Date: 05/06/2010
Final
BILL SUMMARY for SB10-191
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
| Votes: View--> | Action Taken: |
| <none> | <none> |
02:30 PM -- Senate Bill 10-191
Representative Scanlan, co-prime sponsor of Senate Bill 10-191, concerning principal and teacher effectiveness, provided opening remarks on the bill. She reviewed the major provisions of the bill. She addressed concerns raised by the opponents of the bill. She stated that the intent of the bill is not to be punitive, but to legitimize the teaching profession.
02:36 PM
Representative Murray, co-prime sponsor of the bill, also provided opening remarks on the bill. She discussed the art and science of teaching, and how the bill provides the science part of the equation for ensuring effective teachers. She addressed the provisions related to principal accountability in the bill. She stated that she hopes that the bill creates a positive environment for teachers.
02:40 PM
Representative Summers asked the sponsors to address concerns about what happens to nonprobationary teachers that are reverted to probationary status. Representative Scanlan responded that after two years of ineffectiveness, there is a third year for improvement. If after the third year, there in no improvement, then the principal would have discretion to determine what would happen then. Representative Peniston asked how the bill interacts with union contracts that deal with dismissal. Representative Schafer commented that the parent is the first teacher for a student, and whether the sponsors could address that issue. Representative Scanlan responded that the witnesses should be able to address that issue.
02:45 PM
Representative Benefield asked the sponsors to address what the bill means by multiple measures for teacher effectiveness and for teachers who do not teach subjects tested on the Colorado Student Assessment Program (CSAP). Representative Scanlan responded that the measures could include quizzes and end of semester tests. She noted the importance of having measures other than CSAP. She stated that the State Council for Educator Effectiveness (the council) will also look at that issue, instead of legislating it in statute. Representative Benefield asked if there should be a standardized measure as part of the evaluation. Representative Scanlan responded that for the growth model, CSAP is the only measure and does not test every area. She stated that the council will look at those issues to ensure that all subjects can be evaluated. Representative Benefield expressed concern about using CSAP when it is widely recognized a questionable assessment, and where the funding will come for developing a standardized tool for evaluating teachers.
02:51 PM
Representative Murray responded to her comments, noting that with or without the bill, the problem she has identified exists. She explained that the Colorado Department of Education (CDE) is on a path to improve the assessments. Representative Scanlan also responded, stating that the department could address that issue more.
02:54 PM
The following people testified:
02:55 PM -- Brenda Smith, Courtney Smith, and Amanda Sheets, representing AFT Colorado, introduced themselves to the committee. Ms. B. Smith addressed the committee, discussing the importance of effective teachers. She discussed the changes in the bill that led AFT Colorado to support the bill.
03:01 PM -- Amanda Sheets, representing AFT Colorado, testified in support of the bill and shared her experience as a probationary teacher. She responded to questions from the committee on how she suggests she would be assessed, given that she teaches K-6 science.
03:03 PM -- Courtney Smith testified in support of the bill.
03:04 PM -- Cliff Stahl, representing the Douglas County School Board, testified in support of the bill. He responded questions from the committee regarding the cost of implementation. He responded that it is difficult to quantify at this time, but approximately $500,000 to start with. Discussion ensued about the cost of the program, the recent teacher layoffs, and unfunded mandates.
03:08 PM
Representative Solano asked Ms. B. Smith if she believes this type of legislation is representative of a national movement that the national organization supports. Representative Solano discussed a recent article published in The Weekmagazine, which quoted federal education reform efforts of the Obama administration and that the national AFT President Randi Weingarten objected to the blueprint. Ms. B. Smith responded that she believes she is referring to a piece on the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), not on teacher effectiveness. Discussion between Ms. B. Smith and Representative Solano on the article ensued.
03:11 PM
Representative Benefield asked Mr. Stahl how much Douglas County School District (DCSD) is cutting from their budget. Mr. Stahl responded $31 million. Representative Benefield asked how many administrator positions have been cut. He responded that 60 administrator positions have been cut. Representative Benefield expressed concern that school districts do not have the ability to assess educators with the amount of cuts school districts are seeing. Discussion on this topic ensued between Mr. Stahl and Representative Benefield.
