 |
State |
Status/Date |
Level |
Summary |
|
 | 21st Century Skills |
| |
| Accountability |
| |
| Accountability--Accreditation |
| |
| Accountability--Measures/Indicators |
| |
| Accountability--Reporting Results |
| |
| Accountability--Rewards |
| |
| Accountability--Sanctions/Interventions |
| |
| Accountability--Sanctions/Interventions--Takeovers |
| |
| Accountability--School Improvement |
| |
| Adult Basic Education |
| |
| Assessment |
| |
| Assessment--Accommodations |
| |
| Assessment--College Entrance Exams |
| |
| Assessment--Computer Based |
| |
| Assessment--Formative/Interim |
| |
| Assessment--Value Added |
| |
| At-Risk (incl. Dropout Prevention) |
| |
| At-Risk (incl. Dropout Prevention)--Alternative Education |
| |
| At-Risk (incl. Dropout Prevention)--Drugs/Alcohol |
| |
| Attendance |
| |
| Attendance--Compulsory |
| |
| Attendance--Statutory Ages (Upper and Lower) |
| |
| Attendance--Truancy |
| |
| Background Checks |
| |
| Bilingual/ESL |
| |
| Business Involvement |
| |
| Career/Technical Education |
| |
| Career/Technical Education--Career Academies/Apprenticeship |
| |
| Choice of Schools--Charter Schools |
| |
| Choice of Schools--Charter Schools--Charter Districts |
| |
| Choice of Schools--Charter Schools--Closings |
| |
| Choice of Schools--Charter Schools--Cyber Charters |
| |
| Choice of Schools--Charter Schools--Finance |
| |
| Choice of Schools--Choice/Open Enrollment |
| |
| Choice of Schools--Choice/Open Enrollment--Research |
| |
| Choice of Schools--Magnet or Specialized Schools |
| |
| Choice of Schools--Tax Credits |
| |
| Choice of Schools--Vouchers |
| |
| Civic Education |
| |
| Civic Education--Character Education |
| |
| Civic Education--Civic Knowledge and Literacy |
| |
| Civic Education--Pledge of Allegiance |
| |
| Class Size |
| |
| Curriculum |
| |
| Curriculum--Alignment |
| |
| Curriculum--Arts Education |
| |
| Curriculum--Censorship |
| |
| Curriculum--Drivers Education |
| |
| Curriculum--Excusal |
| |
| Curriculum--Family Living Education |
| |
| Curriculum--Financial Literacy/Economics Ed. |
| |
| Curriculum--Foreign Language/Sign Language |
| |
| Curriculum--Geography Education |
| |
| Curriculum--Health/Nutrition Education |
| |
| Curriculum--Language Arts |
| |
| Curriculum--Language Arts--Writing/Spelling |
| |
| Curriculum--Mathematics |
| |
| Curriculum--Physical Education |
| |
| Curriculum--Science |
| |
| Curriculum--Sex Education |
| |
| Curriculum--Social Studies/History |
| |
| Demographics--Enrollments |
| |
| Economic/Workforce Development |
| |
| Equity |
| |
| Federal |
| |
| Finance |
| |
| Finance--Bonds |
| |
| Finance--District |
| |
| Finance--Facilities |
| |
| Finance--Federal |
| |
| Finance--Funding Formulas |
| |
| Finance--Local Foundations/Funds |
| |
| Finance--Lotteries |
| |
| Finance--Private Giving |
| |
| Finance--Resource Efficiency |
| |
| Finance--State Budgets/Expenditures |
| |
| Finance--Student Fees |
| |
| Finance--Taxes/Revenues |
| |
| Finance--Taxes/Revenues--Alternative Revenues |
| |
| Governance |
| |
| Governance--Deregulation/Waivers/Home Rule |
| |
| Governance--Ethics/Conflict of Interest |
| |
| Governance--Mandates |
| |
| Governance--School Boards |
| |
| Governance--School Boards--Training |
| |
| Governance--Site-Based Management |
| |
| Governance--State Boards/Chiefs/Agencies |
| |
| Health |
| |
| Health--Child Abuse |
| |
| Health--Mental Health |
| |
| Health--Nutrition |
| |
| Health--School Based Clinics or School Nurses |
| |
| Health--Suicide Prevention |
| |
| High School |
| |
| High School--Advanced Placement |
| |
| High School--College Readiness |
| |
| High School--Dropout Rates/Graduation Rates |
| |
| High School--Dual/Concurrent Enrollment |
| |
| High School--Early Colleges/Middle Colleges |
| |
| High School--Exit Exams |
| |
| High School--GED (General Education Development) |
| |
| High School--Graduation Requirements |
| |
| High School--International Baccalaureate |
| |
| Instructional Approaches--Grading Practices |
| |
| Instructional Approaches--Homeschooling |
| |
| Integrated Services/Full-Service Schools |
| |
| International Benchmarking |
| |
| Leadership |
| |
| Leadership--District Superintendent |
| |
| Leadership--District Superintendent--Compensation and Diversified Pay |
| |
| Leadership--Principal/School Leadership |
| |
| Leadership--Principal/School Leadership--Certification and Licensure |
| |
| Leadership--Principal/School Leadership--Compensation and Diversified Pay |
| |
| Leadership--Principal/School Leadership--Evaluation and Effectiveness |
| |
| Leadership--Principal/School Leadership--Induction Programs and Mentoring |
| |
| Leadership--Principal/School Leadership--Preparation |
| |
| Leadership--Principal/School Leadership--Preparation--Alternative |
| |
| Leadership--Principal/School Leadership--Tenure |
| |
| Middle School |
| |
| Minority/Diversity Issues |
| |
| Minority/Diversity Issues--American Indian / Alaska Native / Native Hawaiian |
| |
| Minority/Diversity Issues--Hispanic |
| |
| No Child Left Behind--Adequate Yearly Progress |
| |
| No Child Left Behind--Assessment |
| |
| No Child Left Behind--Consequences for Schools |
| |
| No Child Left Behind--Finance |
| |
| No Child Left Behind--Reauthorization Issues/Waivers |
| |
| No Child Left Behind--Report Cards |
| |
| No Child Left Behind--School Support |
| |
| No Child Left Behind--Special Populations |
| |
| Online Learning--Digital/Blended Learning |
| |
| Online Learning--Virtual Schools/Courses |
| |
| P-16 or P-20 |
| |
| P-3 |
| |
| P-3 Child Care |
| |
| P-3 Content Standards and Assessment |
| |
| P-3 Early Intervention (0-3) |
| |
| P-3 Ensuring Quality |
| |
| P-3 Evaluation/Economic Benefits |
| |
| P-3 Family Involvement |
| |
| P-3 Finance |
| |
| P-3 Governance |
| |
| P-3 Grades 1-3 |
| |
| P-3 Kindergarten |
| |
| P-3 Preschool |
| |
| P-3 Teaching Quality/Professional Development |
| |
| Parent/Family |
| |
| Parent/Family--Parent Rights |
| |
| Partnerships--University/School |
| |
| Postsecondary |
| |
| Postsecondary Accountability |
| |
| Postsecondary Accountability--Accreditation |
| |
| Postsecondary Accountability--Diploma Mills |
| |
| Postsecondary Affordability--Financial Aid |
| |
| Postsecondary Affordability--Textbooks |
| |
| Postsecondary Affordability--Tuition/Fees |
| |
| Postsecondary Affordability--Tuition/Fees--Prepd/College Savings Plans |
| |
| Postsecondary Affordability--Tuition/Fees--Undocumented Immigrants |
| |
| Postsecondary Faculty--Compensation |
| |
| Postsecondary Faculty--Tenure |
| |
| Postsecondary Finance |
| |
| Postsecondary Finance--Efficiency/Performance-Based Funding |
| |
| Postsecondary Finance--Facilities |
| |
| Postsecondary Finance--Revenue and Expenditures |
| |
| Postsecondary Governance and Structures |
| |
| Postsecondary Governance and Structures--Administrative/Leadership Issues |
| |
| Postsecondary Governance and Structures--State Executives/State Agencies |
| |
| Postsecondary Institutions |
| |
| Postsecondary Institutions--Community/Technical Colleges |
| |
| Postsecondary Institutions--For-Profit/Proprietary |
| |
| Postsecondary Institutions--Private/Independent |
| |
