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