Existing law requires the State Board of Education to develop guidelines that school districts may use in the development of certain teacher evaluation procedures and to distribute those guidelines to every school district.

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 specified matters, including the progress of pupils, as provided, instructional techniques and strategies, and adherence to curricular objectives. Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district to develop and adopt additional evaluation and assessment guidelines or criteria.

This bill would specifically authorize and encourage the evaluation and assessment of certificated employee performance as it reasonably relates to the progress of pupils, instructional techniques and strategies, and adherence to curricular objectives to include certain things, as provided. The bill would also provide that it shall not be construed to require the state board to revise its guidelines, to limit a school district governing boards authority to adopt additional guidelines or criteria, or to limit the right of certificated employees or their exclusive representative to bargain concerning evaluation procedures.

Existing law requires the State Board of Education to develop guidelines that school districts may use in the development of certain teacher evaluation procedures and to distribute those guidelines to every school district.

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 specified matters, including the progress of pupils, as provided, instructional techniques and strategies, and adherence to curricular objectives. Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district to develop and adopt additional evaluation and assessment guidelines or criteria.

This bill would specifically authorize and encourage the evaluation and assessment of certificated employee performance as it reasonably relates to the progress of pupils, instructional techniques and strategies, and adherence to curricular objectives to include certain things, as provided. The bill would also provide that it shall not be construed to require the state board to revise its guidelines, to limit a school district governing board authority to adopt additional guidelines or criteria, or to limit the right of certificated employees or their exclusive representative to bargain concerning evaluation procedures.

Existing law requires the State Board of Education to develop guidelines that school districts may use in the development of certain teacher evaluation procedures and to distribute those guidelines to every school district.

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 specified matters, including the progress of pupils, as provided, instructional techniques and strategies, and adherence to curricular objectives. Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district to develop and adopt additional evaluation and assessment guidelines or criteria.

This bill would specifically authorize and encourage the evaluation and assessment of certificated employee performance as it reasonably relates to the progress of pupils, instructional techniques and strategies, and adherence to curricular objectives to include certain things, as provided. The bill would also provide that its provisions it shall not be construed as to require the state board to revise its guidelines. guidelines, to limit a school district governing board authority to adopt additional guidelines or criteria, or to limit the right of certificated employees or their exclusive representative to bargain concerning evaluation procedures.

Existing law requires the State Board of Education to develop guidelines that school districts may use in the development of certain teacher evaluation procedures and to distribute those guidelines to every school district.

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 specified matters, including pupil progress, as provided. the progress of pupils, as provided, instructional techniques and strategies, and adherence to curricular objectives. Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district to develop and adopt additional evaluation and assessment guidelines or criteria.

This bill would provide, if applicable, that multiple measures of pupil progress, pupil academic growth, pupil achievement, and pupil outcomes as used for certain purposes of evaluating and assessing certificated employee performance may include specified sources. specifically authorize and encourage the evaluation and assessment of certificated employee performance as it reasonably relates to the progress of pupils, instructional techniques and strategies, and adherence to curricular objectives to include certain things, as provided. The bill would also provide that its provisions shall not be construed as to require the state board to revise its guidelines.

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

This bill would require the development of those guidelines to comply with the Administrative Procedure Act.

(2)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 specified matters, including pupil progress, as provided. Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district to develop and adopt additional evaluation and assessment guidelines or criteria.

This bill would provide, if applicable, that multiple measures of pupil progress, pupil academic growth, pupil achievement, and pupil outcomes as used for certain purposes of evaluating and assessing certificated employee performance may include specified sources.

The bill would require an employing authority to use a minimum of 3 rating levels of professional achievement for evaluation and assessment of certificated employees, as provided.

By imposing additional duties on school districts, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

(3)Existing law requires an evaluation to include recommendations, if necessary, as to areas of improvement in the performance of the employee. Existing law authorizes these evaluations to include a requirement that the employee participate in a specified program if a permanent certificated employee receives an unsatisfactory evaluation.

This bill would instead require a certificated employee, if that employee receives one of the a specified rating levels level of professional achievement for evaluation and assessment, to participate in the California Peer Assistance and Review Program for Teachers if the school district participates in that program. The bill would require, in order to endeavor to assist the employee in areas of improvement, the school district to, at minimum, consider the employees eligibility for professional development identified in the school district and the schools applicable local control and accountability plan, and prioritize the employees eligibility for professional development, as provided. By expanding the duties of a school district, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

(4)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.

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

This bill would require the development of those guidelines to comply with the Administrative Procedure Act.

(2)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 specified matters, including pupil progress, as provided. Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district to develop and adopt additional evaluation and assessment guidelines or criteria.

This bill would provide, if applicable, that multiple measures of pupil progress, pupil academic growth, pupil achievement, and pupil outcomes as used for certain purposes of evaluating and assessing certificated employee performance may include specified sources.

