BILL ANALYSIS �
SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Alan Lowenthal, Chair
2011-12 Regular Session
BILL NO: SB 1292
AUTHOR: Liu
AMENDED: April 16, 2012
FISCAL COMM: No HEARING DATE: April 25, 2012
URGENCY: No CONSULTANT:Beth Graybill
SUBJECT : School employees: Principal evaluations.
SUMMARY
This bill authorizes school districts to evaluate principals
and establishes provisions to guide principal evaluation.
BACKGROUND
Existing law, the Stull Act, expresses the intent of the
Legislature that governing boards establish a uniform system
of evaluation and assessment of the performance of all
certificated personnel within each school district. The
system must involve the development and adoption of objective
evaluation and assessment guidelines that may be uniform
throughout the district or, for compelling reasons, differ by
regions within the district, provided that all certificated
personnel of the district are subject to a system of
evaluation and assessment.
(Education Code � 44660)
The Stull Act further requires school districts to evaluate
and assess the performance of certificated employees as it
reasonably relates to the following:
1) The progress of pupils towards locally-adopted
standards 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.
4) The establishment and maintenance of a suitable
SB 1292
Page 2
learning environment within the scope of the employee's
responsibilities. (EC � 44662)
The Stull Act further requires governing boards to establish
and define job responsibilities for certificated
noninstructional employees, such as supervisory and
administrative personnel, and requires them to be evaluated
appropriately with regard to the fulfillment of those
responsibilities. (EC � 44662)
Current law requires school principals to have a preliminary
or professional administrative services credential and
requires, among other things, applicants for a preliminary
administrative services credential to have at least three
years of successful, full-time classroom teaching experience
in the public schools or in private schools of equivalent
status, or three years of experience in the fields of pupil
personnel, health, clinical or rehabilitative, or librarian
services. (EC � 44270 and � 44834)
ANALYSIS
This bill :
1) Makes findings and declarations relating to the need for
State and local educational agencies, not the federal
government, to determine the process for implementing
principal evaluations; the obligation to evaluate
principals fairly, consistently, and effectively using
multiple methods; and the characteristics of an
effective evaluation system.
2) Expresses the intent of the Legislature that evaluators
receive training for the purpose of calibrating
evaluations when funds become available.
3) Specifies that a school principal may be evaluated
annually in the first and second year of employment with
a district and authorizes governing boards to determine
the interval thereafter; permits additional evaluations
to be agreed upon between the evaluator and the
principal.
4) Specifies that evaluators and principals may review
school success and progress relative to goals defined by
the school district.
SB 1292
Page 3
5) Specifies that criteria for principal evaluations may be
based on the California Professional Standards for
Educational Leaders (CPSELs). Codifies the standards
and identifies effective leadership as:
a) Facilitating the development, articulation,
implementation, and stewardship of a vision of
learning that is shared and supported by the school
community.
b) Advocating, nurturing, and sustaining a school
culture and instructional program conducive to
pupil learning and staff professional growth.
c) Ensuring management of the organization,
operations, and resources for a safe, efficient,
and effective learning environment.
d) Collaborating with families and community
members, responding to diverse community interests
and needs, and mobilizing community resources.
e) Modeling a personal code of ethics and
developing professional leadership capacity.
f) Understanding, responding to, and influencing
the larger political, social, economic, legal and
cultural context.
6) Authorizes a school principal evaluation to include the
following:
a) Pupil academic growth based on multiple
measures, as specified.
b) Effective and comprehensive teacher
evaluations.
c) Culturally responsive instructional strategies
to address and eliminate the achievement gap.
d) The ability to analyze instructional
strategies and provide effective feedback to
facilitate instructional improvement.
e) High expectations for pupils and leadership to
ensure active pupil engagement and learning.
SB 1292
Page 4
f) Collaborative professional practices.
g) Effective school management.
h) Meaningful self-assessment to improve as a
professional educator.
i) Consistent and effective relationships with
pupils, parents, teachers, staff, and other
administrators.
7) Authorizes the use of Title I and Title II carryover
funds and any other available state and federal funds to
be used to implement the act.
8) Requires local agencies and school districts to be
reimbursed for costs if the Commission on State Mandates
determines that this act contains costs mandated by the
state.
