking opportunities.
Reform Support Network. (2011). Great teachers and leaders: State
considerations on building systems of educator effectiveness. Retrieved
This report, commissioned by the US Department of Education, provides a
solid overview of the national effort, inspired by the implementation of
Common Core State Standards and the various Race to the Top
initiatives, to create systems of educator effectiveness. The report
represents a synthesis of the discussions and expert thinking of Race to
the Top state participants about the early challenges they faced as
they designed and built performance-based systems of teacher and leader
Rockwood, P.R. (2010). Board and superintendent perceptions of the
Illinois professional standards for school leaders critical for
superintendent success. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from Proquest
LLC. (UMI No. 3438728).
The purpose of this study was to determine what differences existed
between the perceptions of Illinois public school superintendents and
their school board presidents as to which performance competencies in
the ISLLC-based Illinois Standards for School Leaders were considered
most critical for success in the superintendency. The study includes a
thorough review of the use of ISLLC as the basis for the Illinois school
leader evaluation system and the author highlights the importance of
employing a standards-based competency model as the basis for preparing,
hiring, developing, and hiring effective superintendents. Rockwood
notes that the use of a competency model can provide the framework for
determining superintendent professional development based on individual
competencies that need further development and improvement.
Santiago-Marullo, D. A. (2010). School superintendents' perceptions of
the American Association of School Administrators' professional
standards for the superintendency. (Doctoral Dissertation). Retrieved
from ProQuest LLC. (UMI No. 3421832).
This study looked at the perceptions of superintendents in New York
about those indicators from the AASA superintendent performance
standards that contributed most to their success as superintendents. The
researcher used a survey to gauge respondents perceptions about 33 of
the 81 indicators on a five-point scale with 5 being 'extremely
important.' The indicator with the highest mean score for importance was
"Promote academic rigor and excellence for staff" from AASA Standard
One: Leadership and District Culture. The second highest score went to
"Write and speak clearly and forcefully," Standard Three: Communications
and Community Relations. This study provides a good format that we
could replicate to gather feedback on the new KY Superintendent
Effectiveness Standards from new and experienced KY superintendents.
Spanneut, G., Tobin, J., & Ayers, S. (2011). Identifying the
professional development needs of school superintendents. Retrieved from
This study involved 60 participating superintendents who provided
feedback to the authors about their self-identified professional
development needs and their preferences for professional development
delivery. The researchers make a strong case for the importance of
grounding superintendent professional development decisions in a set of
performance standards despite the fact that the research indicated that
superintendents’ professional development experiences were often
generalized, were rarely standards-based, and often employed
questionable pedagogical practices.