Bills

AB 575: Instructional materials: followup adoptions.

Session Year: 2015-2016
House: Assembly
Latest Version Date: 2016-09-24

Version:

Existing law requires the State Board of Education to adopt instructional materials for kindergarten and grades 1 to 8, inclusive, and to adopt procedures for the submission of instructional materials, and provides that instructional materials may be submitted for adoption in specified subject areas every 8 years.

This bill would instead provide that instructional materials may be submitted for adoption at least once but no more than twice every 8 years. The bill, until January 1, 2024, would require the State Department of Education, before conducting a followup adoption, as defined, in a given subject area to post a notice on the departments Internet Web site and notify all publishers or manufacturers known to produce basic instructional materials in that subject area that each publisher and manufacturer choosing to participate in the followup adoption shall be assessed a fee, as specified.

This bill would instead provide that instructional materials may be submitted for adoption at least once but no more than twice every 8 years. The bill would require the State Department of Education, before conducting a follow up adoption, as defined, in a given subject area to post a notice on the departments Internet Web site and notify all publishers or manufacturers known to produce basic instructional materials in that subject area that each publisher and manufacturer choosing to participate in the follow up adoption shall be assessed a fee, as specified.

(1)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.

This bill would provide that the provisions described above would become inoperative on July 1, 2018. The bill would state findings and declarations of the Legislature regarding the nature of effective teachers and of the teaching profession. Commencing on July 1, 2018, the bill would require the governing board of each school district and each county board of education to adopt and implement a locally negotiated best practices teacher evaluation system, described as one in which each teacher is evaluated on a continuing basis on the degree to which he or she accomplishes specific objectives and multiple observations of instructional and other professional practices that are conducted by trained evaluators. The bill would authorize the State Board of Education, in consultation with the Superintendent of Public Instruction and appropriate education stakeholder groups, to adopt nonregulatory guidance to support the implementation of a best practices teacher evaluation system by school districts and county offices of education, as specified. The bill would, on or before May 1, 2016, or May 1 of the year that precedes the year in which an existing collective bargaining contract will expire, whichever is later, require the governing board of each school district and each county board of education, at a regularly scheduled public hearing, to seek comment on the development and implementation of the best practices teacher evaluation system, and, on or before May 1 of each year before local negotiations required by law, to seek comment on the best practices teacher evaluation system. The bill would require if, by mutual agreement between the school district or county office of education and the collective bargaining unit, an intermediate mid-year agreement is reached regarding a best practices teacher evaluation system, the negotiation timeline to allow time for the governing board of the school district or county board of education to hold a public hearing to seek comment on the best practices teacher evaluation system. The bill also would require the governing board of each school district and each county board of education to disclose the provisions of the best practices teacher evaluation system at a regularly scheduled public hearing. The bill would also require the governing board of each school district and each county board of education to establish and define job responsibilities for certificated, noninstructional employees whose responsibilities cannot be evaluated appropriately under the best practices teacher evaluation system and to evaluate and assess their performance in relation to the fulfillment of those responsibilities. The bill would provide that these provisions do not apply to certificated personnel who are employed on an hourly basis in adult education classes. The bill would also provide that the provisions of the best practices teacher evaluation system do not supersede or invalidate a teacher evaluation system that is locally negotiated and that is in effect at the time the best practices teacher evaluation system becomes operative. By imposing additional duties on school districts and county offices of education, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

(2)Existing law requires that an evaluation and assessment of the performance of a certificated employee be made on a continuing basis, as provided, including at least every 5 years for personnel with permanent status who have been employed at least 10 years with the school district, are highly qualified, as specified, and whose previous evaluation rated the employee as meeting or exceeding standards, if the evaluator and certificated employee being evaluated agree.

This bill, commencing July 1, 2018, would require the evaluation and assessment of the above personnel at least every 3 years, except as locally negotiated and provided in the best practices teacher evaluation system. The bill would also require county offices of education to comply with these provisions. By imposing additional duties on school districts and county offices of education, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

(3)Existing law authorizes a school district to evaluate a principal annually for the principals first and 2nd year of employment as a new principal and authorizes additional evaluations, as specified.

