BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 575
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB
575 (O'Donnell and Atkins)
As Amended June 2, 2015
Majority vote
-------------------------------------------------------------------
|Committee |Votes |Ayes |Noes |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|----------------+------+--------------------+----------------------|
|Education |5-2 |O'Donnell, McCarty, |Chávez, Kim |
| | |Santiago, Thurmond, | |
| | |Weber | |
| | | | |
|----------------+------+--------------------+----------------------|
|Appropriations |11-5 |Gomez, Bonta, |Bigelow, Chang, |
| | |Calderon, Daly, |Gallagher, Jones, |
| | |Eggman, |Wagner |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | |Eduardo Garcia, | |
| | |Gordon, Holden, | |
| | |Quirk, Rendon, Wood | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
-------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Requires the governing board of each school district and
the governing body of each county office of education (COE) to
adopt and implement a best practices teacher and administrator
AB 575
Page 2
evaluation system by July 1, 2018. Specifically, this bill:
1)Requires the best practices teacher evaluation system to be
negotiated with the local collective bargaining unit; and,
specifies if the certificated employees of the school district
or COE do not have an exclusive bargaining representative, the
governing board of the school district or COE shall adopt
objective evaluation and support components, as applicable.
2)Specifies that a best practices teacher evaluation system has
the following attributes:
a) Each teacher is evaluated on the degree to which he or she
accomplishes the following objectives:
i) Engages and supports all students in learning,
evidence of which may include, but is not limited to, high
expectations and active student engagement for each
student;
ii) Creates and maintains effective environments for
student learning;
iii) Understands and organizes subject matter for student
learning, evidence of which may include, but is not limited
to, extensive subject matter, content standards, and
curriculum competence;
iv) Plans instruction and designs learning experiences for
all students, evidence of which may include, but is not
limited to, use of differentiated instruction and practices
based on student progress and use of culturally responsive
instruction, including, but not limited to, incorporation
of multicultural information and content into the delivery
of curriculum to eliminate the achievement gap;
v) Uses student assessment information to inform
AB 575
Page 3
instruction and improve learning, evidence of which shall
include, but is not limited to, the use of formative and
summative assessments to adjust instructional practices to
meet the needs of individual students; and, specifies that
for certificated employees who directly instruct English
learner pupils in acquiring English language fluency, the
assessment information shall include the results of the
English language development test;
vi) Develops as a professional educator, evidence of which
may include, but is not limited to, consistent and positive
relationships with students, parents, staff and
administrators, use of collaborative professional practices
for improving instructional strategies, use of
participation in identified professional growth
opportunities, and use of meaningful self-assessment to
improve as a professional educator; and,
vii) Contributes to student academic growth based on
multiple measures which include state and local formative
and summative assessments that are applicable to the
teaching assignment being evaluated, and as available and
applicable for the grade level and subject taught, shall
also include but are not limited to, classroom work, other
local and state assessments, student grades, classroom
participation, student presentations and performance, and
student projects and portfolios; specifies for certificated
employees who directly instruct English learner pupils in
acquiring English, measures shall include the degree to
which pupils acquire the English language development
standards for the purpose of improving a pupil's English
proficiency; and, specifies that pupil data used for
purposes of teacher evaluation shall be confidential in the
same manner as all other elements of a teacher's personnel
file.
AB 575
Page 4
b) Multiple observations of instructional and other
professional practices conducted by evaluators who have
received appropriate training and calibration and who have
demonstrated competence in teacher evaluation, as determined
by the school district.
i) Specifies that multiple observations may include, but
are not limited to, classroom observations, one-on-one
discussions, and review of classroom materials and course
of study.
ii) Specifies the observations shall be conducted using a
uniform tool for use in observing the teacher for the
purpose of conducting an evaluation.
iii) Specifies that prior to each observation, the observer
shall meet with the teacher to discuss the purpose of the
observation and after each observation, the observer shall
meet with the teacher to discuss recommendations, as
necessary, with regard to areas of improvement in the
performance of the teacher.
iv) Nothing shall prohibit evaluators from conducting
unscheduled classroom visits.
c) A minimum of three performance levels for the evaluation
of teacher performance.
3)Evaluations at least once each school year for probationary
personnel; at least every other year for personnel with
permanent status; or, except as may be provided in the best
practices teacher evaluation system that is negotiated with the
local collective bargaining unit, at least every three years for
personnel with permanent status who have been employed at least
10 years with the school district, and are highly qualified
under the federal No Child Left Behind Act; requires the
evaluator to conduct at least one unscheduled observation per
year during a year when the certificated employee does not
receive a formal performance evaluation and assessment.
