Recently, the federal government has pressured states to add student growth data as a part of the evaluation system. State legislatures in New York and Colorado have passed legislation to revamp teacher and principal evaluation to include student growth data. Numerous researchers acknowledged the critical impact of school principals on student achievement, and asserted the need to develop a coherent evaluation that would assess and expand the capacity of principals. This study examined accountability indicators designed to evaluate elementary school principals. A quantitative approach was used to study correlation between six accountability indicators (Academic Performance Index (API) scores, similar-school ranks, residualized difference (RD) scores, Value Added Method (VA) scores, Academic Growth over Time (AGT) scores, and school experience surveys) and three external factors (socio-economic status, mean parent education level, and percentage of English Learners). The participants included elementary schools in the Los Angeles Unified School District from 2005 to 2010. The data files were collected from the public websites, and were downloaded and analyzed. The study's conclusions are: API scores were extremely stable, but AGT scores were not nearly as stable over the years. There was a steady growth in API over the years. Employee and student survey results were strongly correlated, but neither correlated to parent ratings. None of the school experience surveys were correlated with test-based accountability indices. API scores were strongly related to all three external factors, but VAM scores, AGT scores, RD scores, and school experience survey results were not related to them. API was found to be biased against principals who were working at a school with one or more disadvantageous external factors. Thus, using API as a part of a principal performance evaluation would be unfair. Results of this study highlights similar-school ranks, RD scores, VAM scores, AGT scores, and school experience surveys as potential accountability indicators that were unbiased and fair to be included in principal performance evaluation system. RD scores were found to be the most reliable accountability indicator. Due to their low cost and simplicity, RD scores should be considered as possible alternative to complex and expensive value-added systems. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]