Bill
S 2468
Bans the State Board of Education from requiring student growth objectives in teacher evaluations, giving districts local control to use or drop SGOs.
Title (short): Prohibits State Board of Education from requiring student growth objectives in teacher evaluations
Note on sources and jurisdiction
- The materials provided appear to combine multiple, inconsistent documents (including a New Jersey teacher‑evaluation bill text and an unrelated Massachusetts military death/disability amendment, plus mixed legislative action and sponsor metadata). The summary below focuses on the teacher‑evaluation language supplied (the “Introduced Version”). Before relying on this summary for legal or policy decisions, verify the bill number, state, and official text on the relevant legislative website.
Purpose and intent
- The bill prohibits the State Board of Education from requiring student growth objectives (SGOs) — or any substantially similar assessment — as part of any teacher’s evaluation. The stated intent is to remove a mandated component of teacher evaluations that currently measures student progress through teacher‑designed assessments.
Key provisions
- Prohibition: “Notwithstanding any law, rule, or regulation to the contrary, the State Board of Education shall not require student growth objectives, or any substantially similar assessment, as part of the evaluation of any teacher.”
- Scope: Applies to the State Board’s authority to set evaluation requirements; does not explicitly ban local districts or school leaders from voluntarily using SGOs.
- Effective date: The act takes effect immediately upon enactment (per the introduced text).
- Background detail (from bill statement): Under current practice SGOs are multiple assessments designed by teachers to measure student progress versus state learning standards and reportedly account for 15–50% of a teacher’s overall evaluation.
Who would be affected
- Teachers: Would no longer be subject to a state‑mandated requirement that SGOs be included in their evaluations; the weight and components of evaluations could change.
- State Board of Education: Would lose authority to mandate SGOs or substantially similar measures as an evaluation requirement.
- School districts and local evaluators: Would gain discretion whether to use SGOs; evaluation rubrics and procedures may need revision.
- Students and accountability systems: Potentially affected indirectly through changes to how teacher effectiveness and student growth are measured.
Potential impacts and considerations
- Local control: The change increases local discretion over evaluation design; districts could still adopt SGOs voluntarily or via collective bargaining.
- Comparability and data: Removing a statewide SGO requirement may reduce comparability of evaluation results across districts and complicate statewide aggregation of student‑growth data.
- Labor and legal implications: May affect collective bargaining, evaluation contracts, educator professional development, and any performance‑pay systems tied to SGOs.
- Fiscal impact: The bill itself contains no direct spending provisions; however, districts could see indirect budgetary effects if they revise evaluation systems or assessments.
Procedural status (from provided material)
- Introduced; described as “Introduced Version.” The provided action history is inconsistent across jurisdictions. Confirm current status (committee referral/hearing dates, sponsor list, and official bill number) on the appropriate state legislative website.
Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.
Sign in to ask a question.
