Bill Text: MI HB5776 | 2011-2012 | 96th Legislature | Engrossed
Bill Title: Education; school districts; written parental consent to place student in a classroom with a teacher rated ineffective on most recent year-end evaluation; require. Amends secs. 1249 & 1249a of 1976 PA 451 (MCL 380.1249 & 380.1249a).
Spectrum: Bipartisan Bill
Status: (Introduced - Dead) 2012-12-12 - Referred To Committee On Education [HB5776 Detail]
Download: Michigan-2011-HB5776-Engrossed.html
HB-5776, As Passed House, December 6, 2012
SUBSTITUTE FOR
HOUSE BILL NO. 5776
A bill to amend 1976 PA 451, entitled
"The revised school code,"
by amending sections 1249 and 1249a (MCL 380.1249 and 380.1249a),
section 1249 as amended and section 1249a as added by 2011 PA 102.
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN ENACT:
Sec. 1249. (1) Not later than September 1, 2011, and subject
to subsection (9), with the involvement of teachers and school
administrators, the board of a school district or intermediate
school district or board of directors of a public school academy
shall adopt and implement for all teachers and school
administrators a rigorous, transparent, and fair performance
evaluation system that does all of the following:
(a) Evaluates the teacher's or school administrator's job
performance at least annually while providing timely and
constructive feedback.
(b) Establishes clear approaches to measuring student growth
and provides teachers and school administrators with relevant data
on student growth.
(c) Evaluates a teacher's or school administrator's job
performance, using multiple rating categories that take into
account data on student growth as a significant factor. For these
purposes, student growth shall be measured by national, state, or
local assessments and other objective criteria. If the performance
evaluation system implemented by a school district, intermediate
school district, or public school academy under this section does
not already include the rating of teachers as highly effective,
effective, minimally effective, and ineffective, then the school
district, intermediate school district, or public school academy
shall revise the performance evaluation system within 60 days after
the effective date of the amendatory act that added this sentence
to ensure that it rates teachers as highly effective, effective,
minimally effective, or ineffective.
(d) Uses the evaluations, at a minimum, to inform decisions
regarding all of the following:
(i) The effectiveness of teachers and school administrators,
ensuring that they are given ample opportunities for improvement.
(ii) Promotion, retention, and development of teachers and
school administrators, including providing relevant coaching,
instruction support, or professional development.
(iii) Whether to grant tenure or full certification, or both, to
teachers and school administrators using rigorous standards and
streamlined, transparent, and fair procedures.
(iv) Removing ineffective tenured and untenured teachers and
school administrators after they have had ample opportunities to
improve, and ensuring that these decisions are made using rigorous
standards and streamlined, transparent, and fair procedures.
(2) Beginning with the 2013-2014 school year, the board of a
school district or intermediate school district or board of
directors of a public school academy shall ensure that the
performance evaluation system for teachers meets all of the
following:
(a) The performance evaluation system shall include at least
an annual year-end evaluation for all teachers. An annual year-end
evaluation shall meet all of the following:
(i) For the annual year-end evaluation for the 2013-2014 school
year, at least 25% of the annual year-end evaluation shall be based
on student growth and assessment data. For the annual year-end
evaluation for the 2014-2015 school year, at least 40% of the
annual year-end evaluation shall be based on student growth and
assessment data. Beginning with the annual year-end evaluation for
the 2015-2016 school year, at least 50% of the annual year-end
evaluation shall be based on student growth and assessment data.
All student growth and assessment data shall be measured using the
student growth assessment tool that is required under legislation
enacted by the legislature under subsection (6) after review of the
recommendations
contained in the report of the governor's council
on
Michigan council for educator effectiveness submitted under
subsection (5).
(ii) If there are student growth and assessment data available
for a teacher for at least 3 school years, the annual year-end
evaluation shall be based on the student growth and assessment data
for the most recent 3-consecutive-school-year period. If there are
not student growth and assessment data available for a teacher for
at least 3 school years, the annual year-end evaluation shall be
based on all student growth and assessment data that are available
for the teacher.
(iii) The annual year-end evaluation shall include specific
performance goals that will assist in improving effectiveness for
the next school year and are developed by the school administrator
or his or her designee conducting the evaluation, in consultation
with the teacher, and any recommended training identified by the
school administrator or designee, in consultation with the teacher,
that would assist the teacher in meeting these goals. For a teacher
described in subdivision (b), the school administrator or designee
shall develop, in consultation with the teacher, an individualized
development plan that includes these goals and training and is
designed to assist the teacher to improve his or her effectiveness.
