I’ve been thinking a lot about a new principal evaluation system that my district has begun using. It is based on the principal evaluation work of Kim Marshall and consists of a set of rubrics. It feels strange to be on the other end of the rubric. I have been using Charlotte Danielson’s work to evaluate teachers for years and have really enjoyed using her rubrics as a basis for my discussions with teachers about their work. The discussions, from my vantage point, have been rich ones that relate to the complexity of teaching. So why am I giving Marshall’s rubrics so much thought. Perhaps it is that the evaluation of principals has caught up with the evaluation of teachers. Moving from vague to specific. Perhaps it is the (and this shouldn’t be shocking) revelation that my job is complicated. What is your rubric? How do you evaluate your work? I’d love to hear your thoughts on principal evaluation.