STAFF COMMENTS
1) Need for the bill : According to the author's office,
the Education Code requires a principal to be evaluated
but provides no direction as to what should be
considered and why. While some school districts have
established their own principal evaluation systems, many
have not. The stated intent of SB 1292 is to provide a
foundation to work from while providing the necessary
flexibility to tailor an evaluation plan to meet a
district's needs.
2) Uncertain policy climate . This bill gives local
educational agencies (LEAs) authority they already have
to implement systems and criteria for evaluating school
principals. However, the bill addresses broader policy
questions about the need for effective teacher and
principal evaluation systems and the extent to which
those systems are a matter of local control. The U.S.
Department of Education has expressed its desire for
states to have effective educator evaluation systems and
has indicated such systems are required for states
submitting an application to waive selected provisions
of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) authorization of the
Elementary and Secondary Education (ESEA) Act of 1965.
The federal waiver requirements specify that to receive
SB 1292
Page 5
flexibility a state and each LEA must commit to develop,
adopt, pilot, and implement, with the involvement of
teachers and principals, teacher and principal
evaluation and support systems that:
a) Will be used for continual improvement and
instruction;
b) Meaningfully differentiate
performance using at least three
performance levels;
b) Use multiple valid measures in determining
performance levels,
including as a significant factor data on
student growth for all students (including
English learners and students with
disabilities), and other measures of
professional practice;
c) Evaluate teachers and principals on a regular
basis;
d) Provide clear, timely, and useful feedback,
including feedback
that identifies needs and guides professional
development; and
e) Will be used to inform personnel decisions.
The requirements further state that a state must develop
and adopt guidelines for these systems and LEAs must
develop and implement teacher and principal evaluation
and support systems that are consistent with the state's
guidelines. According to the CDE, a cost-benefit
analysis of the waiver requirements suggested that the
state would face significant challenges in meeting the
waiver criteria including necessary legislation to
implement selected principles and potential
state-mandated local costs. To date, the SBE has not
taken action to seek a waiver of ESEA provisions.
Although this bill asserts that determining the process
for implementing principal evaluations is not a matter
for the federal government but rather the state and
school districts, it is possible that funds for federal
programs may eventually be conditioned on California
SB 1292
Page 6
having a principal evaluation system that meets
specified criteria. If the voluntary process SB 1292
would establish proves inconsistent with federal
requirements, the Legislature may need to revisit this
legislation in the future.
The Superintendent of Public Instruction has established
a task force on Educator Excellence which is examining
various dimensions of educator quality, including
effective evaluation. The task force expects to
complete its work and make recommendations later this
year. In light of the uncertain policy climate, would
it make sense for the SBE to develop guidelines for a
principal evaluation system that would be informed by
all of these factors?
3) California Professional Standards for Educational
Leaders . This bill codifies the current set of
standards that outline the traits that an effective
principal should possess. These standards follow the
2008 Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium
(ISLLC) Standards for School Leaders that have changed
little since the original 1996 ISLLC standards. In
2001, representatives from the California School
Leadership Academy at WestEd, the Association of
California School Administrators, the California
Commission on Teacher Credentialing, the California
Department of Education, and various California colleges
and universities adapted the ISLLC standards to
establish the current set of six CPSELs. The CPSELS
guide the practice of school administrators and inform
preparation programs that lead to the administrative
services credential.
Codifying these standards would require conforming
legislation whenever the CPSELs are revised. Given the
Federal government's push for states to have more robust
evaluation systems, it is not out of the question that
both the ISLLC and CPSEL standards may change in the
future to align to federal guidelines. Instead, it may
be more appropriate for this bill to identify the six
broad areas of the CPSELs such as shared vision,
teaching and learning, management and safety, etc. This
approach could allow greater flexibility to be more
responsive to changes in state or federal policy and
SB 1292
Page 7
would enable the state and districts to establish
priorities that reflect trends and/or research and best
practices. Staff recommends the bill be amended to
replace the standards specified in � 44671(a) with
language that identifies the six broad themes of the
standards.
4) Related and prior legislation . SB 57 (Liu, 2011)
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. This bill was
passed by this Committee on a 9-0 vote and is in the
Assembly Education Committee.
AB 5 (Fuentes, 2011) Requires school districts to implement
a best practices teacher evaluation system, as
specified, by July 1 of the first fiscal year following
the year in which the deficit factor is reduced to zero.
This bill was passed by this Committee on a 6-0 vote
and is in the Senate Appropriations Committee.
SUPPORT
Association of California School Administrators
California School Boards Association
OPPOSITION
None received.