03:17 PM
Ms. B. Smith provided clarification on the cost of the evaluation system versus the cost to implement a pay for performance system. Mr. Stahl also discussed the board's work to enhance the pay for performance system to pay teachers more in the future. He also discussed how the district decides to lay off teachers, which is by probationary status. Representative Todd commented that DCSD is already implementing this without the legislation. She asked the witnesses to discuss the evaluation process. Ms. Sheets responded how her performance is evaluated, noting that the principal and assistant principal visit the classroom often.
03:21 PM
Representative Tipton asked how DCSD measures on CSAP. Mr. Stahl responded that the district performs highly. Representative Tipton asked if,under the current system, is there a difference between an effective teacher and an ineffective teacher when considering hiring and firing decisions, or if it is more about time served. Representative Schafer asked the AFT members about the system enacted in Florida, which has now been repealed. Representative Schafer quoted Ms. Weingarten, national AFT president, on her opposition to the Florida program and asked Ms. B. Smith to comment on the differences between this bill and the Florida system.
03:26 PM
Representative Summers asked the witnesses to comment on peer review practices in the district. Ms. B. Smith responded that it is part of the review system, known as peer assistance and review. Representative Peniston asked the witnesses if they felt that the effective teachers in their school district would perform at the same level as a school district with higher percentages of free- and reduced-lunch. Committee discussion on this topic ensued.
03:37 PM
Ms. Sheets weighed in, discussing her experience working with at-risk populations. She said that she believes the bill allows school districts to create its own evaluation systems. Representative Massey asked the sponsors if school districts can develop their own measures, and weigh those measures as they see fit. Representative Scanlan discussed the issue of student poverty, noting that is not a factor that may be considered in teacher evaluations, unless the classroom meets a 95 percent threshold.
03:43 PM
Representative Solano asked how the sponsors determined 95 percent threshold and asked how many school district fit that definition. Representative Scanlan responded that she would be open to amending that provision of the bill.
03:46 PM -- Charlotte Cianco, representing Mapleton Public Schools, testified in support of the bill. She discussed the issues that arise of the current system, which only permits for three years to decide to make a teacher nonprobationary or probationary.
03:48 PM -- Mike Miles, representing Harrison School District, testified in support of the bill.
03:51 PM -- John Barry, representing Aurora Public Schools, testified in support of the bill. He stated the importance of tying teacher performance to student performance and teacher performance to principal performance. He noted the importance of flexibility in evaluating teachers. He responded to questions from the committee regarding unfunded mandates and local control.
03:57 PM -- Tom Boasberg, representing Denver Public Schools, testified in support of the bill. He addressed previous testimony about the link to poverty and student performance. He stated that, regardless of poverty, it is the job of educators to teach children and help them grow. He also addressed previous testimony about the cost for implementing the bill.
04:02 PM
Representative Solano clarified that this state has due process and not tenure. Representative Solano asked if the bill keeps due process. Representative Scanlan responded that, in her opinion, it does. Representative Benefield asked the witnesses to discuss what it means to create a resource bank. Ms. Ciancio responded to the question. Representative Scanlan responded that CDE can answer that question as well when their representatives testify. Representative Benefield asked the other superintendents to address her question.
04:11 PM
Mr. Miles discussed his assessment program for teachers, providing an example of how a choir teacher would be evaluated. Mr. Boasberg discussed the Denver Pro-Comp System, a pay-for-performance program, and stated that they would be happy to share this system with other school districts as part of a resource bank. He added that he believes all superintendents would be happy to share their assessments. Mr. Barry responded to Representative Benefield's question about the resource bank.
