To require public schools to make teacher layoff decisions on the basis of whether a teacher is more or less “effective,” and prohibit using seniority as the primary or determining factor (“last in first out,” or LIFO). Also, to allow principals to refuse to accept an "ineffective" teacher assigned to the school, placing the employee on unpaid leave. Evidence of increased student achievement would be the "majority" of the effectiveness judgment. If a current union contract prohibits these criteria, they would only go into effect after it has expired. See also House Bill 4625.   Official Text and Analysis.

With the recommendation that the substitute (H-2) be adopted and that the bill then pass.

To replace the previous version of the bill with one that revises various details, but does not change its substance. This version was defeated in favor of another substitute with more changes.

To replace the previous version of the bill with one that revises details but does not change the substance as previously described.

To clarify that the bill applies to layoff-related decisions, not general staffing ones.

To exempt from the proposed policy teachers who are rated either "effective" or "highly effective." In other words, a school could still lay-off a "highly effective" teacher with less seniority ahead of an "effective" one who has more years on the payroll.

Eliminate the tie-bar of the bill to House Bill 4628, which prohibits this bill from becoming law unless that one does also. HB 4628 would prohibit teacher unions from bargaining over staffing decisions, including assignments, promotions, demotions, transfers, layoffs, methods for assessing “effectiveness,” discipline and merit pay systems.

To require public schools to make teacher layoff decisions on the basis of whether a teacher is more or less “effective,” and prohibit using seniority as the primary or determining factor (“last in first out,” or LIFO). Also, to allow principals to refuse to accept an "ineffective" teacher assigned to the school, placing the employee on unpaid leave. The bill would establish an "effectiveness" evaluation system in which an empirical "student growth" standard would count for 50 percent of the rating. If a current union contract prohibits these criteria, they would only go into effect after it has expired.

With the recommendation that the substitute (S-1) be adopted and that the bill then pass.

To require a proposed gubernatorial review of recommendations made by a proposed state "governor's council on educator effectiveness" to include examining recommendations for how local school districts perform teacher effectiveness ratings.

To adopt a version that strips out a House-passed provision allowing principals to refuse to accept an "ineffective" teacher assigned to the school, placing the employee on unpaid leave. Also, among other changes, one establishing a detailed and complex "effectivness" rating system in which a "student acheivement" standard would only gradually be phased-in, and count for 50 percent of the rating, vs. being the "predominant" criteria in the House version.

To impose additional procedural steps before a tenured teacher can be rated as "ineffective" (which under House Bill 4625, if done twice would remove the person's tenure privilege).

To prohibit public schools from using seniority as the primary or determining factor when making layoff or recall decisions (“last in first out,” or LIFO), and prohibit giving preference to a teacher rated "ineffective" over ones rated "minimally effective" or above, according to a detailed and complex rating system. Unlike the House version, principals could not refuse to accept an "ineffective" teacher assigned to the school.

To eliminate the tie-bar of the bill to House Bill 4628, which prohibits this bill from becoming law unless that one does also. HB 4628 would the teachers union from bargaining over staffing decisions, including assignments, promotions, demotions, transfers, layoffs, methods for assessing “effectiveness,” discipline and merit pay systems, meaning it could not place obstacles in the way of a school district instituting these measures.

To require public school officials to “take all steps necessary to ensure that pupils who are members of historically underserved groups, such as African-American, Hispanic, Native American, or low-income pupils, are not assigned disproportionately to ineffective teachers”.

To concur with the Senate-passed version of the bill, which among other things, stripped out a provision allowing a principal to refuse to accept an assigned "ineffective" teacher, and which potentially waters-down the extent to which effectiveness ratings are based on "student acheivement".