HB4256 102ND GENERAL ASSEMBLY

LRB102 21733 CMG 30852 b

102ND GENERAL ASSEMBLY
State of Illinois
2021 and 2022
HB4256

Introduced 1/5/2022, by Rep. Tony McCombie - Thomas M. Bennett

SYNOPSIS AS INTRODUCED:

105 ILCS 5/24A-5	from Ch. 122, par. 24A-5
105 ILCS 5/24A-7	from Ch. 122, par. 24A-7
105 ILCS 5/24A-15

Amends the Employment of Teachers Article of the School Code. In provisions related to the content of evaluation plans, allows a school district to waive, for the 2021-2022 and 2022-2023 school years only, the evaluation requirement of any teacher in contractual continued service whose performance during the last school year in which the teacher was evaluated was rated as either "excellent" or "proficient". In regard to rules adopted by the State Board of Education concerning educator evaluations, for the 2021-2022 and 2022-2023 school years only, provides that factors related to methods of measuring student growth may not be used in any educator evaluation. In regard to the development of an evaluation plan for principals and assistant principals, allows a school district to waive, for the 2021-2022 and 2022-2023 school years only, the evaluation requirement of any principal or assistant principal whose performance during the last school year in which the teacher was evaluated was rated as either "excellent" or "proficient". Effective immediately.

A BILL FOR

AN ACT concerning education.

Be it enacted by the People of the State of Illinois, represented in the General Assembly:

Section 5. The School Code is amended by changing Sections 24A-5, 24A-7, and 24A-15 as follows:

(105 ILCS 5/24A-5) (from Ch. 122, par. 24A-5)

(Text of Section before amendment by P.A. 102-252)

Sec. 24A-5. Content of evaluation plans. This Section does not apply to teachers assigned to schools identified in an agreement entered into between the board of a school district operating under Article 34 of this Code and the exclusive representative of the district's teachers in accordance with Section 34-85c of this Code.

Each school district to which this Article applies shall establish a teacher evaluation plan which ensures that each teacher in contractual continued service is evaluated at least once in the course of every 2 school years.

By no later than September 1, 2012, each school district shall establish a teacher evaluation plan that ensures that:

(1) each teacher not in contractual continued service is evaluated at least once every school year; and

(2) each teacher in contractual continued service is evaluated at least once in the course of every 2 school years. However, any teacher in contractual continued service whose performance is rated as either "needs improvement" or "unsatisfactory" must be evaluated at least once in the school year following the receipt of such rating.

For the 2021-2022 and 2022-2023 school years only, a school district may waive the evaluation requirement of any teacher in contractual continued service whose performance was rated as either "excellent" or "proficient" during the last school year in which the teacher was evaluated under this Section.

Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Section or any other Section of the School Code, a principal shall not be prohibited from evaluating any teachers within a school during his or her first year as principal of such school. If a first-year principal exercises this option in a school district where the evaluation plan provides for a teacher in contractual continued service to be evaluated once in the course of every 2 school years, then a new 2-year evaluation plan must be established.

The evaluation plan shall comply with the requirements of this Section and of any rules adopted by the State Board of Education pursuant to this Section.

The plan shall include a description of each teacher's duties and responsibilities and of the standards to which that teacher is expected to conform, and shall include at least the following components:

(a) personal observation of the teacher in the classroom by the evaluator, unless the teacher has no classroom duties.

(b) consideration of the teacher's attendance, planning, instructional methods, classroom management, where relevant, and competency in the subject matter taught.

(c) by no later than the applicable implementation date, consideration of student growth as a significant factor in the rating of the teacher's performance.

(d) prior to September 1, 2012, rating of the performance of teachers in contractual continued service as either:

(i) "excellent", "satisfactory" or "unsatisfactory"; or

(ii) "excellent", "proficient", "needs improvement" or "unsatisfactory".

(e) on and after September 1, 2012, rating of the performance of all teachers as "excellent", "proficient", "needs improvement" or "unsatisfactory".

(f) specification as to the teacher's strengths and weaknesses, with supporting reasons for the comments made.

(g) inclusion of a copy of the evaluation in the teacher's personnel file and provision of a copy to the teacher.

(h) within 30 school days after the completion of an evaluation rating a teacher in contractual continued service as "needs improvement", development by the evaluator, in consultation with the teacher, and taking into account the teacher's on-going professional responsibilities including his or her regular teaching assignments, of a professional development plan directed to the areas that need improvement and any supports that the district will provide to address the areas identified as needing improvement.

(i) within 30 school days after completion of an evaluation rating a teacher in contractual continued service as "unsatisfactory", development and commencement by the district of a remediation plan designed to correct deficiencies cited, provided the deficiencies are deemed remediable. In all school districts the remediation plan for unsatisfactory, tenured teachers shall provide for 90 school days of remediation within the classroom, unless an applicable collective bargaining agreement provides for a shorter duration. In all school districts evaluations issued pursuant to this Section shall be issued within 10 days after the conclusion of the respective remediation plan. However, the school board or other governing authority of the district shall not lose jurisdiction to discharge a teacher in the event the evaluation is not issued within 10 days after the conclusion of the respective remediation plan.

(j) participation in the remediation plan by the teacher in contractual continued service rated "unsatisfactory", an evaluator and a consulting teacher selected by the evaluator of the teacher who was rated "unsatisfactory", which consulting teacher is an educational employee as defined in the Educational Labor Relations Act, has at least 5 years' teaching experience, and a reasonable familiarity with the assignment of the teacher being evaluated, and who received an "excellent" rating on his or her most recent evaluation. Where no teachers who meet these criteria are available within the district, the district shall request and the applicable regional office of education shall supply, to participate in the remediation process, an individual who meets these criteria.

In a district having a population of less than 500,000 with an exclusive bargaining agent, the bargaining agent may, if it so chooses, supply a roster of qualified teachers from whom the consulting teacher is to be selected. That roster shall, however, contain the names of at least 5 teachers, each of whom meets the criteria for consulting teacher with regard to the teacher being evaluated, or the names of all teachers so qualified if that number is less than 5. In the event of a dispute as to qualification, the State Board shall determine qualification.

(k) a mid-point and final evaluation by an evaluator during and at the end of the remediation period, immediately following receipt of a remediation plan provided for under subsections (i) and (j) of this Section. Each evaluation shall assess the teacher's performance during the time period since the prior evaluation; provided that the last evaluation shall also include an overall evaluation of the teacher's performance during the remediation period. A written copy of the evaluations and ratings, in which any deficiencies in performance and recommendations for correction are identified, shall be provided to and discussed with the teacher within 10 school days after the date of the evaluation, unless an applicable collective bargaining agreement provides to the contrary. These subsequent evaluations shall be conducted by an evaluator. The consulting teacher shall provide advice to the teacher rated "unsatisfactory" on how to improve teaching skills and to successfully complete the remediation plan. The consulting teacher shall participate in developing the remediation plan, but the final decision as to the evaluation shall be done solely by the evaluator, unless an applicable collective bargaining agreement provides to the contrary. Evaluations at the conclusion of the remediation process shall be separate and distinct from the required annual evaluations of teachers and shall not be subject to the guidelines and procedures relating to those annual evaluations. The evaluator may but is not required to use the forms provided for the annual evaluation of teachers in the district's evaluation plan.

(l) reinstatement to the evaluation schedule set forth in the district's evaluation plan for any teacher in contractual continued service who achieves a rating equal to or better than "satisfactory" or "proficient" in the school year following a rating of "needs improvement" or "unsatisfactory".

(m) dismissal in accordance with subsection (d) of Section 24-12 or Section 24-16.5 or 34-85 of this Code of any teacher who fails to complete any applicable remediation plan with a rating equal to or better than a "satisfactory" or "proficient" rating. Districts and teachers subject to dismissal hearings are precluded from compelling the testimony of consulting teachers at such hearings under subsection (d) of Section 24-12 or Section 24-16.5 or 34-85 of this Code, either as to the rating process or for opinions of performances by teachers under remediation.

(n) After the implementation date of an evaluation system for teachers in a district as specified in Section 24A-2.5 of this Code, if a teacher in contractual continued service successfully completes a remediation plan following a rating of "unsatisfactory" in an annual or biennial overall performance evaluation received after the foregoing implementation date and receives a subsequent rating of "unsatisfactory" in any of the teacher's annual or biennial overall performance evaluation ratings received during the 36-month period following the teacher's completion of the remediation plan, then the school district may forego remediation and seek dismissal in accordance with subsection (d) of Section 24-12 or Section 34-85 of this Code.

Nothing in this Section or Section 24A-4 shall be construed as preventing immediate dismissal of a teacher for deficiencies which are deemed irremediable or for actions which are injurious to or endanger the health or person of students in the classroom or school, or preventing the dismissal or non-renewal of teachers not in contractual continued service for any reason not prohibited by applicable employment, labor, and civil rights laws. Failure to strictly comply with the time requirements contained in Section 24A-5 shall not invalidate the results of the remediation plan.

Nothing contained in this amendatory Act of the 98th General Assembly repeals, supersedes, invalidates, or nullifies final decisions in lawsuits pending on the effective date of this amendatory Act of the 98th General Assembly in Illinois courts involving the interpretation of Public Act 97-8.

If the Governor has declared a disaster due to a public health emergency pursuant to Section 7 of the Illinois Emergency Management Agency Act that suspends in-person instruction, the timelines in this Section connected to the commencement and completion of any remediation plan are waived. Except if the parties mutually agree otherwise and the agreement is in writing, any remediation plan that had been in place for more than 45 days prior to the suspension of in-person instruction shall resume when in-person instruction resumes and any remediation plan that had been in place for fewer than 45 days prior to the suspension of in-person instruction shall be discontinued and a new remediation period shall begin when in-person instruction resumes. The requirements of this paragraph apply regardless of whether they are included in a school district's teacher evaluation plan.

(Source: P.A. 101-643, eff. 6-18-20.)

(Text of Section after amendment by P.A. 102-252)

Sec. 24A-5. Content of evaluation plans. This Section does not apply to teachers assigned to schools identified in an agreement entered into between the board of a school district operating under Article 34 of this Code and the exclusive representative of the district's teachers in accordance with Section 34-85c of this Code.

Each school district to which this Article applies shall establish a teacher evaluation plan which ensures that each teacher in contractual continued service is evaluated at least once in the course of every 2 or 3 school years as provided in this Section.

Each school district shall establish a teacher evaluation plan that ensures that:

(1) each teacher not in contractual continued service is evaluated at least once every school year; and

(2) except as otherwise provided in this Section, each teacher in contractual continued service is evaluated at least once in the course of every 2 school years. However, any teacher in contractual continued service whose performance is rated as either "needs improvement" or "unsatisfactory" must be evaluated at least once in the school year following the receipt of such rating.

No later than September 1, 2022, each school district must establish a teacher evaluation plan that ensures that each teacher in contractual continued service whose performance is rated as either "excellent" or "proficient" is evaluated at least once in the course of the 3 school years after receipt of the rating and implement an informal teacher observation plan established by agency rule and by agreement of the joint committee established under subsection (b) of Section 24A-4 of this Code that ensures that each teacher in contractual continued service whose performance is rated as either "excellent" or "proficient" is informally observed at least once in the course of the 2 school years after receipt of the rating.

For the 2021-2022 and 2022-2023 school years only, a school district may waive the evaluation requirement of any teacher in contractual continued service whose performance was rated as either "excellent" or "proficient" during the last school year in which the teacher was evaluated under this Section.

Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Section or any other Section of the School Code, a principal shall not be prohibited from evaluating any teachers within a school during his or her first year as principal of such school. If a first-year principal exercises this option in a school district where the evaluation plan provides for a teacher in contractual continued service to be evaluated once in the course of every 2 or 3 school years, as applicable, then a new 2-year or 3-year evaluation plan must be established.

