Coraggio Consulting
Virginia Board of Education, Business Meeting, Thursday, November 13, 2025

Date: Thursday, November 13, 2025
Place: Virginia Board of Education (Virginia Department of Education), Richmond, Virginia
Length: 5h 57m (video)
Official meeting video (VDOE, YouTube): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdm6NYzLO50
Board of Education meetings, agendas and minutes (VDOE): https://www.doe.virginia.gov/state-board-data-funding/virginia-board-of-education

Machine transcript (speech-to-text) produced by Coraggio Consulting. Not an official county record. Names and numbers may be misspelled; check the video at the timestamp before quoting.
Speech-to-text: whisper.cpp, model large-v3-turbo. Produced 2026-10-22. Timestamps are [HH:MM:SS] into the meeting video.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

[00:12:10] Good morning. It's 9.05. I will now call this meeting to order, and as is customary for this board, we'll begin our meeting with a moment of silence, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.

[00:12:28] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, the republic for which to stand, one nation, one for God, indivisible, liberty and justice for all.

[00:12:52] Okay, moving on. Is there a motion to approve the agenda as presented? so moved uh Dr Ackerman aye Mr Green Dr Northern aye Ms McPherson aye Ms Kilgore aye Ms Ashton aye Mr Monk aye and chair votes aye okay um staff has provided the members of the board with draft minutes before the meeting is there a motion to approve the minutes as presented to the board

[00:13:27] so moved second Dr Ackerman aye Mr Green aye Dr Northern aye Ms McPherson aye Ms Kilgore aye Miss Ashton. Hi. Mr. Monk. Hi. So as is customary now for this board, the board appreciates being able to feature our wonderful arts programs from across the Commonwealth by having students perform at our meetings. So I will now ask Dr. Ackerman to provide us with an introduction of our guests. Excited to do this. My parents majored in music and we're music educators.

[00:14:01] I would like to welcome Kilgore Gifted Center Chorus. This morning, members of the Kilgore Gifted Center Chorus from Hampton City Schools in Hampton, Virginia, were performed on the direction of Mandy Grispoli-Galloway. Also in attendance is Kilgore Gifted Center Principal, Mr. Paul Loris, and Fine Arts Coordinator, Mr. Kelly D.

[00:14:24] The Kilgore Gifted Center Chorus consistently earns superior ratings at the Virginia Chorus Directors Association Concert Assessment. There are four-time recipients of the Virginia Music Educators Association Blue Ribbon School Award for their chorus and music programs.

[00:14:41] The Kilgore Gifted Center Chorus will perform two musical selections. First, Ad Astra by Jacob Narvaro, this piece radiates energy with the message of hope and empowerment. The Latin text reads, to the stars through difficulties, look up, move forward, leave all cares behind. Second, Seize the Day by Menken, arranged by Emerson's, features text describing camaraderie and working together towards a common goal. Just like our families, our educators, our administrators, our board members in the community in Hampton, Virginia,

[00:15:20] do every day. You may notice the students wearing gold colored treble clef music pins to symbolize the bond that music creates when shared with an audience.

[00:15:29] We hope you enjoy the performance.

[00:16:59] Just know you're not alone, for the stars will come up here.

[00:17:21] *singing*

[00:18:26] Don't be afraid. Don't steal it. They can't rip the snow. I can win.

[00:19:43] *singing*

[00:20:58] Hey, we are back. You guys ready back there? Okay. Dr. Northern, will you introduce our next

[00:27:51] recognition, please? Thank you. Right. I wish we had a drum roll. It's my honor to recognize an outstanding Virginia educator who has received one of our nation's, that's nation, not state, most prestigious honors in K-12 education. This is the Milken Educator Award. Been around a long time and it's a big deal. Today we are joined by Anna Drew, who served as a seventh grade teacher

[00:28:25] and science department head at Shawsville Middle School in Montgomery County Public Schools. This prestigious award celebrates Mrs. Drew's passion for teaching and her commitment to engaging every student in meaningful learning. Her work reflects the very best of our profession, creativity, compassion, and an unwavering belief in the potential of every child.

[00:28:51] Mrs. Drew has inspired her students, supported her colleagues, and built a learning community that prepares the leaders of tomorrow. At this time, please join me in welcoming Ms. Stephanie Bishop, who is Vice President of the Milken Educator Foundation and Milken Educator Awards, to the podium for the presentation, followed by Mrs. Drew, who will share a few brief remarks.

[00:29:14] Good morning, members of the Virginia State Board of Education and Superintendent Gullickson. Thank you for inviting me to join you today as we celebrate the newest Milken Educator Award recipient in Virginia, Anna Drew of Shawsville.

[00:29:39] I am Stephanie Bishop, a 2001 Virginia Milken Educator. At the time of my award, I was a high school theater teacher in Prince George County, and today I serve as vice president of the Milken Educator Awards, and it is an honor to be here representing the Milken Family Foundation.

[00:29:59] On behalf of the Foundation, I want to commend the Virginia Department of Education for its continued partnership and support of the Milken Educator Awards program. This school year, the Foundation will present 28 Milken Educator Awards across the nation, and we look forward to many more surprise announcements here in Virginia in the years ahead.

[00:30:25] The Milken Educator Awards were established in 1987 by Lowell Milken, chairman and co-founder of the Milken Family Foundation, based in Santa Monica, California. Inspired by his own teachers and driven by a belief that educators shape the very future of our society, Lowell created the awards to honor exemplary K-12 teachers, principals, and specialists who represent the highest standards of excellence in education.

[00:30:59] Since those first 12 awards were given in California, the foundation has recognized more than 3,000 outstanding educators nationwide. Often called the Oscars of teaching, the Milken Educator Award is the nation's preeminent recognition for excellence in education.

[00:31:24] Virginia joined the program in 1999, and since then, more than a million dollars has been awarded to Virginia's greatest asset, its educators. Each recipient, like Anna Drew, receives an unrestricted financial award and, more importantly, becomes part of a national network of excellence dedicated to advancing the teaching profession.

[00:31:52] This past April, Anna joined fellow Milken educators from across the country at the Milken Educator Awards Forum in Los Angeles, where she engaged in powerful collaboration and professional learning with other outstanding educators who share her commitment to students and excellence.

[00:32:14] Great educators like Anna do far more than teach content. They transform lives. Every one of us can name a teacher who changed the course of our lives through their guidance, their encouragement, or belief in our potential.

[00:32:32] Milken educators are those teachers whose influence continues to shape students and communities long after the classroom lights go out. Today, we present Anna with the Milken Educator Award obelisk, a lasting symbol of excellence.

[00:32:51] It stands as a reminder that our society values and celebrates the work of talented educators and that through their daily dedication, they have the power to inspire hope, ignite curiosity, and change the future for generations of young people.

[00:33:13] Superintendent Gullickson, would you please join me in presenting the Milken Educator Award obelisk to Anna Drew?

[00:33:20] Thank you, Superintendent Goldstein.

[00:34:25] And now we're going to invite Anna to make some remarks. Thank you so much, Stephanie, the Milken Family Foundation, and members of the board.

[00:34:48] I am truly humbled and deeply grateful to receive the Milken Educator Award. This honor belongs not just to me, but to the incredible teachers I worked alongside of every day. Their collaboration, creativity, and heart reminded me why I love this profession.

[00:35:05] I'm so thankful to my supportive administrators, Mr. Keith, who's sitting in the audience, and Mr. Hairston, who encouraged me to keep growing and trying new things as a teacher. I also want to thank my students. You inspire me every day to stay curious, keep learning, and see the world with fresh eyes.

[00:35:23] You're the reason I strive to be better. To my wonderful husband, Josh, also in the audience this morning, thank you for your endless patience and belief in me. You have been my biggest cheerleader every step of the way. This award has opened doors I never imagined.

[00:35:39] I'm now pursuing my PhD in curriculum and instruction and an EDS in instructional leadership at Virginia Tech so I can continue learning and ultimately help support and empower other teachers. I'm excited to pay forward the encouragement and opportunities that have meant so much to me.

[00:35:57] - Thank you for this incredible honor. It truly inspires me to keep growing, giving, and believing in the power of education in Virginia.

[00:36:14] - And we're not finished. Virginia would like to also, the Virginia Board would also like to recognize, in addition to the Milken Education Award, our very big appreciation for Ms. Drew. So, whereas the Milken Family Foundation National Education Awards Program recognizes exceptional educators who inspire excellence innovation and serve as role models within their schools whereas the milken educator award recognizes anna drew for her outstanding educational practices dedications to student success and unwavering commitment to advancing the field of education and whereas mrs drew has

[00:36:53] fostered a nurturing and innovative classroom environment where students are encouraged to explore their potential develop critical thinking skills and achieve academic excellence now therefore be it resolved that the members of the board of education express to mrs anna drew their sincere congratulations upon this recognition as a milken educator recipient and extend their heartfelt appreciation for her devotion to service that's adopted in richmond virginia the 13th of november in the year 2025. oh finally we are pleased to present you with this recognition

[00:37:32] we also like to extend our thanks to principal keith brandon and her family for joining us today and her continued support that they provide that make these achievements possible please join me again in recognizing mrs drew and everyone else who's here today thank you all so much and i'd like to just say um that pursuing two degrees at a time i'm really sorry because i was only pursuing

[00:38:08] one and teaching at the same time and i can tell you that is a true commitment um and dedication both to your wife um and to supporting education across virginia so not just your wife deserving of this honor but you as well for the support that you've provided to her so thank you um and congratulations to her and her uh pursuit of those degrees because it is not easy i'm sure many of us in this room know that so um so the board will move into public comment at this time as stated

[00:38:45] in the board's bylaws it's the pleasure of the board to accept public comment on all matters related to public education in virginia before we begin public comment today i'd like to provide a few reminders about the manner in which public comment will be conducted we ask that you model professionalism dignity and respect for others as you share your thoughts today when you begin please provide your name role or affiliation and where you live in virginia all remarks must be directed to the chair and not to any other individual speakers will have three minutes

[00:39:17] where are we putting that three minute on these screens back here in the back so you will see three minutes there in green when your remarks begin a timer on the screen will move to yellow at one minute and then red when your time is up at that point please close your remarks promptly if you have written remarks you may provide those to mr joe crook who's down here in the front and he will provide those to the board as soon as possible you may also email a copy of your

[00:39:50] remarks if you haven't done so already to the board at boe at doe.virginia.gov and so with that we will begin public comment with kathy halberson followed by chris jones

[00:40:07] no ma'am just one person he i'll just have you you can go after yes

[00:41:32] just me that way we got all the things coming together

[00:42:16] that's when we got all my things. Now we are saying that we should end Powhatan for good. Thank you. We hope that we will reiterate the community college will make us better and hopefully we'll have some fun after. Thank you. Good morning board. Kathy Halverson from Powhatan.

[00:42:48] i gave y'all some documents the first one is a memo that i found from the attorney general that states that parents have rights they cannot be retaliated upon and i sent to all of you an email along with a recording from powhatan that stated that they did not know where my son was they filed a chins against me and my husband the day after i spoke out at a school board meeting

[00:43:26] um i had to hire an attorney it was very distraught um very emotional to think that somebody would do such things as i had such trust in powhatan the next one is a letter from dr t uh from samantha that was sent to powertan that stated they had to comply they did not comply they had to she was going to refer it she referred it to lisa coons lisa coon said you have to comply within 30 days it's been this delay deny delay deny i received an email

[00:44:05] just two weeks ago i guess from samantha that stated if we can help you with the due process Well, I was taken to federal court and sued for $330,000 because they stated I was filing frivolous due processes.

[00:44:22] That wasn't true. They stated I did not consent. I have my transcripts in here that stated that everybody agreed to being you. Everybody stated that's where he was going, but the attorneys continued, continued.

[00:44:42] So then they sued me for $330,000, kept him out of school for three and a half years. The next one, the due process that Virginia dispute resolution from mayor said, stated that, what was it?

[00:45:01] That the due process was biased. The attorney, the hearing officer that we had, Ms. Lee, She ruled 0.2% in favor of parents in 13 years.

[00:45:17] That's a little biased. CSA consent. Scott Reiner, the attorney general, stated you do not have to sign a CSA consent. Once again, the school did not want to pay for him to go to private placement. However, they stated they could not educate him.

[00:45:38] Beth Teagan wrote a letter to Lisa Koons that stated they would have to pay for him for 10 years. That's not fair to him. Thank you. Chris Jones, followed by Gene Sokolowski.

[00:45:56] Good morning, President Creasy, members of the board, and Superintendent Gullickson. My name is Dr. Chris Jones, and I'm the Executive Director for the Virginia Association for Teaching, Learning, and Leading. I am dad of four of Virginia's public school students, and prior to serving VATLL, I was a high school principal and math teacher.

[00:46:12] Thank you for allowing me to be here today. It is an honor to do so and I do not take this privilege lightly. I'm here today to talk specifically about three topics, cut scores, assessments and accountability, and world geography. As an organization, we are grateful for the work of this board and the administration to raise expectations in several areas. We appreciate the cut score implementation timeline you will vote on today to include this year as a planning year as you also consider the shift to a 100-point scale. Our organization has also advocating for reducing the number of standardized tests students are required to take and instead focusing on performance-based assessments and tasks along with classroom

[00:46:51] assessment practices. Bringing history and social science to the performance and support framework presents an opportunity to implement performance tasks and assessments as well as the PLAAs outlined in HB 1957. Modernizing assessments in Virginia is an ongoing priority for VATLL.

[00:47:10] Finally, we trust that the board will give careful consideration and seek input from schools and divisions as you weigh the option of including world geography in middle schools. Accessibility, staffing, and licensure will become major points for consideration for many school divisions in Virginia, and we are thankful for this board's efforts to seek input from practitioners in the field.

[00:47:31] As always, VATLL stands ready to collaborate with the board and the department. Thank you. Jean Sokoloski, followed by Ann Tatis. Dr. Gene Sokoloski, Woodbridge, Virginia citizen.

[00:47:59] Madam Chair, I've stood before you and your colleagues a number of times pointing out deficiencies in the history and social science standards of learning for the 10th grade student. These deficiencies include omitting the genocide of the Poles and their valor during World War II.

[00:48:16] The board can't be faulted for not knowing the facts, and the reason is straightforward. In the last two years of World War II, Roosevelt and Churchill betrayed Poland and Eastern Europe to Stalin, and for the next 45 years, the Polish people were cruelly oppressed under Stalin's brutal communist machine. During that time, the Soviets suppressed all evidence of Poland's suffering and valor, but in 1989, Poland was the first to eject communist rule and has since endeavored to present the historical facts. Because these facts are not in the standards, but clearly should be,

[00:48:51] my organization has prepared for you a teacher's guide for 10th grade students on Poland's role in World War II. Allow me to read some of the guide's section titles to you. Hitler and Stalin carry out the genocide of the Polish people. Did you know that Poland was the only country that Hitler and Stalin secretly agreed to annihilate? Poland's extraordinary underground resistance. Read why the Polish underground state had no parallel in any other German-occupied country. Polish successes in allied battles. Did you know that Poles were

[00:49:26] instrumental in the Battle of Britain, Falle Gap, Monte Cassino, and the Battle of the Atlantic. Polish technologies contributed to the Allied victory. A key contribution was breaking into Germany's Enigma code and providing working copies of the Enigma machine to stunned British and French counterparts. Poland's unparalleled rescue of Jews. Only in Poland, anyone eating a Jew was executed together with immediate family. Read why Poles, despite the death penalty, outnumbered by far all others on Yad Vashem's listing of saviors. Poland was the first to

[00:50:06] notify the world about the Holocaust. Unfortunately, Roosevelt and Churchill couldn't be bothered. Facts you need to know about genocide. Poles were subjected to genocide not only by the Germans, but also by the Russians and Ukrainians. Hitler's Holocaust helpers. Many countries helped Hitler.

[00:50:25] Poland was the one country that did not. Poles provided critical intelligence to the allies. Examples include an entire German V-2 rocket and Hitler's plan to invade the Soviet Union. I trust that you will find these and many other facts in the guide not only directly relevant, but highly compelling.

[00:50:48] Thank you. Antatus, followed by Eric Ducha. No, Eric. No, Antatus. Eric. Sorry if I didn't pronounce your last name right.

[00:51:06] It's okay. Nobody pronounces it right. Good morning, Superintendent Gullickson and members of the board. My name is Eric Douche, and I serve as the legislative liaison for the Virginia Social Studies Leaders Consortium. I appreciate the opportunity to speak with you today.

[00:51:22] Like many of my colleagues, I am here to respectfully urge the board to pause inclusion of the social studies in the state accountability framework until a clear, workable method for incorporating the permissive local alternative assessment can be fully developed. I was encouraged yesterday to hear Mr. Jennings acknowledge that integrating the PLAA into accountability process is not only possible, but already under active discussion.

[00:51:45] I recognize that building a high-quality, calibrated system takes time, and I appreciate the Board's commitment to getting it right. But until that method exists, asking students to demonstrate their learning through a single high-stakes test puts us in direct conflict with what we know about effective assessment. For three decades, educators across Virginia and the nation have documented the unintended consequences of one-shot, high-pressure exams.

[00:52:08] Narrowed instruction, increased anxiety, reduced opportunities for deep learning, and fewer pathways for students to demonstrate what they truly know. While these new assessments may be more dynamic, their one-time, high-stakes structure still places students at a disadvantage and does not reflect the direction the Commonwealth has intentionally moved toward.

[00:52:28] The VSSLC has already taken proactive steps to support the Board's work. We have shared with VDOE a detailed outline showing how PLAA framework can be integrated into the accountability model in a way that safeguards reliability and comparability while preserving the flexibility divisions need for meaningful, authentic assessment.

[00:52:47] Importantly, this model is not theoretical. It builds directly on the locally awarded verified credit process that nearly half of Virginia school divisions already implement successfully. The LAVC system has demonstrated at scale that performance-based assessment can be scored reliably, moderated across divisions, and aligned to rigorous state expectations while still allowing students to demonstrate learning through inquiry, application, and reasoning rather than single test setting.

[00:53:12] The PLAA framework extends these proven strengths across all social studies courses and honors the intent of HB1957 to broaden access to high quality performance assessment statewide. By aligning accountability expectations with the performance-based model, Virginia has an opportunity to lead nationally in assessment innovation, expanding inquiry, strengthening civic reasoning, and measuring the deeper knowledge and skills embodied in the profile of a Virginia graduate.

[00:53:38] I urge the board to pause implementation long enough to ensure that we build an accountability system that reflects the values we share and the outcomes we want for every student in the the Commonwealth. Thank you for your time and thoughtful consideration. Nealey Minton followed by Ann Evans. I'm sorry. I think I missed one person, but go ahead. You're fine. Go ahead.

[00:54:04] Good morning, Superintendent Golickson and members of the board. My name is Nealey Minton, and I serve as president-elect of the Virginia Social Studies Leaders Consortium. I want to speak today to clarify several points related to the proposed amendment to Virginia's ESSA plan.

[00:54:20] First, divisions already have clear authority to use alternative assessments through the state-developed, locally-awarded, verified credit process. The LAVC process includes board-approved rubrics, a statewide audit system, and four years of successful implementation.

[00:54:40] It allows rigorous performance assessments in lieu of SOL tests in all high school end-of-course courses currently and for the last four years. More than half of Virginia's school divisions use LAVC now and will continue to because it is permitted under current regulations and explicitly codified in HB 1957.

[00:55:01] These assessments increase rigor by requiring students to analyze evidence, write, and apply historical thinking, not simply recall facts on a multiple-choice test with TEI items or even short answer questions included.

[00:55:17] In yesterday's presentation, Mr. Jennings suggested divisions must continue giving SOL tests until data are standardized. Respectfully, divisions already have standardized LAVC data through required local retention and through the existing LAVC audit process that has already been in place for four years.

[00:55:38] Second, authority for divisions to use permissive local alternative assessments, or PLAAs, statewide begins July 1, 2026, under HB 1957, which is a bipartisan law that our organization actually helped to support.

[00:55:54] HB 1957 makes clear that divisions are not required to administer SOL tests in subjects not required under ESSA specifically, and it directs the board to create the shared rubrics, guardrails, and expectations needed for statewide use of PLAAs.

[00:56:11] This means that divisions must be able to implement PLAAs as soon as the law takes effect. They cannot be penalized in accountability for following state law next school year. The VSSLC has already submitted a proposal showing how PLAA results can be incorporated into the accountability framework in a rigorous and comparable way.

[00:56:33] We stand ready to partner with the board and the VDOE. I respectfully urge the board to delay the vote and complete the required rubrics, guardrails, and data comparison mechanisms outlined in HB 1957 with the right people around the table before advancing any changes.

[00:56:50] we need to continue to do what's best for our students without delay thank you for your time and for your service to virginia students danielle graham followed by ann evans good morning superintendent gullickson president creasy and members of the board i appreciate the opportunity to speak with you today my name is danielle graham and i serve as the president of virginia social studies leaders consortium the professional organization representing those who lead social studies education across the commonwealth our members are not only instructional leaders but

[00:57:28] but also parents and community members deeply invested in the success of Virginia's students. Our past president was recently recognized by the National Social Studies Leaders Association as the Social Studies Leader of the Year, reflecting the level of expertise and dedication within our organization.

[00:57:44] Let me be clear: we are not opposed to accountability, but our expertise has been notably absent from the development of this plan. I'm speaking, of course, about item K and the proposal to add history and social science as an accountability measure. A version of this plan was shared in June.

[00:57:59] however much of the collaboration cited in yesterday's presentation focused on content not the accountability plan and that collaboration occurred well over a year ago this plan has not been taken to a regional or larger consortium meeting and transparency about how stakeholders are identified remains an ongoing concern requests for engagement from our organization have been met with either generic replies or ignored completely yesterday's presentation for item k stated this plan does not force sequencing yet in order to offer world geography in eighth grade with civics preceding it divisions would lose flexibility from the recommended sequencing

[00:58:35] noted in the 2023 virginia standards of learning and is in direct conflict with the flexibility guaranteed in that same document making world geography advanced coursework in middle school also raises another concern it effectively turns world history 1500 to the present into an elective students who do not take this elective would miss critical learning opportunities about the global impact of the american revolution international impact of the atrocities such as the holocaust Rwandan and Cambodian genocides, and the leadership of figures like Mahatma Gandhi and Nelson Mandela. There is no other point in their Virginia K-12 education where they will learn

[00:59:11] about these topics. The presentation also noted the need for data to support performance assessments and accountability. That data already exists. Divisions have been implementing the LAVC performance assessments, which includes state-developed tasks, state-developed rubrics, anchor documents, calibration training for scoring, and more. And despite repeated offers to collaborate, no effort has been made on the part of the VDOE to engage the state organization of social studies supervisors and specialists for sharing this comprehensive data. We urge the board to slow down and engage with those who actually lead social studies education in Virginia.

[00:59:47] Accountability can and should strengthen learning, but it can only be successful if it is designed in collaboration with the experts who implement it. Partnering with practitioners will ensure the system preserves depth, rigor, and relevance for every student in the Commonwealth. Thank you for your time and your service to Virginia students. Ann Evans. Good morning, Secretary Gullison and members of the board. My name is Ann Evans. I reside in Suvanna County, Virginia. I'm a former

[01:00:24] social studies teacher and K-12 social studies coordinator. I was educated in the public schools. I'm a third generation teacher in our Virginia public schools. I have 17 nieces and nephews educated in the Virginia public schools. Two are also currently teaching. It's kind of a family business we are very concerned about the proposed change to the sequencing and the assessments for history and social science i have seen firsthand how performance-based assessments and inquiry driven instruction transform student learning these approaches ask students to think critically

[01:01:00] analyze evidence and apply knowledge to real world questions they provide authentic learning experiences that better prepare students for higher education civic life and the modern workforce. Just as importantly, performance-based assessments promote equity and access. Students with disabilities, English language learners, and students living in poverty often thrive when given an opportunity to demonstrate their knowledge and understanding through project-based learning, presentations, and inquiry rather than high-stakes multiple-choice tests. These authentic assessments recognize multiple ways to demonstrate mastery, allowing students to show their strengths,

[01:01:37] creativity historical reasoning and collaboration they reduce opportunity gaps helping students see themselves as capable learners and contributors i urge you to preserve local flexibility in both the sequence of courses and the types of assessments divisions may use to meet the needs of their learners virginia's long-standing support for locally awarded verified credits and the forthcoming permissive local alternative assessment framework offer promising models balancing rigor authenticity and local innovation i respectfully encourage the board to expand opportunities rather than

[01:02:12] limit them through additional high stakes tests or prescriptive course structures world geography when paired at high school level with environmental science courses or their ap equivalents and complemented by cte courses such as gis open additional career pathways and provide cross curricular opportunities limiting world geography as an elective course or forcing it down into the middle school will dramatically reduce enrollment in all of these vital programs i'm disappointed the board is looking at such a last minute hurried revision to our assessment system

[01:02:48] during a transition period with new state leadership coming in it's frustrating as it seems to ignore the voices of parents students and educators who've expressed frustration with over testing and quite frankly politicizing our history standards this seems like an effort to bury honest history under a mountain of factoids and multiple choice testing which does not develop critical thinking problem solving spatial reasoning or durable skills thank you um if anyone else i don't have anyone on the signup sheet so if anyone else would like to speak you can line up behind

[01:03:26] the microphone please good morning superintendent gullickson and members of the board my name is todd truett and i'm here today as a parent of two public school students in arlington to speak in strong support of the plan to raise virginia's math and reading cut scores per the u.s department of education virginia has the nation's lowest math and reading cut scores that means many students

[01:04:00] here get told good job when they wouldn't meet standards in any other state this is not fairness it's a false promise to virginia's children when standards stay low the least advantaged children lose the most as they depend the most on the public school system for their education. As one of the first people in my family to graduate from college, I see the difference daily between myself and my own children. With the current low cut scores, many of these least advantaged kids in Virginia graduate believing they are prepared, only to find out later that the world expected

[01:04:34] more of them. Every year we delay is another year of students walking across the stage with diplomas that don't open as many doors as diplomas in other states. Virginia is more than 10 years behind other states with this plan to raise cut scores. As noted by Ed Week, as the federal government stepped back from accountability with the end of No Child Left Behind 10 plus years ago, states all raised their cut scores, leaving Virginia almost alone at the bottom by 2018, about which Virginia had been publicly notified in 2018. Instead, Virginia lowered math cut

[01:05:12] scores even further in 2019 and lowered them further for reading in 2020, putting us at the bottom in the nation. Meanwhile, you saw states like Louisiana and Mississippi go the opposite direction as Virginia did, raising standards and providing greater state oversight. When you look at the least and most advantaged subgroups on NAEP, Louisiana and Mississippi are outperforming states like Virginia, New Jersey, and numerous other states that spend substantially more per pupil than them. Raising standards to the same level as in Massachusetts is not about punishment.

[01:05:48] It's about truth and belief in Virginia's children. It tells every child in Virginia that we see their potential and we are willing to teach to it. That's not just my own opinion based on my own lived experience. That's also the opinion of Denise Fort, head of the leading education civil rights group, The Education Trust. She has endorsed Virginia's new accountability system and raising the cut scores to be consistent with NAEP levels.

[01:06:13] Her endorsement was specifically because of the benefit to the most vulnerable students. So yes, please approve this plan to raise the cut scores because the students who have the least time to waste are the ones depending on us the most. Thank you. Bo Dickinson, Rockingham County.

[01:06:35] I did sign up for public comment. I don't know why I wasn't on the list, but regardless, I'm here to speak about rigor as well. I believe that that needs to be in social studies. it just needs to have the right test. So members of the board and Superintendent Gullickson, again, my name is Bo Dickinson. I serve as the social studies supervisor for Rockingham County Public Schools. I am deeply concerned that landmark assessment proposals were added to yesterday's agenda with less than 24 hours notice. Changes of this scale require transparent, timely disclosure so that the public can understand and respond. Posting them at the

[01:07:11] last minute not only limits meaningful engagement, it betrays the public's trust in an open and honest decision making process i want to be clear though i fully support rigorous standards and standardized assessment as i said earlier but the field of education also recognizes that the greatest unintended consequences of the no child left behind act were felt in social studies where knowledge-based multiple choice tests pushed instruction towards coverage and memorization at

[01:07:43] the expense of inquiry depth and critical thinking returning to that model especially with dense content standards would take us back 20 years yesterday's presentation by mr jennings briefly referenced house bill 1957 and its expansion of performance assessments which we are quite excited about and want to lean into as previous commentators noted yet his presentation however dismiss much of the substance of that bill by claiming a lack of data. That is simply not

[01:08:19] accurate. Our inquiry-based performance assessments used for the last four years through the locally awarded verified credits process already generate robust, reliable data. They are embedded in instruction. They are administered multiple times a year, not just one test in May. They are scored with a state common rubric. They are cross-scored by fellow colleagues and other leaders to ensure inter-rater reliability. They measure both content knowledge and disciplinary skills far more meaningfully than a single multiple choice test at the end of the school year. This is not just

[01:08:57] local innovation. Virginia's work should be applauded. It is being recognized nationally. I have been fortunate to work directly with Dr. Kathy Swan, one of the most respected voices in social studies education, the lead author of the C3 framework, and one of the architects of the Inquiry Design Model. Together, we authored Teaching to a Better Test, which demonstrates how Virginia's performance assessments can be standardized, how they can be implemented with fidelity, and how they can be used effectively for, yes, accountability. We want accountability,

[01:09:35] but we want the right test. Thank you. Thank you so much. I am submitting the article as well as my public comment today for your reference. Good morning, everyone. My name is Sam Futrell, and i am from richmond and i appreciate the opportunity to be here today i am the president of the virginia council for the social studies the 2024 national secondary social studies teacher of the year and the master teacher of for the office of strategic cultural partnerships at william and

[01:10:11] mary i am also a new mom to a sweet girl who's currently sick at home i am also a little bit sick and under the weather myself and i had to leave her to be here this morning because of the actions of a local politician and his office, which at best can be described as unbecoming of a Virginia lawmaker, and at worst, the intentional misleading of a group of stakeholders in order to further an individual's political career. When Senator Van Valkenburg's office reached out to the Virginia Council for the Social Studies asking us to support the reinstating of standardized testing in some Virginia Social Studies classes, they assured us that this

[01:10:50] testing would only be supplementary to the more effective and comprehensive project-based assessments that have been painstakingly put into place over the past several years in Virginia social studies classrooms. The Virginia Council for the Social Studies would never have signed in support of the standardized testing as a singular measure of student performance and, let's be honest, teacher performance.

