(1)Existing law requires the State Board of Education to develop guidelines that school districts may use in the development of teacher evaluation procedures, and distribute such guidelines to every school district.

This bill would require the state board to revise, update, and adopt guidelines that school districts may use in the development of teacher evaluation procedures by July 1, 2016. The bill would also require that the updated guidelines include a determination of a teachers overall performance, as specified.

(2)Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district or a county board of education, as specified, after a public hearing on the matter, to request the state board to waive all or part of any section of the Education Code or any regulation adopted by the state board that implements a provision of the Education Code that may be waived, except for specified provisions.

This bill would prohibit the state board from granting any waiver request by a governing board of a school district if the state board finds that the governing board of the school district is out of compliance with specified requirements relating to teacher evaluation.

(3)Existing law states the intent of the Legislature that governing boards of school districts establish a uniform system of evaluation and assessment of the performance of all certificated personnel within each school district of the state. Existing law requires the governing board of each school district to establish standards of expected pupil achievement at each grade level in each area of study and to evaluate and assess certificated employee performance on a continuing basis as it reasonably relates to the progress of pupils toward the established standards and, if applicable, the state adopted academic content standards as measured by state adopted criterion referenced assessments, the instructional techniques and strategies used by the employee, the employees adherence to curricular objectives, and the establishment and maintenance of a suitable learning environment, within the scope of the employees responsibilities. Existing law authorizes school district governing boards to develop and adopt additional evaluation and assessment guidelines or criteria.

This bill would encourage the governing board of a school district to use peer observation and surveys of parents and pupils as part of the evaluation and assessment guidelines and criteria.

(4)Existing law requires that an evaluation and assessment of the performance of a certificated employee be made on a continuing basis, as provided.

This bill would instead require an annual evaluation and assessment of the performance of a certificated employee. The bill would require the evaluation and assessment to include a determination of the teachers performance, as specified. By requiring school districts to perform additional duties, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would provide that, to the extent these provisions conflict with any provision of a collective bargaining agreement entered into before January 1, 2016, by a public school employer and an exclusive bargaining representative, the provisions shall not apply to the school district until the expiration or renewal of that collective bargaining agreement.

(5)This bill would update cross-references and would make other nonsubstantive changes.

(6)The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions.

Date of Hearing: April 29, 2015

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION

Patrick O'Donnell, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 1078

Author:(Olsen) – As Introduced Ver:February 27, 2015

SUBJECT: Teachers: evaluations

SUMMARY: Makes changes to the certificated employee evaluation system, known as the Stull Act. Specifically, this bill:

1. Requires the State Board of Education (SBE), by July 1, 2016 to revise, update and adopt guidelines that school districts may use in the development of teacher evaluation procedures; and, requires the updated guidelines to include, but not necessarily be limited to, a determination that a teacher's overall performance is highly effective, effective, minimally effective or ineffective.

2. Prohibits the SBE from granting any waiver request by a governing board of a school district if the state board finds the governing board of the school district to be out of compliance with subdivision (a) or paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) of Section 44662, or out of compliance with the requirement to confer with a certificated employee making specific recommendations as to areas of improvement in the certificated employee’s performance and endeavor to assist the certificated employee in his or her performance.

3. Encourages the governing board of a school district to use peer observation and surveys of parents and students as part of the evaluation and assessment guidelines or criteria for certificated employees.

4. Requires all certificated employees to be evaluated annually, which shall result in a determination of highly effective, effective, minimally effective or ineffective.

5. Defines "unsatisfactory" to mean an evaluation that results in a determination of ineffective or minimally effective; and, defines "satisfactory" to mean an evaluation that results in a determination of effective or highly effective.