The bill would require an employing authority to use a minimum of 3 rating levels of professional achievement for evaluation and assessment of certificated employees, as provided.

By imposing additional duties on school districts, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

(3)Existing law requires an evaluation to include recommendations, if necessary, as to areas of improvement in the performance of the employee. Existing law authorizes these evaluations to include a requirement that the employee participate in a specified program if a permanent certificated employee receives an unsatisfactory evaluation.

This bill would instead require a certificated employee, if that employee receives one of the specified rating levels of professional achievement for evaluation and assessment, to participate in the California Peer Assistance and Review Program for Teachers if the school district participates in that program. The bill would require, in order to endeavor to assist the employee in areas of improvement, the school district to, at minimum, consider the employees eligibility for professional development identified in the school district and the schools applicable local control and accountability plan, and prioritize the employees eligibility for professional development, as provided. By expanding the duties of a school district, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

(4)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.

GOVERNOR'S VETO

GV Bill Id:AB 2826

Author:(Weber)

As Enrolled Ver:August 24, 2016

2/3 vote

Original Committee Reference: ED.

SUMMARY: Specifies measures of pupil progress, instructional techniques and strategies, and adherence to curricular objectives that school districts may use for purposes of teacher evaluation.

The Senate amendments specify that locally-adopted measures of pupil progress would be in addition to local and state criterion-referenced evidence required by existing law and that locally-adopted formative and summative assessments measure the progress of pupils toward local or state-adopted academic content standards.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Requires the governing board of each school district to establish standards of expected pupil achievement at each grade level in each area of study.
2. Requires the governing board of each school district to evaluate and assess certificated employee performance as it reasonably relates to:
   1. The progress of pupils toward the standards established pursuant to subdivision (a) and, if applicable, the state adopted academic content standards as measured by state adopted criterion referenced assessments;
   2. The instructional techniques and strategies used by the employee;
   3. The employee's adherence to curricular objectives; and
   4. The establishment and maintenance of a suitable learning environment, within the scope of the employee's responsibilities.
3. Specifies that these provisions shall not be construed as in any way limiting the authority of school district governing boards to develop and adopt additional evaluation and assessment guidelines or criteria.
4. Requires teacher evaluation to be performed on a periodic basis, as follows:
   1. At least once each school year for probationary personnel;
   2. At least every other year for personnel with permanent status; and
   3. 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 by the federal No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, and whose previous evaluation rated the employee as meeting or exceeding standards, if the evaluator and certificated employee being evaluated agree. The certificated employee or the evaluator may withdraw consent at any time.

FISCAL EFFECT: This bill is keyed non-fiscal by the Legislative Counsel.

COMMENTS: Existing law, known as the Stull Act, requires school districts to evaluate teacher performance on a periodic basis as it relates to the following:

1. The progress of pupils toward the standards established pursuant to subdivision (a) and, if applicable, the state adopted academic content standards as measured by state adopted criterion referenced assessments;
2. The instructional techniques and strategies used by the employee;
3. The employee's adherence to curricular objectives; and
4. The establishment and maintenance of a suitable learning environment, within the scope of the employee's responsibilities.

The terms, "progress of pupils," "instructional techniques and strategies," and "the establishment and maintenance of a suitable learning environment" are not defined in statute, but the Stull Act gives governing boards broad authority to "develop and adopt additional evaluation and assessment guidelines or criteria."

Reason for the bill. According to the author's office, although the Stull Act has required the consideration of pupil progress in the evaluation and assessment of certificated staff job performance for over four decades, school district leadership continues to struggle with what measures of pupil progress are appropriate especially with the lack of state tests in specific grade levels or content areas. This bill includes an expansive set of evidence for student achievement that recognizes the differences in outcome measures for various disciplines and pedagogy beyond statewide assessments, including, but not limited to, student portfolios, surveys, classroom observation, department assessments, AP examinations, and English-language proficiency assessments.

GOVERNOR'S VETO MESSAGE:

I am returning Assembly Bill 2826 without my signature.

This bill sets forth 20 separate measures that school districts may voluntarily use for teacher evaluation.

I don't believe that this list of particular measures will materially change current teacher evaluations in California.

Analysis Prepared by: Rick Pratt / ED. / (916) 319-2087 FN: 0005109

CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS

CSA1 Bill Id:AB 2826

Author:(Weber)

As Amended Ver:June 14, 2016

Majority vote

Original Committee Reference: ED.

SUMMARY: Specifies measures of pupil progress, instructional techniques and strategies, and adherence to curricular objectives that school districts may use for purposes of teacher evaluation.

