California ranks below 31 other public-school systems and earns just a D-plus in ensuring teacher quality, according to a new report aimed at spurring states to improve teacher preparation.

The Washington, D.C. based National Council on Teacher Quality’s 2017 State Teacher Policy Yearbook evaluated and graded state policies on teacher preparation, evaluation, compensation and other factors that contribute to successful teaching. Since its last survey in 2015, the nonprofit, non-partisan council found that California and most states stagnated in their progress.

In an emailed response Tuesday, California Board of Education President Michael Kirst called the organization that produced the report “an advocacy group with its own arbitrary criteria for state grades.”

“There are other interstate organizations that accredit teachers and university preparation programs,” Kirst said, “and they have different criteria than NCTQ.”

Linda Darling-Hammond, who chairs the state’s Commission on Teacher Credentialing, called the yearbook “a strange report with a strong ideological bias.” The review both downgrades the state for high requirements for teachers not trained at state universities, and sets criteria that “have nothing to do with teacher training or effectiveness.”

But Joe Ross, a member of the San Mateo County Board of Education, called the report “a road map for improvement.” Clearly, the council grades on a harsh curve, but he said, “the report has lots of well-founded recommendations that are research-based. The reality is we need to do a much better job at teacher prep.”

Representatives of state teachers unions did not respond Tuesday to requests for comment on the report.

The council looked at nine policy areas in reviewing the 50 states and the District of Columbia. California earned an F in policies on hiring, teacher and principal evaluation and retention of effective teachers. The Golden State failed to meet the council’s goal of using student growth to measure teacher effectiveness, or of maintaining data needed for teacher evaluation. The state also did not meet similar goals for ensuring the effectiveness of school principals.

California has consistently earned a D-plus since the council’s first survey in 2009, although it dropped to a D in 2015. In a 2014 council survey of just teacher credential programs, the council rated California universities a D-plus.

No states earned an A overall. Eight earned Bs, and top scorers Florida and Louisiana each earned a B-plus. Two states — Montana and South Dakota — earned Fs. While California’s scores are not impressive, 10 states performed in the same range as California, and nine states earned a lower grade.

Among the nation’s other most populous states, Texas earned a B-minus, New York a B, Pennsylvania a C and Illinois a C-plus.

But all is not terrible. California earned a B, its highest mark, in teacher compensation — although absolute salary levels do not reflect the high cost of living in pricey areas like the San Francisco Bay Area. The council praised the state school districts’ practice of offering different pay scales for high-need schools and for teaching particular subjects.

The yearbook also flagged a standout practice in preparing teacher candidates to teaching reading to elementary, secondary and special-education students.

California earned the most needs-to-improve marks in the area of teacher and principal evaluation. Specifically, the council recommended that the state include evidence of student growth in teacher evaluations, require student surveys be part of teacher evaluations and ensure that teacher evaluators are trained and certified.

The council also recommended that California require teachers be evaluated annually and observed multiple times, offer appropriate training and improvement plans for teachers, equitably distribute teacher talent among schools, effectively evaluate principals, and place ineffective ones on improvement plans.

The report’s harsh review doesn’t ring true to history teacher Meg Honey. “What I’m seeing in the California report card isn’t what’s really happening in Mount Diablo Unified School District,” said Honey, who also teaches in the St. Mary’s College credentialing program. Both, she said, have high standards and work hard to prepare teachers.

In the past decade, many states focused on improving the teaching profession. Those efforts received a boost by the Obama administration, which pushed hard in particular to improve teaching of poor and immigrant children.

But the council noted that since 2015, few states took the initiative to improve how teachers are selected, prepared, evaluated and retained. It’s not clear why progress leveled off, or whether it was linked to the end of the No Child Left Behind Act. That signature law of George W. Bush favored standardized testing and punitive measures to hold schools accountable for teaching the most struggling students.

The council was created in 2000 and has links to education-reform foundations, including some that advocate for “market-style” and standards-based reforms. For its critical evaluations of teacher quality and the credential programs, it has been savaged by teachers, teacher unions and universities’ schools of education — many of which have refused to cooperate with the council’s surveys.

Ross said that the survey failed to examine what’s happening locally. County offices of education like San Mateo’s are innovating in collecting data and providing teacher training, he noted, and helping paraprofessionals earn teaching credentials.

“In this state, the fastest way to make improvement is to start at the local level,” he said. “It’s going to take a long time to make changes at the state level.”

How the nation’s most populous states ranked in teacher preparedness according to the 2017 State Teacher Policy Yearbook:

California: D-plus

Texas: B-minus

Florida: B-plus

New York: B

Pennsylvania: C

To see the full 2017 State Teacher Policy Yearbook go to https://nctq.org/dmsView/EIGHT_KEY_MEASURES_2017 For information on each state’s teacher policies go to https://www.nctq.org/yearbook/home.