(b) The performance evaluation system shall include a midyear
progress report for a teacher who is in the first year of the
probationary period prescribed by section 1 of article II of 1937
(Ex Sess) PA 4, MCL 38.81, or who received a rating of minimally
effective or ineffective in his or her most recent annual year-end
evaluation. The midyear progress report shall be used as a
supplemental tool to gauge a teacher's improvement from the
preceding school year and to assist a teacher to improve. All of
the following apply to the midyear progress report:
(i) The midyear progress report shall be based at least in part
on student achievement.
(ii) The midyear progress report shall be aligned with the
teacher's individualized development plan under subdivision (a)(iii).
(iii) The midyear progress report shall include specific
performance goals for the remainder of the school year that are
developed by the school administrator conducting the annual year-
end evaluation or his or her designee and any recommended training
identified by the school administrator or designee that would
assist the teacher in meeting these goals. At the midyear progress
report, the school administrator or designee shall develop, in
consultation with the teacher, a written improvement plan that
includes these goals and training and is designed to assist the
teacher to improve his or her rating.
(iv) The midyear progress report shall not take the place of an
annual year-end evaluation.
(c) The performance evaluation system shall include classroom
observations to assist in the performance evaluations. All of the
following apply to these classroom observations:
(i) Except as provided in this subdivision, the manner in which
a classroom observation is conducted shall be prescribed in the
evaluation tool for teachers described in subdivision (d).
(ii) A classroom observation shall include a review of the
teacher's lesson plan and the state curriculum standard being used
in the lesson and a review of pupil engagement in the lesson.
(iii) A classroom observation does not have to be for an entire
class period.
(iv) Unless a teacher has received a rating of effective or
highly effective on his or her 2 most recent annual year-end
evaluations, there shall be multiple classroom observations of the
teacher each school year.
(d) For the purposes of conducting annual year-end evaluations
under the performance evaluation system, the school district,
intermediate school district, or public school academy shall adopt
and implement the state evaluation tool for teachers that is
required under legislation enacted by the legislature under
subsection (6) after review of the recommendations contained in the
report
of the governor's council on Michigan
council for educator
effectiveness submitted under subsection (5). However, if a school
district, intermediate school district, or public school academy
has a local evaluation tool for teachers that is consistent with
the state evaluation tool, the school district, intermediate school
district, or public school academy may conduct annual year-end
evaluations for teachers using that local evaluation tool.
(e) The performance evaluation system shall assign an
effectiveness rating to each teacher of highly effective,
effective, minimally effective, or ineffective, based on his or her
score on the annual year-end evaluation described in this
subsection.
(f) As part of the performance evaluation system, and in
addition to the requirements of section 1526, a school district,
intermediate school district, or public school academy is
encouraged to assign a mentor or coach to each teacher who is
described in subdivision (b).
(g) The performance evaluation system may allow for exemption
of student growth data for a particular pupil for a school year
upon the recommendation of the school administrator conducting the
annual year-end evaluation or his or her designee and approval of
the school district superintendent or his or her designee,
intermediate superintendent or his or her designee, or chief
administrator of the public school academy, as applicable.
(h) The performance evaluation system shall provide that, if a
teacher is rated as ineffective on 3 consecutive annual year-end
evaluations, the school district, public school academy, or
intermediate school district shall dismiss the teacher from his or
her employment. This subdivision does not affect the ability of a
school district, intermediate school district, or public school
academy to dismiss an ineffective teacher from his or her
employment regardless of whether the teacher is rated as
ineffective on 3 consecutive annual year-end evaluations.
(i) The performance evaluation system shall provide that, if a
teacher is rated as highly effective on 3 consecutive annual year-
end evaluations, the school district, intermediate school district,
or public school academy may choose to conduct a year-end
evaluation biennially instead of annually. However, if a teacher is
not rated as highly effective on 1 of these biennial year-end
evaluations, the teacher shall again be provided with annual year-
end evaluations.
(j) The performance evaluation system shall provide that, if a
teacher who is not in a probationary period prescribed by section 1
of article II of 1937 (Ex Sess) PA 4, MCL 38.81, is rated as
ineffective on an annual year-end evaluation, the teacher may
request a review of the evaluation and the rating by the school
district superintendent, intermediate superintendent, or chief
administrator of the public school academy, as applicable. The
request for a review must be submitted in writing within 20 days
after the teacher is informed of the rating. Upon receipt of the
request, the school district superintendent, intermediate
superintendent, or chief administrator of the public school
academy, as applicable, shall review the evaluation and rating and
may make any modifications as appropriate based on his or her
review. However, the performance evaluation system shall not allow
for a review as described in this subdivision more than twice in a
3-school-year period.
