BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Senator Carol Liu, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular
Bill No: AB 2826
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Author: |Weber |
|-----------+-----------------------------------------------------|
|Version: |June 14, 2016 Hearing |
| |Date: June 29, 2016 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Urgency: |No |Fiscal: |No |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Consultant:|Lenin Del Castillo |
| | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Teachers: evaluation and assessment
SUMMARY
This bill specifies additional measures of pupil progress,
instructional techniques and strategies, and adherence to
curricular objectives that school districts may use for purposes
of teacher evaluation.
BACKGROUND
Existing law:
1) Establishes the Stull Act which expresses legislative
intent that school districts and county governing boards
establish a uniform system of evaluation and assessment of
certificated personnel.
2) Requires school districts, with the exception of
certificated personnel who are employed on an hourly basis
to teach adult education classes, to evaluate and assess
teacher performance as it reasonably relates to:
a) Progress of pupils toward district-adopted
and, if applicable, state-adopted academic content
standards as measured by state-adopted criterion
referenced tests;
b) Instructional techniques and strategies used
AB 2826 (Weber) Page 2
of ?
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.
(Education Code § 44660, et seq.)
3) Requires an evaluation and assessment of the performance
of each certificated employee to be made 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 permanent employees who have
been employed with the district at least 10 years and were
rated as meeting or exceeding standards in their previous
evaluation. Teachers who receive an unsatisfactory rating
may be required to participate in a program designed to
improve the employee's performance and to further pupil
achievement and the instructional objectives of the
district.
4) Provides that if the district participates in the Peer
Assistance and Review (PAR) program, then the teachers who
receive an unsatisfactory rating are required to
participate in that program. (Education Code § 44664)
5) Establishes the PAR program for teachers by authorizing
school districts and the exclusive representative of the
certificated employees to develop and implement the program
locally. The PAR programs are to include multiple
observations of a teacher during periods of classroom
instruction and sufficient staff development activities to
assist a teacher in improving his or her skills and
knowledge. The final evaluation of a teacher's
participation in the program is made available for
placement in his or her personnel file. (Education Code §
44505)
ANALYSIS
This bill:
AB 2826 (Weber) Page 3
of ?
1) Provides that, for purposes of teacher evaluation, the
following phrases may include, but not be limited to, the
following:
a) "Progress of pupils," in addition to local and
state criterion-referenced evidence, as specified, may
include the following multiple measures:
i) Formative or summative
criterion-referenced assessments measuring
progress of pupils towards local or state-adopted
academic content standards;
ii) School district, school, or
department-developed assessments;
iii) Curriculum-based and end-of-course
assessments;
iv) Pretest and posttest data;
v) Interim, periodic, benchmark, and
formative assessments;
vi) English language proficiency
assessments;
vii) Assessments measuring progress in an
individualized education program;
viii) Advanced placement, International
Baccalaureate, and college preparedness
examinations;
AB 2826 (Weber) Page 4
of ?
ix) A-G coursework completion;
x) Industry-recognized career technical
education assessments and program completion;
xi) Portfolios of pupils' work,
projects, and performances redacted of personally
identifiable pupil information;
xii) Surveys from parents, if approved in
advance by the certificated employee;
xiii) Surveys from pupils, if approved in
advance by the certificated employee;
xiv) Written reports from classroom
observations; and
xv) Progress on outcomes described in
the local control and accountability plan (LCAP).
b) "Instructional techniques and strategies" may
include the following:
i) Engaging and supporting all pupils
in learning;
ii) Planning instruction and designing
learning experiences for all pupils; and
iii) Using pupil assessment information
to inform instruction and improve learning.
AB 2826 (Weber) Page 5
of ?
c) "Adherence to curricular objectives" may
include:
i) Understanding and organizing subject
matter for pupil learning; and
ii) Developing as a professional
educator.
2) Provides that the Legislature encourages school
districts to utilize these options for purposes of teacher
evaluation.
3) Provides that these provisions shall not be construed as
to require the State Board of Education to revise the
guidelines developed pursuant to existing law.
4) Provides that these provisions shall not be construed as
in any way limiting the authority of school district
governing boards to develop and adopt additional evaluation
and assessment guidelines or criteria or to limit the
rights of certificated employees or their exclusive
representative to bargain procedures to be used for the
evaluation of employees or other terms and conditions of
employment pursuant.