04:17 PM
Representative Pensiton asked if there is a way to quantify the number of teachers who would have lost nonprobationary status under this bill. Each of the superintendents responded to the question, with each noting the challenges with quantifying the answer. Mr. Barry discussed a survey that is currently given, noting a specific question of the survey regarding an environment of trust, and that it has increased from 30 percent to 70 percent because of the honest conversations his school district has had with teachers and administrators.
04:22 PM
Representative Peniston asked the superintendents to discuss how they would address using CSAP scores, which have been reported to be flat or declining, and how that looks to the public when those teachers are not fired for poor CSAP scores. Mr. Barry responded, noting that it is not fair to gauge a teacher by scores, but it is far to measure a teacher by his or her students' growth. Mr. Miles responded that he believes that the public is confused, because the public sees that teachers are 98 percent effective, yet CSAP scores are flat, which he believes call for a better measure to assess teachers.
04:26 PM
Representative Merrifield shared information from a discussion on the website, EdNews Colorado,regarding growth models, providing a perspective of one discussant who stated the various elements that contribute to growth, such as the teacher from the previous year, summer education access, and other issues. Representative Summers commented on the timeline for the bill, noting that the bill calls for a five-year implementation period, and that issues can be addressed as they arise. He also asked the superintendents to discuss the provisions in the bill pertaining to quality school leadership. He shared concerns he heard from teachers that principals may use this bill as a mechanism for firing them, or to take a quality teacher and place them in a different school.
04:30 PM
Mr. Barry responded to the question, stating that success is built on quality leadership and questioned why a principal would take such an action. He shared his district's current practices on interviewing principal candidates, noting that each candidate is asked about his or her willingness to prove demonstrated growth. Mr. Miles also responded, noting the accountability of principals in the bill. He stated that this piece is critical for the program to be successful. He discussed a measure in his district's evaluation to track principal's evaluations. Representative Todd asked each superintendent to comment on professional development and evaluation tools currently. Ms. Ciancio spoke about the review process and school support teams that look for inconsistencies and gaps in the classroom. Mr. Miles spoke to the overall system of evaluation.
04:38 PM
Mr. Barry discussed the evaluation review committee in Aurora Public Schools, noting it includes administrators and teachers. Mr. Boasberg discussed the importance of professional development. Representative Todd asked about the process for establishing an educator evaluator system, noting that the governor established a council by executive order, which was designed to bring everyone together to discuss and vet the issue thoroughly. She asked each superintendent to discuss the morale of teachers. Mr. Miles responded that his district conducted an anonymous survey on this issue. Representative Todd asked not about the survey, but currently today. Ms. Ciancio responded that at this time of year, there is anxiety, because of CSAP results, winding down the school year, and nonrenewal notices are being mailed, but shared that there is a broad range of perceptions. Mr. Barry responded that morale goes in cycles, but that there have been annual improvements in satisfaction from year-to-year. He also discussed budget cuts, changing of job descriptions, and hiring processes.
04:48 PM
Mr. Boasberg also addressed the question of morale, noting that his district is not cutting teaching positions, but that there is anxiety on account of budget cuts. He noted that the district has an anonymous survey which saw positive improvements in all questions. Representative Merrifield asked the superintendents to address why the bill is necessary, seeing as each of their districts are in the process of implementing evaluation systems. Mr. Boasberg stated that the bill should provide the latitude for school districts to establish the specifics, and that the legislation should provide general principles. He also noted the current state mandates on nonprobationary status.
04:53 PM
Representative Middleton shared concerns she has heard from teachers about the number of factors that affect the student performance, and the concerns from support staff and how they will be evaluated. Mr. Barry responded to her comments, discussing the coaching model the district has adopted, which puts teacher leaders in classrooms to support teachers who are new or working with challenging populations. Mr. Miles discussed the "no excuses" policy he instituted in his district, stating that there are no excuses for poor instruction. Representative Middleton asked the superintendents to discuss the growth model and its application in their districts. Mr. Miles responded the formula his district uses. Ms. Ciancio responded that her school district uses the MAPS assessments, and special education students are monitored each month.
