GROWTH AND ASSESSMENT DATA

IN PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS

House Bill 5707 as introduced

Sponsor:  Rep. Aaron Miller

House Bill 6401 as introduced

Sponsor: Rep. Jeffrey R. Noble

Committee:  Education Reform

Complete to 10-3-18

SUMMARY:

House Bill 5707 would amend the Revised School Code to prevent the percentage of annual year-end teacher evaluations based on student growth and assessment data from increasing from 25% to 40% in the 2018-2019 school year.

Currently, the Code specifies that school district and intermediate school district (ISD) boards and public school academy (PSA, or charter school) boards of directors must ensure that student growth and assessment data account for 25% of year-end teacher evaluations for the school years 2015-2016, 2016-2017, and 2017-2018. That percentage is slated to increase to 40% of the evaluation beginning with the 2018-2019 school year.

Under the bill, the percentage would remain at 25%.

MCL 380.1249

House Bill 6401 would likewise reflect a continued percentage of 25% instead of the currently-planned increase to 40% in 2018-2019 for building-level school administrators and central-office-level school administrators who are regularly involved in instructional matters.

MCL 380.1249b

The bills would take effect 90 days after enactment.

BACKGROUND:

The federal Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) of 2015, which replaced the No Child Left Behind Act, eliminated the requirement that states adopt an evaluation system significantly based on student growth and prevented the U.S. Department of Education from prescribing specific measures for evaluations. Under the purview of the ESSA, states could determine how much student growth data would be used in educator evaluations.

In response, Michigan Public Act 173 of 2015[1] made several changes to the Code, one of which was to reduce the overall weight of student growth data in evaluations from 50% of the annual year-end teacher and administrator evaluation to 25% until the 2018-2019 school year, when it was slated to increase to 40%.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The bills would have no fiscal impact on the state or local units of government.

                                                                                        Legislative Analyst:   Dana Adams

                                                                                               Fiscal Analysts:   Samuel Christensen

                                                                                                                           Jacqueline Mullen

This analysis was prepared by nonpartisan House Fiscal Agency staff for use by House members in their deliberations, and does not constitute an official statement of legislative intent.



[1]http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?2015-SB-0103