Evaluating Leadership: How Arlington ISD Will Grade Superintendent Matt Smith’s First Year

As Superintendent Matt Smith approaches the conclusion of his inaugural year at the helm of Arlington Independent School District (AISD), a pivotal moment is on the horizon. The school board is set to conduct its first evaluation of his performance, marking a significant milestone in both Smith's career and the district's trajectory.

On November 7, trustees approved a framework to assess Smith’s performance, which will take place in a closed-door meeting. This evaluation process not only reviews the superintendent's effectiveness but also examines his contract, compensation, and benefits.

The Framework for Evaluation

During his tenure, Smith collaborated with board members to establish district goals and performance metrics designed to guide his evaluation. However, it is noteworthy that these metrics were primarily intended for 2025, creating a challenge in accurately measuring Smith's progress for 2024.

The evaluation tool, developed in partnership with the Texas Association of School Boards, allows for a transparent assessment of Smith's leadership. School board Vice President Sarah McMourrough emphasized that Smith was actively involved in crafting this evaluation instrument.

Key Areas of Focus

The evaluation consists of ten questions divided across three critical areas, which include:

1. Strategic Investment in the District's Future

Trustees will scrutinize how Smith has positioned the district for future success, with scoring options ranging from "No evidence" to "Exceeds goal." Key considerations include:

• Evidence of investment in school culture and staff development.
• Celebration of Arlington ISD and community achievements.
• Engagement and connection with the community.
• Initiation of thoughtful changes aimed at improving Arlington ISD.

2. Execution of Superintendent Responsibilities

Trustees will evaluate Smith's effectiveness in representing the district and fostering involvement. The scoring criteria will assess:

• Encouragement and recognition of student efforts and achievements.
• Collaboration with governmental and community organizations to meet student needs.
• Regular communication with the board regarding significant issues.

3. Academic Improvement Initiatives

Smith's efforts to meet state-required academic goals will be under review, particularly concerning student performance on the STAAR test. Assessment criteria include:

• Increasing third-grade reading achievement:
• Raising the percentage of students approaching grade level from 62% to 65%.
• Boosting the percentage meeting grade level from 36% to 39%.
• Increasing mastery levels from 13% to 15%.
• Enhancing third-grade math performance:
• Increasing students approaching grade level from 63% to 67%.
• Raising the percentage meeting grade level from 34% to 37%.
• Boosting mastery levels from 11% to 14%.
• Growing the percentage of career-ready students from 88% to 90%.

While the evaluation will consider Smith's leadership over the past year, the board acknowledges that he hasn't yet had a full year to influence academic outcomes, particularly with the upcoming spring STAAR tests occurring shortly after his arrival on January 30, 2024.

Despite facing challenges, including the district's performance in the spring 2024 STAAR tests falling below expectations, the administration continues to argue that standardized testing does not accurately reflect student achievement.

What do you think?

• Should the evaluation criteria for school superintendents be more flexible to account for unforeseen challenges?
• Is it fair to judge a superintendent's performance based on metrics that were set before they took office?
• How important is community involvement in evaluating a school district's leadership?
• Should standardized testing be the primary measure of a district's success?
• What role should transparency play in the evaluation process of public officials?