This bill would make those provisions inoperative on July 1, 2018, and, commencing July 1, 2018, would instead require the governing board of each school district and each county board of education to establish a system of evaluation for school administrators to guide their growth and performance with the purpose of supporting them as instructional leaders in order to raise pupil achievement. The bill would require the evaluation system to include certain attributes, including, but not limited to, promoting the success of all pupils, advocating and supporting a safe, nurturing school culture that sustains a quality instructional program conducive to pupil learning and staff professional growth, and ensuring the management, organization, and operation of a safe and successful learning environment as evidenced by the establishment of effective practices for personnel and resource management, campus safety, and school climate. The bill would require the governing board of the school district and the county board of education to identify who will conduct the evaluation of each school administrator. By imposing additional duties on school districts and county offices of education, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

(4)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 add the above-mentioned provisions relating to teacher and school administrator evaluation to the list of provisions that may not be waived.

(5)This bill also would state the intent of the Legislature to provide adequate resources to train evaluators, continue robust beginning teacher induction programs, and support struggling educators.

(6)Under the California Constitution, whenever the Legislature or a state agency mandates a new program or higher level of service on any local government, including a school district and a community college district, the state is required to provide a subvention of funds to reimburse the local government, with specified exceptions. Existing law requires certain funds appropriated in the annual Budget Act for reimbursement of the cost of a new program or increased level of service of an existing program mandated by statute or executive order to be available as a block grant to school districts, county offices of education, and charter schools to support specified state-mandated local programs and permits those entities to elect to receive that block grant funding in lieu of claiming mandated costs pursuant to the state claims process.

This bill would, as of July 1, 2018, add the best practices teacher evaluation system and the school administrator evaluation system to the state-mandated local programs supported by the block grant funding.

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

(8)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.

This bill would provide that the provisions described above would become inoperative on July 1, 2018. The bill would state findings and declarations of the Legislature regarding the nature of effective teachers and of the teaching profession. Commencing on July 1, 2018, the bill would require the governing board of each school district, each district and each county board of education, and the governing body of each charter school education to adopt and implement a locally negotiated best practices teacher evaluation system, described as one in which each teacher is evaluated on a continuing basis on the degree to which he or she accomplishes specific objectives and multiple observations of instructional and other professional practices that are conducted by trained evaluators. The bill would authorize the State Board of Education, in consultation with the Superintendent of Public Instruction and appropriate education stakeholder groups, to adopt nonregulatory guidance to support the implementation of a best practices teacher evaluation system by school districts, districts and county offices of education, and charter schools, as specified. The bill would, on or before May 1, 2016, or May 1 of the year that precedes the year in which an existing collective bargaining contract will expire, whichever is later, require the governing board of each school district, each district and each county board of education, and the governing body of each charter school, at a regularly scheduled public hearing, to seek comment on the development and implementation of the best practices teacher evaluation system, and, on or before May 1 of each year before local negotiations required by law, to seek comment on the best practices teacher evaluation system. The bill would require if, by mutual agreement between the school district, district or county office of education, or charter school education and the collective bargaining unit, an intermediate mid-year agreement is reached regarding a best practices teacher evaluation system, the negotiation timeline to allow time for the governing board of the school district, district or county board of education, or the governing body of the charter school education to hold a public hearing to seek comment on the best practices teacher evaluation system. The bill also would require the governing board of each school district, each district and each county board of education, and the governing body of each charter school education to disclose the provisions of the best practices teacher evaluation system at a regularly scheduled public hearing. The bill would also require the governing board of each school district, each district and each county board of education, and the governing body of each charter school education to establish and define job responsibilities for certificated, noninstructional employees whose responsibilities cannot be evaluated appropriately under the best practices teacher evaluation system and to evaluate and assess their performance in relation to the fulfillment of those responsibilities. The bill would provide that these provisions do not apply to certificated personnel who are employed on an hourly basis in adult education classes. The bill would also provide that the provisions of the best practices teacher evaluation system do not supersede or invalidate a teacher evaluation system that is locally negotiated and that is in effect at the time the best practices teacher evaluation system becomes operative. By imposing additional duties on school districts, districts and county offices of education, and charter schools, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

This bill, commencing July 1, 2018, would require the evaluation and assessment of the above personnel at least every 3 years, except as locally negotiated and provided in the best practices teacher evaluation system. The bill would also require county offices of education and charter schools to comply with these provisions. By imposing additional duties on school districts, districts and county offices of education, and charter schools, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