The evaluation plan shall comply with the requirements of this Section and of any rules adopted by the State Board of Education pursuant to this Section.

The plan shall include a description of each teacher's duties and responsibilities and of the standards to which that teacher is expected to conform, and shall include at least the following components:

(a) personal observation of the teacher in the classroom by the evaluator, unless the teacher has no classroom duties.

(b) consideration of the teacher's attendance, planning, instructional methods, classroom management, where relevant, and competency in the subject matter taught.

(c) by no later than the applicable implementation date, consideration of student growth as a significant factor in the rating of the teacher's performance.

(d) prior to September 1, 2012, rating of the performance of teachers in contractual continued service as either:

(i) "excellent", "satisfactory" or "unsatisfactory"; or

(ii) "excellent", "proficient", "needs improvement" or "unsatisfactory".

(e) on and after September 1, 2012, rating of the performance of all teachers as "excellent", "proficient", "needs improvement" or "unsatisfactory".

(f) specification as to the teacher's strengths and weaknesses, with supporting reasons for the comments made.

(g) inclusion of a copy of the evaluation in the teacher's personnel file and provision of a copy to the teacher.

(h) within 30 school days after the completion of an evaluation rating a teacher in contractual continued service as "needs improvement", development by the evaluator, in consultation with the teacher, and taking into account the teacher's on-going professional responsibilities including his or her regular teaching assignments, of a professional development plan directed to the areas that need improvement and any supports that the district will provide to address the areas identified as needing improvement.

(i) within 30 school days after completion of an evaluation rating a teacher in contractual continued service as "unsatisfactory", development and commencement by the district of a remediation plan designed to correct deficiencies cited, provided the deficiencies are deemed remediable. In all school districts the remediation plan for unsatisfactory, tenured teachers shall provide for 90 school days of remediation within the classroom, unless an applicable collective bargaining agreement provides for a shorter duration. In all school districts evaluations issued pursuant to this Section shall be issued within 10 days after the conclusion of the respective remediation plan. However, the school board or other governing authority of the district shall not lose jurisdiction to discharge a teacher in the event the evaluation is not issued within 10 days after the conclusion of the respective remediation plan.

(j) participation in the remediation plan by the teacher in contractual continued service rated "unsatisfactory", an evaluator and a consulting teacher selected by the evaluator of the teacher who was rated "unsatisfactory", which consulting teacher is an educational employee as defined in the Educational Labor Relations Act, has at least 5 years' teaching experience, and a reasonable familiarity with the assignment of the teacher being evaluated, and who received an "excellent" rating on his or her most recent evaluation. Where no teachers who meet these criteria are available within the district, the district shall request and the applicable regional office of education shall supply, to participate in the remediation process, an individual who meets these criteria.

In a district having a population of less than 500,000 with an exclusive bargaining agent, the bargaining agent may, if it so chooses, supply a roster of qualified teachers from whom the consulting teacher is to be selected. That roster shall, however, contain the names of at least 5 teachers, each of whom meets the criteria for consulting teacher with regard to the teacher being evaluated, or the names of all teachers so qualified if that number is less than 5. In the event of a dispute as to qualification, the State Board shall determine qualification.

(k) a mid-point and final evaluation by an evaluator during and at the end of the remediation period, immediately following receipt of a remediation plan provided for under subsections (i) and (j) of this Section. Each evaluation shall assess the teacher's performance during the time period since the prior evaluation; provided that the last evaluation shall also include an overall evaluation of the teacher's performance during the remediation period. A written copy of the evaluations and ratings, in which any deficiencies in performance and recommendations for correction are identified, shall be provided to and discussed with the teacher within 10 school days after the date of the evaluation, unless an applicable collective bargaining agreement provides to the contrary. These subsequent evaluations shall be conducted by an evaluator. The consulting teacher shall provide advice to the teacher rated "unsatisfactory" on how to improve teaching skills and to successfully complete the remediation plan. The consulting teacher shall participate in developing the remediation plan, but the final decision as to the evaluation shall be done solely by the evaluator, unless an applicable collective bargaining agreement provides to the contrary. Evaluations at the conclusion of the remediation process shall be separate and distinct from the required annual evaluations of teachers and shall not be subject to the guidelines and procedures relating to those annual evaluations. The evaluator may but is not required to use the forms provided for the annual evaluation of teachers in the district's evaluation plan.

