File No. 478

Senate, April 5, 2016

The Committee on Education reported through SEN. SLOSSBERG of the 14th Dist., Chairperson of the Committee on the part of the Senate, that the bill ought to pass.

AN ACT CONCERNING THE EXCLUSION OF STUDENT PERFORMANCE RESULTS ON THE MASTERY EXAMINATION FROM TEACHER EVALUATIONS.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Assembly convened:

Section 1. Section 10-151b of the 2016 supplement to the general statutes is repealed and the following is substituted in lieu thereof (Effective from passage):

(a) The superintendent of each local or regional board of education shall annually evaluate or cause to be evaluated each teacher, and for the school year commencing July 1, 2013, and each school year thereafter, such annual evaluations shall be the teacher evaluation and support program adopted pursuant to subsection (b) of this section. The superintendent may conduct additional formative evaluations toward producing an annual summative evaluation. An evaluation pursuant to this subsection shall include, but need not be limited to, strengths, areas needing improvement, strategies for improvement and multiple indicators of student academic growth. For any evaluation conducted for the school year commencing July 1, 2016, and each school year thereafter, such multiple indicators of student academic growth shall not include the use of student performance data on the state-wide mastery examination pursuant to section 10-14n. Claims of failure to follow the established procedures of such teacher evaluation and support program shall be subject to the grievance procedure in collective bargaining agreements negotiated subsequent to July 1, 2004. In the event that a teacher does not receive a summative evaluation during the school year, such teacher shall receive a "not rated" designation for such school year. The superintendent shall report (1) the status of teacher evaluations to the local or regional board of education on or before June first of each year, and (2) the status of the implementation of the teacher evaluation and support program, including the frequency of evaluations, aggregate evaluation ratings, the number of teachers who have not been evaluated and other requirements as determined by the Department of Education, to the Commissioner of Education on or before September fifteenth of each year. For purposes of this section, the term "teacher" shall include each professional employee of a board of education, below the rank of superintendent, who holds a certificate or permit issued by the State Board of Education.

(b) Except as provided in subsection (d) of this section, not later than September 1, [2013] 2016, each local and regional board of education shall adopt and implement a teacher evaluation and support program that is consistent with the guidelines for a model teacher evaluation and support program adopted by the State Board of Education, pursuant to subsection (c) of this section. Such teacher evaluation and support program shall be developed through mutual agreement between the local or regional board of education and the professional development and evaluation committee for the school district, established pursuant to subsection (b) of section 10-220a. If a local or regional board of education is unable to develop a teacher evaluation and support program through mutual agreement with such professional development and evaluation committee, then such board of education and such professional development and evaluation committee shall consider the model teacher evaluation and support program adopted by the State Board of Education, pursuant to subsection (c) of this section, and such board of education may adopt, through mutual agreement with such professional development and evaluation committee, such model teacher evaluation and support program. If a local or regional board of education and the professional development and evaluation committee are unable to mutually agree on the adoption of such model teacher evaluation and support program, then such board of education shall adopt and implement a teacher evaluation and support program developed by such board of education, provided such teacher evaluation and support program is consistent with the guidelines adopted by the State Board of Education, pursuant to subsection (c) of this section. Each local and regional board of education may commence implementation of the teacher evaluation and support program adopted pursuant to this subsection in accordance with a teacher evaluation and support program implementation plan adopted pursuant to subsection (d) of this section.

(c) (1) On or before [July 1, 2012] August 15, 2016, the State Board of Education shall adopt, in consultation with the Performance Evaluation Advisory Council established pursuant to section 10-151d, guidelines for a model teacher evaluation and support program. Such guidelines shall include, but not be limited to, (A) the use of four performance evaluations designators: Exemplary, proficient, developing and below standard; (B) subject to the provisions of subdivision (3) of this subsection, the use of multiple indicators of student academic growth and development in teacher evaluations that do not include the use of student performance data on the state-wide mastery examination pursuant to section 10-14n; (C) methods for assessing student academic growth and development; (D) a consideration of control factors tracked by the state-wide public school information system, pursuant to subsection (c) of section 10-10a, that may influence teacher performance ratings, including, but not limited to, student characteristics, student attendance and student mobility; (E) minimum requirements for teacher evaluation instruments and procedures, including scoring systems to determine exemplary, proficient, developing and below standard ratings; (F) the development and implementation of periodic training programs regarding the teacher evaluation and support program to be offered by the local or regional board of education or regional educational service center for the school district to teachers who are employed by such local or regional board of education and whose performance is being evaluated and to administrators who are employed by such local or regional board of education and who are conducting performance evaluations; (G) the provision of professional development services based on the individual or group of individuals' needs that are identified through the evaluation process; (H) the creation of individual teacher improvement and remediation plans for teachers whose performance is developing or below standard, designed in consultation with such teacher and his or her exclusive bargaining representative for certified teachers chosen pursuant to section 10-153b, and that (i) identify resources, support and other strategies to be provided by the local or regional board of education to address documented deficiencies, (ii) indicate a timeline for implementing such resources, support, and other strategies, in the course of the same school year as the plan is issued, and (iii) include indicators of success including a summative rating of proficient or better immediately at the conclusion of the improvement and remediation plan; (I) opportunities for career development and professional growth; and (J) a validation procedure to audit evaluation ratings of exemplary or below standard by the department or a third-party entity approved by the department.

