Missouri Senate

House Committee Substitute

CHARTER SCHOOL EVALUATIONS: Each charter school's charter must contain a provision requiring the use of personnel performance evaluations. Each charter school must develop an evaluation system centered on student achievement, performance, and progress that conforms to the school's performance contract, mission and other requirements. The evaluation system must include formative performance reviews and summative evaluations. The evaluation results must be used to improve student achievement, performance, and progress.

Teachers and administrators must be evaluated at least annually using multiple valid measures. For teachers who teach grades and courses subject to annual assessments, student achievement and student growth on the assessments must count for at least thirty-three percent of the evaluation. For teachers who do not directly instruct students in subjects and grades subject to assessments but who are expected to contribute to student performance, growth in student achievement on the assessments must be used as an evaluation measure and will count for a percentage of the evaluation, as determined by the charter school.

Student growth must be measured through assessments in accordance with value-added methods or models and reflect at least one year's worth of growth for a school year of instruction, or that students otherwise achieved appropriate growth based on expectations derived from at least two years of individual student achievement data. Multiple additional measures for teachers and administrators must be correlated with impacts on student achievement results, as described in the act.

Teachers and administrators must be given a rating of highly effective, effective, minimally effective, or ineffective that correlates directly to the summative evaluation results. (Sections 160.405 & 160.420)

STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION RULEMAKING: This act requires the State Board of Education to promulgate rules under which the board classifies the public schools of the states.

The appropriate scoring guides, instruments, and procedures used in determining the accreditation status of a district are subject to a public meeting upon notice in a newspaper of general circulation in each of the three most populous cities in Missouri and a newspaper that is a certified minority business enterprise or woman-owned business enterprise in each of the two most populous cities in Missouri, and notice to various state government officials, as described in the act, at least fourteen days in advance of the meeting. The Department of Elementary and Secondary Education must conduct the public meeting no less than ninety days prior to the application in accreditation, with all comments received to be reported to the State Board of Education. (Section 161.092)

UNACCREDITED SCHOOL DISTRICTS: This act removes the two-year waiting period that exists between the classification of a school district as unaccredited and the lapse of the district's corporate organization. Instead, when the State Board of Education initially classifies, or reclassifies, a district as unaccredited, it must review the governance of the district to establish the conditions under which the existing school board will continue to govern or determine the date on which the district will lapse and determine an alternative governing structure for the district.

This act changes the timing and purpose of the hearing that the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education must conduct. The Department must conduct at least two public hearings, which must be regarding the accreditation status of the district. Also, the hearings must provide an opportunity to convene community resources that may be useful or necessary to support the district as it attempts to return to accredited status. The hearings must be conducted at least twice annually for every year in which the district remains unaccredited or provisionally accredited.

When it classifies a district as unaccredited, the State Board of Education may allow continued governance by the existing local board of education under specific terms and conditions. If the State Board appoints a special administrative board to oversee the district, the board must consist of at least five members, the majority of whom must be district residents. In addition, the board members must reflect the population characteristics of the district and collectively possess strong experience in school governance, management and finance, and leadership. Within fourteen days after appointment by the State Board, the special administrative board must organize by the election of a president, vice president, secretary and a treasurer, as provided in current law for the organization of school boards. The special administrative board must appoint a superintendent of schools to serve as the chief executive officer of the district and to have all powers and duties of any other general district superintendent. A special administrative board will be responsible for the operation of the district until it is classified as provisionally accredited for two successive school years, at which time the State Board of Education may provide for a transition back to local governance, as described in the act.

If the State Board determines an alternative governing structure, it must provide a rationale for its decision and recertify the alternative form of governance every three years. In addition, the State Board must create a public comment method, establish expectations for academic progress by creating a time line for full accreditation, and provide annual reports to the General Assembly and Governor on the district's progress, as described in the act.

