Effectiveness ratings of principals by researchers have frequently been hampered by relying on teachers' one-dimensional, research-triggered "global" ratings. This paper reports a 1979-80 British Comumbia superintendents' study geared toward multidimensional subjective assessments of 266 administrators, and concentrates primarily on ways in which superintendents make their evaluations. The first section deals with data--including distributions of general evaluator ratings and of ratings by positions--and with evaluation strategies. The next section presents a random sample of 77 reports and examines the aspects on which evaluators focus as they consider principals' schools, rather than their behaviors. Professional background, as well as descriptors (adjectives) describing the evaluated, are addressed in the third section, although it is chiefly given to analyzing the number (290) and variety of principals' actions in terms of a 4-dimensional framework, The next section relates differences between reports of differently rated principals, and conclusions are drawn in a closing section. (KS)