BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 48
Page A
Date of Hearing: May 18, 2011
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Felipe Fuentes, Chair
AB 48 (John A. Perez) - As Amended: May 11, 2011
Policy Committee: Education
Vote:7-3
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
This bill authorizes school districts to implement a best
practices teacher evaluation system, as specified.
Specifically, this bill:
1)Declares the primary purpose of an evaluation system is to
ensure that teachers meet the highest professional standards
of effective teachers, thereby resulting in high levels of
pupil learning.
2)Specifies the best practices teacher evaluation system has
specified attributes, including the following:
a) Engages and supports all pupils in learning and
creates/maintains effective environments for pupil
learning.
b) Organizes subject matter for pupil learning, evidence of
which may include extensive subject matter, content
standards, and curriculum competence.
c) Instruction and learning experiences for all pupils,
evidence of which may include differentiated instruction
and practices based upon pupil progress and the use of
culturally responsive instruction, as specified.
d) Use of pupil assessment information to inform
instruction and to improve learning, evidence of which may
include use of formative assessments to adjust
instructional practices to meet the needs of individual
pupils.
e) Assesses academic growth based upon multiple measures,
which may include classroom work, local and state academic
assessments, and pupil grades, classroom participation,
AB 48
Page B
presentations, projects, and portfolios.
3)Requires multiple observations of instructional and other
professional practices conducted by evaluators who have
received appropriate training. Requires a uniform tool to be
used and requires the observer to meet with the teacher before
and after the observation.
4)Requires the teacher evaluation to be locally negotiated under
collective bargaining statue and requires teachers to be
evaluated with the frequency of current statute.
5)Requires the teacher to receive evaluation results in writing,
with the right to initiate a written response to the
evaluation, as specified.
6)Authorizes a school district that implements a best practice
teacher evaluation system to continue implementing the current
categorical flexibility in perpetuity (regardless of the 2015
sunset date).
7)Specifies a school district that implements a best practice
teacher evaluation system is not subject to the Stull Act
(existing teacher evaluation requirements).
8)Prohibits a school district that implements a best practice
teacher evaluation system from initiating dismissal unless the
teacher is given the opportunity to participate in a program
similar to the California Peer Assistance and Review Program
for Teachers.
FISCAL EFFECT
1)GF/98 cost pressure, likely in the low millions, to school
districts to conduct evaluations pursuant to this measure.
Actual costs will depend on the number of districts that
choose to implement a best practice teacher evaluation system.
The annual cost for the Stull Act, current certificated
employee evaluation system and state reimbursable mandate, is
approximately $19 million. This bill does not repeal or
amend the Stull Act nor does it impose a state reimbursable
mandate. According to the Center for the Future of Teaching
in Learning, there are approximately 300,000 teachers in
AB 48
Page C
California.)
2)GF/98 cost pressure of approximately $500,000 to school
districts to provide teachers a program similar to the
California Peer Assistance and Review Program for Teachers
prior to the district dismissing the teacher, as specified.
Actual costs will depend on the number of districts
implementing a best practice teacher evaluation system and the
number of teachers designated to participate in this program.
3)GF/98 cost pressure, likely between $300,000 and $600,000, to
school districts to provide training to personnel to conduct
evaluation observations.
COMMENTS
1)Purpose . Several research studies document the correlation
between teacher quality and student achievement.
Specifically, research indicates "differential teacher
effectiveness is a strong determinant of differences in
student learning, far outweighing the effects of differences
in class size and heterogenity. 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."<1>
The author contends a teacher evaluation system should focus
on determining best practices that occur in the classroom. An
evaluation should provide constructive, valuable feedback to
the teacher regarding his or her instructional practice. This
bill authorizes school districts to implement a best practices
teacher evaluation system, as specified.
2)Existing law establishes the Stull Act, enacted in 1971, which
governs certificated employee evaluations. Specifically, the
Stull Act 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.
---------------------------
<1> Teacher Quality and Student Achievement: A Review of State
Policy Evidence; Linda Darling-Hammond, Education Policy
Analysis (January 2000)
AB 48
Page D
Under the Stull Act, school districts are authorized, by
mutual agreement with their collective bargaining
representative, to include the National Board for Professional
Teaching Standards, California Standards for the Teaching
Profession, or any other objective standards, in the
evaluation.
3)Differences between existing law and this bill . This bill
does not propose to amend existing statute. Instead, it
authorizes school districts to implement a best practice
teacher evaluation system. Essentially, it provides school
districts with another option for evaluating teachers.
Current law authorizes school districts to collectively
bargain teacher performance via the evaluation process 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. This measure requires the best practice
teacher evaluation to be collectively bargained.
While current statute authorizes school districts to
collectively bargain many of the attributes specified in this
measure, this bill specifies the components of a best practice
teacher evaluation system, including a focus on instructional
practice, conducting multiple observations, and examining
pupil performance over time using multiple measures. This
measure, however, provides school districts with full
authority in implementing the components of this system.
This bill also prohibits a school district that implements a
best practice teacher evaluation system from initiating
dismissal, unless the teacher is given the opportunity to
participate in a program similar to the California Peer
Assistance and Review Program for Teachers.
4)Related legislation .
a) AB 5 (Fuentes), pending in this committee, commencing
with the 2012-13 school year, establishes the Evaluation
and Support System for Certificated Employees, which
delineates minimum components for a teacher evaluation
system and repeals the current evaluation system, the Stull
Act, on July 1, 2012.
AB 48
Page E
b) SB 257 (Liu), pending on the Senate Floor, encourages a
school district to include in its evaluation and assessment
guidelines specific information relating to current best
teaching practices in all subject areas and authorizes a
school district to include additional criteria into the
evaluation and assessment of certificated employees.
c) SB 355 (Huff) makes various changes to statutes
governing the evaluation of certificated employees and
teacher effectiveness. This bill was heard in the Senate
Education Committee on May 11, 2011 and failed passage.
The bill, however, was granted reconsideration and is a
two-year bill.
Analysis Prepared by : Kimberly Rodriguez / APPR. / (916)
319-2081