BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1099
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 29, 2015
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Patrick O'Donnell, Chair
AB 1099
(Olsen) - As Introduced February 27, 2015
SUBJECT: School accountability: local control and
accountability plans: teacher evaluations
SUMMARY: Requires each school district and county office of
education (COE) to post information on its Internet Web site, if
it has one, regarding its procedures for evaluating teachers and
principals. Also requires the local control and accountability
plan (LCAP) of each school district and county office of
education to contain a listing and description of specified
expenditures at each schoolsite. Specifically, this bill:
1)Requires each school district and county office of education
(COE) to post the following on its Internet Web site, if it
has one:
a) An easily understandable explanation of how the
evaluation of certificated teaching staff is conducted,
including, but not limited to, all blank evaluation forms,
all procedures to be used for the evaluation of
certificated teachers contained in the current collective
bargaining agreement, how evaluations include the progress
of pupils toward the locally adopted standards of expected
pupil achievement at each grade level in each area of
AB 1099
Page 2
study, and, if applicable, the state adopted academic
content standards as measured by state adopted criterion
referenced assessments;
b) Aggregate data on the number of certificated teachers at
each schoolsite that receive satisfactory or unsatisfactory
evaluations, unless the posting of this data would reveal
personally identifiable information; and
c) Whether or not the school district or county office of
education has adopted an evaluation system for school
principals, and how it compares to the standards set forth
in Sections 44670 and 44671 of the Education Code.
2)Requires each school district and county office of education
(COE) to include the following in its LCAP:
a) A listing and description of the expenditures for the
fiscal year implementing the specific actions included in
the local control and accountability plan and the changes
to the specific actions made pursuant to the annual update;
b) A listing and description of expenditures for the fiscal
year that will serve the pupils who are in at least one of
the following categories:
i) Eligible for free or reduced-price meals;
ii) Foster youth;
AB 1099
Page 3
iii) Limited English proficient; or
iv) Redesignated as English proficient.
3)Requires the schoolsite expenditures to be classified using
the California School Accounting Manual.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Requires school districts to evaluate and assess certificated
employee performance as it reasonable relates to:
a) The progress of pupils toward performance standards;
b) The instructional techniques and strategies used by the
employee;
c) The employee's adherence to curricular objectives; and
d) The establishment and maintenance of a suitable learning
environment within the scope of the employee's
responsibilities.
2)Requires school districts and COEs to adopt and annually
update an LCAP.
3)Requires the LCAP to include, among other things:
AB 1099
Page 4
a) A listing and description of district expenditures for
the fiscal year implementing the specific actions included
in the local control and accountability plan and the
changes to the specific actions made pursuant to the annual
update; and
b) A listing and description of district expenditures for
the fiscal year that will serve the pupils who are in at
least one of the following categories:
i) Eligible for free or reduced-price meals;
ii) Foster youth;
iii) Limited English proficient; or
iv) Redesignated as English proficient.
1)Requires the district expenditures to be classified using the
California School Accounting Manual.
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown
COMMENTS: Existing law requires LCAPs to contain a description
of district and COE expenditures of the actions described in the
LCAP to achieve the goals specified in the LCAP. This bill
extends that requirement to schoolsite expenditures for each
school within a district and COE. In addition, this bill
requires each school district and COE to provide detailed on its
procedures for evaluation, how the evaluations include the
progress of pupils toward the locally adopted standards of
AB 1099
Page 5
achievement, and the number of teacher at each schoolsite who
receive satisfactory or unsatisfactory ratings.
Need for the bill. According to the author's office, this bill
provides more transparency in two areas-processes and procedures
for teacher and principal evaluation and the expenditure of
funds at each schoolsite to the specific actions described in
LCAPs. This "can make our education system more effective by
providing more information about how schools are measuring
quality and spending their resources." In addition, the
author's office argues that "we cannot hold our teachers or
principals responsible for the success or failure of schools if
districts do not evaluate their performance and invest in their
continuing education."
Arguments in support. In its letter of support, Students First
argues that this bill will "build on the principles of
transparency and accountability" in two ways. First, by
required detailed disclosure of schoolsite spending, this will
"shine a light on the extent to which districts are using LCFF
dollars to truly provide additional resources to student
populations according to their needs." Second, requiring public
posting of the process and materials used for teacher and
principal evaluation is important, because "teachers are the
single-most important in school factor influencing student
achievement, [and] information on teacher quality is essential
for parents and families to truly understand the quality of the
schools in their community."
Arguments in opposition. Opponents argue that this bill is an
unnecessary duplication of federal mandates, which require
states to report the following:
Information regarding the system used to evaluate the
performance of teachers and principals;
AB 1099
Page 6
The overall performance evaluation rating for all
teachers at each school; and
The overall performance evaluation rating for all
principals district-wide.
Charter schools. This bill does not apply to charter schools,
which, according to data from the California Department of
Education, enrolled about 514,000 pupils in 2013-14. This is
about 8% of total public school K-12 enrollment in California.
This is a significant number of public school pupils who would
not benefit from the increased transparency required by this
bill. As noted by Students First, "information on teacher
quality is essential for parents and families to truly
understand the quality of the schools in their community." The
committee may wish to consider why the parents and families of
charter school pupils should be denied the same level of
transparency and accountability as the parents and families of
non-charter school pupils.
Committee amendments. This bill requires aggregate data on the
number of certificated teachers at each schoolsite that receive
satisfactory or unsatisfactory evaluations to be posted on the
Internet, unless the posting of this data would reveal
personally identifiable information. This presumes that
"satisfactory" and "unsatisfactory" will continue to be
categories. However, legislation is pending that would create
more than two categories of teacher performance, and those
labels may not be used in the future. In addition, any such
information is likely to be inaccurate at any point in time, as
teachers are reassigned to and from schools. Finally, it is
impossible to assess the circumstances under which the posting
of such data may reveal personally identifiable information,
leading to a potential violation of confidentiality. For these
AB 1099
Page 7
reasons, staff recommends that the bill be amended to delete
this provision.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
Students First
Opposition
California Teachers Association
Analysis Prepared by:Rick Pratt / ED. / (916) 319-2087