SENATE BILL REPORT

SB 5880

As Reported by Senate Committee On:

Ways & Means, March 3, 2014

Title: An act relating to education.

Brief Description: Relating to education.

Revised for 1st Substitute: Changing the requirements for the multiple measures of student growth used in teacher and principal evaluations

Sponsors: Senator Hill.

Brief History:

Committee Activity: Ways & Means: 3/03/14 [DPS, DNP, w/oRec].

Majority Report: That Substitute Senate Bill No. 5880 be substituted therefor, and the substitute bill do pass.

Signed by Senators Hill, Chair; Baumgartner, Vice Chair; Honeyford, Capital Budget Chair; Bailey, Becker, Braun, Dammeier, Hewitt, Parlette, Rivers, Schoesler and Tom.

Minority Report: Do not pass.

Signed by Senators Hargrove, Ranking Member; Keiser, Assistant Ranking Member on the Capital Budget; Ranker, Assistant Ranking Member on the Operating Budget; Billig, Conway, Fraser, Hasegawa and Kohl-Welles.

Minority Report: That it be referred without recommendation.

Signed by Senator Padden.

Staff: Lorrell Noahr (786-7708)

Background: Teacher and Principal Evaluation Systems. Certain aspects of performance evaluation for school employees are specified in statute. Consequences such as probation or nonrenewal of contract may be based on performance judged as not satisfactory. Legislation enacted in 2010 directed development of revised evaluation systems for teachers and principals, including new evaluation criteria for teachers and principals, and a four-level rating system using a continuum of performance based on the extent that the criteria are met. Data on student growth—the change in student achievement between two points in time—may be included in an evaluation of a teacher or principal if it is based on multiple measures of student achievement. The 2013-14 school year is the first year all school districts must begin implementation of the revised teacher and principal evaluation systems.

Elements of Student Growth Data. Student growth data to be factored into the evaluation process for both certificated classroom staff and principals must be based on multiple measures that can include classroom-based, school-based, district-based, and state-based tools. Student growth data may include the teacher or principal's performance as a member of a grade level, subject matter, or other instructional team within a school. Student growth data may also include the teacher or principal's performance as a member of the overall instructional team of a school.

No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB)/Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA)Waiver. Under the federal NCLB/ESEA, schools and school districts that receive federal Title I money must meet an adequate yearly progress target for all students in reading and mathematics and reach 100 percent student proficiency in both subjects by 2014. Failure to meet the target goals in adequate yearly progress and student proficiency triggers consequences for a school. Consequences include that parents must be notified that the school has not met the adequate yearly progress goal, and 20 percent of the school's Title I funds must be set aside to provide transportation to students who transfer out of the school or district and to provide supplemental educational services such as tutoring. Washington obtained a waiver from these federal requirements in 2011. In a letter from the U.S. Department of Education (ED), which was received by the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) on August 14, 2013, ED designated Washington's waiver of certain provisions of NCLB/ESEA to be at high risk and directed Washington to require the use of federally required state test scores as one the measures of student growth in Washington’s teacher and principal evaluations.

Summary of Bill: The bill as referred to committee not considered.

Summary of Bill (Recommended Substitute): Student Growth Data. For teachers who teach reading, language arts, or mathematics in a grade in which a federally mandated statewide student assessment is administered, student results on the statewide assessment must be used as one of the multiple measures of student growth.

Appropriation: None.

Fiscal Note: Not requested.

Committee/Commission/Task Force Created: No.

Effective Date: Ninety days after adjournment of session in which bill is passed.

Staff Summary of Public Testimony: CON: The state moved away from a compliance-based evaluation system in 2010. This bill moves us back towards the compliance-based system. New state assessments will begin next year. Since no one has seen the test in its entirety, it is unknown if it will be valid, reliable and have no cultural bias. The state assessments will not measure student growth in the same year that it is administered, and may not measure student growth at all. There is no substantial research that links student growth with teacher quality. Annual assessment scores are received in the summer. This does not allow teachers to reform their practices within the same school year. Schools that do not have tutoring services in their area available can get an immediate waiver from OSPI to free up the Title I money.

OTHER: The ESEA waiver is an important issue. Supports a delay in using the state assessment and would like more flexible language for using the assessments. We know the United States Education Department will approve an extension to the 2016-17 school year and possibly further based on conversations with the Secretary of Education. Teachers need time and training to implement current reforms, and it is fair to provide them that prior to evaluating them on the implementation of state assessments.

Persons Testifying: CON: Lucinda Young, WA Education Assn.

OTHER: Marcia Fromhold, OSPI; Dan Steele, WA Assn. of School Administrators.