(l) reinstatement to the evaluation schedule set forth in the district's evaluation plan for any teacher in contractual continued service who achieves a rating equal to or better than "satisfactory" or "proficient" in the school year following a rating of "needs improvement" or "unsatisfactory".

(m) dismissal in accordance with subsection (d) of Section 24-12 or Section 24-16.5 or 34-85 of this Code of any teacher who fails to complete any applicable remediation plan with a rating equal to or better than a "satisfactory" or "proficient" rating. Districts and teachers subject to dismissal hearings are precluded from compelling the testimony of consulting teachers at such hearings under subsection (d) of Section 24-12 or Section 24-16.5 or 34-85 of this Code, either as to the rating process or for opinions of performances by teachers under remediation.

(n) After the implementation date of an evaluation system for teachers in a district as specified in Section 24A-2.5 of this Code, if a teacher in contractual continued service successfully completes a remediation plan following a rating of "unsatisfactory" in an overall performance evaluation received after the foregoing implementation date and receives a subsequent rating of "unsatisfactory" in any of the teacher's overall performance evaluation ratings received during the 36-month period following the teacher's completion of the remediation plan, then the school district may forego remediation and seek dismissal in accordance with subsection (d) of Section 24-12 or Section 34-85 of this Code.

Nothing in this Section or Section 24A-4 shall be construed as preventing immediate dismissal of a teacher for deficiencies which are deemed irremediable or for actions which are injurious to or endanger the health or person of students in the classroom or school, or preventing the dismissal or non-renewal of teachers not in contractual continued service for any reason not prohibited by applicable employment, labor, and civil rights laws. Failure to strictly comply with the time requirements contained in Section 24A-5 shall not invalidate the results of the remediation plan.

Nothing contained in this amendatory Act of the 98th General Assembly repeals, supersedes, invalidates, or nullifies final decisions in lawsuits pending on the effective date of this amendatory Act of the 98th General Assembly in Illinois courts involving the interpretation of Public Act 97-8.

If the Governor has declared a disaster due to a public health emergency pursuant to Section 7 of the Illinois Emergency Management Agency Act that suspends in-person instruction, the timelines in this Section connected to the commencement and completion of any remediation plan are waived. Except if the parties mutually agree otherwise and the agreement is in writing, any remediation plan that had been in place for more than 45 days prior to the suspension of in-person instruction shall resume when in-person instruction resumes and any remediation plan that had been in place for fewer than 45 days prior to the suspension of in-person instruction shall be discontinued and a new remediation period shall begin when in-person instruction resumes. The requirements of this paragraph apply regardless of whether they are included in a school district's teacher evaluation plan.

(Source: P.A. 101-643, eff. 6-18-20; 102-252, eff. 1-1-22.)

(105 ILCS 5/24A-7) (from Ch. 122, par. 24A-7)

(Text of Section before amendment by P.A. 102-252)

Sec. 24A-7. Rules. The State Board of Education is authorized to adopt such rules as are deemed necessary to implement and accomplish the purposes and provisions of this Article, including, but not limited to, rules:

(1) relating to the methods for measuring student growth (including, but not limited to, limitations on the age of usable data; the amount of data needed to reliably and validly measure growth for the purpose of teacher and principal evaluations; and whether and at what time annual State assessments may be used as one of multiple measures of student growth);

(2) defining the term "significant factor" for purposes of including consideration of student growth in performance ratings;

(3) controlling for such factors as student characteristics (including, but not limited to, students receiving special education and English Learner services), student attendance, and student mobility so as to best measure the impact that a teacher, principal, school and school district has on students' academic achievement;

(4) establishing minimum requirements for district teacher and principal evaluation instruments and procedures; and

(5) establishing a model evaluation plan for use by school districts in which student growth shall comprise 50% of the performance rating.

Notwithstanding any other rule or law to the contrary, for the 2021-2022 and 2022-2023 school years only, student growth measures described under paragraph (1) of this Section and in administrative rules adopted by the State Board of Education may not be used as a factor in any evaluation under this Article.

Notwithstanding any other provision in this Section, such rules shall not preclude a school district having 500,000 or more inhabitants from using an annual State assessment as the sole measure of student growth for purposes of teacher or principal evaluations.

The State Superintendent of Education shall convene a Performance Evaluation Advisory Council, which shall be staffed by the State Board of Education. Members of the Council shall be selected by the State Superintendent and include, without limitation, representatives of teacher unions and school district management, persons with expertise in performance evaluation processes and systems, as well as other stakeholders. The Council shall meet at least quarterly and may also meet at the call of the chairperson of the Council, following August 18, 2017 (the effective date of Public Act 100-211) until June 30, 2021. The Council shall advise the State Board of Education on the ongoing implementation of performance evaluations in this State, which may include gathering public feedback, sharing best practices, consulting with the State Board on any proposed rule changes regarding evaluations, and other subjects as determined by the chairperson of the Council.

Prior to the applicable implementation date, these rules shall not apply to teachers assigned to schools identified in an agreement entered into between the board of a school district operating under Article 34 of this Code and the exclusive representative of the district's teachers in accordance with Section 34-85c of this Code.

(Source: P.A. 102-558, eff. 8-20-21.)

(Text of Section after amendment by P.A. 102-252)

Sec. 24A-7. Rules. The State Board of Education is authorized to adopt such rules as are deemed necessary to implement and accomplish the purposes and provisions of this Article, including, but not limited to, rules:

(1) relating to the methods for measuring student growth (including, but not limited to, limitations on the age of usable data; the amount of data needed to reliably and validly measure growth for the purpose of teacher and principal evaluations; and whether and at what time annual State assessments may be used as one of multiple measures of student growth);

(2) defining the term "significant factor" for purposes of including consideration of student growth in performance ratings;

(3) controlling for such factors as student characteristics (including, but not limited to, students receiving special education and English Learner services), student attendance, and student mobility so as to best measure the impact that a teacher, principal, school and school district has on students' academic achievement;

(4) establishing minimum requirements for district teacher and principal evaluation instruments and procedures; and

(5) establishing a model evaluation plan for use by school districts in which student growth shall comprise 50% of the performance rating.

Notwithstanding any other rule or law to the contrary, for the 2021-2022 and 2022-2023 school years only, student growth measures described under paragraph (1) of this Section and in administrative rules adopted by the State Board of Education may not be used as a factor in any evaluation under this Article.

Notwithstanding any other provision in this Section, such rules shall not preclude a school district having 500,000 or more inhabitants from using an annual State assessment as the sole measure of student growth for purposes of teacher or principal evaluations.

The State Superintendent of Education shall convene a Performance Evaluation Advisory Council, which shall be staffed by the State Board of Education. Members of the Council shall be selected by the State Superintendent and include, without limitation, representatives of teacher unions and school district management, persons with expertise in performance evaluation processes and systems, as well as other stakeholders. The Council shall meet at least quarterly and may also meet at the call of the chairperson of the Council, following August 18, 2017 (the effective date of Public Act 100-211) until June 30, 2024. The Council shall advise the State Board of Education on the ongoing implementation of performance evaluations in this State, which may include gathering public feedback, sharing best practices, consulting with the State Board on any proposed rule changes regarding evaluations, and other subjects as determined by the chairperson of the Council.

Prior to the applicable implementation date, these rules shall not apply to teachers assigned to schools identified in an agreement entered into between the board of a school district operating under Article 34 of this Code and the exclusive representative of the district's teachers in accordance with Section 34-85c of this Code.

(Source: P.A. 102-252, eff. 1-1-22; 102-558, eff. 8-20-21.)

