The annual Board review of the superintendent's performance is coming up. We're seeing signs of it, calendar items on the Board calendar, hagiographies in the Seattle Times, etc.
By what criteria should the superintendent's performance be judged and, by those criteria, how has she performed. We could look to Policy B61.00 for some clues. We could also look to any statement of the District's annual priorities.
Here's the tool used last year.
I think her performance should be measured in a number of ways including:
Overall satisfaction with the District as expressed on the District's student family surveys
Overall academic achievement by all students
Improvement in academic achievement by under-performing students
Closing the Academic Achievement Gap
Effective management of the budget
Capital projects completed on time and on budget
Compliance with Board Policy
Progress on the Strategic Plan
Effective management of her staff
Compliance with State and Federal law
What other criteria are appropriate?