6. Specifies to the extent that this bill conflicts with a provision of a collective bargaining agreement entered into by a public school employer and an exclusive bargaining representative before January 1, 2016, pursuant to Chapter 10.7 (commencing with Section 3540) of Division 4 of Title 1 of the Government Code, the changes made to by this bill shall not apply to the school district until expiration or renewal of that collective bargaining agreement.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Establishes the Stull Act, enacted in 1971, which governs certificated employee evaluations and requires school districts to evaluate and assess teacher performance as it reasonability relates to pupil performance on criterion referenced tests, teacher technique and strategies, curricular objectives, and the maintenance of a suitable learning environment. Specifies that in the development and adoption of evaluation guidelines and procedures, the governing board shall avail itself of the advice of the certificated instructional personnel in the district's organization of certificated personnel pursuant to collective bargaining statutes. Specifies that a school district may, by mutual agreement between the exclusive representative of the certificated employees of the school district and the governing board of the school district, include any objective standards from the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards or any objective standards from the California Standards for the Teaching Profession. Specifies that teacher evaluations shall be made on a continuing basis at least once each school year for probationary personnel; at least every other year for personnel with permanent status; and, at least every five years for personnel with permanent status who have been employed at least 10 years with the school district, are highly qualified, if those personnel occupy positions that are required to be filled by a highly qualified professional, and whose previous evaluation rated the employee as meeting or exceeding standards, if the evaluator and certificated employee being evaluated agree. Specifies that an employee who receives an unsatisfactory rating in the area of teaching methods or instruction may be required to participate in a program designed to improve appropriate areas of the employee's performance; and, requires if a school district participates in the Peer Assistance and Review Program for Teachers (PAR), employees who receive an unsatisfactory rating shall participate in PAR. (Education Code 44660 et. seq.)

2. Establishes the Peer Assistance and Review Program for Teachers (PAR) by authorizing school districts and the exclusive representative of the certificated employees to develop and implement the program locally. Specifies that assistance and review shall include multiple observations of a teacher during periods of classroom instruction. Specifies the program shall expect and strongly encourage a cooperative relationship between the consulting teacher and the principal with respect to the process of peer assistance and review. Specifies the school district shall provide sufficient staff development activities to assist a teacher to improve his or her teaching skills and knowledge. Specifies the final evaluation of a teacher's participation in the program shall be made available for placement in the personnel file of the teacher receiving assistance. (Education Code 44505)

FISCAL EFFECT: Legislative counsel has keyed this bill a state mandated local program.

COMMENTS: This bill makes changes to the certificated employee evaluation system, known as the Stull Act.

According to the author, The Stull Act was passed in 1971 to provide school districts with a timeline for teacher evaluations, and to designate the importance of peer review and student academic performance in such evaluations. However, the Act lacks definition and guidelines, and school districts have largely ignored its provisions. AB 1078 would improve teacher evaluations by modernizing the Stull Act to develop meaningful teacher evaluations that will help both teachers and students continue on the path to success.

Operative Date: If enacted, this bill has as operative January 1, 2016, but the revised SBE guidance is not available until July 1, 2016. The committee should consider whether the revised SBE guidance should be published and distributed to school districts before the operative date of the bill.

SBE Waivers: This bill prohibits all SBE waivers from being granted if a school district does not do both of the following:

1. Establish standards of expected pupil achievement at each grade level in each area of study.

2. Evaluate and assess certificated employee performance as it reasonably relates to the progress of pupils toward the standards, the state adopted academic content standards as measured by state adopted criterion referenced assessments.

Under this provision, it is unclear what the status of existing SBE waivers would hold. Would the SBE waivers that have been approved to date, be void?

Research on Evaluation: Several research studies detail the essential principals and components of a strong teacher evaluation system. The National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality argues a strong evaluation system must: "involve teachers and stakeholders in developing the system; use multiple indicators; and give teachers opportunities to improve in the areas in which they score poorly." Likewise, the New Teacher Project states "evaluations should provide all teachers with regular feedback that helps them grow as professionals, no matter how long they have been in the classroom. The primary purpose of evaluations should not be punitive. Good evaluations identify excellent teachers and help teachers of all skill levels understand how they can improve." This bill does not implement multiple indicators for teacher evaluation.

