To move back until the 2018-19 school year the deadlines imposed by a 2011 law establishing a process for determining whether teachers are “effective” in which 22.5 percent of the assessment is based on the progress of students in their classroom on statewide tests. A school would be prohibited from assigning students to a class in the same subject for two years in a row taught by a teacher rated “ineffective” in that subject two years in a row. Nothing would prohibit continuing to assign new students to an ineffective teacher, however.   Official Text and Analysis.

With the recommendation that the substitute (S-3) be adopted and that the bill then pass.

To reduce the amount of a teacher's assessment based on actual "student growth" or academic progress from 50 percent to 40 percent.

To place in statute a restrictive list of requirements that teacher evaluation tools would have to contain.

To only allow teachers to be rated on student test results if three years of testing data are available.

To revise a reference to when during the year teacher evaluations would be performed.

To only allow teachers to be rated on student test results if three years of data from the same tests are available.

To make doing teacher evaluations contingent on adopting detailed and restrictive standards for teacher evaluators and systems.

To add an additional level of appeal for teachers who don't like the "ineffective" evaluation rating they've been given.

To expand the range of teacher performance evaluations criteria to include measures that are not "value added" ones.

To delay until the 2018-19 school year the final deadline to establish a teacher "effectiveness" rating system, and reduce the amount of the rating that is based on assessments actual of students in a teacher's classroom. A school would be prohibited from assigning students to a class in the same subject for two years in a row taught by a teacher rated “ineffective” in that subject, but new students could still be assigned.

With the recommendation that the substitute (H-8) be adopted and that the bill then pass.

To require a teacher to have been given mostly "highly effective" ratings by administrators and no "ineffective" ratings in order to qualify for a particular state education certificate.

To require that the training schools are required to provide to ineffective teachers be paid out of a particular state fund.

To base just 20 percent of a teacher's "effectiveness" rating on actual progress of students in the teacher's classroom as measured by state assessments, instead of as much as 50 percent suggested by a 2011 teacher tenure reform law. Also, to let school districts develop their own evaluation tools for other parts of the rating rather than ones prescribed by the state. A school would be prohibited from assigning students to a class in the same subject for two years in a row taught by a teacher rated “ineffective” in that subject, but new students could still be assigned to that teacher.