| Postsecondary Online Instruction |
| |
| Postsecondary Participation |
| |
| Postsecondary Participation--Access |
| |
| Postsecondary Participation--Admissions Requirements |
| |
| Postsecondary Participation--Affirmative Action |
| |
| Postsecondary Students--Adults |
| |
| Postsecondary Students--Disabled |
| |
| Postsecondary Students--Foster Youth |
| |
| Postsecondary Students--Graduate/Professional |
| |
| Postsecondary Students--International |
| |
| Postsecondary Students--Military |
| |
| Postsecondary Students--Minority |
| |
| Postsecondary Success |
| |
| Postsecondary Success--Completion |
| |
| Postsecondary Success--Completion--Completion Rates (Statistics) |
| |
| Postsecondary Success--Developmental/Remediation |
| |
| Postsecondary Success--Transfer/Articulation |
| |
| Private Schools |
| |
| Privatization |
| |
| Promotion/Retention |
| |
| Public Involvement |
| |
| Reading/Literacy |
| |
| Religion |
| |
| Rural |
| |
| Scheduling/School Calendar |
| |
| Scheduling/School Calendar--Day/Class Length |
| |
| Scheduling/School Calendar--Extended Day Programs |
| |
| Scheduling/School Calendar--Summer School |
| |
| Scheduling/School Calendar--Week |
| |
| Scheduling/School Calendar--Year |
| |
| Scheduling/School Calendar--Year Round |
| |
| School Climate/Culture |
| |
| School Safety |
| |
| School Safety--Bullying Prevention/Conflict Resolution |
| |
| School Safety--Code of Conduct |
| |
| School Safety--Corporal Punishment |
| |
| School Safety--Disaster/Emergency Preparedness |
| |
| School Safety--Expulsion/Suspension |
| |
| School Safety--Sexual Harassment and Assault |
| |
| School Safety--Special Education |
| |
| School/District Structure/Operations |
| |
| School/District Structure/Operations--District Consolidation/Deconsolidation |
| |
| School/District Structure/Operations--Facilities |
| |
| School/District Structure/Operations--Food Service |
| |
| School/District Structure/Operations--Libraries |
| |
| School/District Structure/Operations--Personnel (Non-Teaching) |
| |
| School/District Structure/Operations--School Size |
| |
| School/District Structure/Operations--Shared Services |
| |
| School/District Structure/Operations--Transportation |
| |
| Service-Learning |
| |
| Special Education |
| |
| Special Education--Federal Law/Regulations |
| |
| Special Education--Finance |
| |
| Special Education--Placement |
| |
| Special Education--Transition |
| |
| Special Populations--Corrections Education |
| |
| Special Populations--Foster Care |
| |
| Special Populations--Gifted and Talented |
| |
| Special Populations--Homeless Education |
| |
| Special Populations--Migrant Education |
| |
| Special Populations--Military |
| |
| Standards |
| |
| Standards--Common Core State Standards |
| |
| State Longitudinal Data Systems |
| |
| State Policymaking |
| |
| State Policymaking--Task Forces/Commissions |
| |
| STEM |
| |
| Student Achievement |
| |
| Student Achievement--Closing the Achievement Gap |
| |
| Student Supports |
| |
| Student Supports--Counseling/Guidance |
| |
| Student Supports--Remediation |
| |
| Student Surveys |
| |
| Students |
| |
| Students--Athletics/Extracurricular Activities |
| |
| Students--Employment |
| |
| Students--K-12 Exchange Students |
| |
| Students--Mobility |
| |
| Students--Records/Rights |
| |
| Teaching Quality |
| |
| Teaching Quality--Certification and Licensure |
| |
| Teaching Quality--Certification and Licensure--Alternative |
| |
| Teaching Quality--Certification and Licensure--Assignment |
| |
| Teaching Quality--Certification and Licensure--Natl. Bd. for Prof. Teach. Stds. |
| |
| Teaching Quality--Certification and Licensure--Special Education |
| |
| Teaching Quality--Certification and Licensure--State Prof. Standards Bds. |
| |
| Teaching Quality--Certification and Licensure--Substitute Teachers |
| |
| Teaching Quality--Compensation and Diversified Pay |
| |
| Teaching Quality--Compensation and Diversified Pay--Pay-for-Performance |
| |
| Teaching Quality--Compensation and Diversified Pay--Retirement/Benefits |
| |
 | Teaching Quality--Evaluation and Effectiveness |
| |
| AL | Adopted 12/2010 | P-12 | Rewrites Chapter 290-3-2. To align the format so that all relevant information on each topic is placed together which will make the document more user-friendly. To include practices and procedures that are currently being implemented based on memoranda or requirements made effective by other sections within the department of education. To include substantive requirements in the alternative approaches to ensure that applicants selected by LEAs have demonstrated content knowledge before working with students. To provide consistency in requirements and dates across various certification approaches. To incorporate safeguards within various certification approaches to ensure that the most qualified teachers/instructional support personnel are in the schools of Alabama. To delete all references to the term 'satisfactory' as related to an individual's performance due to the subjectivity. To clarify the certification revocation process and the authority of the state superintendent regarding sanctions against a certificate or license holder. To streamline the certification process. http://www.alabamaadministrativecode.state.al.us/docs/ed/290-3-2.pdf
Title: ADC 290-3-2-.01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35
Source: www.alabamaadministrativecode.state.al.us
| |
| MI | Signed into law 12/2010 | P-12 | Provides an exception to the statutory requirement that a school board adopt and implement a performance evaluation system, if a collective bargaining agreement that prevented compliance with that requirement were in effect on January 4, 2010, until that agreement expired. Requires school districts, intermediate school districts, or public school academies to continue to conduct the evaluations for school principals that are currently required by the state department of education through the 2010-2011 school year. At the end of the 2010-2011 school year, a school district, intermediate school district, or public school academy must report the most recently completed or determined "effectiveness label" from that evaluation for each principal who is in place for 2010-2011, in a form and manner prescribed by the state department of education. http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2009-2010/publicact/htm/2010-PA-0336.htm
Title: S.B. 1509
Source: http://www.legislature.mi.gov
| |
| NJ | Issued 09/2010 | P-12 | Creates a New Jersey Educator Effectiveness Task Force for School and District-level education professionals. Charges the task force with developing recommendations on how best to measure the effectiveness of teachers and school leaders, based on defined parameters. Requires that the effectiveness recommendations include:
(1) Identified measures of student achievement — representing at least 50% of the teacher or school leader evaluation — which should be used for evaluating educator performance
(2) Demonstrated practices of effective teachers and leaders, which should comprise the remaining basis for such evaluations
(3) How these measures of effective practices should be weighted.