(3) Beginning with the 2013-2014 school year, the board of a
school district or intermediate school district or board of
directors of a public school academy shall ensure that the
performance evaluation system for building-level school
administrators and for central office-level school administrators
who are regularly involved in instructional matters meets all of
the following:
(a) The performance evaluation system shall include at least
an annual year-end evaluation for all school administrators
described in this subsection by the school district superintendent
or his or her designee, intermediate superintendent or his or her
designee, or chief administrator of the public school academy, as
applicable, except that a superintendent or chief administrator
shall be evaluated by the board or board of directors.
(b) For the annual year-end evaluation for the 2013-2014
school year, at least 25% of the annual year-end evaluation shall
be based on student growth and assessment data. For the annual
year-end evaluation for the 2014-2015 school year, at least 40% of
the annual year-end evaluation shall be based on student growth and
assessment data. Beginning with the annual year-end evaluation for
the 2015-2016 school year, at least 50% of the annual year-end
evaluation shall be based on student growth and assessment data.
The student growth and assessment data to be used for the school
administrator annual year-end evaluation are the aggregate student
growth and assessment data that are used in teacher annual year-end
evaluations in each school in which the school administrator works
as an administrator or, for a central-office level school
administrator, for the entire school district or intermediate
school district.
(c) The portion of the annual year-end evaluation that is not
based on student growth and assessment data shall be based on at
least the following for each school in which the school
administrator works as an administrator or, for a central-office
level school administrator, for the entire school district or
intermediate school district:
(i) If the school administrator conducts teacher performance
evaluations, the school administrator's training and proficiency in
using the evaluation tool for teachers described in subsection
(2)(d), including a random sampling of his or her teacher
performance evaluations to assess the quality of the school
administrator's input in the teacher performance evaluation system.
If the school administrator designates another person to conduct
teacher performance evaluations, the evaluation of the school
administrator on this factor shall be based on the designee's
training and proficiency in using the evaluation tool for teachers
described in subsection (2)(d), including a random sampling of the
designee's teacher performance evaluations to assess the quality of
the designee's input in the teacher performance evaluation system,
with the designee's performance to be counted as if it were the
school administrator personally conducting the teacher performance
evaluations.
(ii) The progress made by the school or school district in
meeting the goals set forth in the school's school improvement plan
or the school district's school improvement plans.
(iii) Pupil attendance in the school or school district.
(iv) Student, parent, and teacher feedback, and other
information considered pertinent by the superintendent or other
school administrator conducting the performance evaluation or the
board or board of directors.
(d) For the purposes of conducting performance evaluations
under the performance evaluation system, the school district,
intermediate school district, or public school academy shall adopt
and implement the state evaluation tool for school administrators
described in this subsection that is required under legislation
enacted by the legislature under subsection (6) after review of the
recommendations
contained in the report of the governor's council
on
Michigan council for educator effectiveness submitted under
subsection (5). However, if a school district, intermediate school
district, or public school academy has a local evaluation tool for
school administrators described in this subsection that is
consistent with the state evaluation tool, the school district,
intermediate school district, or public school academy may conduct
performance evaluations for school administrators using that local
evaluation tool.
(e) The performance evaluation system shall assign an
effectiveness rating to each school administrator described in this
subsection of highly effective, effective, minimally effective, or
ineffective, based on his or her score on the evaluation tool
described in subdivision (d).
(f) The performance evaluation system shall ensure that if a
school administrator described in this subsection is rated as
minimally effective or ineffective, the person or persons
conducting the evaluation shall develop and require the school
administrator to implement an improvement plan to correct the
deficiencies. The improvement plan shall recommend professional
development opportunities and other measures designed to improve
the rating of the school administrator on his or her next annual
year-end evaluation.
(g) The performance evaluation system shall provide that, if a
school administrator described in this subsection is rated as
ineffective on 3 consecutive annual year-end evaluations, the
school district, public school academy, or intermediate school
district shall dismiss the school administrator from his or her
employment. However, this subdivision applies only if the 3
consecutive annual year-end evaluations are conducted using the
same evaluation tool and under the same performance evaluation
system. This subdivision does not affect the ability of a school
district, intermediate school district, or public school academy to
dismiss an ineffective school administrator from his or her
employment regardless of whether the school administrator is rated
as ineffective on 3 consecutive annual year-end evaluations.
(h) The performance evaluation system shall provide that, if a
school administrator is rated as highly effective on 3 consecutive
annual year-end evaluations, the school district, intermediate
school district, or public school academy may choose to conduct a
year-end evaluation biennially instead of annually. However, if a
school administrator is not rated as highly effective on 1 of these
biennial year-end evaluations, the school administrator shall again
be provided with annual year-end evaluations.
(4)
The governor's council on Michigan
council for educator
effectiveness
is created as a temporary commission described in
section
4 of article V of the state constitution of 1963. in the
department of technology, management, and budget. All of the
following
apply to the governor's council on Michigan council for
educator effectiveness:
(a)
The governor's council on Michigan
council for educator
effectiveness shall consist of the following 5 voting members:
(i) The governor shall appoint 3 members.
(ii) The senate majority leader shall appoint 1 member.
(iii) The speaker of the house of representatives shall appoint
1 member.
(b) In addition to the members appointed under subdivision
(a), the superintendent of public instruction or his or her
designee shall serve as a nonvoting member.
(c) The members appointed under subdivision (a), and the
designee of the superintendent of public instruction if he or she
appoints a designee, shall have expertise in 1 or more of the
following areas: psychometrics, measurement, performance-based
educator evaluation models, educator effectiveness, or development
of educator evaluation frameworks in other states.
(d)
Not later than October 31, 2011, the governor's council on
Michigan council for educator effectiveness shall contract with 1
or more additional experts in the areas described in subdivision
(c) as the council considers necessary.
(e) The governor shall appoint an advisory committee for the
governor's
council on Michigan council
for educator effectiveness
to provide input on the council's recommendations. The advisory
committee shall consist of public school teachers, public school
administrators, and parents of public school pupils.
(f)
The governor's office shall provide staffing and support
for
the governor's council on educator effectiveness.
(5)
Not later than April 30, 2012, the governor's council on
Michigan council for educator effectiveness shall submit to the
state board, the governor, and the legislature a report that
identifies and recommends all of the following for the purposes of
this section and that includes recommendations on evaluation
processes and other matters related to the purposes of this
section:
(a) A student growth and assessment tool. The student growth
and assessment tool shall meet all of the following:
(i) Is a value-added model that takes into account student
achievement and assessment data, and is based on an assessment tool
that has been determined to be reliable and valid for the purposes
of measuring value-added data.
(ii) In addition to measuring student growth in the core
subject areas of mathematics, science, English language arts, and
social science, will measure student growth in other subject areas.
(iii) Complies with all current state and federal law for
students with a disability.
(iv) Has at least a pre- and post-test.
(v) Is able to be used for pupils of all achievement levels.
(b) A state evaluation tool for teachers. All of the following
apply to this recommendation:
(i) In addition to the student growth and assessment tool, the
recommended state evaluation tool for teachers may include, but is
not limited to, instructional leadership abilities, teacher and
pupil attendance, professional contributions, training, progress
report achievement, school improvement plan progress, peer input,
and pupil and parent feedback.
(ii) The council shall ensure that the recommended state
evaluation tool for teachers will allow all special education
teachers to be rated.
(iii) The council shall seek input from school districts,
intermediate school districts, and public school academies that
have already developed and implemented successful, effective
performance evaluation systems.
(c) A state evaluation tool for school administrators
described in subsection (3). In addition to the student growth and
assessment tool, the recommended state evaluation tool for these
school administrators may include, but is not limited to, teacher
and pupil attendance, graduation rates, professional contributions,
training, progress report achievement, school improvement plan
progress, peer input, and pupil and parent feedback.
(d) For the purposes of the recommended state evaluation tools
for teachers and school administrators under subdivisions (b) and
(c), recommended parameters for the effectiveness rating categories
for teachers under subsection (2)(e) and for school administrators
under subsection (3)(e).
(e) Recommended changes to be made in the requirements for a
professional education teaching certificate that will ensure that a
teacher is not required to complete additional postsecondary credit
hours beyond the credit hours required for a provisional teaching
certificate.
(f) A process for evaluating and approving local evaluation
tools for teachers under subsection (2)(d) and school
administrators under subsection (3)(d).
(6) It is the intent of the legislature to review the report
submitted
by the governor's council on Michigan
council for
educator effectiveness under subsection (5) and to enact
appropriate legislation to put into place a statewide performance
evaluation system taking into consideration the recommendations
contained in the report.
(7) If all of the following apply for a public school operated
by a school district, intermediate school district, or public
school academy, then the school district, intermediate school
district, or public school academy is not required to comply with
subsection (2) or (3) for that public school:
(a) As of the effective date of this subsection, the school
district, intermediate school district, or public school academy
has already implemented and is currently using a performance
evaluation system for that public school that meets all of the
following requirements:
(i) Under the system, the most significant portion of a
teacher's or school administrator's evaluation is based on student
growth and assessment data, which may include value-added measures.
