BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular Session
AB 1099 (Olsen) - School accountability: teacher evaluations.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| |
| |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Version: July 8, 2015 |Policy Vote: ED. 5 - 1 |
| | |
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Urgency: No |Mandate: Yes |
| | |
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Hearing Date: August 17, 2015 |Consultant: Jillian Kissee |
| | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.
Bill
Summary: This bill requires each school district and county
office of education to post information on its website, if it
has one, its procedures for evaluating teachers and principals.
Fiscal
Impact:
Unknown, potentially significant reimbursable state mandated
costs in the high tens of thousands for school districts and
county offices of education to post required information
online. If the Commission on State Mandates determines the
requirements of this bill constitute a reimbursable state
mandate, this could put pressure to increase the K-12 Mandate
Block Grant to reflect the inclusion of the new mandate.
(Proposition 98)
The California Department of Education has indicated that any
costs associated with implementing this bill would be minor
and absorbable.
AB 1099 (Olsen) Page 1 of
?
Potential increase in local costs related to litigation.
Background: Under existing law, the Stull Act expresses legislative intent
that school districts and county governing boards establish a
uniform system of evaluation and assessment of certificated
personnel. With the exception of certificated personnel who are
employed on an hourly basis to teach adult education classes,
the Stull Act requires school districts to evaluate and assess
teacher performance as it reasonably relates to:
1) Progress of pupils toward district-adopted and, if
applicable, state-adopted academic content standards as
measured by state-adopted criterion referenced tests;
2) Instructional techniques and strategies used by the
employee;
3) The employee's adherence to curricular objectives; and
4) The establishment and maintenance of a suitable learning
environment within the scope of the employee's
responsibilities. (Education Code § 44660, et seq.)
Existing law also establishes a discretionary a framework for a
principal evaluation system. It authorizes a governing board of
a school district to identify who will conduct the evaluation of
each school principal. It also authorizes evaluators and
principals to review school success and progress throughout the
year and that the review should include goals that are defined
by the school district.
It authorizes criteria for effective school principal
evaluations to be based up on the California Professional
Standards for Educational Leaders. The standards are intended
to identify a school administrator as being an educational
leader who promotes the success of all students through
leadership that fosters various related qualities. Finally, it
authorizes a principal evaluation to includes several components
AB 1099 (Olsen) Page 2 of
?
such as: the academic growth of students, including local and
state academic assessments; effective and comprehensive teacher
evaluations; the ability to analyze quality instructional
strategies; and meaningful self-assessment to improve a
professional educator.
Proposed Law:
This bill requires a school district and a county
superintendent of schools to make available to the public and
post on their websites, if they have one, all of the following:
An easily understandable explanation of how the
evaluation of certificated teaching staff is conducted.
This includes all blank evaluation forms; all procedures
used for the evaluation of certificated teachers contained
in the current collective bargaining agreement; how
evaluations include the progress of students toward the
locally adopted standards of expected student achievement;
and if applicable, the state adopted academic content
standards as measured by state assessments.
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 existing law that describe a discretionary framework for
a principal evaluation system, as described in the
Background section above.
Staff
Comments: This bill likely creates a new reimbursable state
mandate for school districts and county offices of education to
post required information on their websites. Costs will likely
vary across the state depending on staff time and resources are
allocated to meeting the requirements of this bill. The
majority of the costs will likely be one-time in nature and
absorbable to update information as it may change in future
years.
AB 1099 (Olsen) Page 3 of
?
Activities that could be deemed by the Commission on State
Mandates to be reimbursable may include:
Developing an easily understandable explanation of how
certificated teaching staff evaluations are conducted.
Extracting from collective bargaining agreements,
procedures used for the evaluation of certificated
teachers.
Indicating how evaluations include the progress of
students, as specified.
Developing a comparison of principal evaluation systems
that may be in place with the framework outlined in
existing law.
If about half of school districts claim staff time of 3 hours to
complete this work at a rate of $60 per hour, including
benefits, costs to the state could run in the high tens of
thousands.
This bill relates to a recent lawsuit filed against thirteen
districts alleging that their collective bargaining agreements
do not comply with state law requiring school districts to
evaluate teachers based on, in part, the progress of their
students toward local and state academic standards. To the
extent required information is posted online and school
districts are perceived to be out of compliance with current
law, this could result in increased costs at the local level for
litigation. The magnitude is unknown.
-- END --