Directs the task force to provide the governor with its initial recommended effectiveness evaluation framework by March 2011. Provides the task force will expire upon the governor's receipt of a report containing its final recommendations. http://www.state.nj.us/governor/news/news/552010/pdf/EO-42.pdf
Title: E.O. 42
Source: www.state.nj.us
| |
| LA | Signed into law 08/2010 | P-12 | The bill links the evaluations of teachers and school administrators to student growth. The legislation requires student growth to count for 50% of teacher evaluations. The remainder of the evaluation will be based on principal observations, peer reviews and other indicators, as was previously required. The law also calls for teachers to undergo formal evaluations annually. The legislation does not affect teacher compensation, and districts will decide how teachers are rewarded and retained. The value-added model is set to become part of teacher evaluations statewide in 2012-13 school year.
http://www.legis.state.la.us/billdata/streamdocument.asp?did=711248
Title: H.B. 1033
Source: http://www.legis.state.la.us
| |
| OK | Signed into law 08/2010 | P-12 | Requires local boards to establish a policy for evaluation which by no later than the 2013-14 school year, must be revised and based upon the Oklahoma Teacher and Leader Effectiveness Evaluation System (TLE) developed by the state board. A principal, assistant principal, or other trained certified individual must be assigned by the district board to conduct evaluations and each must go through training matched to the TLE.
http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/2009-10bills/SB/SB2033_ENR.RTF
Title: S.B. 2033
Source: http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us
| |
| FL | Issued 06/2010 | P-12 | Establishes Florida's Task Force on Excellent Teaching. Directs the task force to:
(1) Review performance appraisal systems and teacher certification systems
(2) Identify initiatives and strategies that honor Florida's quality teachers for dedicating their careers to teaching
(3) Examine the positive impact teachers have on the state's ability to compete in a global economy
(4) Identify methods for establishing differential and performance-based merit pay for classroom teachers
(5) Develop workable measures of student learning gains, including special education students
(6) Formulate strategies for identifying and dealing with low-performing teachers
(7) Identifying successful strategies and initiatives for improving the recruitment, development and retention of quality teachers through:
--Reviewing teacher preparation programs
--Identifying linkages between teacher merit and student learning
--Identifying effective peer-delivered professional development and support and the essential components of new teacher support programs
--Identifying, disseminating and replicating effective teaching practices, including strategies for teachers to collaborate
--Identifying technologies proven to support teacher productivity, efficiency and effectiveness
--Identifying effective working conditions to retain beginning teachers
--Examining compensation, benefits and incentive issues
--Examining options to define, recognize and reward effective teachers
By December 2010, directs the task force to provide recommendations to the governor, president of the senate, speaker of the house and state board of education that address the goals and objectives of the task force, including recommendations regarding changes to statute and administrative rule. Provides the task force must continue in existence until its objectives are achieved but no later than June 2011, unless extended by a subsequent executive order. http://flgov.com/pdfs/orders/10-126-teaching.pdf
Title: E.O. 10-126
Source: flgov.com
| |
| OK | Signed into law 06/2010 | P-12 | This section addresses employment status of career teachers (defined in this section), probationary teachers and administrators. A principal who has received a rating of "ineffective" as measured pursuant to the Oklahoma Teacher and Leader Effectiveness Evaluation System (TLE) as set forth in Section 6 of this act for two (2) consecutive school years, shall not be reemployed by the school district, subject to the due process procedures of this section. Subject to the Teacher Due Process Act of 1990, 1. A career teacher who has been rated as "ineffective" as measured pursuant to the Oklahoma Teacher and Leader Effectiveness Evaluation System (TLE) as set forth in Section 6 of this act for two (2) consecutive school years shall be dismissed or not reemployed on the grounds of instructional ineffectiveness by the school district. 2. A career teacher who has been rated as "needs improvement" or lower pursuant to the TLE for three (3) consecutive school years shall be dismissed or not reemployed on the grounds of instructional ineffectiveness by the school district. 3. A career teacher who has not averaged a rating of at least "effective" as measured pursuant to the TLE over a five-year period shall be dismissed or not reemployed on the grounds of instructional ineffectiveness by the school district.