AB 575
Page 5
a) Authorizes a locally negotiated evaluation process to
designate certificated employees to conduct, or participate
in, evaluations of other certificated employees for the
purposes of determining needs for professional development or
providing corrective advice for the certificated employee
being evaluated, as specified.
b) Specifies a best practices teacher evaluation system shall
not omit any of the attributes specified.
4)Requires the evaluation to include recommendations, if
necessary, as to areas of improvement in the performance of the
employee as follows:
a) If an employee is not performing his or her duties in a
satisfactory manner according to the standards prescribed by
the governing board of the school district or the governing
board of the COE, the employing authority shall notify the
employee in writing of that fact and describe the
unsatisfactory performance.
b) The employing authority shall thereafter confer with the
employee making specific recommendations as to areas of
improvement in the employee's performance and endeavor to
assist the employee in his or her performance.
c) If a permanent certificated employee has received an
unsatisfactory evaluation, the employing authority shall
annually evaluate the employee until the employee achieves a
positive evaluation or is separated from the school district
or COE.
d) An evaluation that contains an unsatisfactory rating of an
employee's performance in the area of teaching methods or
instruction may include the requirement that the certificated
employee shall, as determined necessary by the employing
authority, participate in a program designed to improve
AB 575
Page 6
appropriate areas of the employee's performance and to
further pupil achievement and the instructional objectives of
the employing authority.
e) If a school district or COE participates in the California
Peer Assistance and Review Program for Teachers, a
certificated employee of that school district or COE who
receives an unsatisfactory rating on an evaluation shall
participate in the California Peer Assistance and Review
Program for Teachers.
5)Specifies the administrator evaluation shall include, but not be
limited to, all of the following attributes:
a) Promoting the success of all pupils by facilitating the
development and implementation of a vision of pupil learning,
including, but not limited to, communicating with parents,
pupils, and the community regarding the importance of a
standards-based education and high expectations for all
pupils.
b) Advocating and supporting a safe, nurturing school culture
that sustains a quality instructional program conducive to
pupil learning and staff professional growth, including, but
not limited to, all of the following:
i) Promoting equity, fairness, and respect among staff,
pupils, and members of the school community with
acknowledgment of the role cultural attributes have in
pupil learning.
ii) Supporting professional development opportunities for
staff that encourage collaboration and effective
instructional practice with the goal of improving outcomes
for all pupils.
c) Ensuring the management, organization, and operation of a
safe and successful learning environment, as evidenced by the
AB 575
Page 7
establishment of effective practices for personnel and
resource management, campus safety, and school climate,
including, but not limited to, supporting curricular and
management leadership in all of these areas and successfully
implementing a best practices teacher evaluation system.
d) Collaborating with parents and the community to establish
an inclusive school environment, including, but not limited
to, embracing and recognizing that diversity strengthens a
learning environment and promotes meaningful parent and
community engagement, for the development of the local
control and accountability plan.
e) Providing ethical and professional leadership that fosters
effective instructional practice as evidenced by promoting
quality teaching and instructional strategies and provides
relevant, effective feedback that leads to pupil learning.
School administrators shall be held accountable for the
academic growth of pupils over time and academic growth shall
be based on multiple measures that may include pupil work as
well as pupil and school longitudinal data. Multiple measures
shall include state and local formative and summative
assessments. For school administrators who supervise
certificated staff that directly instruct English learner
pupils acquiring English, assessment information shall
include the results of assessments adopted pursuant to
Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 60810) of Part 33 of
Division 4 of the Education Code. Multiple measures may
include, but are not limited to, benchmark, end-of-chapter,
end-of-course, advanced placement, international
baccalaureate, college entrance, or performance assessments.
Pupil data used for purposes of an administrator evaluation
shall be confidential in the same manner as all other
elements of an administrator's personnel file.
f) Providing professional leadership by understanding,
responding, and influencing the larger social, political,
cultural and legal context with the goal of ensuring pupil
AB 575
Page 8
success, as evidenced by working in collaboration with the
governing board of the school district, bargaining units, and
local school, school district, and community leaders.
g) Specifies the administrator evaluation system shall not
omit any of the attributes specified.