This bill would make those provisions inoperative on July 1, 2018, and, commencing July 1, 2018, would instead require the governing board of each school district, each district and each county board of education, and the governing body of each charter school education to establish a system of evaluation for school administrators to guide their growth and performance with the purpose of supporting them as instructional leaders in order to raise pupil achievement. The bill would require the evaluation system to include certain attributes, including, but not limited to, promoting the success of all pupils, advocating and supporting a safe, nurturing school culture that sustains a quality instructional program conducive to pupil learning and staff professional growth, and ensuring the management, organization, and operation of a safe and successful learning environment as evidenced by the establishment of effective practices for personnel and resource management, campus safety, and school climate. The bill would require the governing board of the school district, district and the county board of education, and the governing body of the charter school education to identify who will conduct the evaluation of each school administrator. By imposing additional duties on school district, districts and county office offices of education, and charter school officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

This bill would add the above-mentioned provisions relating to teacher and school administrator evaluation to the list of provisions that may not be waived.

(5)This bill also would state the intent of the Legislature to provide adequate resources to train evaluators, continue robust beginning teacher induction programs, and support struggling educators.

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

This bill would provide that the provisions described above would become inoperative on July 1, 2018. The bill would state findings and declarations of the Legislature regarding the nature of effective teachers and of the teaching profession. Commencing on July 1, 2018, the bill would require the governing board of each school district, each county board of education, and the governing body of each charter school to adopt and implement a locally negotiated best practices teacher evaluation system, described as one in which each teacher is evaluated on a continuing basis on the degree to which he or she accomplishes specific objectives and multiple observations of instructional and other professional practices that are conducted by trained evaluators. The bill would authorize the State Board of Education, in consultation with the Superintendent of Public Instruction and appropriate education stakeholder groups, to adopt nonregulatory guidance to support the implementation of a best practices teacher evaluation system by school districts, county offices of education, and charter schools, as specified. The bill would, on or before May 1, 2016, or May 1 of the year that precedes the year in which an existing collective bargaining contract will expire, whichever is later, require the governing board of each school district, each county board of education, and the governing body of each charter school, at a regularly scheduled public hearing, to seek comment on the development and implementation of the best practices teacher evaluation system, and, on or before May 1 of each year before local negotiations required by law, to seek comment on the best practices teacher evaluation system. The bill would require if, by mutual agreement between the school district, county office of education, or charter school and the collective bargaining unit, an intermediate mid-year agreement is reached regarding a best practices teacher evaluation system, the negotiation timeline to allow time for the governing board of the school district, county board of education, or the governing body of the charter school to hold a public hearing to seek comment on the best practices teacher evaluation system. The bill also would require the governing board of each school district, each county board of education, and the governing body of each charter school to disclose the provisions of the best practices teacher evaluation system at a regularly scheduled public hearing. The bill would also require the governing board of each school district, each county board of education, and the governing body of each charter school to establish and define job responsibilities for certificated, noninstructional employees and whose responsibilities cannot be evaluated appropriately under the best practices teacher evaluation system and to evaluate and assess their performance in relation to the fulfillment of those responsibilities. The bill would provide that these provisions do not apply to certificated personnel who are employed on an hourly basis in adult education classes. The bill would also provide that the provisions of the best practices teacher evaluation system do not supersede or invalidate a teacher evaluation system that is locally negotiated and that is in effect at the time the best practices teacher evaluation system becomes operative. By imposing additional duties on school districts, county offices of education, and charter schools, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

This bill, commencing July 1, 2018, would require the evaluation and assessment of the above personnel at least every 3 years, except as locally negotiated and provided in the best practices teacher evaluation system. The bill would also require county offices of education and charter schools to comply with these provisions. By imposing additional duties on school districts, county offices of education, and charter schools, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

This bill would make those provisions inoperative on July 1, 2018, and, commencing July 1, 2018, would instead require the governing board of each school district, each county board of education, and the governing body of each charter school to establish a system of evaluation for school administrators to guide their growth and performance with the purpose of supporting them as instructional leaders in order to raise pupil achievement. The bill would require the evaluation system to include certain attributes, including, but not limited to, promoting the success of all pupils, advocating and supporting a safe, nurturing school culture that sustains a quality instructional program conducive to pupil learning and staff professional growth, and ensuring the management, organization, and operation of a safe and successful learning environment as evidenced by the establishment of effective practices for personnel and resource management, campus safety, and school climate. The bill would require the governing board of the school district, the county board of education, and the governing body of the charter school to identify who will conduct the evaluation of each school administrator. By imposing additional duties on school district, county office of education, and charter school officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

This bill would add the above-mentioned provisions relating to teacher and school administrator evaluation to the list of provisions that may not be waived.