A probationary teacher who has been rated as "ineffective" as measured pursuant to the TLE for two (2) consecutive school years shall be dismissed or not reemployed by the school district subject to the provisions of the Teacher Due Process Act of 1990. A probationary teacher who has not attained career teacher status within a four-year period shall be dismissed or not reemployed by the school district..
http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/2009-10bills/SB/SB2033_ENR.RTF
Title: S.B. 2033
Source: http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us
| |
| AZ | Signed into law 05/2010 | P-12 | Requires the state board of education to adopt and maintain a model framework for a teacher and principal evaluation instrument that includes quantitative data on student academic progress that accounts for between 33-50% of the evaluation outcomes and best practices for professional development and evaluator training before December 15, 2011. Mandates that school districts and charter schools use an instrument that meets the data requirements established by the state board of education to annually evaluate individual teachers and principals beginning in school year 2012-13. Chapter 297
http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1040h.pdf
Title: S.B. 1040
Source: http://www.azleg.gov
| |
| CO | Signed into law 05/2010 | P-12 | Calls for the development of a teacher evaluation system in which at least 50% of the evaluation is determined by the academic growth of the teacher's students. The evaluation system must include multiple measures of student performance in conjunction with student growth expectations. Bases at least 50% of a principal's evaluation on the academic growth of students and the effectiveness or improvement in the effectiveness of his/her teachers.The new evaluation system is to be implemented statewide in 2013-14. Expectations of student academic growth must take diverse factors into consideration, including student mobility, special education status and classrooms in which 95% of the student population meets the statutory definition of "high-risk student." Standardizes "effectiveness" by directing the newly-formed State Council for Educator Effectiveness to recommend to the state board a definition of "effectiveness" (upon which the state board must adopt rules by September 2011).
http://www.leg.state.co.us/clics/clics2010a/csl.nsf/fsbillcont3/EF2EBB67D47342CF872576A80027B078?open&file=191_enr.pdf
Title: S.B. 191
Source: http://www.leg.state.co.us
| |
| CT | Signed into law 05/2010 | P-12 | Directs the state department of education to, on or before July 1, 2013, expand the state-wide public school information system as follows:
(1) Track and report data relating to student, teacher and school and district performance growth and make such information available to local and regional boards of education for use in evaluating educational performance and growth of teachers and students enrolled in public schools in the state; (2) Collect data relating to student enrollment in and graduation from institutions of higher education for any student who had been assigned a unique student identifier, provided such data is available; (3) Develop means for access to and data sharing with the data systems of public institutions of higher education in the state. http://www.cga.ct.gov/2010/ACT/PA/2010PA-00111-R00SB-00438-PA.htm
Title: S.B. 438 - Sec. 3
Source: http://www.cga.ct.gov
| |
| CT | Signed into law 05/2010 | P-12 | Directs the state board of education to adopt, on or before July 1, 2013, in consultation with the Performance Evaluation Advisory Council, guidelines for a model teacher evaluation program; requires such guidelines to provide guidance on the use of multiple indicators of student academic growth in teacher evaluations and include, but not be limited to: (1) Methods for assessing student academic growth; (2) a consideration of control factors tracked by the state-wide public school information system; and (3) minimum requirements for teacher evaluation instruments and procedures. http://www.cga.ct.gov/2010/ACT/PA/2010PA-00111-R00SB-00438-PA.htm
Title: S.B. 438 - Sec. 4
Source: http://www.cga.ct.gov
| |
| CT | Signed into law 05/2010 | P-12 | Establishes the Performance Evaluation Advisory Council within the state department of education; details the council's membership and provides that the council is responsible for (1) assisting board of education in the development and implementation of the teacher evaluation guidelines and (2) data collection and evaluation support system (see Sec. 5 of the bill). http://www.cga.ct.gov/2010/ACT/PA/2010PA-00111-R00SB-00438-PA.htm
Title: S.B. 438 - Sec. 5
Source: http://www.cga.ct.gov
| |
| MN | Signed into law 05/2010 | P-12 | Requires the Board of Teaching and the Department of Education to enter into a data sharing agreement to share educational data at the E-12 level for the limited purpose of program approval and improvement for teacher education programs.
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bin/bldbill.php?bill=H2899.5.html&session=ls86
Title: H.B. 2899
Source: https://www.revisor.mn.gov/
| |
| NY | Emergency Rule Adoption 05/2010 | P-12 | From the administrative register:
As part of its reform agenda for strengthening teaching, the board of regents has made four major changes to the current requirements for the annual professional performance reviews of teachers. First, the proposed amendment requires school districts and BOCES to include student growth as a mandatory criteria to be used in the evaluation of teachers. The proposed amendment defines student growth as a positive change in student achievement between at least two points in time as determined by the district or BOCES, taking into consideration the unique abilities or disabilities of each student, including English language learners.
Secondly, the proposed amendment requires districts and BOCES to implement the following uniform qualitative rating categories/criteria in the evaluation of its teachers: Highly Effective, Effective, Developing and Ineffective. The proposed amendment defines each of these quality rating categories/criteria.
The proposed amendment also requires that districts and BOCES provide timely and constructive feedback to the teacher. The proposed amendment requires districts and BOCES to include in their professional performance review plan a description of how it will provide timely and constructive feedback to its teachers on all criteria evaluated, including data on student growth for each of their students, the class and the school as a whole and feedback and training on how the teacher can use such data to improve instruction as part of the teacher's APPR. Where the Commissioner finds that a collective bargaining agreement was executed by a district or BOCES pursuant to Article 14 of the Civil Service Law prior to the effective date of this regulation and whose terms are inconsistent with the new provisions of this regulation, the Commissioner will grant a variance from that portion of the regulation for the duration of the existing collective bargaining agreement.
Lastly, the proposed amendment eliminates the reporting requirements which previously required school districts and BOCES to annually report information related to the district's efforts to address the performance of teachers whose performance is rated as unsatisfactory.
An emergency action is necessary for the preservation of the general welfare in order to timely implement the provisions of the proposed amendment to provide districts and BOCES with timely notice of the new requirements before the 2011-12 school year. Districts and BOCES will be required to update their professional performance review plans and may be required to negotiate with their unions on certain provisions before the start of the 2011-12 school year. Pages 1-4 of 30: http://www.dos.state.ny.us/info/register/2010/may17/pdfs/rules.pdf
Title: Title 8 NYCRR Section 100.2(o)
Source: www.dos.state.ny.us
| |
| NY | Signed into law 05/2010 | P-12 | From "Summary of Specific Provisions" on Assembly Web site:
Section one of the bill would add a new S3012-c of the Education law, establishing the requirements for new, more rigorous annual professional performance reviews (APPRs) of classroom teachers and building principals. The new S3012-c would provide for a phase-in of the new comprehensive evaluation system, beginning for certain teachers and principals in grades 4-8 in the 2011-12 school year. The evaluations would generate a single composite effectiveness score based on multiple measures of effectiveness and would have to be made a significant factor in employment decisions, including but not limited to, promotion, retention, tenure determination, termination, and supplemental compensation, as well as teacher and principal professional development (including coaching, induction support and differentiated professional development).