According to StudentsFirst, "A growing body of research on teacher evaluation measures and best practices from other states across the country supports the use of standards-based observation tools and objective measures of student growth for evaluating teacher performance. However, AB 1078 does not include requirements that districts utilize research-based measures of teacher performance within locally adopted teacher evaluation systems and provides no guidance for how each of these measures should be weighted in the final rating."

Evaluation Frequency: This bill requires annual evaluation of all certificated employees. Currently, permanent teachers are evaluated at least every other year; and, teachers with more than 10 years of experience are authorized to be evaluated every five years. This bill will require experienced teachers to be evaluated more frequently. It is unclear how many teachers are currently evaluated every other year versus every five years and thus it is unclear how this bill will affect administrator work load to complete the increased number of evaluations. It is unclear whether our current administrative organization at schools will allow for annual evaluations of every teacher. The committee should consider whether this will be possible given the fact that many schools have a single principal. If the committee agrees that annual evaluation is appropriate, the committee should further consider whether it will be possible for principals to receive enough support from the district to accomplish this starting year one.

Professional Development: This bill specifies that teachers who receive an unsatisfactory rating on their evaluation (those deemed ineffective and minimally effective), if a school district has a PAR program in place, they must refer teachers who receive an unsatisfactory review to the PAR program for improvement. The bill does not specify the process if a teacher continues to receive unsatisfactory evaluations after the PAR program is complete. It is unclear whether school districts should begin dismissal proceedings, or provide further instructional support for the teacher.

Performance Bands: This bill requires the state prescribed evaluation system to use four prescribed performance bands which include: "highly effective," "effective," "minimally effective," and "ineffective." The committee should consider whether four performance levels would be the appropriate number, and whether the four levels specified in the bill are the most effective performance level descriptors that should be used state-wide.

Parent and Student Surveys and Peer Observations: This bill encourages the use of peer evaluations and surveys from parents and pupils in certificated employee evaluations. The committee should consider whether it is appropriate to include peer observations, if those peers are not involved in appropriate training. The committee should also consider whether it is appropriate to include surveys from parents and students in certificated employee evaluations. The committee should consider whether it is possible for a particularly "tough" teacher that assigns robust homework to receive negative survey comments, when they are a very effective teacher and how this would impact the overall evaluation of that teacher. Likewise, if surveys from parents and students included in a principal's evaluation, comment on suspensions and expulsions, is that appropriate?

Charter Schools: This bill requires all traditional public schools in the state to adopt the changes to the teacher evaluation system, but the committee should note that the Stull Act and the changes made in this bill do not apply to charter schools. The committee should consider whether charter schools teachers should be left out of this opportunity for annual evaluations and support.

Related Legislation: AB 575 (O'Donnell & Atkins) from 2015, which is pending in the Assembly, would require the governing board of each school district and the governing body of each charter school to adopt and implement a best practices teacher and administrator evaluation system by July 1, 2018.

AB 1495 (Weber) from 2015, which is pending in the Assembly, would make changes to the certificated employee evaluation system, known as the Stull Act.

SB 499 (Liu & DeLeon) from 2015, which is pending in the Senate, would require the governing board of each school district to adopt and implement a best practices teacher and administrator evaluation system by July 1, 2016.

AB 430 (Olsen) from 2013, which was held by the author in the Assembly Education Committee, would have established the Teacher Professional Growth Plan, as specified.

AB 5 (Fuentes) from 2009, which was held by the author on the Senate Floor, would have required the governing board of each school district to adopt and implement a best practices teacher evaluation system, as specified.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

CalChamber

EdVoice

Students Matter

Opposition

California Federation of Teachers

California Teachers Association

Analysis Prepared by: Chelsea Kelley / ED. / (916) 319-2087