The Senate amendments specify that locally-adopted measures of pupil progress would be in addition to local and state criterion-referenced evidence required by existing law and that locally-adopted formative and summative assessments measure the progress of pupils toward local or state-adopted academic content standards.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Requires the governing board of each school district to establish standards of expected pupil achievement at each grade level in each area of study.
2. Requires the governing board of each school district to evaluate and assess certificated employee performance as it reasonably relates to:
   1. The progress of pupils toward the standards established pursuant to subdivision (a) and, if applicable, the state adopted academic content standards as measured by state adopted criterion referenced assessments;
   2. The instructional techniques and strategies used by the employee;
   3. The employee's adherence to curricular objectives; and
   4. The establishment and maintenance of a suitable learning environment, within the scope of the employee's responsibilities.
3. Specifies that these provisions shall not be construed as in any way limiting the authority of school district governing boards to develop and adopt additional evaluation and assessment guidelines or criteria.
4. Requires teacher evaluation to be performed on a periodic basis, as follows:
   1. At least once each school year for probationary personnel;
   2. At least every other year for personnel with permanent status; and
   3. 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 by the federal No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, and whose previous evaluation rated the employee as meeting or exceeding standards, if the evaluator and certificated employee being evaluated agree. The certificated employee or the evaluator may withdraw consent at any time.

FISCAL EFFECT: This bill is keyed non-fiscal by the Legislative Counsel.

COMMENTS: Existing law, known as the Stull Act, requires school districts to evaluate teacher performance on a periodic basis as it relates to the following:

1. The progress of pupils toward the standards established pursuant to subdivision (a) and, if applicable, the state adopted academic content standards as measured by state adopted criterion referenced assessments;
2. The instructional techniques and strategies used by the employee;
3. The employee's adherence to curricular objectives; and
4. The establishment and maintenance of a suitable learning environment, within the scope of the employee's responsibilities.

The terms, "progress of pupils," "instructional techniques and strategies," and "the establishment and maintenance of a suitable learning environment" are not defined in statute, but the Stull Act gives governing boards broad authority to "develop and adopt additional evaluation and assessment guidelines or criteria."

Reason for the bill. According to the author's office, although the Stull Act has required the consideration of pupil progress in the evaluation and assessment of certificated staff job performance for over four decades, school district leadership continues to struggle with what measures of pupil progress are appropriate especially with the lack of state tests in specific grade levels or content areas. This bill includes an expansive set of evidence for student achievement that recognizes the differences in outcome measures for various disciplines and pedagogy beyond statewide assessments, including, but not limited to, student portfolios, surveys, classroom observation, department assessments, Advanced Placement (AP) examinations, and English-language proficiency assessments.

Analysis Prepared by: Rick Pratt / ED. / (916) 319-2087 FN: 0003655

 CONSENT  

Bill No: AB 2826

Author:

:

Vote:

SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE: 9-0, 6/29/16

AYES: Liu, Block, Hancock, Huff, Leyva, Mendoza, Monning, Pan, Vidak

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 68-0, 5/27/16 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT:

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST: This bill specifies additional measures of pupil progress, instructional techniques and strategies, and adherence to curricular objectives that school districts may use for purposes of teacher evaluation.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Establishes the Stull Act which expresses legislative intent that school districts and county governing boards establish a uniform system of evaluation and assessment of certificated personnel.
2. Requires school districts, with the exception of certificated personnel who are employed on an hourly basis to teach adult education classes, to evaluate and assess teacher performance as it reasonably relates to:
   1. Progress of pupils toward district-adopted and, if applicable, state-adopted academic content standards as measured by state-adopted criterion referenced tests;
   2. Instructional techniques and strategies used by the employee;
   3. The employee’s adherence to curricular objectives; and
   4. The establishment and maintenance of a suitable learning environment within the scope of the employee’s responsibilities. (Education Code § 44660, et seq.)
3. Requires an evaluation and assessment of the performance of each certificated employee to be made 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 permanent employees who have been employed with the district at least 10 years and were rated as meeting or exceeding standards in their previous evaluation. Teachers who receive an unsatisfactory rating may be required to participate in a program designed to improve the employee’s performance and to further pupil achievement and the instructional objectives of the district.
4. Provides that if the district participates in the Peer Assistance and Review (PAR) program, then the teachers who receive an unsatisfactory rating are required to participate in that program. (Education Code § 44664)
5. Establishes the PAR program for teachers by authorizing school districts and the exclusive representative of the certificated employees to develop and implement the program locally. The PAR programs are to include multiple observations of a teacher during periods of classroom instruction and sufficient staff development activities to assist a teacher in improving his or her skills and knowledge. The final evaluation of a teacher’s participation in the program is made available for placement in his or her personnel file. (Education Code § 44505)

This bill:

1. Provides that, for purposes of teacher evaluation, the following phrases may include, but not be limited to, the following:
   1. “Progress of pupils,” in addition to local and state criterion-referenced evidence, as specified, may include the following multiple measures:
      1. Formative or summative criterion-referenced assessments measuring progress of pupils towards local or state-adopted academic content standards;
      2. School district, school, or department-developed assessments;
      3. Curriculum-based and end-of-course assessments;
      4. Pretest and posttest data;
      5. Interim, periodic, benchmark, and formative assessments;
      6. English language proficiency assessments;
      7. Assessments measuring progress in an individualized education program;
      8. Advanced placement, International Baccalaureate, and college preparedness examinations;
      9. A-G coursework completion;
      10. Industry-recognized career technical education assessments and program completion;
      11. Portfolios of pupils' work, projects, and performances redacted of personally identifiable pupil information;
      12. Surveys from parents, if approved in advance by the certificated employee;
      13. Surveys from pupils, if approved in advance by the certificated employee;
      14. Written reports from classroom observations; and
      15. Progress on outcomes described in the local control and accountability plan.
   2. “Instructional techniques and strategies” may include the following:
      1. Engaging and supporting all pupils in learning;
      2. Planning instruction and designing learning experiences for all pupils; and
      3. Using pupil assessment information to inform instruction and improve learning.
   3. “Adherence to curricular objectives” may include:
      1. Understanding and organizing subject matter for pupil learning; and
      2. Developing as a professional educator.
2. Provides that the Legislature encourages school districts to utilize these options for purposes of teacher evaluation.
3. Provides that these provisions shall not be construed as to require the State Board of Education to revise the guidelines developed pursuant to existing law.
4. Provides that these provisions shall not be construed as in any way limiting the authority of school district governing boards to develop and adopt additional evaluation and assessment guidelines or criteria or to limit the rights of certificated employees or their exclusive representative to bargain procedures to be used for the evaluation of employees or other terms and conditions of employment pursuant.

Comments

Need for the bill. According to the author, “although California law has required the consideration of actual pupil progress in the evaluation and assessment of certificated staff job performance for over four decades, school district personnel continue to struggle with what measures of pupil progress are appropriate especially with the lack of state tests in specific grade levels or content areas. As a result of this confusion, a majority of California’s largest school districts do not comply with the law and fail to include any actual data from state or local measures or observations of actual pupil progress in the performance evaluations of certificated staff.”

Improvements to the Stull Act. The terms, “progress of pupils,” “instructional techniques and strategies,” and “the establishment and maintenance of a suitable learning environment” are not defined in statute, but the Stull Act gives school districts broad authority to “develop and adopt additional evaluation and assessment guidelines or criteria.” This bill is intended to provide clarity to the Stull Act by specifying criteria that may be used by a governing board within its existing authority to define and measure these terms. This bill also includes an expansive set of evidence for student achievement that recognizes the differences in outcome measures for various disciplines and pedagogy beyond statewide assessments, including, but not limited to, student portfolios, surveys, classroom observation, department assessments, Advanced Placement examinations, and English-language proficiency assessments. Further, this bill encourages the use of all the elements of the interrelated domains of teaching practice from the California Standards of the Teaching Profession, which represent consensus on the developmental, holistic view of effective teaching.

Current research. Several studies document the correlation between teacher quality and student achievement. According to information provided by the author, research indicates differential teacher effectiveness is a strong determinant of differences in student learning, far outweighing the effects of differences in class size and heterogeneity. Studies have shown that students who are assigned to several ineffective teachers in a row have significantly lower achievement and gains in achievement than those who are assigned to several highly effective teachers.

The Center for the Future of Teaching and Learning has recommended making teacher evaluation multi-dimensional, strengthening the training of those who conduct evaluations, and tying evaluation results directly to substantive feedback to teachers. The National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality suggests 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.”

According to a 2010 report released by the National Board Resource Center at Stanford University, “While evaluation processes across the state vary widely, many of them look very much the same as they did in 1971…” Comments from Accomplished California Teachers indicate that current approaches to teacher evaluation results in a system that teachers do not trust, that rarely offers clear direction for improving practice, and often charges school leaders to implement without preparation or resources. A January 2011 report by the Center for the Future of Teaching and Learning notes that evaluations pay “scarce attention to student learning or do not connect that learning to elements of teacher content knowledge or instructional skills that could be improved.”

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:

SUPPORT: (Verified 7/5/16)

California State PTA

Children Now

EdVoice

Students Matter

OPPOSITION: (Verified 7/5/16)

None received

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 68-0, 5/27/16

AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Arambula, Atkins, Baker, Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chang, Chau, Chávez, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Eggman, Frazier, Beth Gaines, Gallagher, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Harper, Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte, Olsen, Patterson, Quirk, Ridley-Thomas, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark Stone, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Williams, Wood, Rendon

NO VOTE RECORDED: Brough, Brown, Chiu, Dodd, Cristina Garcia, Grove, Hadley, Medina, Melendez, O'Donnell, Rodriguez, Thurmond

Prepared by:

7/29/16 10:50:11

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION

Senator Carol Liu, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular

Bill No: AB 2826

Subject: Teachers: evaluation and assessment

SUMMARY

This bill specifies additional measures of pupil progress, instructional techniques and strategies, and adherence to curricular objectives that school districts may use for purposes of teacher evaluation.

BACKGROUND

Existing law:

1. Establishes the Stull Act which expresses legislative intent that school districts and county governing boards establish a uniform system of evaluation and assessment of certificated personnel.
2. Requires school districts, with the exception of certificated personnel who are employed on an hourly basis to teach adult education classes, to evaluate and assess teacher performance as it reasonably relates to:
   1. Progress of pupils toward district-adopted and, if applicable, state-adopted academic content standards as measured by state-adopted criterion referenced tests;
   2. Instructional techniques and strategies used by the employee;
   3. The employee’s adherence to curricular objectives; and
   4. The establishment and maintenance of a suitable learning environment within the scope of the employee’s responsibilities.

(Education Code § 44660, et seq.)

1. Requires an evaluation and assessment of the performance of each certificated employee to be made 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 permanent employees who have been employed with the district at least 10 years and were rated as meeting or exceeding standards in their previous evaluation. Teachers who receive an unsatisfactory rating may be required to participate in a program designed to improve the employee’s performance and to further pupil achievement and the instructional objectives of the district.
2. Provides that if the district participates in the Peer Assistance and Review (PAR) program, then the teachers who receive an unsatisfactory rating are required to participate in that program. (Education Code § 44664)
3. Establishes the PAR program for teachers by authorizing school districts and the exclusive representative of the certificated employees to develop and implement the program locally. The PAR programs are to include multiple observations of a teacher during periods of classroom instruction and sufficient staff development activities to assist a teacher in improving his or her skills and knowledge. The final evaluation of a teacher’s participation in the program is made available for placement in his or her personnel file. (Education Code § 44505)
   

ANALYSIS

This bill:

1. Provides that, for purposes of teacher evaluation, the following phrases may include, but not be limited to, the following:
   1. "Progress of pupils," in addition to local and state criterion-referenced evidence, as specified, may include the following multiple measures:
      1. Formative or summative criterion-referenced assessments measuring progress of pupils towards local or state-adopted academic content standards;
      2. School district, school, or department-developed assessments;
      3. Curriculum-based and end-of-course assessments;
      4. Pretest and posttest data;
      5. Interim, periodic, benchmark, and formative assessments;
      6. English language proficiency assessments;
      7. Assessments measuring progress in an individualized education program;
      8. Advanced placement, International Baccalaureate, and college preparedness examinations;
      9. A-G coursework completion;
      10. Industry-recognized career technical education assessments and program completion;
      11. Portfolios of pupils' work, projects, and performances redacted of personally identifiable pupil information;
      12. Surveys from parents, if approved in advance by the certificated employee;
      13. Surveys from pupils, if approved in advance by the certificated employee;
      14. Written reports from classroom observations; and
      15. Progress on outcomes described in the local control and accountability plan (LCAP).
   2. "Instructional techniques and strategies" may include the following:
      1. Engaging and supporting all pupils in learning;
      2. Planning instruction and designing learning experiences for all pupils; and
      3. Using pupil assessment information to inform instruction and improve learning.
   3. "Adherence to curricular objectives" may include:
      1. Understanding and organizing subject matter for pupil learning; and
      2. Developing as a professional educator.
2. Provides that the Legislature encourages school districts to utilize these options for purposes of teacher evaluation.
3. Provides that these provisions shall not be construed as to require the State Board of Education to revise the guidelines developed pursuant to existing law.
4. Provides that these provisions shall not be construed as in any way limiting the authority of school district governing boards to develop and adopt additional evaluation and assessment guidelines or criteria or to limit the rights of certificated employees or their exclusive representative to bargain procedures to be used for the evaluation of employees or other terms and conditions of employment pursuant.

STAFF COMMENTS

1. Need for the bill. According to the author, “although California law has required the consideration of actual pupil progress in the evaluation and assessment of certificated staff job performance for over four decades, school district personnel continue to struggle with what measures of pupil progress are appropriate especially with the lack of state tests in specific grade levels or content areas. As a result of this confusion, a majority of California’s largest school districts do not comply with the law and fail to include any actual data from state or local measures or observations of actual pupil progress in the performance evaluations of certificated staff.”
2. Improvements to the Stull Act. The terms, "progress of pupils," "instructional techniques and strategies," and "the establishment and maintenance of a suitable learning environment" are not defined in statute, but the Stull Act gives school districts broad authority to "develop and adopt additional evaluation and assessment guidelines or criteria." This bill is intended to provide clarity to the Stull Act by specifying criteria that may be used by a governing board within its existing authority to define and measure these terms. The bill also includes an expansive set of evidence for student achievement that recognizes the differences in outcome measures for various disciplines and pedagogy beyond statewide assessments, including, but not limited to, student portfolios, surveys, classroom observation, department assessments, Advanced Placement examinations, and English-language proficiency assessments. Further, the bill encourages the use of all the elements of the interrelated domains of teaching practice from the California Standards of the Teaching Profession, which represent consensus on the developmental, holistic view of effective teaching.
3. Current research. Several studies document the correlation between teacher quality and student achievement. According to information provided by the author, research indicates differential teacher effectiveness is a strong determinant of differences in student learning, far outweighing the effects of differences in class size and heterogeneity. Studies have shown that students who are assigned to several ineffective teachers in a row have significantly lower achievement and gains in achievement than those who are assigned to several highly effective teachers.
   
   The Center for the Future of Teaching and Learning has recommended making teacher evaluation multi-dimensional, strengthening the training of those who conduct evaluations, and tying evaluation results directly to substantive feedback to teachers. The National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality suggests 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.”

According to a 2010 report released by the National Board Resource Center at Stanford University, “While evaluation processes across the state vary widely, many of them look very much the same as they did in 1971…” Comments from Accomplished California Teachers indicate that current approaches to teacher evaluation results in a system that teachers do not trust, that rarely offers clear direction for improving practice, and often charges school leaders to implement without preparation or resources. A January 2011 report by the Center for the Future of Teaching and Learning notes that evaluations pay “scarce attention to student learning or do not connect that learning to elements of teacher content knowledge or instructional skills that could be improved.”

1. Related and prior legislation.

SB 499 (Liu, 2015) repeals and replaces various provisions of existing law governing the evaluation of certificated employees and requires school districts to implement a best practices teacher evaluation system, as specified. This bill also repeals and replaces provisions of existing law regarding school administrator evaluations. The bill is pending before the Assembly Education Committee.

AB 1495 (Weber) proposed to add various requirements to the certificated employee evaluation system known as the Stull Act. This bill failed passage in the Assembly Education Committee.

AB 1078 (Olsen) would also make changes to the certificated employee evaluation system. This measure failed passage in the Assembly Education Committee.

SB 441 (Calderon, 2013) proposed to amend various provisions of existing law governing the evaluation of certificated employees by requiring the evaluations to use multiple measures, including a minimum of four rating levels, increasing the frequency of evaluations for teachers with 10 or more years of experience in a school district from every five years to every three years, and requiring school districts to consider the findings of sessions, surveys, and specific focus groups by subject matter and grade level from parents of pupils. SB 441 failed passage in this Committee on May 1, 2013.

SB 453 (Huff) would have authorized the governing board of a school district to evaluate and assess the performance of certificated employees using a multiple-measures evaluation system, authorized school districts to make specified employment decisions based on teacher performance, and expanded the reasons districts may deviate from the order of seniority in terminating and reappointing teachers. This bill failed passage in this Committee on April 24, 2013.

SB 1292 (Liu, Chapter 435, Statutes of 2012) authorized the evaluation of school principals based on the California Professional Standards for Educational Leaders as well as evidence of pupil academic growth, effective and comprehensive teacher evaluations, culturally responsive instructional strategies, the ability to analyze quality instructional strategies and provide effective feedback, and effective school management.

AB 5 (Fuentes, 2012), similar to this bill, would have repealed and replaced various provisions of existing law governing the evaluation of certificated employees and required school districts to implement a best practices teacher evaluation system.

SUPPORT

California State PTA

Children Now

EdVoice

Students Matter

OPPOSITION

None received.

-- END --

ASSEMBLY THIRD READING

ATR Bill Id:AB 2826

Author:(Weber)

As Amended Ver:May 11, 2016

Majority vote

SUMMARY: Specifies measures of pupil progress, instructional techniques and strategies, and adherence to curricular objectives that school districts may use for purposes of teacher evaluation. Specifically, this bill:

1. Provides that, for purposes of teacher evaluation, the following phrases may include, but not necessarily be limited to, the following:
   1. "Progress of pupils" may include the following multiple measures:
      1. State-adopted formative and summative criterion referenced assessments;
      2. School district, school, or department-developed assessments;
      3. Curriculum-based and end-of-course assessments;
      4. Pretest and posttest data;
      5. Interim, periodic, benchmark, and formative assessments;
      6. English language proficiency assessments;
      7. Assessments measuring progress in an individualized education program;
      8. Advanced placement, International Baccalaureate, and college preparedness examinations;
      9. A-G coursework completion;
      10. Industry-recognized career technical education assessments and program completion;
      11. Portfolios of pupils' work, projects, and performances redacted of personally identifiable pupil information;
      12. Surveys from parents, if approved in advance by the certificated employee;
      13. Surveys from pupils, if approved in advance by the certificated employee;
      14. Written reports from classroom observations; and
      15. Progress on outcomes described in the local control and accountability plan (LCAP).
   2. "Instructional techniques and strategies" may include the following:
      1. Engaging and supporting all pupils in learning;
      2. Planning instruction and designing learning experiences for all pupils; and
      3. Using pupil assessment information to inform instruction and improve learning.
   3. "Adherence to curricular objectives" may include:
      1. Understanding and organizing subject matter for pupil learning; and
      2. Developing as a professional educator.
2. States that the Legislature encourages school districts to utilize these options for purposes of teacher evaluation.
3. States that these provisions shall not be construed as to require the State Board of Education to revise the guidelines developed pursuant to existing law.
4. Clarifies that these provisions shall not be construed as in any way limiting the authority of school district governing boards to develop and adopt additional evaluation and assessment guidelines or criteria or to limit the rights of certificated employees or their exclusive representative to bargain procedures to be used for the evaluation of employees or other terms and conditions of employment pursuant.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Requires the governing board of each school district to establish standards of expected pupil achievement at each grade level in each area of study.
2. Requires the governing board of each school district to evaluate and assess certificated employee performance as it reasonably relates to:
   1. The progress of pupils toward the standards established pursuant to subdivision (a) and, if applicable, the state adopted academic content standards as measured by state adopted criterion referenced assessments;
   2. The instructional techniques and strategies used by the employee;
   3. The employee's adherence to curricular objectives; and
   4. The establishment and maintenance of a suitable learning environment, within the scope of the employee's responsibilities.
3. Specifies that these provisions shall not be construed as in any way limiting the authority of school district governing boards to develop and adopt additional evaluation and assessment guidelines or criteria.
4. Requires teacher evaluation to be performed on a periodic basis, as follows:
   1. At least once each school year for probationary personnel;
   2. At least every other year for personnel with permanent status; and
   3. 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 by the federal No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, and whose previous evaluation rated the employee as meeting or exceeding standards, if the evaluator and certificated employee being evaluated agree. The certificated employee or the evaluator may withdraw consent at any time.

FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown. This bill is keyed non-fiscal by the Legislative Counsel.

COMMENTS: Existing law, known as the Stull Act, requires school districts to evaluate teacher performance on a periodic basis as it relates to the following:

1. The progress of pupils toward the standards established pursuant to subdivision (a) and, if applicable, the state adopted academic content standards as measured by state adopted criterion referenced assessments;
2. The instructional techniques and strategies used by the employee;
3. The employee's adherence to curricular objectives; and
4. The establishment and maintenance of a suitable learning environment, within the scope of the employee's responsibilities.

The terms, "progress of pupils," "instructional techniques and strategies," and "the establishment and maintenance of a suitable learning environment" are not defined in statute, but the Stull Act gives governing boards broad authority to "develop and adopt additional evaluation and assessment guidelines or criteria."

This bill specifies criteria that may be used by a governing board within its existing authority to define and measure these three terms. According to the author's office, although the Stull Act has required the consideration of pupil progress in the evaluation and assessment of certificated staff job performance for over four decades, school district leadership continues to struggle with what measures of pupil progress are appropriate especially with the lack of state tests in specific grade levels or content areas. This bill includes an expansive set of evidence for student achievement that recognizes the differences in outcome measures for various disciplines and pedagogy beyond statewide assessments, including, but not limited to, student portfolios, surveys, classroom observation, department assessments, Advanced Placement examinations, and English-language proficiency assessments. This bill also encourages the use of all the elements of the interrelated domains of teaching practice from the California Standards of the Teaching Profession, which represent consensus on the developmental, holistic view of effective teaching.

Analysis Prepared by: Richard Pratt / ED. / (916) 319-2087 FN: 0002925

Date of Hearing: May 4, 2016

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION

Patrick O'Donnell, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 2826 (

Author:Weber) – As Amended Ver:April 20, 2016

SUBJECT: Teachers: evaluation and assessment

SUMMARY: Specifies measures of pupil progress, instructional techniques and strategies, and adherence to curricular objectives that school districts may use for purposes of teacher evaluation. Specifically, this bill:

1. Provides that, for purposes of teacher evaluation, the following phrases may include, but not necessarily be limited to, the following:
   1. "Progress of pupils" may include the following multiple measures:
      1. State-adopted formative and summative criterion referenced assessments;
      2. School district, school, or department-developed assessments;
      3. Curriculum-based and end-of-course assessments;
      4. Pretest and posttest data;
      5. Interim, periodic, benchmark, and formative assessments;
      6. English language proficiency assessments;
      7. Assessments measuring progress in an individualized education program;
      8. Advanced placement, International Baccalaureate, and college preparedness examinations;
      9. A-G coursework completion;
      10. Industry-recognized career technical education assessments and program completion;
      11. Portfolios of pupils’ work, projects, and performances redacted of personally identifiable pupil information;
      12. Surveys from parents, if approved in advance by the certificated employee;
      13. Surveys from pupils, if approved in advance by the certificated employee;
      14. Written reports from classroom observations; and
      15. Progress on outcomes described in the local control and accountability plan LCAP).
   2. “Instructional techniques and strategies” may include the following:
      1. Engaging and supporting all pupils in learning;
      2. Planning instruction and designing learning experiences for all pupils; and
      3. Using pupil assessment information to inform instruction and improve learning.
   3. “Adherence to curricular objectives” may include:
      1. Understanding and organizing subject matter for pupil learning; and
      2. Developing as a professional educator.
2. States that the Legislature encourages school districts to utilize these options for purposes of teacher evaluation.
3. States that these provisions shall not be construed as to require the state board to revise the guidelines developed pursuant to existing law.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Requires the governing board of each school district to establish standards of expected pupil achievement at each grade level in each area of study.
2. Requires the governing board of each school district to evaluate and assess certificated employee performance as it reasonably relates to:
   1. The progress of pupils toward the standards established pursuant to subdivision (a) and, if applicable, the state adopted academic content standards as measured by state adopted criterion referenced assessments;
   2. The instructional techniques and strategies used by the employee;
   3. The employee’s adherence to curricular objectives; and
   4. The establishment and maintenance of a suitable learning environment, within the scope of the employee’s responsibilities.
3. Specifies that these provisions shall not be construed as in any way limiting the authority of school district governing boards to develop and adopt additional evaluation and assessment guidelines or criteria.
4. Requires teacher evaluation to be performed on a periodic basis, as follows:
   1. At least once each school year for probationary personnel;
   2. At least every other year for personnel with permanent status; and
   3. 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 by the federal No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, and whose previous evaluation rated the employee as meeting or exceeding standards, if the evaluator and certificated employee being evaluated agree. The certificated employee or the evaluator may withdraw consent at any time.

FISCAL EFFECT: This bill is keyed nonfiscal

COMMENTS: Existing law, known as the Stull Act, requires school districts to evaluate teacher performance on a periodic basis as it relates to the following:

• The progress of pupils toward the standards established pursuant to subdivision (a) 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 employee’s adherence to curricular objectives; and
• The establishment and maintenance of a suitable learning environment, within the scope of the employee’s responsibilities.

The terms, "progress of pupils," "instructional techniques and strategies," and "the establishment and maintenance of a suitable learning environment" are not defined in statute, but the Stull Act gives governing boards broad authority to "develop and adopt additional evaluation and assessment guidelines or criteria."

This bill specifies criteria that may be used by a governing board within its existing authority to define and measure these three terms. It is the intent of the author that the bill neither add to nor subtract from the existing scope of bargaining or authority of governing boards. To make certain of this, staff recommends the bill be amended to include the following language:

Nothing in this section shall be construed as in any way limiting the authority of school district governing boards to develop and adopt additional evaluation and assessment guidelines or criteria nor shall it be construed to limit the rights of certificated employees or their exclusive representative to bargain procedures to be used for the evaluation of employees or other terms and conditions of employment pursuant to Chapter 10.7 (commencing with Section 3540) of Division 4 of Title 1 of the Government Code.

Reason for the bill. According to the author's office, although the Stull Act has required the consideration of pupil progress in the evaluation and assessment of certificated staff job performance for over four decades, school district leadership continues to struggle with what measures of pupil progress are appropriate especially with the lack of state tests in specific grade levels or content areas. This bill includes an expansive set of evidence for student achievement that recognizes the differences in outcome measures for various disciplines and pedagogy beyond statewide assessments, including, but not limited to, student portfolios, surveys, classroom observation, department assessments, AP examinations, and English-language proficiency assessments. The bill also encourages the use of all the elements of the interrelated domains of teaching practice from the California Standards of the Teaching Profession (CSTPs), which represent consensus on the developmental, holistic view of effective teaching.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

Children Now

EdVoice

Students Matter

Opposition

Association of Rowland Educators

Capistrano Unified Education Association

Carlsbad Unified Teachers Association

Fresno Teachers Association

Hacienda La Puente Teachers Association

Inglewood Teachers Association

Analysis Prepared by: Rick Pratt / ED. / (916) 319-2087