6)Requires the governing board of a school district to identify
who will conduct the evaluation of each school administrator and
specifies the following:
a) A school administrator shall be evaluated annually for the
first and second year of employment as a new administrator in
a school district. The governing board of the school
district may determine the frequency at regular intervals of
evaluations after this period.
b) Additional evaluations that occur outside of the regular
intervals determined by the governing board of the school
district shall be agreed upon between the evaluator and the
administrator.
c) Evaluators and administrators shall review school success
and progress throughout the year. This review should include
goals that are defined by the school district, including, but
not limited to, the goals specified in the local control and
accountability plan approved by the governing board.
7)Requires the following sections of the Stull Act to become
inoperative July 1, 2018:
a) Legislative intent that governing boards establish a
uniform system for evaluation and assessment;
b) The requirement that the governing board shall, in
developing and adopting the guidelines, avail itself of the
advice of the certificated instructional personnel in the
district as part of a locally negotiated collective
bargaining agreement; and,
AB 575
Page 9
c) The authorization for a school district, by mutual
agreement between the local bargaining unit and the district,
to include objective standards from the National Board for
Professional Teaching Standards or the California Standards
for the Teaching Profession.
8)Specifies that the teacher evaluation system and the
administrator evaluation system cannot be waived for a school
district or county office of education by the State Board of
Education (SBE).
9)Authorizes the SBE, 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.
10)Requires the following public hearings:
a) 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, the governing board
of a school district and the governing body of a COE, at a
regularly scheduled public hearing, seek comment on the
development and implementation of the teacher and
administrator evaluation system.
b) On or before May 1 of each year before local negotiations,
the governing board of a school district and the governing
board of the COE, at a regularly scheduled public hearing,
seek comment on the teacher and administrator evaluation
system.
c) Both during and before the final agreement of local
negotiations, the governing board of each school district and
the governing board of the COE shall seek public comment on
AB 575
Page 10
the teacher and administrator evaluation system.
d) If, by mutual agreement between a school district or COE
and the collective bargaining unit, an intermediate mid-year
agreement is reached regarding a best practices teacher
evaluation system or administrator evaluation system, the
negotiation timeline shall allow time for the governing board
of the school district or the governing board of the COE to
hold a public hearing to seek comment on the teacher and
administrator evaluation system.
e) Consistent with Government Code Section 3547 and no more
than 30 days after the local negotiations, the governing
board of each school district and the governing board of the
COE shall disclose the provisions of the best practices
teacher evaluation system and administrator evaluation system
at a regularly scheduled public hearing.
11)Specifies that this bill does not supersede or invalidate a
teacher evaluation system that is locally negotiated and that is
in effect at the time this bill becomes operative. If a locally
negotiated teacher evaluation system is in effect at the time
this bill becomes operative, the teacher evaluation system shall
remain in effect until the parties to the agreement negotiate a
successor agreement. A memorandum of understanding shall not
extend the adoption of a locally negotiated teacher evaluation
system that is in effect at the time this section becomes
operative.
12)Adds the best practices teacher evaluation system and the
administrator evaluation system to the mandate block grant and
specifies that it is the intent of the Legislature to provide
adequate resources to train evaluators, continue robust
beginning teacher induction programs, and support struggling
educators.
AB 575
Page 11
13)Makes legislative findings and declarations that teaching is a
professional endeavor, one in which effective practice is driven
by an understanding of knowledge in the field and a commitment
to all students and their families; excellent teaching requires
knowledge, skills, artistry, passion, and commitment; effective
teachers integrate ethical concern for children and society;
extensive subject matter competence; thoughtfully selected
pedagogical practices; a depth of knowledge about their
students, including knowledge of child and adolescent
development and learning; an understanding of their individual
strengths, interests, and needs; and, knowledge about their
families and communities; effective teachers share a common set
of professional and ethical obligations that includes a profound
and fundamental commitment to the growth and success of the
individual students within their care as well as to the
strengthening and continual revitalization of our democratic
society; certificated, non-instructional employees share the
same deep commitment to children, families and communities, and
they provide essential support and services; and, the primary
purpose of an evaluation system is to ensure that teachers meet
the highest professional standards of effective teaching thereby
resulting in high levels of student learning.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Establishes the Stull Act, enacted in 1971, which governs
certificated employee evaluations and requires school districts
to evaluate and assess teacher performance as it reasonability
relates to pupil performance on criterion referenced tests,
teacher technique and strategies, curricular objectives, and the
maintenance of a suitable learning environment. Specifies that
in the development and adoption of evaluation guidelines and
procedures, the governing board shall avail itself of the advice
of the certificated instructional personnel in the district's
organization of certificated personnel pursuant to collective
bargaining statutes. Specifies that a school district may, by
mutual agreement between the exclusive representative of the
AB 575
Page 12
certificated employees of the school district and the governing
board of the school district, include any objective standards
from the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards or
any objective standards from the California Standards for the
Teaching Profession. Specifies that teacher evaluations shall
be made on a continuing basis at least once each school year for
probationary personnel; at least every other year for personnel
with permanent status; and, at least every five years for
personnel with permanent status who have been employed at least
10 years with the school district, are highly qualified, if
those personnel occupy positions that are required to be filled
by a highly qualified professional, and whose previous
evaluation rated the employee as meeting or exceeding standards,
if the evaluator and certificated employee being evaluated
agree. Specifies that an employee who receives an
unsatisfactory rating in the area of teaching methods or
instruction may be required to participate in a program designed
to improve appropriate areas of the employee's performance; and,
requires if a school district participates in the Peer
Assistance and Review Program for Teachers (PAR), employees who
receive an unsatisfactory rating shall participate in PAR.
