Award Date

1-1-1989

Degree Type

Dissertation

Degree Name

Doctor of Education (EdD)

Department

Educational Administration

Number of Pages

167

Abstract

The Chief State School Officer, along with his staff, had the principal duties and responsibilities of the state government in the administration of education. In an era of increased educational accountability, little information was available on the evaluation procedures for Chief State School Officers. The purpose of this study was to conduct an assessment of the policy, scope, and methods used by State Boards of Education in the evaluation of the Chief State School Officers; Questionnaires were mailed to each State Board of Education President and each Chief State School Officer in order to elicit specific information concerning the evaluation procedures used in forty-nine states and six U.S. Territories; Results indicated that: (1) Of the 48 states and 4 territories responding to this survey (95%), only 17 states (32%) conducted evaluations. In states where the Chief State School Officer was elected by the people or appointed by the governor, no evaluation occurred. In 10 states where the Chief was appointed by the State Board of Education, no evaluation occurred. (2) Less than 20% of the states and territories responding to these questionnaires had a formal plan for this evaluation. When evaluations were conducted, they were usually done so at yearly intervals using a number of different processes. (3) State Board of Education Chairpersons who had an evaluation process in place, used predominantly two methods in evaluating the Chief State School Officer, essay questions and checklist ratings. The instrument was usually designed by the State Board of Education, was relatively new and had not been validated. (4) Most of the State Boards of Education that evaluated the Chief State School Officer did discuss the evaluation with the Chief. Fifty-three percent of the responding states completed a written evaluation. Most of the states utilized the results to set goals and standards for future performance. (5) State Board of Education presidents saw the process as being more effective in improving performance standards than did the Chief State School Officers.

Keywords

Chief; Current; Evaluating; Offic; Officer; Practices; Schools; State; Study

Controlled Subject

School management and organization

File Format

pdf

File Size

4474.88 KB

Degree Grantor

University of Nevada, Las Vegas

Language

English

Permissions

If you are the rightful copyright holder of this dissertation or thesis and wish to have the full text removed from Digital Scholarship@UNLV, please submit a request to digitalscholarship@unlv.edu and include clear identification of the work, preferably with URL.

Identifier

https://doi.org/10.25669/fgus-jf7e


Share

COinS