05:02 PM
Representative Merrifield asked how many of the surveys are completed electronically. Each superintendents respondent responded that the surveys are electronic. Representative Merrifield noted concerns he has heard from teachers about the anonymity of the surveys. Mr. Barry shared with the committee the response rates for the surveys conducted in his district. Representative Solano commented on teaching 21st century learning skills and how those can be assessed and how a teacher's worth can be measured on his or her ability to teach creative learning, critical thinking, and collaboration skills. Mr. Boasberg responded to her comments, noting that is a critical element of an observation protocol. Discussion on this topic ensued between Representative Solano and the panel of superintendents.
05:09 PM
Mr. Barry discussed why he thinks the bill is necessary, noting the partnerships he has established with the business community to ensure that education is relevant. Representative Tipton followed up on Representative Solano's comments on the bill and asked if the council and the resource box are complementary. Ms. Ciancio stated that she believes that the two complement each other. Representative Schafer asked the panelists to comment on the public's perception that laying the responsibility of student achievement on teachers and that it is unfair. She enumerated a list of education reforms that is supposed to improve student achievement, and asked if this is a fad or an earnest effort. Mr. Boasberg responded to her question, discussing the importance of staff development, and that this bill provides a workable framework for addressing how educators perform.
05:18 PM
Representative Merrifield stated that he would like the committee to move on to other witnesses, and provided his thoughts to the superintendents about the council and the bill.
05:19 PM -- Beverly Ingle, representing the Colorado Education Association (CEA), testified against the bill. She shared CEA's belief statements with the committee on student graduation, education reform, and teacher evaluation. She stated that CEA objects to reform being done to teachers instead of with teachers. She stated the importance of employee buy-in.
05:25 PM -- Tony Salazar, also representing CEA, testified against the bill. He stated that the bill does not improve the evaluation system and will create division in a profession that needs more collaboration. He discussed the work of CEA to support the development of the council. He also expressed concern of the cost for implementing the bill.
05:29 PM
Representative Tipton asked Mr. Salazar to explain where the mutual consent provisions are in the bill. Representative Tipton also addressed earlier testimony by Ms. Ingle. Representative Scanlan explained that there will be amendments to address the issue of mutual consent. Representative Benefield asked the witnesses to discuss what they think about the resource bank. Representative Benefield asked Ms. Ingle to comment on teacher morale. Ms. Ingle responded that teachers are angry. She stated that they understand that there will be cuts, but teachers are very concerned about the fairness of the evaluation of probationary teachers.
05:37 PM
Representative Todd asked the witnesses to comment on the misperception of what nonprobationary status means, and how this is commonly perceived as having a job for life. Ms. Ingle responded, discussing the current process for evaluating and what happens when a teacher is evaluated at his or her third year, which is unsatisfactory or satisfactory. She discussed improvement plans that are created based on this third year evaluation.
05:42 PM
Representative Schafer asked what ideas CEA has on evaluating student outputs, instead of inputs. Ms. Ingle responded that the outputs cannot always be included in a measurable test, noting the subjectivity of certain achievements.
05:45 PM -- Linda Barker, representing CEA, testified against the bill. She discussed the Race to the Top application scoring.
05:50 PM -- Marti Houser, representing CEA, testified against the bill. She discussed current law pertaining to probationary and nonprobationary status.
05:55 PM
Representative Benefield asked the witnesses to discuss how long it takes for a teacher to be effective at classroom management. Ms. Barker responded that teachers come in at different levels, but generally in years five to seven is when teachers reach their stride in teaching and classroom management. Ms. Barker also discussed the classroom management courses that CEA offers, and noted the importance of mentor teachers and outreach to parents. Discussion on this topic ensued.
05:58 PM
Representative Solano asked where due process is included in the bill, stating that she believes that the bill is not about teacher effectiveness, but it is about due process. Ms. Houser responded that the bill removes due process for teachers who are considered to be underperforming. Representative Peniston discussed her experience as the head of Westminster Education Association, and how she tried to support teachers. She asked Ms. Houser to discuss how many teachers have been let go. Ms. Houser responded that the vast majority of nonprobationary teachers who are recommended for dismissal are counseled out of the profession. Ms. Houser also discussed the statistics of dismissed teachers, which she noted does not include those who are counseled out.