[01:11:13] Please consider the Virginia Council for the Social Studies letter of support of this amendment revoked. As an educator, I do support the diversification of assessments. Adding testing as another indicator of a student performance would add to our data of what students understand and how they come to understand it. But if we are to replace project-based assessments that lead with inquiry and student-centered learning with testing, that will create a vacuum in which students and teachers are held up to a singular measure of their abilities. One test cannot show us what students understand about the content that they learned in a course and it certainly cannot show us what

[01:11:53] skills they have acquired which is why we which is what we really want to understand if we are to actually prepare them to be college and career ready citizens replacing project-based assessment with testing is an absolute disservice to virginia students and will certainly be a disservice to virginia's teachers i strongly encourage the board to consult with expert groups like the virginia Social Studies Leaders Consortium, Virginia Council for the Social Studies, and ATLL to make significant changes to this amendment that will better serve Virginia students and educators.

[01:12:26] Thank you for your time and for your service to Virginia education. Good morning. President Creasy, Superintendent Gullickson, and members of the Virginia Board of Education, my name is Scott Braebrand, and I'm Executive Director for VAS, the Virginia Association of School Superintendents, and I live in Lynchburg, Virginia. On behalf of Virginia School Division Superintendents, we respectfully submit the following feedback around the SOL Proficiency Implementation Plan you're voting on today. We strongly appreciate the designation of the 25-26 school year as a

[01:13:03] planning year. We look forward to closely working with Superintendent Gullickson and BDOE for the remainder of the year to ensure its successful implementation. We also appreciate and support your total four-year phase-in approach to intentional transition planning and to allow for further modeling of metrics by BDOE and school divisions. We respectfully urge the board to extend the existing proficiency and graduation requirements for all students, not just seniors, who are already enrolled in high school. The requirements in place when students enter ninth

[01:13:39] grade should be honored through their graduation. We also want to continue to work with you around concerns regarding advanced math pathways, the new growth metric to replace VVOS, I know you talked about that yesterday, expedited retakes, alternative credits, double jeopardy due to federal identification, and performance category rounding. We also want to look forward to working with you more deeply as you do communications and supports around the new SOL proficiency plan. Schools do need communication tools like infographics, parent letters, talking points, and training modules to help teachers and school boards and students and families understand the new

[01:14:17] proficiency scale and its implications for a focus on raising expectations. Consistent statewide communication will build trust and understanding during the transition, and we ask for these plans to be available for stakeholder review as soon as possible. The new SOL cut scores will require extensive student interventions and sufficient staff to design and deliver individualized plans for students to meet these higher expectations. Without substantial state investment to fund and provide qualified intervention personnel resources implementation will be impacted so we look forward

[01:14:53] to working with you on additional state supports thank you for engaging with us and so many others and we look forward to continued partnership with you on this very very important work thank you very much uh good morning president creasy members of the board of education and superintendent guggson my name is rodney jordan i'm here representing the virginia school boards association and i live in Norfolk, Virginia. During yesterday's work session you received and discussed several

[01:15:27] presentations focused on student outcomes, what students know and are able to do. At VSBA we believe strongly that excellence in the classroom begins with excellence in the boardroom. In the spirit that our school divisions exist with the primary focus on improving student outcomes, I share with you the following comments. Regarding the SOL Proficiency Implementation Plan, we support the designation of the 2025-2026 school year as a planning year during your discussion

[01:16:02] yesterday the challenge that turnover of school board members division superintendents and even representation at the state level can have on sustaining and growing student outcomes please know that vsba reiterates our commitment to partner with the board of education vdoe and executive and legislative branch leadership with the goal of setting high expectations of continuous improvement for our students while providing the supports and resources to undergird every learner to meet and exceed those expectations. Effective school board governance matters,

[01:16:40] and it's critically important to ensure strategic alignment toward improving student outcomes in all schools, including those students in schools subjected to corrective action. We welcome the opportunity to strengthen our partnership with you in support of governance training, resulting in sustained cultures of excellence on behalf of virginia students we thank you for your service is there anyone else who wishes to participate participate in public comment today

[01:17:12] okay i'm sorry good morning my name is teachee pinkney apps i'm a former school board member with richmond city public schools from 2012 to 2016. i'm currently working with families across this state as an advocate. As you all know, in the area of exceptional education, we've got a lot of work to do, a lot of work to do. So last night, I had an opportunity to kind of audit

[01:17:49] some of the conversation that took place during the work session. And I just wanted to, with that same zealousness, remind you that Richmond Public Schools is under a memorandum of understanding with you. Parents do not know that this board, and I know we've got new individuals on this board, I want to congratulate Mr. Green, do not know the level of accountability that you

[01:18:23] are holding the superintendent to and or even in your training of those school board members in understanding their role of governance i felt compelled to come down here and say listen it's got to be a new day it's got to be a new day we cannot talk about wanting to be innovative and assess our gifted students and i think i heard the comment you know we want to do it the same

[01:18:59] way we do it for the struggling students well you're not doing it for the struggling students It's not happening. Richmond Public Schools has not moved from the bottom five percentile over the past 20 years. And to make parents believe that these small incremental gains

[01:19:29] is something that they should be celebrating is clear exploitation of their lack of knowledge that the bar is here and then when we lower the bar and tell them to celebrate it as one of the gentlemen said earlier you're putting our children out there at a disadvantage so I'm just here to say please hold Richmond public schools accountable to meeting the tenets of the MOU that you all

[01:20:06] created thank you anyone else who would like to speak during public come on up good morning Superintendent Gullickson, Chair Creasy, and members of the board. My name is Mim Longraj and I'm a resident of Arlington, Virginia. I'm here on this cold November morning to speak and support of raising Virginia's math and reading cut scores, especially for our English learner and economically

[01:20:42] disadvantaged kids because I grew up as one of them. I immigrated to the U.S. from Laos at four years old and was raised by a single mom who spoke little English and worked long hours. I grew up in the city heights neighborhood of san diego california a neighborhood that continues to see high poverty rates over 50 of the community population make less than half of the average cost of living in the city growing up i was surrounded by kids of similar circumstances who emigrated from latin america or escaped war-torn countries like laos cambodia vietnam

[01:21:17] and somalia to the land of opportunity and that opportunity starts with education i'm sorry it's my first public comment i'm a little emotional while every parent cares deeply about their children's success economically disadvantaged parents and particularly those that don't speak english often work long jobs i'm sorry long hours or multiple jobs so they're often too busy or are ill-prepared to help with homework attend parent-teacher conferences or in this case board meetings to advocate for their children more so parents like my mom who didn't grow up

[01:21:53] in this education system likely do not know where their what standards should be set for college and career readiness so as a product of that community and on behalf of those that can't advocate for their own children i'm here today to say it's crucial that their children receive an education at schools with standards with high standard with high academic expectations and real opportunity because for many of them that's the only place they'll get it i was shocked to learn that according to the U.S. Department of Education, the beautiful state of Virginia, which I'm fortunate enough to call my new home, has the lowest math and reading standardized test

[01:22:32] cut scores in the nation. No matter your background or your family's income bracket, all of Virginia's students are capable of extraordinary things, but right now our state tells them otherwise. This is especially true for our economically disadvantaged kids who have limited to no access to tutors or other forms of supplemental education and so when standards are low these students lose the most raising standards isn't about making life harder for students or teachers it's about giving them the tools to succeed with the right

[01:23:06] teaching and students and adults who believe with the right teaching and adults who believe in their potential students do rise to meet high expectations however when we label students as proficient for work that would be considered below grade level elsewhere. We're not helping them. We are holding them back. I believe that Virginia public schools. Sorry, I'm a boat. Yes. Anyone else here today that would like to speak in public comment? Thank

[01:23:43] you. We will move on into finishing a presentation from yesterday. We probably need to take a break to get that back into you guys need to revert back. So let's take a quick

[01:24:00] five minute break. Thank you. Tation from yesterday, please. Will do. So good morning,

[01:44:07] President Creasy, Sabrina Gellickson and board. Yesterday during the work session, item K, we were discussing proposed changes in accountability to our consolidated state plan. And so I'll pick up that presentation. I'm gonna do a recap from yesterday. Do you want to be clear that this item, there's no action being requested of the board today. The intent of this as it was in June was to bring this conversation to the public, to the board, to have conversation on this, to think through the implications. It's a multi-year plan. We will continue to have stakeholder engagement and comments around the different topics. And so today again is a conversation. And so I'm sure there's a larger audience today and we welcome that as we talk

[01:44:46] about the different topics as we go through. So as you're watching and when you're looking at the slide deck, I'm going to go somewhat quickly just because it is going to be a recap. And so then we'll get to the piece of the presentation that we did not conclude from yesterday. And so the purpose here is very important to talk through, you know, where this comes from. Again, the items I'm discussing do go back to when we adopted the framework. There were pieces that we knew we'd need more data on. And so the board also had said there are some pieces they wanted to consider for year two with full implementation. And so we're bringing those to the board and for conversation.

[01:45:22] There's other items that we put in our state plan. It was Amendment 7 that we said USED, they had requested more information. We'll come back in a year and bring them more information. So this is also in alignment with that. And then thirdly, through this year of implementation, we've gotten feedback from the field about some of the pieces and saying, you know, can we look to make some changes? And so some of the items I'm bringing the field thus far in our stakeholder engagement is asking, requesting that we do make it for 25-26, even though the school year has begun. And so we can go through those specific pieces as we walk through them. So stakeholder engagement you see here, we've engaged with different stakeholder groups, recognize some

[01:46:01] groups are still, you know, want more engagement, we'll certainly be engaging with them. And so I presented this to different groups around the different topics. Yesterday, actually, I had an opportunity to speak with the Title III Consortium. Today, there's another EL conference happening around the recently arrived English learner engagement there. But back in June, we met with the secondary principals, the superintendent association. We present a few weeks ago on these topics to the groups to have dialogue and think through the different levels.

