BILL ANALYSIS Ó AB 48 Page A Date of Hearing: May 18, 2011 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS Felipe Fuentes, Chair AB 48 (John A. Perez) - As Amended: May 11, 2011 Policy Committee: Education Vote:7-3 Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: No Reimbursable: No SUMMARY This bill authorizes school districts to implement a best practices teacher evaluation system, as specified. Specifically, this bill: 1)Declares the primary purpose of an evaluation system is to ensure that teachers meet the highest professional standards of effective teachers, thereby resulting in high levels of pupil learning. 2)Specifies the best practices teacher evaluation system has specified attributes, including the following: a) Engages and supports all pupils in learning and creates/maintains effective environments for pupil learning. b) Organizes subject matter for pupil learning, evidence of which may include extensive subject matter, content standards, and curriculum competence. c) Instruction and learning experiences for all pupils, evidence of which may include differentiated instruction and practices based upon pupil progress and the use of culturally responsive instruction, as specified. d) Use of pupil assessment information to inform instruction and to improve learning, evidence of which may include use of formative assessments to adjust instructional practices to meet the needs of individual pupils. e) Assesses academic growth based upon multiple measures, which may include classroom work, local and state academic assessments, and pupil grades, classroom participation, AB 48 Page B presentations, projects, and portfolios. 3)Requires multiple observations of instructional and other professional practices conducted by evaluators who have received appropriate training. Requires a uniform tool to be used and requires the observer to meet with the teacher before and after the observation. 4)Requires the teacher evaluation to be locally negotiated under collective bargaining statue and requires teachers to be evaluated with the frequency of current statute. 5)Requires the teacher to receive evaluation results in writing, with the right to initiate a written response to the evaluation, as specified. 6)Authorizes a school district that implements a best practice teacher evaluation system to continue implementing the current categorical flexibility in perpetuity (regardless of the 2015 sunset date). 7)Specifies a school district that implements a best practice teacher evaluation system is not subject to the Stull Act (existing teacher evaluation requirements). 8)Prohibits a school district that implements a best practice teacher evaluation system from initiating dismissal unless the teacher is given the opportunity to participate in a program similar to the California Peer Assistance and Review Program for Teachers. FISCAL EFFECT 1)GF/98 cost pressure, likely in the low millions, to school districts to conduct evaluations pursuant to this measure. Actual costs will depend on the number of districts that choose to implement a best practice teacher evaluation system. The annual cost for the Stull Act, current certificated employee evaluation system and state reimbursable mandate, is approximately $19 million. This bill does not repeal or amend the Stull Act nor does it impose a state reimbursable mandate. According to the Center for the Future of Teaching in Learning, there are approximately 300,000 teachers in AB 48 Page C California.) 2)GF/98 cost pressure of approximately $500,000 to school districts to provide teachers a program similar to the California Peer Assistance and Review Program for Teachers prior to the district dismissing the teacher, as specified. Actual costs will depend on the number of districts implementing a best practice teacher evaluation system and the number of teachers designated to participate in this program. 3)GF/98 cost pressure, likely between $300,000 and $600,000, to school districts to provide training to personnel to conduct evaluation observations. COMMENTS 1)Purpose . Several research studies document the correlation between teacher quality and student achievement. Specifically, research indicates "differential teacher effectiveness is a strong determinant of differences in student learning, far outweighing the effects of differences in class size and heterogenity. 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."<1> The author contends a teacher evaluation system should focus on determining best practices that occur in the classroom. An evaluation should provide constructive, valuable feedback to the teacher regarding his or her instructional practice. This bill authorizes school districts to implement a best practices teacher evaluation system, as specified. 2)Existing law establishes the Stull Act, enacted in 1971, which governs certificated employee evaluations. Specifically, the Stull Act requires school districts to evaluate and assess teacher performance as it reasonability relates to pupil performance on criterion referenced tests, teacher technique and strategies, curricular objectives, and the maintenance of a suitable learning environment. --------------------------- <1> Teacher Quality and Student Achievement: A Review of State Policy Evidence; Linda Darling-Hammond, Education Policy Analysis (January 2000) AB 48 Page D Under the Stull Act, school districts are authorized, by mutual agreement with their collective bargaining representative, to include the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards, California Standards for the Teaching Profession, or any other objective standards, in the evaluation. 3)Differences between existing law and this bill . This bill does not propose to amend existing statute. Instead, it authorizes school districts to implement a best practice teacher evaluation system. Essentially, it provides school districts with another option for evaluating teachers. Current law authorizes school districts to collectively bargain teacher performance via the evaluation process as it reasonability relates to pupil performance on criterion-referenced tests, teacher technique and strategies, curricular objectives, and the maintenance of a suitable learning environment. This measure requires the best practice teacher evaluation to be collectively bargained. While current statute authorizes school districts to collectively bargain many of the attributes specified in this measure, this bill specifies the components of a best practice teacher evaluation system, including a focus on instructional practice, conducting multiple observations, and examining pupil performance over time using multiple measures. This measure, however, provides school districts with full authority in implementing the components of this system. This bill also prohibits a school district that implements a best practice teacher evaluation system from initiating dismissal, unless the teacher is given the opportunity to participate in a program similar to the California Peer Assistance and Review Program for Teachers. 4)Related legislation . a) AB 5 (Fuentes), pending in this committee, commencing with the 2012-13 school year, establishes the Evaluation and Support System for Certificated Employees, which delineates minimum components for a teacher evaluation system and repeals the current evaluation system, the Stull Act, on July 1, 2012. AB 48 Page E b) SB 257 (Liu), pending on the Senate Floor, encourages a school district to include in its evaluation and assessment guidelines specific information relating to current best teaching practices in all subject areas and authorizes a school district to include additional criteria into the evaluation and assessment of certificated employees. c) SB 355 (Huff) makes various changes to statutes governing the evaluation of certificated employees and teacher effectiveness. This bill was heard in the Senate Education Committee on May 11, 2011 and failed passage. The bill, however, was granted reconsideration and is a two-year bill. Analysis Prepared by : Kimberly Rodriguez / APPR. / (916) 319-2081