(105 ILCS 5/24A-15)

Sec. 24A-15. Development of evaluation plan for principals and assistant principals.

(a) Each school district, except for a school district organized under Article 34 of this Code, shall establish a principal and assistant principal evaluation plan in accordance with this Section. The plan must ensure that each principal and assistant principal is evaluated as follows:

(1) For a principal or assistant principal on a single-year contract, the evaluation must take place by March 1 of each year.

(2) For a principal or assistant principal on a multi-year contract under Section 10-23.8a of this Code, the evaluation must take place by March 1 of the final year of the contract.

On and after September 1, 2012, the plan must:

(i) rate the principal's or assistant principal's performance as "excellent", "proficient", "needs improvement" or "unsatisfactory"; and

(ii) ensure that each principal and assistant principal is evaluated at least once every school year.

Nothing in this Section prohibits a school district from conducting additional evaluations of principals and assistant principals.

For the 2021-2022 and 2022-2023 school years only, a school district may waive the evaluation requirement of any principal or assistant principal whose performance was rated as either "excellent" or "proficient" during the last school year in which the principal or assistant principal was evaluated under this Section.

(b) The evaluation shall include a description of the principal's or assistant principal's duties and responsibilities and the standards to which the principal or assistant principal is expected to conform.

(c) The evaluation for a principal must be performed by the district superintendent, the superintendent's designee, or, in the absence of the superintendent or his or her designee, an individual appointed by the school board who holds a registered Type 75 State administrative certificate.

Prior to September 1, 2012, the evaluation must be in writing and must at least do all of the following:

(1) Consider the principal's specific duties, responsibilities, management, and competence as a principal.

(2) Specify the principal's strengths and weaknesses, with supporting reasons.

(3) Align with research-based standards established by administrative rule.

On and after September 1, 2012, the evaluation must, in addition to the requirements in items (1), (2), and (3) of this subsection (c), provide for the use of data and indicators on student growth as a significant factor in rating performance.

(c-5) The evaluation of an assistant principal must be performed by the principal, the district superintendent, the superintendent's designee, or, in the absence of the superintendent or his or her designee, an individual appointed by the school board who holds a registered Type 75 State administrative certificate. The evaluation must be in writing and must at least do all of the following:

(1) Consider the assistant principal's specific duties, responsibilities, management, and competence as an assistant principal.

(2) Specify the assistant principal's strengths and weaknesses with supporting reasons.

(3) Align with the Illinois Professional Standards for School Leaders or research-based district standards.

On and after September 1, 2012, the evaluation must, in addition to the requirements in items (1), (2), and (3) of this subsection (c-5), provide for the use of data and indicators on student growth as a significant factor in rating performance.

(d) One copy of the evaluation must be included in the principal's or assistant principal's personnel file and one copy of the evaluation must be provided to the principal or assistant principal.

(e) Failure by a district to evaluate a principal or assistant principal and to provide the principal or assistant principal with a copy of the evaluation at least once during the term of the principal's or assistant principal's contract, in accordance with this Section, is evidence that the principal or assistant principal is performing duties and responsibilities in at least a satisfactory manner and shall serve to automatically extend the principal's or assistant principal's contract for a period of one year after the contract would otherwise expire, under the same terms and conditions as the prior year's contract. The requirements in this Section are in addition to the right of a school board to reclassify a principal or assistant principal pursuant to Section 10-23.8b of this Code.

(f) Nothing in this Section prohibits a school board from ordering lateral transfers of principals or assistant principals to positions of similar rank and salary.

(Source: P.A. 96-861, eff. 1-15-10; 97-217, eff. 7-28-11.)

Section 95. No acceleration or delay. Where this Act makes changes in a statute that is represented in this Act by text that is not yet or no longer in effect (for example, a Section represented by multiple versions), the use of that text does not accelerate or delay the taking effect of (i) the changes made by this Act or (ii) provisions derived from any other Public Act.

Section 99. Effective date. This Act takes effect upon becoming law.