[01:46:29] And so you see them listed there. But I want to be clear that with this going into now even more of a public forum, we will engage and have listening sessions and continue to have dialogue. Again, no action is being asked of the board today, but we want to bring this to the public for full consideration and conversation. So in the mastery component, again, very quickly, we talked about the index and the change in the weights, the balance between the four performance levels and the three performance levels. That was the proposal there. We talked about for science, fifth and eighth grade, going to four performance levels to be aligned to reading and mathematics.

[01:47:04] We talked about participation, very important, about our 95 percent in accordance with federal law. Remember, this goes back to our guiding principles, that this is a cohesive system. And when you look at state and federal and the two systems we had and all the data collection and all the reporting and just the misunderstandings, this brings it into one, which you find in state law that will say in accordance with ESSA.

[01:47:29] And then you'll see in these slides, we talked about a profile of a graduate, the five C's. And we talked about the importance of civic responsibility, engagement, again, the five C's around collaboration and critical thinking. There were references here to involvement around the new, the 2023 History and Social Science Standards of Learning, the instructional guides, the new redesigned assessments, which previously had been based off 2015 standards. They were field tested last year, but they'll go into effect operationally this year and some of the changes. My presentation

[01:48:04] this afternoon, you'll hear more about changes to the history SOL test. I'll say a couple things now around cluster items, really using, for example, some primary secondary resources and having students use those through multiple items. We've talked about technology in hands, but really bringing in that critical thinking element and educators were involved in that process. And so we get to slide 11 here in the presentation around the proposal of adding a history indicator to the framework and consistently in each of the areas. And so I want to speak a little bit to that. First, we want to be clear that the Virginia Studies SOL assessment, all students

[01:48:42] are taking that assess currently. So we want to lay that groundwork of the assessments we're talking about. Secondly, for civics and economics is another assessment students are all taking. So that's a standardized assessment. All students are taking it. Again, it's been redesigned for using the 2023 standards. The conversation is around the Virginia U.S. History SOL test. And so as you've heard the conversations today we do have in place based on legislation from 2014 the locally awarded verified credits and divisions taking opportunity in that and what I'll say to you is it's less than half the state is using that option so half the state is taking the option of doing

[01:49:21] the locally awarded five verified credits in history so what you can do is students again name a number of verified credits for graduation credits and there are divisions who have elected to do that in history in history you have the world history one test the world history two test We have a World Geography test, the USVA History test.

[01:49:38] We have a number of assessments. And we do that to give students more pathways in order to graduate. And I'm going to use the analogy of science. For science, you need a credit, a verified credit to graduate. And so to earn that, students might take Earth Science in ninth grade. But for accountability, we use the biology assessment for accountability.

[01:49:57] And so students take the Earth Science, they get the verified credit, they're ready for graduation. They do have to take biology as well. And so what I want to say to you is that the locally awarded verified credit is still a pathway. We're not saying that will go away. I do need to bring up 1957, but we're not saying it's going to go away.

[01:50:15] What we are saying is for the accountability system, currently, we will use the standardized assessment, which meets requirements of ESSA, meets the requirements even of our own regulations around the indicator, to collect this information. so students could still use the locally awarded verified credit in world history one satisfy that requirement and still take the virginia u.s history test again for accountability purposes and i go back to my example of science it's what we're currently doing in science as well it's the same piece here we're collecting data and then the board can discuss around you know virginia u.s history and having that assessment and collecting the data on that but want to be clear around this alternative assessment or performance task performance

[01:50:54] based assessments, we're speaking specifically to one assessment. And it's around the Virginia U.S. history test, typically given in grade 11. So that's what we're speaking about here. Now we'll speak about 1957, House Bill 1957. In that legislation, it does talk about criteria that the board will adopt around content, around guidelines for the assessment, around scoring rubrics. It is around that legislation that we're looking to bring more standardization to this process because as we've met with uscd to talk about our accountability system they've given us the steps it will take to be adopted and so we will need to have more standardization more data

[01:51:30] collection and i hear about data collection at the division level which is excellent for consistency and reliability it needs to come to the state level we need to look and make sure across all eight regions of the state that it is consistent and reliable that it meets the criteria and so that is a pathway we're looking to engage upon we've talked with uscd about a timeline for that But at this time, to bring it into accountability, when we have, like I keep saying, newly designed history assessments, the proposal is that next year in history, we would use the Virginia U.S. History SOL test in high school.

[01:52:03] To be clear, it does not mean students could not use the locally awarded verified credit. We're just saying for accountability purposes, we want to measure and see how are students doing in Virginia U.S. history. Let me also say, going back to 1957, the House Bill, also for grades 7 through 12, it becomes part of their grade on the test.

[01:52:23] And so this goes back a couple decades where we did, based on a student's performance on the SOL test, it might become their final exam. Teachers were saying, that's a final exam. Let me use that in my grade book as the final exam. And so you see this here as well. If students are in the Virginia U.S. History course, and they're going to take a final exam, then why not use the SOL test as their final exam?

[01:52:43] So if you say, well, we're testing kids more, they were already taking a final exam. So you do need to look at 1957 broadly, a number of pieces in that legislation. But I also want to be clear about the pathways. We're not eliminating pathways for students. 1957 will bring in more criteria for the locally awarded verified credits.

[01:53:01] You're going to hear me later today talk about performance tasks and innovation. I am excited about this energy on our assessments. We want to look at a coherent system. We want to think about redesign, but also to be clear about this proposal before you today. Mr. Jennings, can you clarify a little bit about what the implementation timeline is for the use of SOL tests as an exam grade?

[01:53:26] That would start July 1st, 2026 for next year. Part of 1950. That's part of House Bill 1957. Currently, the legislation says grades 7 through 12, it is 10% of a student's grade, and that begins July 1st of next year. and that was legislation had nothing to do with what the board no we are we are in compliant with the law we're going to follow the law preparing now for the law we're doing trainings already on it but i do want to see all the pieces and how they fit together absolutely for clarification also on that question uh the 10 that's being required in legislation how did it could still

[01:54:03] be what they determined to be the school system determines to be verified credit or some of the issues they're working on with their standardized test, or does it have to be our SOL standardized test? What is that 10%? It talks about, for the SOL assessment, it's 10% of their final grade.

[01:54:19] The SOL assessment. Yes. It's in legislation. Yes, that's in legislation. This is not, yeah, department, it's, well, the department's implementing the laws we do in other areas as well. Mark, also, can you dive a little bit deeper into USED's stance on the local assessments, please yes and we've talked with them at length about this we're excited about this idea you know again my presentation later about the performance task and thinking a little differently on those as well we need around at least a minimum of two years of data we need to show consistent reliable statewide data and and that is the every student succeeds act you're looking at statewide consistency

[01:54:56] and so we ask them the timeline what will we need the steps to do it and so they laid out for us we need two years of data we need to see these steps 1957 is in alignment with that as far as clear criteria, rubrics. We're going to have to talk about the scoring, how data is submitted to us, auditing, all the steps it will take, and then us presenting with US Ed, doing a peer review, having those conversations, and then two consecutive years of that, then say, can we go forward with this? We want to be innovative. We've talked about other states who've tried this and sort of what lessons learned there. And so it's something we're very excited to pursue. And again, my presentation later will address this. We have an innovative assessment work group that's going

[01:55:32] to talk about this. We talk about a new assessment system, but we've also talked about how do we make that happen? And so again, USAID will sit there and look at you and say, just like we are, we're bound by the Every Student Succeeds Act. And so these are the steps that have to be followed. And then this is the pathway you would need to do. And can you talk a little bit more also about why civics is at that 7.5 percent? Excellent. Yes. So in our proposal, let me go ahead and go to that slide around the weights. That's a great slide to look at. And so what you'll see here is in our weight proposal, we talk through with different stakeholder groups, the weighting. You see the 5% Virginia studies at elementary, and you see the 10% for science

[01:56:11] at elementary school. Science is a cumulative assessment, three, four, five, third, fourth, fifth grade content, so it's 10%. At the middle school, as you heard me talk about the five C's in profile of a graduate, you see the consistency around civics. I mean, civics is in our five C's.

[01:56:27] It's one of them. Civic responsibility and understanding, again, our country, but also, we talked about world geography, understanding other cultures and diversity and the respect for that. And so given the importance of that, and also the economics piece to think around financial literacy, is it was decided to make middle school a 7.5, science still being again at 10% because it's three years of content. But given the importance of civics and economics, it was weighted 7.5%. You'll see down at the bottom, this is in the readiness factor, but the integrated reading and writing is 5% in coordination with the reading. As we talked through different

[01:57:04] stakeholder groups, they were interested in their feedback. Initially, they had asked us to pull the points out of chronic absenteeism. And then as they've learned more about the system and they've seen more of the power they have in chronic absenteeism and the recovery, they said, you know, it's a whole school effort. Really think 5% is too low. Keep it 10%. Now, this again is going out for public comment. We've talked to different groups, you know, and gotten different feedback that might come back and people say, no, we really do think 5% is better there. But thus far, what we've heard is to actually, you know, some of these groups, they're saying they were surprised. They're like, yeah, if you'd asked me this several months ago, I would have argued for the 5%. Now I think it should be 10. So we go to high school. And again, as I was sharing,

[01:57:43] biology is a one-year assessment, one content is 5%. The Virginia U.S. history is a 5%, again, noting that it is one year of content there. So that's the differences in the weights. but and that's why it explains the dirt and the weights for science science in elementary middle school 10 because they're three years of content high school is one year of content so it's five percent madam president may ask dr ackerman um yes i i get all this there was a lot of good clarification for me i really appreciate it is there a kind of once we build this and you get public comment and people agree is there some plug and play available because i'm hearing it's a

[01:58:21] little complicated when we were trying to really simplify the system so when you start getting for example, to 0.5%. So is there going to be an ability to kind of uncomplicate it? So when we, excellent, excellent question. When we rolled this out last year, even prior sort of building and talking through it, one of the tools that we provide is we have an Excel spreadsheet with all these weights by models. And so we provide that for the school divisions and we've encouraged and we've done trainings on how to use that. And so it builds in basically, you know, how many students and it has the point values and you have the weights. And the power of that tool is really to look because it calculates your overall score.

[01:58:56] And then you look to see sort of where you are. And if you're between different performance categories, you start to think, what could we do differently? Obviously, we want all kids have high expectations for them for mastery and advance. And so you start to see, especially on chronic absenteeism, you know, so if you're sitting in March or April and you're looking and you're seeing, okay, we're this close based on preliminary, you know, data, where can we make some adjustments?

[01:59:18] And so when you think about, yeah, it's five points here, five points here, 10 points here. I think that was the shift in thinking from some of the stakeholders, both principals, superintendents, and the people who oversee attendance were very excited about keeping it 10%. But they saw the power in that because on that Excel sheet, they changed it to 5% and saw, oh, that doesn't affect as much as 10%. And they were like, we have quite a bit of control over recovery. We are seeing through the all-in initiative, we are seeing students come in before school, after school. We're seeing students come on Saturday school. We're seeing it to be very effective. Students are appreciating the small group parents are appreciating they're getting this tailorized personalized support and so you

[01:59:56] know using those resources chronic absenteeism and virginia's leading the nation in this every conference i go to speak to i'm asked around i'm going to talk about something but they're like well you're here do you mind talking about chronic absenteeism because you're doing something that's working we're seeing the results great thank you appreciate it actually reminds me a little like when you're doing a mortgage or car and you change all the different numbers and you see what you need to fix in your whatever and how much down payment and yeah so that's what i meant even something that could be complicated it was simplified by a neat tool yeah and those are available to the public they're on the doe website it's on the road to readiness hub they're available to anyone uh we've done trainings for school division leaders on how to use them but they

[02:00:36] are available on the website for the public thank you dr northern just to clarify the integrated reading and writing is that the performance-based task it is it is a type of performance task and did used to have the performance based task i thought at 10 is that right talked about again with different weights we talked about not for last year but for the upcoming year there was conversation around should well actually the plan was for years well this fits the plan the plan was for year two to do a performance task and it was going to divide chronic absenteeism to five percent and the performance test of five percent and again with that one part

[02:01:16] of the conversation was that chronic absenteeism be five percent in all the models and that is where we were headed and like i shared as we were showing this model to different stakeholders they said i really think you should pull the five percent out of reading let chronic absenteeism say ten percent at elementary middle school so i say that to you again the board this will be your decision but also i'm very excited to hear from the public on that but initially the intention was to lower chronic absenteeism to five so that it was five percent in all the different models uh we can give give them to you. I mean, basically the difference for this one that you're looking on the slide was

[02:01:52] 5% came out of reading and then the 5% came out of math for elementary. So we can provide for you. I can give you the current weights and then middle school, you know, 5% came from math for the history and then 5% came from reading for the IRW. And then in high school, it was basically science was taken from 10% to 5% and 5% was given to the history, Virginia U.S. history.

[02:02:20] any other questions here before mark moves on i'll just follow by saying with the weights again part of the guiding principles of the board and part of the every student succeeds act is that your academic achievement your mastery be weighted more again you're looking that your school quality success indicators don't overweight because federal law requires that you're putting emphasis on your reading math science those core areas and so we're still maintaining that even with these weight distributions and also we have ranges in our regulations that still abides by that as well

[02:02:52] and so from there we talk about growth yesterday we had a conversation on value progress tables what we're doing here is a vertical scale still calling it progress tables but i know too when you look at this and if you're home watching this you're about to see a number of animations but the essence of this is again going back to our guiding principle we want to incentivize the importance of proficiency we want to make it clear that proficiency and advanced you know mastery of content is where the value the more value is but we also want to honor growth and so

[02:03:28] this again purposely may look complicated but the intent is to provide more opportunities for students to demonstrate growth and so you get a number of point values through that whether it's again it's obviously if students are moving backwards on the range there's no points we talked about students if they're not succeeding but if they're staying in the same range getting half a point if students are proficient one year on the high proficient but then they go back towards lower proficient they get a 0.75 and then you see if students are advanced, but there's still room to grow. They are getting a point value in that. On our next slide,

[02:04:03] you have, we look here about students moving from one range to a next. Again, not being proficient, but they're still showing growth by moving a range. It's a one-point value. Then you see demonstrated next is if students move two ranges, or they move, sorry, from basic not succeeding to proficient it's a 1.25 value if they are going from uh proficient to advanced it's a 1.25 value again moving performance levels we're incentivizing moving that and if they're at the high end uh and

[02:04:39] they're again there's nowhere to go as far as growth or at the high end of the range then they're staying are receiving 1.25 uh we're honoring again that 0.25 is additional credit every child counts is one, but they're receiving more. And then finally, you see another example of 1.25 where this student has moved two ranges. Again, the student did not pass. They were not proficient.

[02:05:02] However, tremendous growth was made in that year to move two ranges. And so our proposal is that those students receive 1.25 as well. And then again, you see the weights. And just what I want to emphasize there is there's no recommendation to change the weights for growth. And that's why you don't see it in red it's sort of stabilized there the other weight distributions as i mentioned earlier came from pulling some points from reading for irw pulling some points for math for history across and except for high school we pulled them from science readiness we talked through advanced coursework yesterday we talked about earth science which many divisions are

[02:05:41] currently using offering for students who are ready we would apply for a waiver from uscd to bring this in both to the mastery points for students and also to bring it into advanced coursework. And you see the denominator there and how that would work. But I also want to be clear that this is from both state statute and from federal law. Students would need to complete the grade eight science test as a cumulative test prior to taking the earth science. And then we have the conversation on world geography. And so I want to be clear here, again, all the layers and

[02:06:17] pieces. We were talking earth science about being grade 8. World geography, you'll notice on this slide, there is no language around the grade level. State statute is clear about local school divisions have authority around when they offer their sequence of studies. And so students should absolutely take world geography at the 7th grade level and take civics at the 8th grade. Or they could do civics in 7th grade and do world geography at 8th grade. We're allowing, again, according to state statute. We're going to follow that and allow this flexibility. We're not saying all students take world geography. If you think about currently, we have students who are in math eight and students who are in algebra at the same time. So this is not saying all students are in world

[02:06:56] geography. There is a place where students might be in eighth grade civics and other students are in world geography in eighth grade. And so again, as you think about differentiation and personalized learning, this would be a pathway for those students. And I use the math example because we're doing that. Students are sitting in eighth grade math, algebra, and geometry at the same time.

[02:07:14] And they're all in eighth grade. And so how a school or a division does their master schedule around world geography and civics and U.S. history, the decision would be made either at the school or the division level. And then we discuss IRW.

[02:07:31] You'll see a demonstration later on performance task. It is a type of performance task. In this assessment, students have a few questions around what they've read. The reading will be on a history or science content, and then they have a writing prompt. The standards around this are accumulating standards.

[02:07:48] Again, this is given at fifth grade, and so you're looking at K through five standards. Eighth grade, you're looking six through eight standards, but also embeds previous standards. You're talking about writing, you know, what you've learned around the rules of grammar, language usage, mechanics, and composing, and written expression, a number of layers there.

[02:08:06] And again, to be clear, this is proposed for next year, 26, 27, not for this year, but for next year. It's an assessment they've been given and looking at data, but proposals for next year. and so what you see in the proposed weights there is again the 27 28 year is where the advanced coursework would take effect and it was 10 and so what we've done is six percent for math two percent for science and two percent for heat reading so again math is being obviously weighted more significantly but science and history uh being calculated with that 10 point and now we're

[02:08:42] going to talk about 3e i want to share that very clearly if you go back and i'm happy to provide the links as we talked about 3e through listening sessions we did over 16 listening sessions when we presented this to the board around the framework and got feedback from the board and stakeholders if you go back to those presentations 23 year 2024 even the final vote from the board if you look at the 3e slides at the very bottom uh under the 3e or on especially on the enlistment it says the board wants to continue to have conversation around jrtc and the board signaled at that time they were hearing from the public around jrtc how do we include it what do we think

[02:09:20] we want to do more in enlistment and currently if you look at our 3e you'll see it on the next slide i'll show you uh currently enlistment does not have a 1.25 value it is the only category without a 1.25 i was here presenting to the board earlier several months back where we brought a 1.25 into employment so we had it in enrollment we've added to uh employment and so today we're going to talk about a path that perhaps we use for enlistment to bring a balance across all three and so this is the current as you see enrollment employment enlistment we're asking for no changes in

[02:09:57] enrollment no changes in employment we're going to discuss today enlistment and it's very clearly you can see even just looking at it visually enlistment again has three point values one point being the max and even if you just look at the layer of text not as detailed and so we're we're going to talk about a proposal again even when the board adopted this had noted they wanted to talk deeper about enlistment. So current data demonstrates we did and looked at a number of state scans and when you know ESSA plans and I want to be clear about this. We looked at both ASVAB and state plans for accountability. We also looked at military readiness. Some states use ASVAB and some

[02:10:36] use if students enlist in the military. So 14 states in the nation use ASVAB and some states I pointed there out Texas does military readiness. They're not using ASVAB currently. They've reached out to us to learn more about how we're using it, but they're currently not using it. So I just want to share sort of this idea of enlistment and how it's being applied. I do want to share with you, as we looked at these 14 states very indepthly, North Dakota requires a few things. One, that they have to have an eligible score of 31 on the ASVAB. That is your minimum enlistment score for certain

[02:11:11] branches. Secondly, they require quality citizenship measured through discipline. What they look at is if a student does not have any suspensions or expulsions. And thirdly, they look at the student also has to have physical fitness. A PE teacher has to sign off that the student would be able to pass a physical education exam. And then they go beyond that to say the student also has to have two other indicators from college and career ready. So I want to share when we look at Virginia's, what used to be the CCCRI, the College Career Readiness Indicator, and then we think about the 3E. You know, we're getting points in all three of the E's. Other states say you need to do one

[02:11:48] in each of these just to get one point. And so we've allowed students to really go deep into one or do across to get point values. And we honor that. You know, right now you can get up to 3.5 points. But as you look at some of these states and you just see North Dakota, what's required just to get a minimum of a point. Wyoming requires an eligible score of 45 on the ASVAB, and they require one extra item from either college or career ready and it could be like a ct complete or something like that then we look at illinois they require three indicators in career ready to include military service or an asvab score of 31. so as we look to see what

[02:12:23] other states are doing with asvab and how they're doing military readiness uh we did find mississippi i didn't put it on this slide but mississippi it was similar to us as far as the asvab scores but But I would say to you, they required a higher score to get higher number of points. When I looked at their range and our range, our students were getting, you know, a 0.5 and they were getting a quarter of a point.