(5)This bill also would state the intent of the Legislature to provide adequate resources to train evaluators, continue robust beginning teacher induction programs, and support struggling educators.

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

This bill would provide that the provisions described above would become inoperative on July 1, 2018. The bill would state findings and declarations of the Legislature regarding the nature of effective teachers and of the teaching profession. Commencing on July 1, 2018, the bill would require the governing board of each school district district, each county board of education, and the governing body of each charter school to adopt and implement a locally negotiated best practices teacher evaluation system, described as one in which each teacher is evaluated on a continuing basis on the degree to which he or she accomplishes specific objectives and multiple observations of instructional and other professional practices that are conducted by trained evaluators. The bill would authorize the State Board of Education, in consultation with the Superintendent of Public Instruction and appropriate education stakeholder groups, to adopt nonregulatory guidance to support the implementation of a best practices teacher evaluation system by school districts districts, county offices of education, and charter schools, as specified. The bill would, on or before May 1, 2016, or May 1 of the year that precedes the year in which an existing collective bargaining contract will expire, whichever is later, require the governing board of each school district district, each county board of education, and the governing body of each charter school, at a regularly scheduled public hearing, to seek comment on the development and implementation of the best practices teacher evaluation system, and, on or before May 1 of each year before local negotiations required by law, to seek comment on the best practices teacher evaluation system. The bill would require if, by mutual agreement between the school district district, county office of education, or charter school and the collective bargaining unit, an intermediate mid-year agreement is reached regarding a best practices teacher evaluation system, the negotiation timeline to allow time for the governing board of the school district district, county board of education, or the governing body of the charter school to hold a public hearing to seek comment on the best practices teacher evaluation system. The bill also would require the governing board of each school district district, each county board of education, and the governing body of each charter school to disclose the provisions of the best practices teacher evaluation system at a regularly scheduled public hearing. The bill would also require the governing board of each school district district, each county board of education, and the governing body of each charter school to establish and define job responsibilities for certificated, noninstructional employees and whose responsibilities cannot be evaluated appropriately under the best practices teacher evaluation system to evaluate and assess their performance in relation to the fulfillment of those responsibilities. The bill would provide that these provisions do not apply to certificated personnel who are employed on an hourly basis in adult education classes. The bill would also provide that the provisions of the best practices teacher evaluation system do not supersede or invalidate a teacher evaluation system that is locally negotiated and that is in effect at the time the best practices teacher evaluation system becomes operative. By imposing additional duties on school districts, county offices of education, and charter schools, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

This bill, commencing July 1, 2018, would require the evaluation and assessment of the above personnel at least every 3 years, except as locally negotiated and provided in the best practices teacher evaluation system. The bill would also require county offices of education and charter schools to comply with these provisions. By imposing additional duties on school districts, county offices of education, and charter schools, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

This bill would repeal make those provisions and inoperative on July 1, 2018, and, commencing July 1, 2018, would instead require the governing board of each school district district, each county board of education, and the governing body of each charter school to establish a system of evaluation for school administrators to guide their growth and performance with the purpose of supporting them as instructional leaders in order to raise pupil achievement. The bill would require the evaluation system to include certain attributes, including, but not limited to, promoting the success of all pupils, advocating and supporting a safe, nurturing school culture that sustains a quality instructional program conducive to pupil learning and staff professional growth, and ensuring the management, organization, and operation of a safe and successful learning environment as evidenced by the establishment of effective practices for personnel and resource management, campus safety, and school climate. The bill would require the governing board of a the school district district, the county board of education, and the governing body of the charter school to identify who will conduct the evaluation of each school administrator. By imposing additional duties on school district district, county office of education, and charter school officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

This bill would add the above-mentioned provisions relating to teacher and school administrator evaluation to the list of provisions that may not be waived.

(5)This bill also would state the intent of the Legislature to provide adequate resources to train evaluators, continue robust beginning teacher induction programs, and support struggling educators.

