Teacher & Administrator Evaluation Bills Move

The Senate this week passed Senate Bill 103, which would approve new teacher and administrator evaluation standards.  The bill passed by a vote of 22-15, with Republican Senators Margaret O’Brien (R-Portage), Ken Horn (R-Frankenmuth), Rick Jones (R-Grand Ledge), Tory Rocca (R-Sterling Heights), and Tonya Schuitmaker (R-Lawton) voting no along with Democrats.

As passed by the Senate, SB 103 would base 25% of evaluations on student growth and achievement starting in the 2017-2018 school year, increasing to 40% in the following years.  The bill largely reflects the version passed out of committee.  However, it was amended on the floor to ensure that student growth and assessment data only be considered when assessment data is available for three consecutive school years, preventing results from the MSTEP to be factored into evaluations until the 2018-2019 school year.

Sen. O’Brien, who worked on this issue over the last four years when serving in the House, offered an amendment that would outline explicit standards for evaluation tools utilized the school districts in an attempt, but that amendment was defeated on a narrow 18-19 vote.  The standards Sen. O’Brien attempted to codify in SB 103 were outlined in the report issued a few years ago by the Michigan Council for Educator Effectiveness.  However, Sen. Pavlov argued against the amendment saying it would be overly prescriptive, and in favor of the approach contained in SB 103 that provides a great degree of flexibility to local district in selecting an evaluation tool.  If SB 103 or similar legislation is not passed before the Legislature adjourns for the summer, current law dictates that student growth and assessment will represent 50% of evaluations starting in the 2015-2016 school year, so time is of the essence, especially given the transition to the MSTEP.

Ballot Proposal Fallout

 With the failure of Proposal 1 this past Tuesday (failure being a charitable description), House and Senate leaders have indicated they intend to stay in session throughout the summer if necessary to work on road funding. Neither chamber has ruled out a tax increase or another effort to go to the ballot with a new proposal, but both have indicated they heard voters’ message that any solution needs to be simpler and more straightforward than Proposal 1.  The House has indicated a desire to look at $20 billion in state restricted funds, and while open to new revenue, Speaker Kevin Cotter (R-Mt. Pleasant) has indicated that the vast majority of any new road funding plan must rely on existing revenue, and has no interest in a plan that would rely solely on new revenue (i.e., a tax increase).

Testimony on Teacher/Administrator Evaluations Legislation Moves to Senate Floor

The Senate Education Committee this week moved Senate Bill 103 to the Senate floor, which is the first movement this session of legislation establishing new guidelines for teacher & administrator evaluations.  Following are the latest highlights of the legislation as passed out of committee:

• The percentage of an evaluation based on student growth and assessment data will be 25% in the 2017-2018 school year and 40% in the 2018-2019 and following school years.
• Student growth and assessment data will not be utilized until the 2017-2018 school year, in order to provide continuity and uniform data with implementation the new test in the current school year.
• School districts, ISDs, or PSAs are authorized to either utilize evaluation tools prescribed by the state or adopt their own evaluation tool provided the tool is research-based.  In either case, the tool must be utilized consistently throughout the district.
• Evaluation feedback must be given to teachers and administrators within 30 days.
• A school district, ISD, or PSA is prohibited from assigning a pupil to be taught in the same subject area for two consecutive years by a teacher who is rated ineffective.  If the school district, ISD, or PSA cannot comply, parental notification is required.
• Beginning July 1, 2018, an individual cannot receive a teaching certificate unless they complete three years of classroom teaching and were rated as effective or highly-effective for three consecutive years, or three nonconsecutive school years with recommendation from the chief school administrator, and have completed at least six semester credit hours in a planned program at an approved teacher preparation institution.
• No funding is included for evaluations.  Rather, the intent of Sen. Pavlov is for districts to make this item a priority within the foundation allowance.

Given the flexibility provided for districts to utilize their own evaluation tools and a reduction in the percentage of student growth and assessment utilized in evaluations from 45% to 40%, a number of groups supported the bill with these amendments in committee. Generally, larger districts already have evaluation frameworks in place, so the lack of funding for evaluations is a more critical issue for smaller districts.

It is important to remember that this legislation is a work in progress and will see a number of proposed amendments going forward both on the Senate floor and in the House.  MEMSPA will be working to include language in the bill that requires evaluator training in order to ensure reliability and rigor throughout the evaluation process, and we continue to advocate for funding for evaluations to ensure a degree of fairness between larger and smaller school districts.

Supreme Court Rules 2012 School Employee Retirement Reforms Are Constitutional

The Michigan Supreme Court ruled yesterday in a unanimous 6-0 decision (Justice Richard Bernstein chose not to participate as the case was argued before his election) that Michigan lawmakers did not violate the Michigan Constitution when they amended state law in 2012 to require increased public school employee contributions to pension and retiree health care benefits.  AFT Michigan and other employee groups initially filed suit challenging the constitutionality of the law in 2012, arguing that only the Civil Service Commission had the authority to alter employee compensation, that PA 2012 represented an unlawful “takings”, and was also violation of contract law.  The Supreme Court ultimately disagreed.

Public Act 300 of 2012 included significant amendments to the MPSERS Act intended to provide greater financial stability to the system.  Some of the more significant changes included:

• Employees were required to make higher contributions to their pension benefits by choosing one of three options:
  • Increased contributions to maintain the 1.5% pension multiplier going forward (4% for Basic plan employees, 7% for MIP employees, no graduated scale),
  • A reduced multiplier of 1.25% for future years of service, or electing the reduced multiplier after 30 years of service, or
  • Move into a Defined Contribution (DC) or 401(k) plan, capping past pension credit, with a flat employer contribution of 4% and 3% match for future service.

• New employees could choose between the hybrid Pension Plus plan or a DC/401(k) plan

• No retiree health insurance benefits for employees hired on or after September 4, 2012, replaced with a DC benefit of up to 2% of pay plus a lump sum payment of $1000 or $2000 into a Health Insurance Reimbursement Account

• Increased contributions for retiree health care insurance premiums to at least 20% of premium costs, 10% for existing Medicare-eligible retirees as of January 1, 2013, and

• Continuing the 3% employee contribution for retiree health benefits created in 2010, but guaranteeing individual contributions upon cessation of employment.  Additionally, employees could forego retiree health benefits and instead receive the 2% DC benefit for health care.  This change was made specifically in response to an outstanding legal challenge to creation of the 3% employee contribution requirement in a prior round of MPSERS reforms, PA 75 of 2010.

The Supreme Court decision ruled that the 2012 reforms are constitutional.  Thus, the status quo remains in effect.  However, the Supreme Court did not rule on the constitutionality of the 3% retiree health care contribution initially created in 2010 that applied to employee contributions from July 2010 until September 2012.  Those contributions are currently held in escrow, and the Supreme Court is expected to issue an order that specifically addresses the constitutionality of that provision in the near future.

Roughly $550 million is currently being held in escrow from the July 2010 – September 2012 employee retiree health care 3% contribution enacted in PA 75 of 2010.

 Dr. Venessa Keesler, Deputy Superintendent from MDE was gracious enough to join us at our MEMSPA March board meeting. She shared some insight and MDE perspective regarding the M-STEP transition giving us hope and reliving some anxiety. She highlighted the 5 following points regarding the upcoming assessment: