Skip to content
Bills from the 2011–12 session

Assembly Bill 558

The governor's read to lead development fund, the Read to Lead Development Council, grants in support of literacy and early childhood development programs, teacher licensure, screening kindergarten pupils for reading readiness, remedial reading services for certain pupils, evaluating teacher preparatory programs and educator effectiveness, requiring the exercise of rule-making authority, and making an appropriation

Topics: Executive office, Governor: Appointments, Kindergarten, Literacy, Public Instruction, Department of, School, Teacher: Certificate

Stopped before the full Assembly voted

The recommended passing it, but the full Assembly never voted on it. To try again, a lawmaker would have to start a new bill.

  1. Introduced, passed

    Feb 10, 2012

  2. Committee, passed

    Approved

  3. Assembly vote, stopped here

    Stopped here. The full Assembly never voted on it.

  4. Senate vote, not reached

  5. Governor, not reached

  6. Law, not reached

Latest entry in the official record, Mar 23, 2012: “Failed to pass pursuant to ⁠”

Read the bill

Following saves it on this device. New actions show on your Following page. You can also get updates in a feed reader.

What it would have done

Summary by the , the Legislature's nonpartisan drafting office. It's their wording, not ours.

Read to lead This bill creates the Read to Lead Development Council in the Office of the Governor. The council consists of the governor, the state superintendent of public instruction, four legislators, and 15 additional members appointed by the governor.

The bill creates a segregated fund, designated the governor's read to lead development fund, consisting of all contributions made to the fund. The bill appropriates moneys in the fund to the governor and to the state superintendent to award grants in support of literacy and early childhood development programs. The governor may award a grant to any person other than a school board. The state superintendent may award a grant only to a school board. The governor and the state superintendent jointly determine the amount of each grant. The bill directs the Read to Lead Development Council to advise the governor and state superintendent on grant recipients.

Read the full summary

Assessments of reading readiness This bill directs each school board and each independent charter school annually to assess all pupils in five-year-old kindergarten programs for reading readiness. If the Department of Public Instruction (DPI) determines that sufficient moneys are available, the school board and the charter school must also assess all pupils in four-year-old kindergarten programs. The school board and charter school must use an assessment selected by DPI. The school board and charter school must provide a pupil whose assessment indicates that he or she is at risk of reading difficulty with remedial reading services. The bill appropriates moneys to DPI to provide school districts and independent charter schools with the assessments.

Teacher licensure Beginning January 1, 2014, the bill prohibits DPI from issuing an initial teaching license that authorizes the holder to teach in grades kindergarten to five or in special education unless the applicant has passed an examination that tests the applicant's knowledge of specified facets of reading development and reading instruction. The bill provides that any teacher who passes the examination must notify DPI in order to have a notation added to the teacher's license indicating that he or she passed the examination.

Teacher preparatory programs Under current law, DPI establishes standards and requirements for and approves education programs leading to licensure as a teacher, including programs leading to licensure as an alternative education program teacher. This bill requires each teacher education program located in this state to, beginning on July 1, 2012, and annually thereafter, provide DPI with a list of graduates, and their graduation dates, from each term or semester of the program's most recently completed academic year. The bill requires DPI to include this information about graduates of teacher education programs in the statewide student information system.

This bill requires DPI to work in consultation with the governor's office, the University or Wisconsin system, chairpersons and ranking members of the senate and assembly education committees, the technical college system, and the Wisconsin Association of Independent Colleges and Universities to determine how the performance of recent graduates of teacher education programs should be used to evaluate the teacher education programs and what measures of performance will be used to evaluate teacher performance. The bill also requires DPI to develop a system through which information about teacher performance and the evaluation of teacher education programs will be made available to the public. The bill requires DPI, beginning in the 2013-14 school year, to report for each teacher education program the rate of passage on first attempt of students and graduates of the program on examinations administered for licensure as a teacher and as an alternative education program teacher, and any other information recommended by DPI in consultation with the entities above, on the system developed as required in the bill.

Beginning in the 2013-14 school year, each teacher education program must prominently display this information on the program's web site and provide this information to persons receiving admissions information to the program.

Educator effectiveness evaluations This bill also requires DPI to develop an educator effectiveness evaluation system (state system) and to develop, by rule, an equivalency process aligned with the state system (equivalency process) to assist school districts in the evaluation of the performance of teachers and principals in the district. Under the state system, 50 percent of the total evaluation score assigned to a teacher or principal must be based on measures of student performance, and 50 percent of the total evaluation score must be based upon the extent to which the teacher's or principal's practice meets standards established under the 2011 Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium or under the 2008 Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium Educational Leadership Policy Standards, respectively. The equivalency process must be based upon the same interstate standards as the state system and must evaluate a teacher with reference to the following four domains:

planning and preparation, the classroom environment, instruction, and professional responsibilities and development. Teachers and principals evaluated under both the state system and the equivalency process must be placed in one of multiple performance categories. Each school district must begin evaluating teachers and principals using either the state system or the equivalency process in the 2014-15 school year.

Who's behind it

6 lawmakers are its ⁠. All 6 are Republicans.

3 more lawmakers ⁠.

See all 9 names

Authors (6)

Signed on in support (3)

What it would cost

State agencies filed a . Each opens as a PDF from the Legislature.