(ii) The system uses research-based measures to determine
student growth, which may be measured by standards-based,
nationally normed assessments.
(iii) The system determines professional competence through
multiple direct observations of classroom practices and
professional practices throughout the school year.
(iv) Under the system, teacher effectiveness and ratings, as
measured by student achievement and growth data, are factored into
teacher retention, promotion, and termination decisions.
(v) Under the system, teacher and school administrator
performance evaluation results are used to inform teacher
professional development for the succeeding year.
(vi) The system ensures that teachers and school administrators
are evaluated at least annually.
(b) The school district, intermediate school district, or
public
school academy notifies the governor's council on Michigan
council for educator effectiveness by November 1, 2011 that it is
exempt under this subsection from the requirements of subsections
(2) and (3).
(c) The school district, intermediate school district, or
public school academy posts a description of its evaluation system
on its website.
(8) If, after the effective date of this subsection, a school
district, intermediate school district, or public school academy
begins operating a new public school, or implements a new
performance evaluation system for a public school it operates, and
all of the following apply, then the school district, intermediate
school district, or public school academy is not required to comply
with subsection (2) or (3) for that public school:
(a) The performance evaluation system adopted and implemented
for that public school replicates and is identical to the
performance evaluation system of a public school that is exempt
under subsection (7).
(b) The school district, intermediate school district, or
public school academy posts a description of the performance
evaluation system on its website.
(9) If a collective bargaining agreement is in effect for
teachers or school administrators of a school district, public
school
academy, or intermediate school district as of the effective
date
of the 2011 amendatory act that amended this subsection, July
19, 2011, and if that collective bargaining agreement prevents
compliance with subsection (1), then subsection (1) does not apply
to that school district, public school academy, or intermediate
school district until after the expiration of that collective
bargaining agreement.
(10) A school district, intermediate school district, or
public school academy shall continue to conduct the evaluations for
school principals that are currently required by the department
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 shall 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 department.
(11) In addition to the purposes prescribed under this
section, a school district, intermediate school district, or public
school academy shall use a teacher's rating from its performance
evaluation system under this section for the purposes of section
1249a.
Sec. 1249a. (1) Beginning in 2015-2016, subject to subsection
(4), if a school district, intermediate school district, or public
school
academy plans to assign a pupil is
assigned to be taught by
a teacher who has been rated as ineffective on his or her 2 most
recent annual year-end evaluations under section 1249, the board of
the school district or intermediate school district or board of
directors of the public school academy in which the pupil is
enrolled shall notify the pupil's parent or legal guardian that the
pupil has been tentatively assigned to a teacher who has been rated
as ineffective on his or her 2 most recent annual year-end
evaluations and that the school district, intermediate school
district, or public school academy must obtain the written consent
of the parent or legal guardian before finalizing that assignment.
The notification shall be in writing, shall be delivered to the
parent or legal guardian not later than July 15 immediately
preceding the beginning of the school year for which the pupil is
assigned
to the teacher, and shall identify the teacher who is the
subject of the notification, and shall include a consent form that
the parent or legal guardian may use to provide the written consent
and a notice of the meeting described in subsection (3). The
consent form shall state that the parent or legal guardian agrees
to the assignment of his or her child to a teacher who has been
rated as ineffective on his or her 2 most recent annual year-end
evaluations.
(2) Beginning in 2015-2016, subject to subsection (4), if the
school district, intermediate school district, or public school
academy does not receive by not later than August 1 before the
beginning of a school year a written consent form that states that
the parent or legal guardian of a pupil agrees to the assignment of
his or her child to a teacher who has been rated as ineffective on
his or her 2 most recent annual year-end evaluations and that is
signed by the parent or legal guardian of the pupil, then the
school district, intermediate school district, or public school
academy shall assign the pupil for that school year only to 1 or
more teachers who have each been rated as at least minimally
effective or better on at least 1 of his or her 2 most recent
annual year-end evaluations.
(3) If a school district, intermediate school district, or
public school academy sends a notice under subsection (1), the
school district, intermediate school district, or public school
academy shall schedule a meeting for parents and legal guardians to
whom the notice is sent to discuss the reasons why the teacher has
been rated as ineffective on his or her 2 most recent annual year-
end evaluations, and shall include notification of this meeting in
the notice. This meeting may be a group meeting.
(4) Subsections (1) to (3) do not apply to assignment of a
pupil to a teacher who is in a probationary period under section 1
of article II of 1937 (Ex Sess) PA 4, MCL 38.81.