[02:12:44] So even there where they allowed the ASVAB, we were not as rigorous just as a comparison. Sorry, Dr. Ackerman. Sorry, if I can. I just want to commend that you've looked at other states to see what they're doing. I find it really helpful. And I sent you a kind of midnight hour email to Tierra as well, because I would love to see us see some analysis on what states are continuing to use verified credits and how you know they're splicing some of the you know the alternative type tests that we've heard people mentioned for social studies earlier today so I don't expect you to break from this one now to do

[02:13:22] that now but perhaps in a work session tomorrow or something I mean next month or something we can dig into a little bit and have a discussion on that I think would be helpful because I'm not completely i i chat gpt it for what it's worth and i think it's five other states besides us are continuing to do that so i think i would again would love to dig deeper on that so i'll respond and say there are six states that do use uh verified credits or some form for graduation requirements we've already begun reaching out to those states i'm a part of a group to talk with them and so there's what's available publicly and when their state plans but we won't have dialogue with them around it because there's things not in their plan because there's flexibilities and so

[02:13:59] we're reaching out to provide that information. It's a great conversation to have because we do want to learn more about them. I meet with them as part of a larger group of 44 states. And so we do want to have more dialogue around this in our conversation on verified credits. And so I'll be excited at the next present, next board meeting to bring our findings on that as we think about our system. Some of those states, in particular, one of them is Louisiana, has just made some major changes to their state plan. And so we're having some conversation because they just had theirs approved not long ago. Yeah, they would be really interesting. And I'm also, since you mentioned 44 states, I'd be curious to see if there's any trend analysis. Are people coming back to the table with

[02:14:36] the verified credits or are they leaving the table? I'm just curious what the kind of data on that, the state of the states on all that is. So thank you. You're welcome. So I want to share the proposal that we have. Again, this is intended for, there's no action today. This is intended for public comment we're excited to hear what the field has to say around this you have on this slide the current enlistment criteria on the left and then our proposal on the right and so i'll go from the bottom up and so a quarter of a point would be provided uh for students who take the asvab and get a 31 or higher so taking this assessment and i'll say with this the intention was never just

[02:15:12] take the assessment and walk away from it if you look at states and i mean i can name some for you one being texas another one being kentucky if you look at what they've done with asvab and the the support they provide for students and the data and the exploration it really shows how this is intended i'll get a little personal just say when i took the asvab i learned more about myself i learned more about a pathway i might pursue but it gave me different data about myself and skillsets i didn't know and so we wanted this again 3e uh you know what the e stand for but it's also exploration is to learn about themselves and so we want students to to take assessments like this and learn about themselves even if they don't have a 31 passing score they still have a score

[02:15:50] and can learn, you know, where they're strong and where they're weak and where they can improve. And so there is a point, a quarter of a point for students to take it and do a third, have a 31 or higher. And again, 31 is the minimum enlistment score in certain branches. So now we move up and you see the proposal to bring in JROTC and JROTC is offered for four years. You'll notice in our proposal, we're only looking at one year. We're not saying students have to be in there and maybe the board would want that, but our proposal is just a minimum of one year. We did follow what we did in enrollment with a B grade that's something we required in dual enrollment courses and so we stood by the B grade for this as well and so you see a half a point if you're 31 on the

[02:16:29] ASVAB and you're in a complete a completed JROTC course with a B grade 0.75 ASVAB of 50 to 64 those are percentiles by the way the 50 to 64 with a B grade and then a point if you're at 65 on the ASVAB and a B grade now that 65 is very important because a 65 on the ASVAB is you're the next to highest percentile or next to highest rank that means you if you go in you enlist you get incentives and so we really do want to honor that that even if they choose not to enlist that they're aware that they enlist there's incentives there and that they're in the second highest uh rank

[02:17:05] there and just the what a 65 means and so that's a point value and then what we are proposing is that 1.25 we're looking at another factors if a student takes the asvab and they have 31 and they enlist they follow through and they enlist in the national guard u.s military or attend a military service academy which virginia is proud to have virginia military institute they would have a 1.25 so think about maybe a senior who's you know gone through high school is not sure what they want to do they take the asvab they get a 31 or higher and they think i'm going to enlist then the high school is going to have that 1.25 and so again we're honoring the asvab and the different point values

[02:17:44] but we're also honoring the students who do this is about post-secondary readiness and so we want to see that through line all the way through and so for the students who do enlist then the school would get the 1.25 value and the student would see sort of that again that pathway and we're very proud of virginia and we have a number of military bases here obviously our proximity to dc we're a very uh friendly military state uh this is something we are proud to offer mr jennings What I am not seeing here, however, that I'd like to be able to integrate somehow is that we know quite a few of our students that go into JROTC in ninth grade or some as early as eighth grade

[02:18:24] in different localities, and they complete all four years in the JROTC program. I'd like to see something in this proposed segment that accounts for at least one point, maybe even 1.25. I don't know, but I do think that we need to account for those students that are completing that four years of JROTC. That's great feedback. I'll go to the next slide and pause because I'm reading your responses there. And so we'll talk more about some other ideas we're exploring is we think also about

[02:19:03] again enlistment, getting that through line, that post-secondary readiness. So enlistment again is about service, service to your country, service to other areas. And so one of the things we're exploring is maybe students enlist in programs such as the Peace Corps, AmeriCorps. We've listed some programs there, volunteers in service to America, the National Civilian Community Corps, and we can collect this data. Where are students, again, exploring, learning more about themselves and their pathways, awarding points in enlistment for students who do go into one of these service areas. And so we've just heard your recommendation there. We'll take that back. And then also just want to share with you where we are. We're exploring more about this and looking at other states and looking at these programs where they might fit. And we want to bring this to the public

[02:19:42] and to the board to have that conversation around, yes, definitely point values, but sort of where this might fit in and sort of any thoughts you might have in this area. Well, I would like to personally speak to this one, Mr. Jennings, as an AmeriCorps alumna myself. And so I felt like it's such a rigorous evaluation and entry program and that we should also be prioritizing are students who want to graduate and go on for a year or more of service for me it helped me pay for future education as well and so as we think about the long-term trajectory of students on

[02:20:21] their pathways we're going to be working with our higher ed and workforce partners to get more information on the data trends what do we know and what's possible here at our next pathways convening next week but we want to start to get input from the field i've had families say this should also count because it's quite a high bar to to get accepted into these programs and so i appreciate the board's consideration there any comments here dr northern i think it's a great

[02:20:58] idea honestly i mean these are programs that are rigorous and i mean i know i have family members that have participated in some of these programs too and it is rigorous and it's it's it does just demonstrate civic leadership readiness all the things that i think we're trying to uh promote in the 3a readiness indicator i just respond and say uh thank you for your comments and this we're excited to hear from the public on this and bring awareness i think again students you know so often we talk with students even guidance counselors or even parents they say we didn't know that was available we know that was a pathway and so by talking about this even today and bringing it to

[02:21:35] the the surface uh put into your accountability system it just is going to have more kids exposed to it so we're excited about that and so next again you're going to see some slides here on weights the calculation rules and participation rate uh just want to be transparent about what's in the uh plan as we move to a public comment period and meet with more stakeholder groups and bring back their comments to you so you have some context uh as we talk through so you've seen this slide before no changes in the weights for 25 26 be very clear about that we're in november we're we're not asking for any changes for 2526 this would be changes for next year you see we've

[02:22:12] talked about bringing history into the accountability system and also the integrated reading and writing so changes to the weights would happen next year the next slide shows you the changes in 2728 schools would have you know some time to think about integration implementation around science and history with the advanced courses some divisions already doing it they can learn from each other talk through whether regionally or school to school around the implementation of earth science and world geography. High school mastery calculations, really want to bring this to the surface, and we've engaged in some conversation. We want more conversation.

[02:22:49] Currently, Virginia is using a cohort calculation in reading, math, and science in our accountability system, and so the conversation has been the pros and cons around moving to an annual calculation. And I'll share with you, you see it on the slide. Well, one, I want to be clear, there's no proposal to do that this year. We're not looking to change anything this year. This will be in effect 26 27 if we move forward uh but you think about why why make this change you know one of the pros and cons and one of the biggest pros that we've heard of is using data using information for school improvement and when you're using a cohort calculation you are talking about students who maybe have taken algebra in their ninth grade year and now we're looking at those summary results

[02:23:28] three four years later and so if you're a school looking to make changes or improvement you're talking about data that is now three four years old uh and yes graduation obviously is a culmination as well but using an annual you'll see sort of where are we right now more in the moment versus well those results those students were there three four years ago also we have students who transfer within virginia they bring those results so a school is looking at data from other schools in their cohort calculation versus annually it's just their results so those are some of the factors i think as we move forward you know we we're having our data validated on the school performance support framework you know as we think about sort of our old systems in our new system you know if

[02:24:07] if we look at our release in August, those are what we call in Virginia our pass rate reports. Federal law calls them student achievement results. They're required under federal law. That is your baseline. It's a very simple calculation. Students who took the test, did they pass or fail, or did they get advanced? So that tells you how schools have done. That tells you how divisions have done. Afterwards, you get the framework. The framework is going to have some allowances. We can remove some students. We bring in 3E. We do some other things.

[02:24:33] But if you're a school division, look at your data from August, and what you're going to see with the framework shouldn't be too far off from that and I'm saying that to you as an example because the cohort calculation is where you see your results in high school but then because a cohort it could be different in this board as we've talked about our guiding principles is around transparency and so you know if I'm a parent and I look and see the results in August and then I see the cohort it's like wait I can understand cohort but again it's sort of that explanation if I'm a parent I'm you know paying attention looking at the news and looking at all the information and you're telling me the pass rate now is worth 60% and then later tell me 80%, wait, that's not what you just said two months ago.

[02:25:11] And so moving to annual allows that transparency between the pieces so that parents feel like, oh, that's what I expected. You know, there will be an adjustment from August to whenever, you know, the accountability system is released. Some states do it September. Some states don't do their accountability system release until January.

[02:25:26] They take a full four or five months just to gather the data and then they use the spring for planning. And so just to share with you where this conversation is coming from, but the connections back to school planning. And then our next piece, this is very technical, very technical, but I know it's important to our schools and divisions.

