There is literature to support each of the 11 functions on the interview but none that evaluates the total set. The unique contribution of this instrument is that the methodology used was to have effective principals in three major urban areas over a three year period explain their success by identifying the specific functions they performed that they believed accounted for their effectiveness. The functions they identified are each cited repeatedly in the literature but not as a total set. Each of the eleven functions is a necessary but not sufficient condition for effectiveness. What this means is that an individual must pass each of the eleven functions at a level above zero to pass the interview. They cannot be totally deficient in an area and function effectively.
Can the instrument be used for principal coaching and principal development? Yes, provided the specific dimension being coached is one that has a low passing score or higher and not a failing score (zero). It is also necessary that the principal's coach be capable in the areas s/he is coaching. This would require giving the coaches the interview and knowing their level on the dimensions they would be coaching.
Can the instrument be used to evaluate the principal? Yes. I would suggest interviewing the principal at the end of the year using the B Form one year and the A Form the next. The functions being assessed are the same; the questions are different.
How might this evaluation be done for existing administrators? The district should first establish the portion of the evaluation that will be based on student achievement. I would recommend that 50 percent of the evaluation be determined by improved student achievement and 50 percent on the interview. This would mean that a principal whose school achievement is not increasing could not be judged higher than 50 percent if he had a perfect score on the interview.