(Education Code Section 44660 et. seq.)
2)Establishes the Principal Evaluation System by authorizing the
governing board of a school district to identify who will
conduct the evaluation of each school principal. Specifies a
school principal may be evaluated annually for the first and
second year of employment as a new principal in a school
district. The governing board may determine the frequency at
regular intervals of evaluations after this period. Additional
evaluations that occur outside of the regular intervals
determined by the governing board may be agreed upon between the
evaluator and the principal. Criteria for effective school
principal evaluations may be based upon the California
Professional Standards for Educational Leaders.
FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Assembly Appropriations
AB 575
Page 13
Committee:
1) Proposition 98 (1988)/General Fund state mandated reimbursable
costs to school districts and COEs, likely in excess of $60
million, to create and implement teacher and administrator
evaluation programs starting July 1, 2018. According to the
Commission on Teacher Credentialing, there are approximately
288,000 teachers in California. New mandated costs include:
annual evaluation costs to increase evaluation frequency from once
every five years to once every three years (likely for more than
100,000 teachers); multiple observations of each teacher;
collective bargaining costs related to negotiating the new
evaluation system; training of educators who will be conducting
the evaluations and cost pressures to provide robust beginning
teacher induction programs and support to struggling educators.
2) General Fund administrative costs of approximately $265,000 to
the California Department of Education, annually over two years,
to adopt non-regulatory guidance to support the implementation of
the evaluations
COMMENTS: This bill replaces the existing teacher evaluation
system, known as the Stull Act, with a new teacher and
administrator evaluation system that requires specific components,
such as state and local formative and summative assessment data
and observations. While existing law requires school districts to
collectively bargain many of these elements, this bill requires
these components to be included in a uniform educator evaluation
system. According to the author, the goal is to establish a fair,
transparent, and comprehensive teacher evaluation system
accountable to pupils, parents and teachers. California's 1,000
school districts serve diverse pupil populations, employees, and
communities. What works in Los Angeles Unified School District
does not necessarily work in the Eureka City Unified School
District. While this measure does require specific components to
be part of teacher and administrator evaluations, it allows
AB 575
Page 14
individual school districts the flexibility to determine how these
elements will be implemented to meet the needs of their pupils,
teachers, administrators, and parents.
Research on the Current Teacher Evaluation System: According to
the author, the state's current teacher evaluation system is
inconsistent, unclear, and does little to foster a culture of
continuous improvement for teachers. 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?
In sharing their own experiences with evaluations, Accomplished
California Teachers members revealed some common challenges: a
system that teachers do not trust, that rarely offers clear
direction for improving practice and that often charges school
leaders to implement without preparation or resources."
Several research studies detail the essential principals and
components of a strong teacher evaluation system. The National
Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality argues a strong
evaluation system must: "involve teachers and stakeholders in
developing the system; use multiple indicators; and give teachers
opportunities to improve in the areas in which they score poorly."
Likewise, the New Teacher Project states "evaluations should
provide all teachers with regular feedback that helps them grow as
professionals, no matter how long they have been in the classroom.
The primary purpose of evaluations should not be punitive. Good
evaluations identify excellent teachers and help teachers of all
skill levels understand how they can improve."
The Use of Assessments in Evaluation: This bill requires both
state and local formative and summative assessments to be included
in educator evaluation. Formative assessments are developed
locally and are used by teachers to continually inform instruction
in the classroom throughout the school year. Summative
assessments can be developed locally or state-wide and assess a
AB 575
Page 15
student's performance at a point in time. Summative assessments
can include end of unit quizzes, end of course tests, or
standardized tests.