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

(8)By requiring school districts and charter schools to perform additional duties, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The

(1)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 of Education 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 include additional specified provisions of the Education Code, relating to teacher evaluation, that may not be waived.

(2)

This bill would provide that the provisions described above would become inoperative on July 1, 2018. The bill would state findings and declarations of the Legislature regarding the nature of effective teachers and of the teaching profession. Commencing on July 1, 2018, the bill would require the governing board of each school district and the governing body of each charter school to adopt and implement a locally negotiated best practices teacher evaluation system, described as one in which each teacher is evaluated on a continuing basis on the degree to which he or she accomplishes specific objectives and multiple observations of instructional and other professional practices that are conducted by trained evaluators. The bill would authorize the state board, State Board of Education, in consultation with the Superintendent of Public Instruction and appropriate education stakeholder groups, to adopt nonregulatory guidance to support the implementation of a best practices teacher evaluation system by school districts and charter schools, as specified. The bill would, on or before May 1, 2016, or May 1 of the year that precedes the year in which an existing collective bargaining contract will expire, whichever is later, require the governing board of each school district and the governing body of each charter school, at a regularly scheduled public hearing, to seek comment on the development and implementation of the best practices teacher evaluation system, and, on or before May 1 of each year prior to before local negotiations required by law, to seek comment on the best practices teacher evaluation system. The bill would require if, by mutual agreement between the school district or charter school and the collective bargaining unit, an intermediate mid-year agreement is reached regarding a best practices teacher evaluation system, the negotiation timeline to allow time for the governing board of the school district or the governing body of the charter school to hold a public hearing to seek comment on the best practices teacher evaluation system. The bill also would require the governing board of each school district and the governing body of each charter school to disclose the provisions of the best practices teacher evaluation system at a regularly scheduled public hearing. The bill would also require the governing board of each school district and the governing body of each charter school to establish and define job responsibilities for certificated, noninstructional employees and evaluate and assess their performance in relation to those responsibilities. The bill would provide that these provisions do not apply to certificated personnel who are employed on an hourly basis in adult education classes. The bill would also provide that the provisions of the best practices teacher evaluation system do not supersede or invalidate a teacher evaluation system that is locally negotiated and that is in effect at the time the best practices teacher evaluation system becomes operative.

(3)

This bill would repeal those provisions and would instead require the governing board of each school district to establish a system of evaluation for school administrators to guide their growth and performance with the purpose of supporting them as instructional leaders in order to raise pupil achievement. The bill would require the evaluation system to include certain attributes, including, but not limited to, promoting the success of all pupils, advocating and supporting a safe, nurturing school culture that sustains a quality instructional program conducive to pupil learning and staff professional growth, and ensuring the management, organization, and operation of a safe and successful learning environment as evidenced by the establishment of effective practices for personnel and resource management, campus safety, and school climate. The bill would require the governing board of a school district to identify who will conduct the evaluation of each school administrator. By imposing additional duties on school district officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

This bill would add the above-mentioned provisions relating to teacher and administrator evaluation to the list of provisions that may not be waived.

(5)This bill also would state the intent of the Legislature to provide adequate resources to train evaluators, continue robust beginning teacher induction programs, and support struggling educators.

(4)

This bill would, as of July 1, 2018, add the best practices teacher evaluation system to the state-mandated local programs supported by the block grant funding.

(5)

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

(6)

(8)By requiring school districts and charter schools to perform additional duties, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

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 include additional specified provisions of the Education Code, relating to teacher evaluation, that may not be waived.

(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 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.