(2) The State Board of Education shall, following the completion of the teacher evaluation and support pilot program, pursuant to section 10-151f, and the submission of the study of such pilot program, pursuant to section 10-151g, review and may revise, as necessary, the guidelines for a model teacher evaluation and support program and the model teacher evaluation and support program adopted under this subsection.

(3) Not later than August 1, 2016, the State Board of Education shall revise the guidelines for a model teacher evaluation and support program and the model teacher evaluation and support program, adopted under this subsection, to exclude the use of student performance data on the state-wide mastery examination, pursuant to section 10-14n. The state board, in consultation with the Performance Evaluation Advisory Council, may reconsider how much weight shall be given to multiple indicators of student academic growth and development in teacher evaluations and revise, as necessary, such guidelines for a model teacher evaluation and support program and the model teacher evaluation and support program.

(d) A local or regional board of education may phase in full implementation of the teacher evaluation and support program adopted pursuant to subsection (b) of this section during the school years commencing July 1, 2013, and July 1, 2014, pursuant to a teacher evaluation and support program implementation plan adopted by the State Board of Education, in consultation with the Performance Evaluation Advisory Council, not later than July 1, 2013. The Commissioner of Education may waive the provisions of subsection (b) of this section and the implementation plan provisions of this subsection for any local or regional board of education that has expressed an intent, not later than July 1, 2013, to adopt a teacher evaluation program for which such board requests a waiver in accordance with this subsection.

The following Fiscal Impact Statement and Bill Analysis are prepared for the benefit of the members of the General Assembly, solely for purposes of information, summarization and explanation and do not represent the intent of the General Assembly or either chamber thereof for any purpose. In general, fiscal impacts are based upon a variety of informational sources, including the analyst's professional knowledge. Whenever applicable, agency data is consulted as part of the analysis, however final products do not necessarily reflect an assessment from any specific department.

OFA Fiscal Note

State Impact: None

Municipal Impact: None

Explanation

The bill, which makes various procedural changes to teacher evaluations, is not anticipated to result in a fiscal impact.

The Out Years

State Impact: None

Municipal Impact: None

OLR Bill Analysis

SB 380

AN ACT CONCERNING THE EXCLUSION OF STUDENT PERFORMANCE RESULTS ON THE MASTERY EXAMINATION FROM TEACHER EVALUATIONS.

SUMMARY:

This bill prohibits teacher evaluations conducted for the 2016-17 school year and each subsequent year from using Connecticut student mastery exam data as part of the student academic growth indicators required in all teacher evaluations (see BACKGROUND). The bill allows standardized test results other than from the mastery exam to be used in teacher evaluation.

Furthermore, the bill requires (1) the State Board of Education (SBE), in consultation with the Performance Evaluation Advisory Committee (PEAC), to revise the teacher evaluation and support guidelines to reflect the change by August 1, 2016 and adopt the revised guidelines by August 15, 2016 and (2) local and regional boards to adopt new teacher evaluation and support programs that reflect the change by September 1, 2016 (see BACKGROUND). Under current state law and the bill, the SBE adopts evaluation guidelines and local or regional boards must then adopt teacher evaluation plans that conform to these guidelines.

When revising the guidelines, the bill also permits SBE and PEAC to reconsider how much weight to give to the student growth indicators and to incorporate any weighting changes. By law, unchanged by the bill, teacher evaluations programs apply to all certified personnel in a school district, which includes all teachers and administrators not including the superintendent.

EFFECTIVE DATE: Upon passage

INDICATORS OF STUDENT GROWTH

By law, SBE's evaluation guidelines must include, among other things, multiple indicators of student academic growth and development. The guidelines call for 45% of a teacher's evaluation to be based on student growth, using the growth indicators to measure progress toward individual teacher goals. Up to half of the growth indicators (22.5% of the overall evaluation) may be based on standardized test scores including the results of the Connecticut mastery tests. The requirement to use such standardized test scores has been delayed for two years (currently it would start with the 2016-17 school year) in part because of the new Smarter Balanced Assessment (SBAC) that was fully implemented in the 2014-15 school year.

The current SBE guidelines allow a state test to be used for the student growth indicators as long as it uses a comparison of test data over time and not a single test. Other types of standardized tests are also permitted, such as Advanced Placement, SATs, Developmental Reading Assessments, and standardized vocational exams.

Under the bill, standardized tests other than the Connecticut mastery tests would be allowed.

For the grades (e.g., first, second, ninth, and twelfth) or subjects (e.g., science in most grades and art, social studies, languages, and physical education in all grades) that do not have applicable mastery tests, the bill has no effect as existing standards call for non-standardized methods of measuring student academic growth (although they permit a standardized test to be used if one can be agreed to by the teacher and the teacher's evaluator).

BACKGROUND

Required Subjects and Grades for Mastery Exams

Table 1 shows the subjects, grades, and exams required for Connecticut public school mastery exams.

Table 1. State Law: Required Subjects and Grades for Mastery Exams

PEAC

The Performance Evaluation Advisory Council (PEAC) was established in 2010 to help SBE develop and implement teacher evaluation program guidelines and a supporting data system. Its members are:

1. the education and higher education commissioners, or their designees;

2. representatives of the associations of boards of education, school superintendents, other school administrators, and teachers; and

3. an unspecified number of appropriate people selected by the education commissioner, who must include teachers and experts in performance evaluation processes and procedures.

COMMITTEE ACTION

Education Committee

Joint Favorable