06:06 PM -- Kerrie Dallman, representing herself, testified against the bill. She shared that she is a member of the council. She stated the importance of a collaborative process in developing a comprehensive evaluation system. She noted the work in Jefferson County School District to implement an evaluation system. She noted that the bill does not fund professional development, it only measures deficiencies in teachers. She explained that there is no research that shows that the measures in the bill improve teacher effectiveness. She noted effective strategies for training teachers.
06:09 PM -- Henry Roman, representing the Denver Classroom Teachers Association, testified against the bill. He spoke to what he sees as the complexities to the bill, noting the costs to implement the bill.
06:13 PM -- Tanya Caruso, representing herself, testified against the bill. She expressed concern about the lack of funding for the bill. She shared her experience as a teacher in Eagle County School District, noting the implementation of the pay for performance rubric there.
06:17 PM
The witnesses responded to questions from the committee. Ms. Dallman discussed a survey of the members regarding their position on the bill. Representative Benefield asked the witnesses to discuss pay for performance plans. Mr. Roman discussed the importance of incentives. He also explained the amount of time it took to implement Denver's Pro-Comp System. Representative Peniston shared the number of phone calls and emails she received on this bill. She asked the witnesses to discuss what might happen to the school environment if teachers are moving from probationary from year-to-year. Mr. Roman responded that he believes it will create instability in the school climate.
06:24 PM
Representative Schafer asked if the passage of the bill will disrupt current work in school districts. Ms. Dallman explained that even the specter of the passage of this bill has impacted teacher contract negotiations. Representative Summers asked how many teachers would be switched from nonprobationary to probationary. Mr. Roman responding by stating it is unknown, but that there are as many as 900 that could be effected.
06:27 PM
Representative Tipton asked if Ms. Dallman agrees with the mission of the council, which states 50 percent of evaluation will be based on student performance. Ms. Dallman stated that she is supportive of the council, and that this bill is more than the 50 percent piece.
06:29 PM
Representative Merrifield read testimony from Diane Ravitch, and shared her biography. Ms. Ravitch testified against the bill in a letter to the committee chair. The committee recessed.
06:45 PM
The committee came back to order.
06:45 PM -- Ben Jackson, representing himself, testified in support of the bill. He shared his experience as a classroom teacher. He stated that he believes the bill empowers teachers. He responded to questions from the committee.
06:48 PM -- Zachary Rowe, representing himself, testified in support of the bill. He noted the importance of data in the bill. He stated the importance of holding teachers accountable.
06:50 PM -- Amy Spicer, representing herself, testified in support of the bill. She shared her experience as a teacher in low-income schools. She stated the importance of instruction and assessments. She addressed the limits on her advancement in her career, even though she has two masters degrees.
06:54 PM -- Mark Sass, representing himself, testified in support of the bill because it incentivizes a collaborative culture. Mr. Sass also discussed peer evaluation. He stated that the bill is not to punish teachers but to identify effective teachers and have them assist other teachers.
06:57 PM
Representative Massey commented that previous testimony reflected on low morale, but noted that the witnesses have a positive outlook on the bill and their profession. He asked if they feel that they are in the minority at their schools. Representative Benefield asked Ms. Spicer to comment on the evaluation process at her school. Dialogue on this topic ensued.
07:03 PM -- Dana Nardello, representing herself, testified in support of the bill. She stated that this bill is a good start in improving evaluation for educators. She shared her experience as a teacher, noting that she wants to be held accountable for her students' growth.
07:07 PM -- David Clayton, representing himself as a parent with a child in Denver Public Schools, testified in support of the bill. He stated that the bill brings about change that is long overdue. He discussed the impact of effective teachers on students. He also stated the importance of having accountability for taxpayers.