This bill would provide that the provisions described above would become inoperative on July 1, 2018. The bill would state findings and declarations of the Legislature regarding the nature of effective teachers and of the teaching profession. Commencing on July 1, 2018, the bill would require the governing board of each school district and the governing body of each charter school to adopt and implement a locally negotiated best practices teacher evaluation system, described as one in which each teacher is evaluated on a continuing basis on the degree to which he or she accomplishes specific objectives and multiple observations of instructional and other professional practices that are conducted by trained evaluators. The bill would authorize the state board, in consultation with the Superintendent of Public Instruction and appropriate education stakeholder groups, to adopt nonregulatory guidance to support the implementation of a best practices teacher evaluation system by school districts, districts and charter schools, as specified. The bill would, on or before May 1, 2016, require the governing board of each school district, district and the governing body of each charter school, at a regularly scheduled public hearing, to seek comment on the development and implementation of the best practices teacher evaluation system, and, on or before May 1 of each year prior to local negotiations required by law, to seek comment on the best practices teacher evaluation system. The bill would require if, by mutual agreement between the school district or charter school and the collective bargaining unit, an intermediate mid-year agreement is reached regarding a best practices teacher evaluation system, the negotiation timeline to allow time for the governing board of the school district or the governing body of the charter school to hold a public hearing to seek comment on the best practices teacher evaluation system. The bill also would require the governing board of each school district and the governing body of each charter school to disclose the provisions of the best practices teacher evaluation system at a regularly scheduled public hearing. The bill would also require the governing board of each school district and the governing body of each charter school to establish and define job responsibilities for certificated, noninstructional employees and evaluate and assess their performance in relation to those responsibilities. The bill would provide that these provisions do not apply to certificated personnel who are employed on an hourly basis in adult education classes. The bill would also provide that the provisions of the best practices teacher evaluation system do not supersede or invalidate a teacher evaluation system that is locally negotiated and that is in effect at the time the best practices teacher evaluation system becomes operative.

(3)Existing law requires that an evaluation and assessment of the performance of a certificated employee be made on a continuing basis, as provided, including at least every 5 years for personnel with permanent status who have been employed at least 10 years with the school district, are highly qualified, as specified, and whose previous evaluation rated the employee as meeting or exceeding standards, if the evaluator and certificated employee being evaluated agree.

(4)Under the California Constitution, whenever the Legislature or a state agency mandates a new program or higher level of service on any local government, including a school district and a community college district, the state is required to provide a subvention of funds to reimburse the local government, with specified exceptions. Existing law requires certain funds appropriated in the annual Budget Act for reimbursement of the cost of a new program or increased level of service of an existing program mandated by statute or executive order to be available as a block grant to school districts, county offices of education, and charter schools to support specified state-mandated local programs and permits those entities to elect to receive that block grant funding in lieu of claiming mandated costs pursuant to the state claims process.

This bill would, as of July 1, 2018, add the best practices teacher evaluation system to the state-mandated local programs supported by the block grant funding.

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

(6)By requiring school districts and charter schools to perform additional duties, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

This bill would include additional specified provisions of the Education Code, relating to teacher evaluation, that may not be waived.

This bill would, as of July 1, 2018, add the best practices teacher evaluation system to the state-mandated local programs supported by the block grant funding.

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

(6)By requiring school districts to perform additional duties, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

Version:

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:SECTION 1.Section 60200 of the Education Code is amended to read:60200.

The state board shall adopt basic instructional materials for use in kindergarten and grades 1 to 8, inclusive, for governing boards, subject to the following provisions:

(a)The state board shall adopt at least five basic instructional materials for all applicable grade levels in each of the following subject areas:

(1)Language arts, including, but not limited to, spelling, reading, and English language development. The state board may not adopt basic instructional materials in this subject area or the subject area specified by paragraph (2) in the year succeeding the year in which the state board adopts basic instructional materials in this subject area for the same grade level.

(2)Mathematics. The state board may not adopt basic instructional materials in this subject area or the subject area specified by paragraph (1) in the year succeeding the year in which the state board adopts basic instructional materials in this subject area for the same grade level.

(3)Science.

(4)Social science.

(5)Bilingual or bicultural subjects.

(6)Any other subject, discipline, or interdisciplinary areas for which the state board determines the adoption of instructional materials to be necessary or desirable.

(b)The state board shall adopt procedures for the submission of basic instructional materials in order to comply with each of the following:

(1)Instructional materials may be submitted for adoption in any of the subject areas pursuant to paragraphs (1) to (6), inclusive, of subdivision (a) at least once but not more than twice every eight years. The state board shall ensure that curriculum frameworks are reviewed and adopted in each subject area and that the criteria for evaluating instructional materials developed pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 60204 are consistent with subdivision (c). The state board may prescribe reasonable conditions to restrict the resubmission of materials that have been previously rejected if those resubmitted materials have no substantive changes.

