Teachers: best practices teacher evaluation.
Summary
Existing law states the intent of the Legislature that school district governing boards establish a uniform system of evaluation and assessment of the performance of all certificated personnel within each school district of the state. Existing law requires the governing board of each school district to establish standards of expected pupil achievement at each grade level in each area of study and to evaluate and assess certificated employee performance on a continuing basis as it reasonably relates to the progress of pupils toward the established standards and, if applicable, the state adopted academic content standards as measured by state adopted criterion referenced assessments, the instructional techniques and strategies used by the employee, the employee's adherence to curricular objectives, and the establishment and maintenance of a suitable learning environment, within the scope of the employee's responsibilities. This bill would state findings and declarations of the Legislature regarding the nature of effective teachers and of the teaching profession. This bill would describe a best practices teacher evaluation system as one in which each teacher is evaluated on a continuing basis on the degree to which he or she accomplishes specific objectives and multiple observations of instructional and other professional practices are conducted by trained evaluators. The bill would provide that a school district that implements a best practices teacher evaluation program is not subject to the evaluation and assessment provisions described above, and would authorize the school district to use specified funds for any educational purpose during the fiscal year in which a best practices teacher evaluation program is operative in that school district. The bill would also prohibit a school district that implements a best practices teacher evaluation program from initiating charges against an employee for unsatisfactory performance unless he or she is given the opportunity to participate in a peer assistance and review process, as specified.
Bill status
failed
1 of 4 stages cleared
Introduction
Dec 2010
Committee Review
Floor Vote
Governor
Introduced Dec 6, 2010
Last action Feb 1, 2012
Floor votes
How they voted
No floor votes recorded yet.
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
12
Key actions
3
Committee
6
Amendments
1
May 27, 2011
Lower · Passed
In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.
lower
May 18, 2011
Committee
In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
lower
May 12, 2011
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
May 10, 2011
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 7. Noes 3.) (May 4).
lower
Apr 27, 2011
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on ED.
lower
Jan 24, 2011
Committee
Referred to Com. on ED.
lower
Dec 7, 2010
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee January 6.
lower
0 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
No sponsor information available.
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 48
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 48. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline