Summary of the Committee Version of the Bill

HCS HB 1526 -- SCHOOL PERSONNEL

SPONSOR: Dieckhaus

COMMITTEE ACTION: Voted "do pass" by the Committee on Elementary

and Secondary Education by a vote of 12 to 9.

 

This substitute changes the laws regarding school personnel.

TEACHING AND ADMINISTRATOR STANDARDS AND TEACHER SALARIES

The substitute allows existing teaching and administrator

standards to become part of a district’s evaluation system. The

provision specifying a minimum salary requirement for a teacher

with a master’s degree is repealed.

TEACHER TENURE ACT

Currently, teachers in all school districts except the City of

St. Louis must be notified concerning their reemployment by April

15 and presented with a contract by May 15. The substitute

changes the deadline for the notification to May 15 and the

contract date to June 15. Contracts fixing the amount of

compensation for the following school year for tenured teachers

may currently be modified each year as provided by the salary

schedule applicable to all teachers. The substitute revises this

provision to refer to the compensation plan adopted by the board

of education rather than the salary schedule. The causes for

terminating a teacher’s contract are changed to remove a mental

or physical condition unfitting the teacher to instruct or

associate with children, incompetency, and inefficiency and

adding unsatisfactory performance based on an evaluation that

includes performance on specified teaching standards. The last-in, first-out provision is revised to remove the requirement that

untenured teachers must be laid off before any tenured teacher is

laid off and that layoff and eligibility for rehiring must be

based on effective teacher performance as based on the school

board’s criteria.

ST. LOUIS CITY SCHOOL EMPLOYEES

The substitute changes the laws regarding the St. Louis school

district as follows:

(1) Requires all appointment and promotion of teachers and other

employees to be based on character of service. Currently, they

are to be based on length and character of service;

(2) Requires teacher contract notices for probationary teachers

who will not be retained to be issued on or before May 15, rather than or before April 15;

(3) Adds incompetency to the causes for which a teacher can be

dismissed;

(4) Repeals a provision which specifies that a notification

regarding removal for specified causes received by an employee

during a vacation period will be considered as received on the

first day of the following school term;

(5) Changes the time period for the notice of pending charges of

incompetency or inefficiency from at least one semester to at

least 30 days;

(6) Requires the teacher and the superintendent, or his or her

representative, to meet and confer to resolve a notification of

incompetency or inefficiency;

(7) Repeals the provision prohibiting a new teacher appointment

after a reduction in force while teachers 70 years of age or

younger and who are qualified and on leave of absence are

available;

(8) Limits a leave of absence to not more than three years

unless extended by the board and specifies that a leave cannot

impair the tenure of a teacher; and

(9) Repeals the “last in, first out” policy for laying off

noncertificated employees.

EVALUATIONS

Teachers and principals must undergo an evaluation that includes,

at a minimum, the following:

(1) An evaluation system that uses multiple measures aligned

with growth in student achievement, which will be used in

personnel and compensation decisions. A district that does not

develop its own system must use the model system developed by the

Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. The district’s

system must be developed and implemented in consultation with

teachers, principals, and parents of students;

(2) Multiple measures that are rigorous. At least 50% of a

teacher’s evaluation must be based on student achievement growth

on state assessments. The substitute describes the process for

the development of measures for teachers for whom performance on

statewide assessments is not available; and

(3) A written notice to the teacher or principal in advance of the evaluation of any specific indicators that will be used to

evaluate him or her.

The substitute specifies that an evaluation will result in one of

four rating levels. After July 1, 2013, a teacher who has

received two successive annual evaluations as ineffective cannot

be reemployed. Each school district board must develop the

evaluation system for administration as a pilot project during

the 2012-2013 school year and implemented during the 2013-2014

school year. The Department of Elementary and Secondary

Education must develop standards for implementation of local

systems, including processes for determining who is the teacher

of record and to verify the minimum amount of instructional time

given by the teacher to a student in order to assign the

student’s achievement scores to a teacher for the purposes of

evaluating the teacher’s performance. The department must also

develop, implement, and publicly disseminate a statewide student

growth model and a value-added system for determining student

growth on assessments, provide technical assistance to districts,

develop a default evaluation for use by districts lacking the

resources to develop their own systems, monitor local systems for

consistency results, and link teacher preparation programs with

achievement data for individual students.

FISCAL NOTE: Estimated Net Cost on General Revenue Fund of

Unknown - Could exceed $100,000 in FY 2013, FY 2014, and FY 2015.

No impact on Other State Funds in FY 2013, FY 2014, and FY 2015.

PROPONENTS: Supporters say that evaluation methods need to

reflect both student performance and information that helps a

teacher improve. Principals should be included, too. Multiple

measures are required by the bill.

Testifying for the bill were Representative Dieckhaus; Pam

Kingsley; Missouri Education Reform Council; Marisol Montero;

Audrey Pribnow; George Parker; Amanda Henry; Rich Thomson, 100

Dads; Larry Doyle; Students First; and Missouri Chamber of

Commerce.

OPPONENTS: Those who oppose the bill say that it imposes

micromanagement. More focus needs to be placed on training

evaluators.

Testifying against the bill were Missouri National Education

Association; Andrea Flinders, American Federation of Teachers and

Kansas City Federation of Teachers; and Missouri State Teachers

Association.

OTHERS: Others testifying on the bill say that districts that

are already doing a good job should not be required to change. It is not clear if an average teacher can elicit above average

performance from a student who has been performing below average.

Testifying on the bill were Steven Carroll, Special

Administrative Board of the St. Louis Public Schools; Missouri

School Boards Association; Missouri Council of School

Administrators; and Jerry Hobbs.

Copyright © Missouri House of Representatives