(2)If a publisher or manufacturer submits revisions to currently adopted instructional material for review after the timeframe specified by the state board, the department shall assess a fee on the submitting publisher or manufacturer in an amount that shall not exceed the reasonable costs to the department to conduct a review of the instructional material pursuant to this section.

(3)Submitted instructional materials shall be adopted or rejected within six months of the submission date of the materials pursuant to paragraph (1) unless the state board determines that a longer period of time, not to exceed an additional three months, is necessary due to the estimated volume or complexity of the materials for that subject in that year, or due to other circumstances beyond the reasonable control of the state board.

(4)The process for review of instructional materials shall involve review committees, which shall include, but not be limited to, volunteer content experts and instructional material reviewers, and shall be composed of a majority of classroom teachers from a wide variety of affected grade levels and subject areas.

(5)The rules and procedures for adoption of instructional materials shall be transparent and consistently applicable regardless of the format of the instructional materials, which may include, but not be limited to, print, digital, and open-source instructional materials.

(c)In reviewing and adopting or recommending for adoption submitted basic instructional materials, the state board shall use the following criteria, and ensure that, in its judgment, the submitted basic instructional materials meet all of the following criteria:

(1)Are consistent with the criteria and the standards of quality prescribed in the state boards adopted curriculum framework. In making this determination, the state board shall consider both the framework and the submitted instructional materials as a whole.

(2)Comply with the requirements of Sections 60040, 60041, 60042, 60043, 60044, 60048, 60200.5, and 60200.6, and the state boards guidelines for social content.

(3)Are factually accurate and incorporate principles of instruction reflective of current and confirmed research.

(4)Are aligned to the content standards adopted by the state board in the subject area and the grade level or levels for which they are submitted.

(5)Do not contain materials, including illustrations, that provide unnecessary exposure to a commercial brand name, product, or corporate or company logo. Materials, including illustrations, that contain a commercial brand name, product, or corporate or company logo may not be used unless the state board determines that the use of the commercial brand name, product, or corporate or company logo is appropriate based on one of the following specific findings:

(A)If text, the use of the commercial brand name, product, or corporate or company logo in the instructional materials is necessary for an educational purpose, as defined in the guidelines or frameworks adopted by the state board.

(B)If an illustration, the appearance of a commercial brand name, product, or corporate or company logo in an illustration in instructional materials is incidental to the general nature of the illustration.

(6)Meet other criteria as are established by the state board as being necessary to accomplish the intent of Section 7.5 of Article IX of the California Constitution and of Section 1 of Chapter 1181 of the Statutes of 1989, provided that the criteria are approved by resolution at the time the resolution adopting the framework for the current adoption is approved, or at least 12 months before the date that the materials are to be approved for adoption.

(d)If basic instructional materials are rejected, the state board shall provide a specific, written explanation of the reasons why the submitted materials were not adopted, based on one or more of the criteria established under subdivision (c). In providing this explanation, the state board may use, in whole or in part, materials written by the Superintendent or any other advisers to the state board.

(e)The state board may adopt fewer than five basic instructional materials in each subject area for each grade level if either of the following occurs:

(1)Fewer than five basic instructional materials are submitted.

(2)The state board specifically finds that fewer than five basic instructional materials meet the criteria prescribed by paragraphs (1) to (5), inclusive, of subdivision (c), or the materials fail to meet the state boards adopted curriculum framework. If the state board adopts fewer than five basic instructional materials in any subject for any grade level, the state board shall conduct a review of the degree to which the criteria and procedures used to evaluate the submitted materials for that adoption were consistent with the state boards adopted curriculum framework.

(f)This section does not limit the authority of the state board to adopt materials that are not basic instructional materials.

(g)Consistent with the quality criteria for the state boards adopted curriculum framework, the state board shall prescribe procedures to provide the most open and flexible materials submission system and ensure that the adopted materials in each subject, taken as a whole, provide for the educational needs of the diverse pupil populations in the public schools, provide collections of instructional materials that illustrate diverse points of view, represent cultural pluralism, and provide a broad spectrum of knowledge, information, and technology-based materials to meet the goals of the program and the needs of pupils.