Versions and amendments

Every text the Legislature printed for this bill, including proposed changes. Each opens on the Legislature's site.

How lawmakers voted

There were 2 votes on this bill.

Assembly Committee on Education vote on an amendment

Passed, 7 to 4 · Feb 27, 2012

No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Official motion: “Report Assembly Amendment 1 to Assembly Substitute Amendment 1 adoption recommended by committee on Education, Ayes 7, Noes 4”. Official record · This vote on its own page

Assembly Committee on Education vote on an amendment

Passed, 7 to 4 · Feb 27, 2012

No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Official motion: “Report Assembly Substitute Amendment 1 adoption recommended by committee on Education, Ayes 7, Noes 4”. Official record · This vote on its own page

What happened

  1. Mar 23, 2012

    The session ended, and the bill died with it.

  2. Feb 27, 2012

    Sent to the Assembly Committee on Rules.

  3. Feb 27, 2012

    The committee voted to recommend passing it, 6 to 5.

  4. Feb 15, 2012

    The committee held a public hearing.

  5. Feb 14, 2012

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  6. Feb 10, 2012

    Sent to the Assembly Committee on Education.

  7. Feb 10, 2012

    Introduced in the Assembly.

See the official record, word for word
  1. Feb 10, 2012 · Assembly

    Introduced by Representatives Kestell, Marklein, Ballweg, Brooks, Endsley and Spanbauer;Cosponsored by Senators Olsen, Darling and Schultz

  2. Feb 10, 2012 · Assembly

    Read first time and referred to committee on Education

  3. Feb 14, 2012 · Assembly

    LRB correction

  4. Feb 14, 2012 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  5. Feb 15, 2012 · Assembly

    Public hearing held

  6. Feb 22, 2012 · Assembly

    Executive action taken

  7. Feb 22, 2012 · Assembly

    Assembly substitute amendment 1 offered by committee on Education

  8. Feb 22, 2012 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 1 to Assembly substitute amendment 1 offered by committee on Education

  9. Feb 27, 2012 · Assembly

    Report Assembly Amendment 1 to Assembly Substitute Amendment 1 adoption recommended by committee on Education, Ayes 7, Noes 4

  10. Feb 27, 2012 · Assembly

    Report Assembly Substitute Amendment 1 adoption recommended by committee on Education, Ayes 7, Noes 4

  11. Feb 27, 2012 · Assembly

    Report passage as amended recommended by committee on Education, Ayes 6, Noes 5

  12. Feb 27, 2012 · Assembly

    Referred to committee on Rules

  13. Mar 2, 2012 · Assembly

    Placed on calendar 3-6-2012 by committee on Rules

  14. Mar 5, 2012 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 1 to Assembly amendment 1 to Assembly substitute amendment 1 offered by Representative Kestell

  15. Mar 5, 2012 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 2 to Assembly substitute amendment 1 offered by Representative Pope-Roberts

  16. Mar 5, 2012 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 3 to Assembly substitute amendment 1 offered by Representative Pope-Roberts

  17. Mar 6, 2012 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 4 to Assembly substitute amendment 1 offered by Representatives Krusick and Fields

  18. Mar 6, 2012 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 1 to Assembly amendment 4 to Assembly substitute amendment 1 offered by Representatives Krusick and Fields

  19. Mar 6, 2012 · Assembly

    Assembly substitute amendment 2 offered by Representative Pope-Roberts

  20. Mar 6, 2012 · Assembly

    Made a special order of business at 11:32 A.M. on 3-13-2012 pursuant to Assembly Resolution 22

  21. Mar 13, 2012 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 2 to Assembly amendment 4 to Assembly substitute amendment 1 offered by Representatives Krusick and Fields

  22. Mar 15, 2012 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 3 to Assembly amendment 4 to Assembly substitute amendment 1 offered by Representative Krusick

  23. Mar 15, 2012 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 1 offered by Representatives Mason, Turner and Barca

  24. Mar 15, 2012 · Assembly

    Laid on the table

  25. Mar 23, 2012 · Assembly

    Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1

Terms on this page

Committee

A small group of lawmakers that looks at a bill first. Most bills never leave committee.

More in the glossary

Senate Joint Resolution 1

The session's calendar. Any bill not passed by its last voting day dies.

Official term: Failed to pass pursuant to SJR 1. More in the glossary

Legislative Reference Bureau

The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.

Official term: LRB analysis. More in the glossary

Author

A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.

Official term: Author, coauthor. More in the glossary

Signed on in support

Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.

Official term: Cosponsor. More in the glossary

Cost estimate

A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.

Official term: Fiscal estimate. More in the glossary

Roll call

A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.

Official term: Roll call vote. More in the glossary

From the Wisconsin Legislature's official record, checked Sep 15, 2026. See the source

Committee

A small group of lawmakers that looks at a bill first. Most bills never leave committee.

Senate Joint Resolution 1

The session's calendar. Any bill not passed by its last voting day dies.

Official term: Failed to pass pursuant to SJR 1

Legislative Reference Bureau

The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.

Official term: LRB analysis

Author

A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.

Official term: Author, coauthor

Signed on in support

Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.

Official term: Cosponsor

Cost estimate

A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.

Official term: Fiscal estimate

Roll call

A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.

Official term: Roll call vote