07:11 PM -- Lawrence Garcia, representing himself, testified against the bill. He shared his experience as a displaced teacher.
07:15 PM -- Lisa Johnson, representing herself, testified against the bill and shared her experience as a teacher who was placed on administrative leave and her experience going through the due process under law. She stated that she believes had this legislation been law, she would not have had the same opportunity under due process.
07:21 PM -- Victor Torres, representing himself as a board member of the Harrison School Board, testified against the bill. He shared his perspective on the evaluation practices in Harrison School District.
07:27 PM
Mr. Torres responded to questions from Representative McNulty about his position on the Harrison School Board and about his current employment. Representative Benefield asked how much Harrison is cutting. Mr. Torres estimated that the district is cutting $9 million from its budget. He further noted 118 teachers are being cut, which is a higher figure that what is being published by the school district.
07:34 PM -- Shannon Hagerman, representing Denver Public Schools, testified in support of the bill. She shared her experience as a principal at Montclair Elementary and hiring positions through forced placements. She explained that this led the school to seek innovation status in order to have control over placement decisions. She stated that all schools should have this flexibility.
07:38 PM
Representative Todd asked Ms. Hagerman to discuss how she evaluates teachers at her school. She stated that the school is reevaluating the process, but currently uses the process recommended by the school district. Representative Merrifield asked how she deals with ineffective teachers. She responded that she has not renewed some teachers and other are on probationary plans. Representative Merrifield responded that he believes Ms. Hagerman's testimony proves that the current system works. Ms. Hagerman responded that the administrative piece for this process takes time away from assisting other teachers. Discussion on evaluation practices at Montclair Elementary ensued.
07:46 PM
Representative Todd asked Ms. Hagerman why she thinks the bill is necessary. She responded that the bill moves the conversation forward on consistency in the educator evaluation system. She stated that she believes education is broken but is a step in the right direction. Representative Merrifield stated that he believes this bill is a distraction to fixing education. Discussion ensued between Ms. Hagerman and Representative Merrifield.
07:51 PM
Representative Solano asked if the bill in her opinion maintains due process. Ms. Hagerman stated that she believes it does. Representative Murray explained that there is an amendment to address that issue. Representative Murray also commented that she believes the bill takes away from the subjectivity of principal evaluations because principals will be judged by a teacher's performance. Ms. Hagerman also addressed previous comments from Representative Schafer about factors that influence student achievement.
07:57 PM -- Jeff Marshall, representing himself, testified against the bill and shared his experience as a teacher in Colorado Springs.
08:01 PM -- Margaret Bobb, representing herself as a high school science teacher, testified against the bill. She discussed the work already underway in Denver Public Schools. She expressed concern with Section 11 of the bill, which deals with consent.
08:09 PM -- Anne Bye Rowe, representing the Colorado Children's Campaign, testified in support of the bill. She expressed her commitment for student achievement. She discussed the research that shows that students are not being adequately taught in Colorado and noted that one in four children who start high school will not finish.
08:17 PM
Ms. Bye Rowe responded to questions from the committee. She discussed the urgency to act on this problem. Representative Todd discussed the need to spend money on interventions and professional development, and smaller class sizes. Representative Schafer asked Ms. Bye Rowe questions regarding CSAP achievement for different ethnic groups.
08:28 PM -- Todd Mayville, representing himself, testified against the bill. He shared his experience as a teacher. He expressed concern about taking federal money for education reform. He also discussed Chicago public schools, noting their progress was flat under Arne Duncan.
08:33 PM
Representative Benefield asked Mr. Mayville to discuss students who do not test well. He responded discussing his experience with testing different students. Representative Peniston responded to his comments about the bill creating a culture of teachers who will not want to teach challenging populations.
08:43 PM
Mr. Mayville continued to respond to questions from the committee, discussing the need for accountability for teachers. Representative McNulty expressed concern for the request of many witnesses for more time to put the evaluation system together. He also responded to questions about how students in other countries perform. Representative Summers also asked about the timelines in the bill.