A multiyear pilot study analyzed the score variation, internal consistency, score stability, and concurrent validity of Pennsylvania's Framework for Leadership¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · designr?·q2
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · overdue for a recheck since 2019: tool and model accuracy changes quickly
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? During its pilot implementation in 2012/13 and 2013/14, the Framework for Leadership was studied for score variation, internal consistency, score stability, and concurrent validity. → Moira McCullough 2016
Evidence¶
Moira McCullough 2016¶
Moira McCullough, Stephen Lipscomb, Hanley Chiang, Brian Gill, Irina Cheban. (2016). Measuring School Leaders' Effectiveness: Findings from a Multiyear Pilot of Pennsylvania's Framework for Leadership (Stated Briefly). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, REL Mid-Atlantic. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/
q2 · i? · design · r?
The brief states the study's scope: it "analyzes the score variation, internal consistency, score stability, and concurrent validity" of the FFL during its pilot in 2012/13 and 2013/14. No effect sizes or detailed findings are printed in the supplied text.
"This study analyzes the score variation, internal consistency, score stability, and concurrent validity of the Framework for Leadership (FFL)—Pennsylvania's tool for evaluating school leaders' effectiveness—during its pilot implementation in 2012/13 and 2013/14."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- The full FFL showed good internal consistency for both principals and assistant principals in the 2012/13 pilot — related
- School leaders' FFL scores are moderately stable year to year (correlation of .54) — related
- The report concludes more validity evidence is needed before using FFL scores to identify effective and ineffective school leaders — related
- FFL scores were not associated with school leaders' estimated contributions to student achievement growth — related
- Most FFL scores for specific leadership practices fell in the top two of four performance levels, indicating limited score variation — related
- Principals with higher FFL scores make larger estimated contributions to student achievement growth (concurrent validity) — related
- School leaders who scored higher in one category of FFL leadership practices tended to score higher in the other categories — related
- The FFL shows good internal consistency across its full scale and its four categories of leadership practices — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
ffl-pilot-psychometric-analysis |
title |
A multiyear pilot study analyzed the score variation, internal consistency, score stability, and concurrent validity of Pennsylvania's Framework for Leadership |
description |
A multiyear pilot study analyzed the score variation, internal consistency, score stability, and concurrent validity of Pennsylvania's Framework for Leadership |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
weak |
newest_evidence |
2016 |
recheck_by |
2019 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-08 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — moira-mccullough-2016 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.