The phase-in would provide for an orderly process under which the new evaluation process will first apply to teachers in common branch subjects or English language arts (ELA) or mathematics, for whom the grades 3-8 state assessments are available for use in measuring student growth and their principals, and then be expanded out to all teachers and principals. As the requirements are phased in, evaluations of teachers and principals will be required to base 40% of the composite effectiveness score on student achievement measures. In addition, the percentage of the 40% that must be based on student growth will increase when the state implements a value-added growth model. An advisory committee would be established so that input received from practitioners in the field as standards are developed for teachers of subjects for which there are no state assessments in multiple years (and their principals). Specifically, the phase-in would be as follows:
* In 2011-12, only teachers in grades 4-8 common branch subjects and ELA and math and the principals of their schools will be subject to the new evaluation standards. These are the grades and subjects in which state assessments have been in place. Forty percent of their evaluation must be based on student achievement measures, including 20% based on student growth on the state assessments or other measures of student growth prescribed by the state, and 20% based on other rigorous and comparable measures of student achievement that are locally established consistent with standards prescribed in commissioner's regulations, with student performance in the 2010-11 school year used as the baseline. The remaining 60% of the score must be based on other locally selected measures, developed through collective bargaining, consistent with standards prescribed in commissioner's regulations.
* In 2012-13, the new evaluation standards become applicable to all classroom teachers and building principals. If the Regents have not adopted a value-added growth model for the 2012-13 school year, all teachers become subject to the requirement that applied to common branch and ELA and math teachers in grades 4-8 in 2011-12: 40% of their evaluation must be based on student achievement measures, including 20%
based on student growth on the state assessments or other measures of student growth prescribed by the state, and 20% based on other rigorous and comparable measures of student achievement that are locally established consistent with commissioner's regulations, with student performance in the 2011-2012 school year used as the baseline. The remaining 60% of the score must be based on other locally selected measures, developed through collective bargaining, consistent with the standards prescribed in commissioner's regulations.
* Commencing in the first school year for which the Regents have adopted a value-added growth model, which can be as early as 2012-13, the percentage of the evaluation that must be based on state assessment
measures of student growth increases from 20% to 25%.
In addition, the new S3012-c would:
* Require that appropriate training be provided to each individual responsible for conducting an evaluation of a teacher or building principal pursuant to the revised APPR.
* Establish in statute requirements for teacher or principal improvement plans that must be developed for any teacher or principal who receives a rating of "developing" or "ineffective," including: identification of needed areas of improvement; timeline for achieving improvement; the manner in which improvement will be assessed; and, where appropriate, differentiated activities to support improvement in those areas.
* Require a locally established appeals procedure in each school district or BOCES under which the employee may only challenge the substance of the APPR, the district's or BOCES' adherence to the standards and methodologies for such reviews, adherence to the Commissioner's regulations and locally negotiated procedures, and the issuance or implementation of a teacher or principal improvement plan.
* Require the Department to consult with an advisory committee (consisting of representatives of teachers, principals, superintendents, school boards, school district and BOCES officials, and other interested
parties) (1) prior to recommending that the Board of Regents approve use of a value-added growth model in evaluations; and (2) in developing regulations for the APPR.
* For purposes of disciplinary proceedings under S3020 and S3020-a, define a "pattern of ineffective teaching or performance" as two consecutive annual ratings of "ineffective."
* Require that all collective bargaining agreements for teachers and building principals entered into after July 1, 2010, be consistent with these new provisions. Provides that any conflicting provisions of collective bargaining agreements in effect on July 1, 2010. are not abrogated and remain in effect until there is a successor agreement. Preserves the right of local collective bargaining representatives to negotiate evaluation procedures with a school district or BOCES per the Civil Service Law.
Section 2 of the bill would amend Education Law S3020, on contractual alternatives to tenured teacher hearing procedures under S3020-a, to require that collective bargaining agreements with contractual alternatives that become effective after July 1, 2010, provide for an expedited hearing process before a single hearing officer on charges of incompetence based upon a pattern of ineffective teaching and provided that a pattern of ineffective teaching shall constitute very significant evidence of incompetence which may form the basis for just cause removal.
Section 3 of the bill would amend Education Law 53020-a(2)(c) to remove the employee's option for either a three-member panel or a single hearing officer, and require a single hearing officer where the charges of
incompetence are based solely upon a pattern of ineffective teaching.
Section 4 of the bill would amend Education Law S3020-a(3)(a) to require the commissioner to notify the employing board and the employee of the hearing officer's record in his or her last five cases commencing and completing hearings in a timely manner.
Section 5 of the bill would add a new subparagraph (1-a) to S3020-a(3)(c) to provide for an expedited hearing under S3020-a where charges of incompetence are brought based upon a pattern of ineffective teaching or performance. As with the contractual alternatives, the bill provides that a pattern of ineffective teaching or performance constitutes very significant evidence of incompetence, which may form the basis for just cause removal of a teacher or building principal. The charges in such an expedited hearing would be required to allege that the employing board developed and implemented a teacher or principal improvement plan for the employee following the first rating of "ineffective" and in the preceding evaluation if the teacher was rated "developing" in that year.
Under the expedited hearing process:
* The hearing must be completed within 60 days after the pre-hearing conference, with limitations on adjournments. The hearing would be held before a single hearing officer.
* The hearing would have to be commenced 7 days after the pre-hearing conference.
* The hearing officer would be required to establish a schedule for the hearing at the pre-hearing conference to ensure compliance with the 60-day timeline and to ensure equitable distribution of days between the employing board and the employee.
* Hearing officers would be authorized to grant an adjournment that would extend the hearing 60 days only if it is limited to circumstances beyond the control of the requesting party and an injustice would result
if no adjournment is granted.
* The commissioner would be authorized to enforce the time limitations for such expedited hearings by removing hearing officers who demonstrate a continued failure to commence and complete expedited hearings in a timely manner from the list of hearing officers available for appointment to serve in such expedited hearings.
The bill also supplies definitions of "board of education," "school district" and "superintendent of schools" for purposes of new S211-e of the Education Law.