(h)Upon making an adoption, the state board shall make available to listed publishers and manufacturers and all school interests a listing of instructional materials, including the most current unit cost of those materials as computed pursuant to existing law. Items placed upon lists shall remain thereon, and be available for procurement through the states systems of financing, from the date of the adoption of the item and until a date established by the state board. The date established by the state board for continuing items on that list shall be the date on which the state board adopts instructional materials based on a new or revised curriculum framework. Lists of adopted instructional materials shall be made available by subject and grade level to school districts and posted on the departments Internet Web site, and shall include information from the reports of findings from the review committees pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (b). The lists shall terminate and shall no longer be effective on the date prescribed by the state board pursuant to this subdivision.

(i)The state board may approve multiple lists of instructional materials, without designating a grade or subject, and the state board may designate more than one grade or subject whenever it determines that a single subject designation or a single grade designation would not promote the maximum efficiency of pupil learning. Any materials so designated may be placed on single grade or single subject lists, or multigrade or interdisciplinary lists, or may be placed on separate lists including other materials with similar grade or subject designations.

(j)A composite listing in the format of an order form may be used to meet the requirements of this section.

(k)The lists maintained pursuant to this section shall not be deemed to control the use period by any school district.

(l)The state board shall give publishers the opportunity to modify instructional materials, in a manner provided for in regulations adopted by the state board, if the state board finds that the instructional materials do not comply with paragraph (5) of subdivision (c).

(m)This section does not prohibit the publisher of instructional materials from including whatever corporate name or logo on the instructional materials that is necessary to provide basic information about the publisher, to protect its copyright, or to identify third-party sources of content.

(n)The state board may adopt regulations that provide for other exceptions to this section, as determined by the state board.

(o)The Superintendent shall develop, and the state board shall adopt, guidelines to implement this section.

SEC. 2.Section 60227 is added to the Education Code, to read:60227.

(a)For purposes of this section, a followup adoption is any adoption other than the primary adoption that occurs within the eight-year cycle established pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 60200.

(b)Before conducting a followup adoption in a given subject area, the department shall post an appropriate notice on the departments Internet Web site pursuant to subdivision (c) and notify all publishers or manufacturers known to produce basic instructional materials in that subject area.

(c)The notice shall specify that each publisher or manufacturer choosing to participate in the followup adoption shall be assessed a fee based on the number of programs the publisher or manufacturer indicates will be submitted for review and the number of grade levels proposed to be covered by each program.

(d)The fee shall offset the cost of conducting the followup adoption process and shall reflect the departments best estimate of the cost. The department shall take reasonable steps to limit costs of the followup adoption and to keep the fee modest, recognizing that some of the work necessary for the primary adoption need not be duplicated.

(e)The department, before incurring substantial costs for the followup adoption, shall require that a publisher or manufacturer who wishes to participate in the followup adoption first declare the intent to submit one or more specific programs for the followup adoption and specify the specific grade levels to be covered by each program. After a publisher or manufacturer has declared the intent to submit one or more programs and the grade levels to be covered by each program, the department shall assess a fee. The fee shall be payable by the publisher or manufacturer even if the publisher or manufacturer subsequently chooses to withdraw a program or reduce the number of grade levels covered. A submission by a publisher or manufacturer shall not be reviewed for purposes of adoption, either in a followup adoption or in any other primary or followup adoption conducted thereafter, until the fee assessed has been paid in full.

(f)(1)It is the intent of the Legislature that the fee not be so substantial that it prevents small publishers or manufacturers from participating in a followup adoption.

(2)Upon the request of a small publisher or manufacturer, the state board may reduce the fee for participation in the followup adoption.

(3)For purposes of this section, small publisher and small manufacturer mean an independently owned or operated publisher or manufacturer who is not dominant in its field of operation, and who, together with its affiliates, has 100 or fewer employees, and has average annual gross receipts of ten million dollars ($10,000,000) or less over the previous three years.

(g)Revenue derived from fees charged pursuant to subdivision (e) shall be budgeted as reimbursements and subject to review through the annual budget process and may be used to pay costs associated with any adoption and any costs associated with the review of instructional materials.

(h)If the department determines that there is little or no interest by publishers and manufacturers in participating in a followup adoption, the department shall recommend to the state board that the followup adoption not be conducted and the state board may choose not to conduct the followup adoption.

(i)General fund revenue shall not be used for the cost of conducting a followup adoption pursuant to this section.

(j)This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2024, and as of that date is repealed, unless a later enacted statute, that is enacted before January 1, 2024, deletes or extends that date.