If the State Board chooses, upon initial classification of a district as unaccredited, to allow the district to remain governed by the local school board under specific terms and conditions, the State Board must annually review its decision for so long as the district remains unaccredited or provisionally accredited. If the unaccredited district earns an improved score on its annual performance report or if the score is sufficient for accredited status, the State Board may allow the local school board to continue governing under specific terms and conditions. If the unaccredited district does not earn an improved score on the annual performance report or has a score insufficient for accredited status, the State Board must lapse the district's corporate organization and implement one of the options described in the act. A district cannot remain under the continued governance of the local school board if it remains unaccredited for three consecutive years. At such time, the State Board must lapse the district's corporate organization and implement one of the options described in the act.

A special administrative board appointed under this act will retain the authority granted to a school board under the laws of the state in effect at the time of the district's lapse. A special administrative board may enter into contracts with accredited districts or other education service providers to deliver high quality educational programs. In addition, if a student graduates from a school operated under a contract with an accredited district, the student will receive his or her diploma from the accredited district.

Neither the special administrative board nor its members will be deemed to be the state or a state agency for any purpose. Furthermore, the state, its agencies and employees, will have absolute immunity from liability, as provided in the act.

This act repeals the authorization for the serving members of a special administrative board to appoint a school superintendent if the State Board of Education appoints a successor member to replace the chair of the special administrative board.

These provisions are substantially similar to SCS/SB 7 (2013), SS#2/SCS/HS/HB 1174 (2012) and SS/SCS/SB 677 (2012). (Sections 162.081 & 162.083)

STATEWIDE ASSESSMENT SCORES: When a school district receives students from another district as a result of a boundary line change, consolidation, annexation, dissolution, or action of the State Board of Education, as described in the act, the statewide assessment scores and all other performance data of the students received by the district will not be used for three years when calculating the receiving district's performance for purposes of the Missouri School Improvement Program.

This provision is identical to SB 168 (2013). (Section 162.1300)

REDUCTION IN FORCE: This act modifies the criteria that a school board uses when placing teachers on leave of absence because of a decrease in student enrollment, district reorganization, or financial condition. This act repeals requirements and procedures commonly referred to as "last in first out" which, when placing teachers on leave, gives preference to permanent teachers and retains permanent teachers based on performance-based evaluation and seniority. Instead, a school board must use educator evaluations as the basis for its primary determination of which teaching personnel will lose their positions. Nothing will prohibit a school board from identifying specific content or grade areas in which reductions are necessary. However, reductions within specific areas must be based primarily on education evaluations.

This section is substantially similar to HCS/HB 631 (2013). (Section 168.124)

TEACHER EVALUATIONS: Each school district must fully implement, and perform at least annually, by the 2014-2015 school year, an evaluation system for teachers and administrators that uses evaluation results for personnel decisions in advance of the next school year. The evaluation system must include formative performance reviews to provide feedback to teachers and must include summative evaluations. If any elements of a local district's evaluation system conflict with the Department's ability to comply with the waiver from the federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act, those items will not be included.

Each district's evaluation system must be based on certain parameters. Each evaluation system for teachers and administrators must use multiple measures, be centered on growth in student achievement and must be consistent with Department of Elementary and Secondary Education regulations with input from the local district. If a district fails to adopt an evaluation system, the district must use the model evaluation system developed by the Department. Alternatively, a district may choose to adopt the Department's model evaluation system. If the district chooses to develop its own system, it must develop such system in consultation with teachers, administrators, and parents.

Teachers and administrators must be evaluated using multiple valid measures. For teachers who teach grades and courses subject to annual assessments aligned with state standards, student achievement and student growth on the assessments must count for at least thirty-three percent of the evaluation, using value-added measures developed by the Department. For teachers who do not directly instruct students in subjects and grades subject to assessments aligned with state standards, but who are expected to contribute to student performance on such assessments, growth in student achievement on the assessments will be used as an evaluation measure and will count for a percentage of the evaluation as determined by the district. Student growth must be measured in accordance with value-added methods or models developed by the Department and must reflect at least one year's worth of growth for a school year or that students otherwise achieved appropriate growth based on expectations derived from at least two years of individual student achievement data.