http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?default_fld=%0D%0A&bn=A11171&Summary=Y&Actions=Y&Memo=Y&Text=Y
Title: A.B. 11171, Section 1-5
Source: assembly.state.ny.us
| |
| MD | Signed into law 04/2010 | P-12 | Extends the probationary period of employment (nontenure) for certificated employees from 2 years to 3 years, requires that nontenured certificated employees be evaluated annually, and requires that student growth data be used in teacher and principal performance evaluations. If a nontenured certificated employee is not on track to qualify for tenure at any formal evaluation point, a mentor must promptly be assigned and additional professional development provided. For tenured teachers who move to another district, that employee is to be granted tenure if his/her contract is renewed after one year as long as the final evaluation from the preceding employer is satisfactory or better and there has been no break in service between the two systems of longer than one year. Local districts may extend the probationary period for such an employee for a second year if the employee does not meet performance evaluation criteria but demonstrates a strong potential for improvement. The new tenure policy only applies to an employee with a date of employment that begins on July 1, 2010, or later. Adds "student growth" to the teacher evaluation measures. Requires the state board to adopt regulations that establish general standards for performance evaluations for teachers and principals that include observations, clear standards, rigor, and claims and evidence of observed instruction. These regulations are required to include model performance evaluation criteria. The state board is required to solicit input from local districts. Requires county boards to establish performance evaluation criteria that includes data on student growth as a significant component of the evaluation and as one of multiple measures -- that are mutually agreed on by the local system and the exclusive employee representative. Evaluations may not be based solely on an existing or newly created examination or assessment, although such an assessment may be used as one of the multiple measures. No single criterion may account for more than 35% of the total performance evaluation criteria. If agreement on the model performance evaluation criteria is not reached between the local system and the exclusive employee representative, this takes effect in the local system 6 months following the final adoption of the state board regulations. http://mlis.state.md.us/2010rs/bills/hb/hb1263e.pdf
Title: H.B. 1263 - Tenure and Evaluation Sections
Source: http://mlis.state.md.us
| |
| ME | Signed into law 04/2010 | P-12 | Eliminates the prohibition on the use of student assessment data in the establishment of models for evaluation of the professional performance of teachers; extends the models for evaluation developed by the Department of Education to principals; requires that the models include multiple measures. http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/bills/bills_124th/chapters/PUBLIC646.asp
Title: S.B. 704
Source: http://www.mainelegislature.org
| |
| RI | Adopted 04/2010 | P-12 | Establishes rules regarding the implementation of educator evaluation system standards.
Title: Board of Regents Rules
Source: Lexis-Nexis/StateNet
| |
| CO | Issued 03/2010 | P-12 | The purpose of the Council is to provide a forum for considering options and providing recommendations to ensure that every educator (teachers and principals) is: Evaluated using multiple fair, transparent, timely, rigorous, and valid methods, at least 50% of which is determined by the academic growth of their students; afforded a meaningful opportunity to improve their effectiveness; and provided the means to share effective practices with other educators statewide.
http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite?blobcol=urldata&blobheader=application%2Fpdf&blobheadername1=Content-Disposition&blobheadername2=MDT-Type&blobheadervalue1=inline%3B+filename%3D780%2F593%2FB+2010-001+%28RTTT%29+Search.pdf&blobheadervalue2=abinary%3B+charset%3DUTF-8&blobkey=id&blobtable=MungoBlobs&blobwhere=1251606172565&ssbinary=true
Title: Exec. Order B 2010-001
Source: http://www.colorado.gov
| |
| NM | Signed into law 03/2010 | P-12 | Adds the use of certain professional development to the standards of annual performance evaluation for teachers; relates to accountability, peer intervention and mentoring.The state education department will adopt criteria and minimum highly objective uniform statewide standards for the annual performance evaluation of licensed school employees. The professional development plan for teachers will include documentation on how a teachers incorporate the results of required professional development in the classroom. At the beginning of each school year, teachers and principals shall devise professional development plans for the coming year, and performance evaluations shall be based in part on how well the professional development plan was carried out.
http://nmlegis.gov/Sessions/10%20Regular/final/SB0111.pdf
Title: S.B. 111
Source: http://nmlegis.gov/
| |
| NM | Signed into law 03/2010 | P-12 | District must provide for the mentorship and evaluation of level one teachers. At the end of each year and at the end of the license period, the teacher shall be evaluated for competency. If the teacher fails to demonstrate satisfactory progress and competence annually, the teacher may be terminated. If the teacher has not demonstrated satisfactory progress and competence by the end of the five-year period, the teacher shall not be granted a level two license.
http://nmlegis.gov/Sessions/10%20Regular/final/HB0071.pdf
Title: H.B. 71
Source: http://nmlegis.gov/
| |
| SD | Signed into law 03/2010 | P-12 | Establishes standards for teaching; requires an annual teacher evaluation; provides for the development of a model evaluation instrument.
http://legis.state.sd.us/sessions/2010/Bills/SB24ENR.pdf
Title: S.B. 24
Source: http://legis.state.sd.us
| |
| TN | Signed into law 03/2010 | P-12 | Requires that evaluations be part of a teacher's permanent record, and as such to be available for review upon request by the teacher. Chapter 731
http://www.capitol.tn.gov/Bills/106/Bill/HB2810.pdf
Title: H.B. 2810
Source: http://www.capitol.tn.gov
| |
| NV | Signed into law 02/2010 | P-12 | Eliminates the prohibition on the use of pupil achievement data for the evaluation and discipline of teachers, paraprofessionals and other employees; provides that such information must be considered, but must not be the sole criterion; removes the prohibition and makes the state eligible to apply for a competitive grant from the Race to the Top Fund. Chapter 5
http://www.leg.state.nv.us/26th2010Special/Bills/SB/SB2_EN.pdf
Title: S.B. 2B
Source: http://www.leg.state.nv.us
| |
| CA | Signed into law 01/2010 | P-12 | Adds Section 10601.6 to the education code. Permits districts to use data in the California Education Information System and/or any other data system to evaluate teachers and administrators and to make employment decisions, but only if these decisions comply with Chapter 10.7 (commencing with Section 3540) of Division 4 of Title 1 of the Government Code. Pages 5-6 of 32: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/sen/sb_0001-0050/sbx5_1_bill_20100107_chaptered.pdf
Specifies that these provisions become operative only if Senate Bill 4 of the Fifth Extraordinary Session of 2009-10 is also enacted (full text http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/sen/sb_0001-0050/sbx5_4_bill_20100107_chaptered.pdf). S.B. 4E was also enacted January 7, 2010.
Title: S.B. 1E - Section 2
Source: www.leginfo.ca.gov
| |
| IL | Signed into law 01/2010 | P-12 | Amends 105 ILCS 5/2-3.25g. After effective date, bars districts, joint agreements of districts or regional superintendents from seeking a waiver or modification of a mandate requiring (i) student performance
data to be a significant factor in teacher or principal evaluations or (ii) teachers and principals to be rated using the categories of "excellent", "proficient", "needs improvement" or "unsatisfactory". Requires any previously authorized waiver or modification from such requirements to terminate.
Creates new 105 ILCS 5/24A-2.5. Defines "evaluator" to include an adminstrator or other qualified individuals. Allows Chicago district to require department chairs to evaluate teachers in their department(s), provided the district bargains with its teacher bargaining representative over the impact of such a requirement on department chairs. Defines "implementation date" : (1) for Chicago, as at least 300 schools by September 2012 and the remaining schools by September 2013; (2) for other districts receiving a Race to the Top grant or School Improvement [under ESEA/NCLB] grant, as the date specified in those grants for implementing a teacher and principal evaluation system incorporating student growth; (3) for the lowest performing 20% of districts outside Chicago (to be determined by state superintendent), September 2015; (4) for all other districts outside Chicago, September 2016.