STAFF COMMENTS
1) Need for the bill. According to the author, "although
California law has required the consideration of actual
pupil progress in the evaluation and assessment of
certificated staff job performance for over four decades,
school district personnel continue to struggle with what
measures of pupil progress are appropriate especially with
the lack of state tests in specific grade levels or content
areas. As a result of this confusion, a majority of
California's largest school districts do not comply with
the law and fail to include any actual data from state or
AB 2826 (Weber) Page 6
of ?
local measures or observations of actual pupil progress in
the performance evaluations of certificated staff."
2) Improvements to the Stull Act. The terms, "progress of
pupils," "instructional techniques and strategies," and
"the establishment and maintenance of a suitable learning
environment" are not defined in statute, but the Stull Act
gives school districts broad authority to "develop and
adopt additional evaluation and assessment guidelines or
criteria." This bill is intended to provide clarity to the
Stull Act by specifying criteria that may be used by a
governing board within its existing authority to define and
measure these terms. The bill also includes an expansive
set of evidence for student achievement that recognizes the
differences in outcome measures for various disciplines and
pedagogy beyond statewide assessments, including, but not
limited to, student portfolios, surveys, classroom
observation, department assessments, Advanced Placement
examinations, and English-language proficiency assessments.
Further, the bill encourages the use of all the elements
of the interrelated domains of teaching practice from the
California Standards of the Teaching Profession, which
represent consensus on the developmental, holistic view of
effective teaching.
3) Current research. Several studies document the correlation
between teacher quality and student achievement. According
to information provided by the author, research indicates
differential teacher effectiveness is a strong determinant
of differences in student learning, far outweighing the
effects of differences in class size and heterogeneity.
Studies have shown that 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.
The Center for the Future of Teaching and Learning has
recommended making teacher evaluation multi-dimensional,
strengthening the training of those who conduct
evaluations, and tying evaluation results directly to
substantive feedback to teachers. The National
Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality suggests a strong
evaluation system must "involve teachers and stakeholders
in developing the system; use multiple indicators; and give
AB 2826 (Weber) Page 7
of ?
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."
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?" Comments from
Accomplished California Teachers indicate that current
approaches to teacher evaluation results in a system that
teachers do not trust, that rarely offers clear direction
for improving practice, and often charges school leaders to
implement without preparation or resources. A January 2011
report by the Center for the Future of Teaching and
Learning notes that evaluations pay "scarce attention to
student learning or do not connect that learning to
elements of teacher content knowledge or instructional
skills that could be improved."
4) Related and prior legislation.
SB 499 (Liu, 2015) repeals and replaces various provisions
of existing law governing the evaluation of certificated
employees and requires school districts to implement a best
practices teacher evaluation system, as specified. This
bill also repeals and replaces provisions of existing law
regarding school administrator evaluations. The bill is
pending before the Assembly Education Committee.
AB 1495 (Weber) proposed to add various requirements to the
certificated employee evaluation system known as the Stull
Act. This bill failed passage in the Assembly Education
Committee.
AB 1078 (Olsen) would also make changes to the certificated
employee evaluation system. This measure failed passage in
AB 2826 (Weber) Page 8
of ?
the Assembly Education Committee.
SB 441 (Calderon, 2013) proposed to amend various
provisions of existing law governing the evaluation of
certificated employees by requiring the evaluations to use
multiple measures, including a minimum of four rating
levels, increasing the frequency of evaluations for
teachers with 10 or more years of experience in a school
district from every five years to every three years, and
requiring school districts to consider the findings of
sessions, surveys, and specific focus groups by subject
matter and grade level from parents of pupils. SB 441
failed passage in this Committee on May 1, 2013.
SB 453 (Huff) would have authorized the governing board of
a school district to evaluate and assess the performance of
certificated employees using a multiple-measures evaluation
system, authorized school districts to make specified
employment decisions based on teacher performance, and
expanded the reasons districts may deviate from the order
of seniority in terminating and reappointing teachers.
This bill failed passage in this Committee on April 24,
2013.
SB 1292 (Liu, Chapter 435, Statutes of 2012) authorized the
evaluation of school principals based on the California
Professional Standards for Educational Leaders as well as
evidence of pupil academic growth, effective and
comprehensive teacher evaluations, culturally responsive
instructional strategies, the ability to analyze quality
instructional strategies and provide effective feedback,
and effective school management.
AB 5 (Fuentes, 2012), similar to this bill, would have
repealed and replaced various provisions of existing law
governing the evaluation of certificated employees and
required school districts to implement a best practices
teacher evaluation system.
SUPPORT
AB 2826 (Weber) Page 9
of ?
California State PTA
Children Now
EdVoice
Students Matter
OPPOSITION
None received.
-- END --