Multiple additional measures for teachers and administrators must be correlated with impacts on student achievement results, as described in the act.

Teachers and administrators must be given a rating of highly effective, effective, minimally effective, or ineffective that correlates directly to the summative evaluation results. For any permanent teacher who receives a rating of ineffective or minimally effective, the district must provide the teacher with an individualized development plan in consultation with the individual teacher.

Evaluation results must be considered as a significant factor for purposes of retention, promotion, dismissals and other staffing decisions based on performance, including but not limited to incompetency, inefficiency or insubordination, and willful and persistent violation of board policy. Nothing will preclude a district from terminating a probationary teacher when the teacher's evaluation was completed prior to the teacher having at least six months’ teaching experience in the district. Each teacher and administrator contract and collective bargaining agreement, including option years exercised, must authorize the use of evaluation to inform staffing decisions. The form and content of the evaluation must not be the subject of collective bargaining agreements. In addition, any other contrary provisions of collective bargaining agreements, regulations, or policies will be void.

The Department must promulgate rules and regulations governing the development and implementation of local evaluation systems. The rules must be designed to preserve local autonomy and flexibility and must include, as described in the act: processes and requirements to determine the teacher of record; standards for rating levels to be assigned to teachers and administrators; processes and requirements for value-added models. The Department must also: develop, implement, and publicly disseminate a statewide student growth model and a value-added model for determining student growth on assessments; provide technical assistance to districts to develop and implement a local evaluation system; develop a model evaluation system; and monitor local evaluation systems.

Local school boards are prohibited from renewing the contract of any probationary teacher who has been rated "ineffective" for two consecutive school years. A permanent teacher must not be retained if he or she receives three consecutive ratings of ineffective.

This section is substantially similar to HCS/HB 631 (2013). (Section 168.128)

ST. LOUIS CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT: This act allows tenured teachers in the St. Louis City School District to be removed based on incompetency.

This act repeals the requirement that a notification of written charges seeking dismissal received during a vacation period be considered as received on the first day of the following school term.

Currently, to be dismissed for inefficiency in the line of duty, a teacher must be notified in writing at least one semester prior to the presentment of charges. This waiting period is shortened to thirty days and will also apply to incompetency.

The St. Louis City School District must establish and implement a local evaluation system for teachers and administrators that conform to the requirements of section 168.128, as described in the act. The district's special administrative board will be allowed to continue using the "St. Louis Plan" for professional development. If the district retains a permanent teacher who has received a rating of ineffective or minimally effective on an annual year-end performance evaluation, the district must provide the teacher with an individualized development plan.

This act modifies the prohibition on new teachers being hired while available teachers have been placed on leave of absence due to a reduction in force because of insufficient funds or a decrease in student enrollment. This act removes the requirement that probationary teachers be placed on leave first and then in the inverse order of their appointment. The school board may identify specific content or grade areas in which reductions are necessary but reductions within specific areas must be based primarily on educator evaluations.

The school board is prohibited from renewing the contract of any probationary teacher who has received a rating of "ineffective" for two consecutive school years. A permanent teacher must not be retained if he or she receives three consecutive ratings of ineffective. Nothing will preclude a district from terminating a probationary teacher when the teacher’s evaluation was completed prior to the teacher having at least six months of teaching experience in the district. In addition, nothing will prohibit the school board from taking disciplinary action concerning a teacher for issues not otherwise identified.

This section is similar to HCS/HB 631 (2013), SB 601 (2012), HB 1893 (2012) and provisions contained in HCS/HB 1526 (2012). (Section 168.221)

REPEALED SECTIONS: This act repeals a provision governing how a reduction in force based on insufficient funds or a decrease in student enrollment would be conducted for non-certified employees in the St. Louis City School District; provisions dealing with the employment of probationary teachers; and school administrator and superintendent evaluations. (Sections 168.126, 168.291, 168.410)

MICHAEL RUFF