Amends 105 ILCS 5/24A-3. Requires evaluators to participate in inservice training on evaluating certified personnel before performing any evaluation, and at least once during each certificate renewal cycle. Requires any evaluator performing an evaluation after September 1, 2012 to first complete a state board-approved prequalification program. Requires that the program include rigorous training and an independent observer's determination that the evaluator's ratings properly align to state board-established requirements.
Amends 105 ILCS 5/24A-4. Directs every district, by its applicable implementation date, in good faith cooperation with its teachers or teachers' exclusive bargaining representatives, to incorporate student growth data/indicators as a significant factor in teacher performance ratings and its evaluation plan for all teachers. Specifies criteria that each district's evaluation plan must meet, including among others the criteria other than student growth that will be used in evaluating the teacher, and the weight that each will have. Describes a joint committee, composed equally of district- and teacher- (or collective bargaining unit-) selected representation, that each district must use to incorporate the use of student growth data in rating teacher performance into the evaluation plan. Provides that if a joint committee does not reach agreement on the plan within 180 days of the committee's first meeting, the district must implement the model evaluation plan set forth in Section 24A-7; provides that if Chicago's joint committee does not reach agreement on the plan within 90 days of the committee's first meeting, the district will not be required to implement any aspect of the model evaluation plan and may implement its last best proposal.
Amends 24A-5. By September 2012, requires each district to establish a teacher evaluation plan that ensures evaluations at least once every school year for each teacher not in contractual continued service, and at least every two school years for each teacher in contractual continued service [i.e., untenured and tenured teachers]. Requires that any teacher in contractual continued service who receives a "needs improvement" or "unsatisfactory" performance rating be evaluated at least once in the school year following the receipt of such rating. Specifies that nothing bars a principal from evaluating any teachers within a school during
his or her first year as principal of such school. Identifies performance ratings (terms) that must be applied to teachers in contractual continued service before and after September 2012. Within 30 days of completion of an evaluation rating a teacher in contractual continued service as "needs improvement", requires the evaluator, in consultation with the teacher, to develop a professional development plan, directed
to the areas that need improvement and any supports that the district will provide to address the areas needing improvement. Requires that a teacher in contractual continued service who receives an "unsatisfactory" evaluation rating participate in a remediation plan, including 90 days of in-classroom remediation, unless an applicable collective bargaining agreement provides for a shorter duration. Requires the evaluator to conduct a mid-point and final evaluation during and at the end of the remediation period. Specifies that nothing in statute prohibits the dismissal or non-renewal of teachers not in contractual continued service
for any reason not prohibited by applicable employment, labor and civil rights laws.
Amends 24A-7. Directs the state board to adopt rules:
(1) Relating to the methods for measuring student growth (including, but not limited to, limitations on the age of useable data; the amount of data needed to reliably and validly measure growth for the purpose of teacher and principal evaluations; and whether and at what time annual state assessments may be used as one of multiple measures of student growth)
(2) Defining the term "significant factor" for purposes of including consideration of student growth in performance ratings
(3) Controlling for such factors as student characteristics (including students receiving special education and English Language Learner services), student attendance, and student mobility to best measure the impact that a teacher, principal, school and district have on students' academic achievement
(4) Establishing minimum requirements for district teacher and principal evaluation instruments and procedures
(5) Establishing a model evaluation plan for use by districts, in which student growth must comprise 50% of the performance rating.
Specifies that the rules may not preclude the Chicago district from using an annual state assessment as the sole measure of student growth for purposes of teacher or principal evaluations. Requires that the rules be developed through collaboration with a Performance Evaluation Advisory Council, whose members must be selected by the state superintendent and include representatives of teacher unions and school district
management, persons with expertise in performance evaluation processes and systems, as well as other stakeholders. Requires that the council meet at least quarterly until June 30, 2017.
Creates new 105 ILCS 5/24A-7.1. Prohibits disclosure of public school teacher, principal and superintendent performance evaluations.
Amends 105 ILCS 5/24A-15. Provides that, effective September 2012, each district's principal evaluation plan must rate the principal's performance as "excellent", "proficient", "needs improvement" or "unsatisfactory", and must ensure every principal is evaluated at least once every school year. Repeals provision requiring that principal evaluations align with the Illinois Professional Standards for
School Leaders or research-based district standards; replaces with provision that principal evaluations align with research-based standards established by administrative rule. Effective September 2012, requires principal evaluations to provide for the use of data and indicators on student growth as a significant factor in rating performance.
Adds new 105 ILCS 5/24A-20. Directs the state board, with the Performance Evaluation Advisory Council, to develop and implement the following data collection and evaluation assessment and support systems:
(1) A system to annually collect and publish data by district and school on teacher and administrator performance evaluation outcomes
(2) Both a teacher and principal model evaluation template that allow customization by districts that does not conflict with statutory requirements
(3) An evaluator pre-qualification program based on the model teacher evaluation template
(4) An evaluator training program based on the model teacher evaluation template
(5) A superintendent training program based on the model principal evaluation template
(6) One or more instruments to provide feedback to principals on the school's instructional environment
(7) A state board-provided or -approved technical assistance system that supports districts in the development and implementation of teacher and principal evaluation systems
(8) Web-based systems and tools supporting implementation of the model templates and the evaluator pre-qualification and training programs
(9) A process for measuring and reporting correlations between local principal and teacher evaluations and (A) student growth in tested grades and subjects and (B) teacher retention rates
(10) A process for assessing whether district evaluation systems developed pursuant to this Act and that consider student growth as a significant factor in teacher and principal performance ratings are valid and reliable, contribute to the development of staff, and improve student achievement outcomes. By September 2014, requires that a research-based study be issued (a) assessing such systems for validity and reliability, contribution to the development of staff, and improvement of student performance and (b) recommending, based on the results of this study, any changes that need to be incorporated into teacher and principal evaluation systems that consider student growth as a significant factor in the rating performance.
Specifies that these data collection and support systems must be developed by September 30, 2011 if Illinois receives a Race to the Top grant, and by September 30, 2012 if the state does not receive a Race to the Top grant. Adds that aforementioned items (3) and (4) (evaluator pre-qualification program and evaluator training program, both based on the model teacher evaluation template) must be developed by September 30, 2011, regardless of whether the state is awarded a Race to the Top grant. Also directs the state board (by September 2011 if the state does receive and by September 2012 if the state does not receive a Race to the Top grant) to execute or contract for the execution of the assessment in aforementioned item (10) above to determine whether local evaluation systems developed pursuant to this Act have been valid and reliable, contributed to the development of staff, and improved student performance.