Evaluation Frequency: This bill requires probationary teachers to
be evaluated at least every year and permanent teacher to be
evaluated at least every other year; and, it reduces the
authorization for teachers with more than 10 years experience to
be evaluated every five years, and instead authorizes evaluation
every three years. By reducing the five-year evaluation cycle to
a three-year evaluation cycle for experienced teachers, this bill
will require experienced teachers to be evaluated more frequently.
It is unclear how many teachers are currently evaluated every
five years and thus it is unclear how this bill will affect
administrator work load to complete the increased number of
evaluations.
Professional Development: This bill specifies that teachers who
receive an unsatisfactory rating on their evaluation, if a school
district has a PAR program in place, they must refer teachers who
receive an unsatisfactory review to the PAR program for
improvement. This bill does not specify the process if a teacher
continues to receive unsatisfactory evaluations after the PAR
program is complete. It is unclear whether school districts
should begin dismissal proceedings, or provide further
instructional support for the teacher.
Evaluation Funding: This bill specifies that is it the intent of
the Legislature to provide adequate resources to train evaluators,
continue robust beginning teacher induction programs, and support
struggling educators. According to the author, appropriate
funding is a key component to achieving a high quality teacher and
administrator evaluation system, as well as necessary support
programs for beginning teachers and struggling teachers.
AB 575
Page 16
Public Hearings: This bill requires public hearings before May
1st of the year proceeding local negotiations, as well as public
hearings should a mid-year agreement be reached. The public
hearing process will require a hearing before negotiations begin,
during negotiations, prior to the final vote on the evaluation
system, as well as after the evaluation has been adopted. The
intent of these public hearings is to allow for parents to give
input on the evaluation system each time it is negotiated. It is
unclear how much information is legally allowed to be shared
publically during the negotiation process. The Legislature should
consider whether this mid-negotiation hearing is appropriate.
Collective Bargaining Agreements: This bill requires the teacher
evaluation system to be collectively bargained, if the district or
COE has a collective bargaining unit. The specific provisions of
this bill cannot be bargained out of the final evaluation system
adopted by a school district or COE. The requirements in this
bill must be included in the evaluation system, they cannot be
weakened or omitted from the evaluation system in any way.
Further, this bill clarifies that the teacher evaluation system
does not supersede or invalidate a teacher evaluation system that
is locally negotiated and that is in effect at the time this bill
becomes operative. If a locally negotiated teacher evaluation
system is in effect at the time this bill becomes operative, the
teacher evaluation system shall remain in effect until the parties
to the agreement negotiate a successor agreement. This bill
further clarifies that a memorandum of understanding (MOU) shall
not extend the adoption of a locally negotiated teacher evaluation
system that is in effect at the time this bill becomes operative.
In other words, if a collective bargaining agreement ends, but is
extended by an MOU, the existing teacher evaluation system cannot
remain in effect indefinitely during an MOU.
Arguments in Support: Public Advocates supports this bill and
states, "In multiple ways AB 575 would strengthen the evaluation
AB 575
Page 17
system and not just by requiring full compliance with California's
teaching standards which are optional under the existing law
(Stull Act). AB 575 requires that any teacher evaluation system
must include certain elements and cannot be negotiated away,
including:
1) Increasing the frequency of the most veteran educators'
evaluation from once every five years to once every three
years,
2) Increasing the categories for rating teachers from two
(simply satisfactory and unsatisfactory) to three,
3) Requiring a series of classroom observations from
evaluators trained for the task; and
4) Requiring that districts receive and consider input from
parents, students, and community members into the development
of the local evaluation process,
5) Requiring evidence of teachers' contribution to students'
academic performance through multiple measures, including
summative and formative assessments,
6) Requiring that teachers who are evaluated unsatisfactory
participate in a district's Peer Assistance and Review (PAR)
program if it has one."
Arguments in Opposition: The Education Trust-West opposes this
bill and states: "The Education Trust - West opposes AB 575
because it would expand the scope of bargaining, mandate the use
of the California Standards for the Teaching Profession (CSTP's)
through a rigid scheme, and eliminate waivers allowing districts
to implement alternative, innovative teacher evaluation systems?
AB 575
Page 18
The proposed scheme allows minimal flexibility to emphasize one or
more of the standards over the others, according to local needs,
and use them in combination with other measures such as parent and
student surveys. This would hamper the innovative efforts of
school districts that are using frameworks not directly tied to
the CSTPs, and demonstrating improvement in teacher performance
and student learning."
Analysis Prepared by:
Chelsea Kelley / ED. / (916) 319-2087 FN: 0000816