Requires districts to submit data and information to the state board on teacher and principal performance evaluations and evaluation plans. Requires that such data include: (i) data on the performance rating given to all teachers in contractual continued service, (ii) data on district recommendations to renew or not renew teachers not in contractual continued service, and (iii) data on the performance rating given to all principals. Provides that if the state board does not timely fulfill any of the requirements set forth in Sections 24A-7 and 24A-20, and adequate and sustainable federal, state or other funds are not provided to the state board and districts to meet their responsibilities, the applicable implementation date must be postponed by the number of calendar days equal to those needed by the state board to fulfill such requirements and for the
adequate and sustainable funds to be provided to the state board and districts.
Amends 105 ILCS 5/34-8, regarding duties of the state superintendent. By September 2012, directs the superintendent or his/her designee to develop a written principal evaluation plan that addresses elements identified in 105 ILCS 5/24A-15.
Amends 105 ILCS 5/34-85c. Amends provisions that authorize districts and collective bargaining agents to establish alternative procedures for teacher evaluation, remediation and removal for cause after remediation. Provides that by September 2012, (i) any alternative procedures must include provisions whereby student performance data is a significant factor in teacher evaluation and (ii) teachers are rated as "excellent", "proficient", "needs improvement" or "unsatisfactory". http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/publicacts/96/PDF/096-0861.pdf
Title: S.B. 315
Source: www.ilga.gov
| |
| MI | Signed into law 01/2010 | P-12 | Part of Michigan's Race to the Top Legislation. Requires the Center for Educational Performance and Information (located in the Office of the State Budget Director within the Department of Management and Budget) to create and implement a teacher identifier system with the ability to match an individual teacher and individual students that the teacher has taught. The system must do all of the following: (1) make accessible annual state assessment records of individual pupils; (2) enable individual pupil academic achievement data, including growth in academic achievement, to be correlated to each teacher who has taught the pupil; and (3) enable local board members, teachers and school administrators to have access to the data.
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2009-2010/publicact/htm/2009-PA-0203.htm
Title: S.B. 926 - Sec. 94a(1)(i)
Source: http://www.legislature.mi.gov
| |
| MI | Signed into law 01/2010 | P-12 | Part of Michigan's Race to the Top Legislation. Requires local school boards, working with teachers and school administrators, to implement a rigorous, transparent, and fair performance evaluation system that evaluates job performance at least annually; establishes clear approaches to measuring student growth and provides teachers and school administrators with relevant data on student growth; and evaluates job performance taking into account multiple rating categories with student growth as a significant factor. http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2009-2010/publicact/htm/2009-PA-0205.htm
Title: S.B. 981 - Sec. 1249
Source: http://www.legislature.mi.gov
| |
| MI | Signed into law 01/2010 | P-12 | Part of Michigan's Race to the Top Legislation. Requires local boards of education to work with teachers and administrators to develop a system to evaluate student academic growth using local assessment and statewide tests. Requires all teachers and administrators to be reviewed annually and given timely feedback. Requires districts use data to: evaluate the effectiveness of teachers and administrators, determine eligibility for promotion or retention, and grant tenure and use during dismissal to help determine the effectiveness of teachers.
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2009-2010/publicact/htm/2009-PA-0205.htm
Title: S.B. 981 - Sec. 1249
Source: . http://www.legislature.mi.gov
| |
| TN | Signed into law 01/2010 | P-12 | Enacts the Tennessee First to the Top Act of 2010. From fiscal note: Authorizes the Commissioner of Education to move any public
school or local education agency (LEA) into or out of a newly created "Achievement School District" (ASD) if the school is in the fifth year of improvement status or at any time a Title I school meets the U.S. Department of Education's definition of "persistently lowest achieving schools." Authorizes the Commissioner to contract with an individual, government entity, or nonprofit entity to manage the day-to-day operations of the ASD. The Administrator of the ASD may apply to the Commissioner for a waiver of any state board rule that hinders the ability of the school or LEA to meet adequate yearly progress (AYP) benchmarks. Authorizes the administrator of the ASD to determine whether any teacher previously assigned to a school in the ASD will have the option of continuing to teach at that school. Any teacher not retained in the ASD will remain an employee of the LEA, subject to provisions in current law for dismissal. Eliminates current law restriction on use of specific teacher's effect on the educational progress of students in formal personnel evaluations. Schools or LEAs will remain in the ASD until achieving AYP for three consecutive years, at which time they will transition back to their pre-ASD status.
http://www.capitol.tn.gov/Bills/106/Fiscal/HB7010.pdf
Title: S.B. 7005A - H.B. 7010A
Source: http://www.capitol.tn.gov
| |
| TN | Signed into law 01/2010 | P-12 | Creates a Teacher Evaluation Advisory Committee (TEAC) composed of 15 members, including the Commissioner of Education, the Executive Director of the State Board of Education, the Chairs of the Education Committees of the Senate and House of Representatives, and 11 other members appointed by the Governor. Requires the TEAC to develop and recommend to the Board guidelines and criteria for annual evaluation of all teachers and principals, including a grievance procedure. Effective no later than July 1, 2011, requires the Board to adopt policies to implement the recommended guidelines and criteria. Annual evaluation of principals shall be based in part on student achievement data. Student achievement data will make up 50% of the evaluation criteria, with 35% on student growth; 15% on other measures of achievement. Authorizes LEAs to develop their own proposed salary schedules, subject to approval by the Commissioner. No salary schedule may reduce the salary of any teacher employed at the time the salary schedule is adopted. Grants any tenured teacher the right to a hearing before an impartial hearing officer selected by the local board of education prior to termination.
Link to fiscal note: http://www.capitol.tn.gov/Bills/106/Fiscal/HB7010.pdf
Title: S.B. 7005A - H.B. 7010A
Source: http://www.capitol.tn.gov
| |
| Teaching Quality--Induction Programs and Mentoring |
| |
| Teaching Quality--Paraprofessionals |
| |
| Teaching Quality--Preparation |
| |
| Teaching Quality--Professional Development |
| |
| Teaching Quality--Recruitment and Retention |
| |
| Teaching Quality--Recruitment and Retention--At-Risk Schools |
| |
| Teaching Quality--Recruitment and Retention--High-Needs Subjects |
| |
| Teaching Quality--Reduction in Force |
| |
| Teaching Quality--Teacher Rights |
| |
| Teaching Quality--Tenure or Continuing Contract |
| |
| Teaching Quality--Unions/Collective Bargaining |
| |
| Teaching Quality--Working Conditions |
| |
| Technology |
| |
| Technology--Devices/Software/Hardware |
| |
| Technology--Equitable Access |
| |
| Technology--Funding Issues |
| |
| Technology--Research/Evaluation |
| |
| Textbooks and Open Source |
| |
| Whole-School Reform Models |
| |