[02:25:47] We talked yesterday about the 95% participation as a federal requirement. In our state plan, you know, federal law requires if a school is not meeting 95%, either overall or at the student group, basically, what are the consequences? What are you doing? And like many states, Virginia requires a plan, a corrective action plan to say less than 95% of our students tested, what are you going to do differently?

[02:26:08] So what we're proposing is that knowing that an N size of 15 is pretty small, we're proposing to use 40 just in basically for the requirement of the plan. So that doesn't change the calculations, the results, any of those pieces. It's simply saying we're looking to see if you're below 95%, we would use an N size of 40 here, then you'd have to develop a plan.

[02:26:28] Now, if the whole school is under 95%, they're still developing the plan. This was specific to the student groups to sort of honor how many students may not have taken the test. So it's more just to alleviate some of the paperwork and sort of the thinking there, but only for the student groups. If the school overall is below 95, they'd be required to do a plan. Dr. Northern.

[02:26:50] To me, it seems a little high, but can you tell me, because you've done some other research in other states, what other states are doing? I don't want us to be Virginia to have the highest end size that's not the optics that we want so i would i'm curious how other states are handling it because i get it's a sensitive right so and to be very clear absolutely we are only would use the end size of 40 only to calculate should they have to do a plan and the reason we selected 40 versus 30 is basically this means you could have two students in a student group not take the test versus one so that's really when you break it down of the percentage of 95 40 that's why 40 was chosen it's just saying two students in that student group may not have taken the test versus

[02:27:28] one. So that's why it's 40. But this really is only about who has to make a plan to say students didn't test. That's it. Kids are still taking the test under 15. Absolutely. It doesn't change the 15. I know it's very, it's more about a paperwork reduction versus we're not changing the incise.

[02:27:45] I know. No, we're not changing the incise. I've got great research when Virginia, the board adopted why 15 matters. Yes. So not changing the incise. I appreciate that clarity. And English learners so we we met yesterday with a group a consortium and today there's a conference they're speaking actually here in richmond talking about this today this is a piece i'll share with you i've been talking about plans for 26 27 27 28 this is one i've heard pretty unanimously please make this effective this year and i think as you hear you'll know why and that is first we'll begin with the definition very often we talk about english learners and we do speak very broadly of them

[02:28:22] under federal law when we talk about exclusions or exemptions we speak about recently arrived federal law is very clear that all students are responsible to take tests expected to take tests to be measured uh you know when we come to excluding students federal law is very very strict based on you know civil rights groups fighting to make sure all students are included so recently arrived you see the definition from essa there's uh students who are enrolled in a u.s or district of columbia school not using or not including puerto rico for less than 12 months so we're talking about recently arrived english learners here in the country less than 12 months

[02:28:55] And this was the essence of ESSA, is that a student would have one year of school, learning, instruction, and then they'd be in your accountability system to measure how are they doing. So that was the essence, 12 months, and then how are they doing? Mark, how are we determining the length of time?

[02:29:15] The 12 months? Yeah. So we use, it's basically when the student enrolls, we're collecting basically their enrollment, and we look back if they come from another state. it's part of when they enroll in the school and we have their records their history of enrollment it comes into our system so we know the 12 months now school divisions it's a it's a two data collection process school divisions will tell us and then we have another data source to verify you know it's a great question because it's something you know what are the 12 months and which months count they are cumulative um so we're looking at them to be sort of students may have been in the country and leave and then come back so we're looking at 12 months um and so yeah and

[02:29:54] it could be any school in the United States. It doesn't have to be a Virginia school. And this is consistent nationwide. It's a great question. So currently we're doing exception A. And exception A, basically it's consistent. A number of states use this, 26 of the 50. And this is what we're doing right now. It basically says a student could be exempt from the reading test one time.

[02:30:18] And then it says in their first year, they take math, science, any other applicable assessments in your system. And then we report the results on how they do. But for the first year, it's not used in accountability. And so that's how it works. There's your 12 months, your one year of learning exposure. Year two, you'd count in the accountability system. So it's year one and year two. That's exception A, sometimes called option one. What we're proposing is to go to exception B. And here's the differences. And the next slide has a nice chart to explain this. Exception B says that a recently arrived student will take all the assessments. They will take reading under this proposal. They will take math. They will take science. They'll take all of them, but only to

[02:30:58] be a baseline. They do not count in the calculations. We show the parents, we show the school how they did, but as far as accountability, they're removed. And so that's, again, under federal law, this is exception B. And so you see this slide that gives you a nice chart. So year one, reading and math, they take the assessment. Virginia reports the score, and by reporting the score, we mean we share the results. That's what that means. And then is it an accountability? The answer is no. Year one, they take the English language progress assessment. That's WIDA in Virginia. We take the assessment. We report how they did. We don't use an accountability because you can't measure progress from the year before if they weren't here. I mean, that kind of fits. You need a prior

[02:31:36] year to measure progress. Year one science, they would take the assessment. We report it. It would not be an accountability as well. Year two, here's the difference in exception B or exception two based on the literature year two they take the assessment we report it and we only look for growth so in our system we call the mastery component the growth component they would only be in the growth component so we're just measuring from year one to year two and reading and math how much did they grow now if you're asking well how are you measuring growth i go back to some of my slides earlier we would use the progress tables to measure growth so it's the same system you know

[02:32:11] for all students about what does growth mean here and then you see for year two science and history again they would take the assessment count and again virginia's pathway we really don't have but we could where students take consecutive science and history tests but it's possible um they would be including accountability in year three here reading and math they take the assessments report and then they count for proficiency so your big difference between exception a and exception b is this extra year just measuring growth and i think as you hear that you would i think you can know why division associations organizations school divisions are asking is please make this effective for this year um it would be a change because currently students

[02:32:51] may be exempt from reading they would be need to be assessed this year as a baseline but the feedback we received is this is one that yes we would ask the board to adopt this and make this effective for 25 26. any questions here i will share with you just like jr tc and some of these other options this was discussed when the board adopted that we would explore this further this was a conversation the board brought up and wanted to know more about english learners as we talked about the 11 semesters and three semesters and we were asked to go back and examine this so this is

[02:33:25] again shouldn't be brand new it's something we've been talking about i'll move now there's a committee that's going to be meeting in a couple weeks uh we have an alternate access test this is for duly identified students these are students who are participating in our alternate assessment program and are also english learners and this is a newer test we have some baseline data now and what we need to determine for virginia is what is our exit criteria and how do we measure progress so we now have enough data we have two years of data we have an expert who serves on our TAC our technical advisory council uh who's going to come and help lead some work she's a national leader in this

[02:34:02] field and she's going to work with us on this and I'll say because I know the public's watching um and for the board there's uh I need to share just there'll be some more information on this but there's some concerns around the access assessment so the access assessment for this year is a brand new assessment it's been completely redesigned the WIDA consortium will do their standard setting in july of 2026 virginia will then do our standard setting in august of 2026 we need their results and we will re-examine our exit criteria and our progress levels on the access based on their findings but i know there's some anxiety in the field and so while i'm talking about this i thought

[02:34:38] i would add those comments just that we're very much aware uh we will not compare to the old results until the standard setting is complete but as i just shared they're not doing their standard setting until July and access to the 26 and 27, so late July. We'll need their results and then we'll do ours. So we'll do another group like this, but not until next August. Madam President, may I ask a question, please? Dr. Ackerman. Thank you. For clarification, if a student does access, do they then not take the other standardized test or is it an addition? It's an addition because this is part of the screening. This is part of looking to see students who are duly identified, where's their english language and for this assessment it's it's paper-based it's very much

[02:35:18] you might have students who are non-verbal and so we're really looking to see sort of is it a language issue or is it an issue around special needs and so that's why with this new assessment really trying to determine the two factors and then the but the vap is separate right absolutely if it's chosen it's not we're not yeah just an excellent excellent point we're not saying if a student exits um via english learner services alternate access they wouldn't also receive um the alternate program the vap all right because as we're looking at other states one thing i'm really wrestling with and and trying to you know just wrap my head around is as we allow differentiated instruction or things or if we consider allowing things to replace the

[02:35:58] standardized test and everything you're working on then you start kind of we're going backwards a little bit right i mean the vap i understand that's different of course but but uh we start tracking students with special needs different than the general population right because i'm going to prepare for this test instead of that right so um but but then wondering what the verified credits are going to do for students with special needs and those are kind of butting heads i think in our heads a little bit um so that's why i'm so curious what other states have done because truly they're they've wrestled this as well but um obviously the vat makes sense but any

[02:36:31] other type of alternative that becomes a replacement to the standardized test the bar's moving again so just kind of for the you know the board kind of knows where i am on some of those things thank you this is another piece that we shared in our amendment that we would bring back to both uscd and the board and just to be clear is uh with our framework we have an exit criteria for federally identified schools um we were asked to go back and be very clear about schools that were identified previously to 2025 how would they exit and so we just want to be clear here with the public that if a school was identified for comprehensive support or additional targeted

[02:37:10] support prior to this year they were in the old system that we use the same methodology of how they entered we look at the same student groups we want to honor the methodology that was used the calculations and that they can show progress based on when they entered and how they entered again the framework is different with the mastery index in those pieces and so want to make sure that we're comparing the right data for consistency there and i'm going to turn to my colleague here deputy superintendent booker dwyer she's going to speak to you about some school improvement

[02:37:39] pieces in the uh school plan state plan hello board members as we were noticing is virginia thai that's what the side comments and so uh mr jennings he talked a little bit about the accountability side of the of our um state plan that's being revised and we're actually going through the entire plan to um to make some minor updates to align with what we are doing noun in the the direction for school improvement so what you will see is for the more rigorous

[02:38:19] interventions section and this is more rigorous interventions for comprehensive support and improvement schools we are going to focus on with school divisions that school level needs assessment root cause analysis process and having that team to support school improvement efforts and at the department level we are going to increase you'll see the the monitoring visits data session so that so that section of the ESSA plan will look a little different to align to all the different presentations I've shared with the board from August up until now with the resource allocation

[02:38:56] review there's a section that is required for us to to look at how resources are distributed to schools and once again this is going to emphasize the cross-departmental team led by the office of school improvement looking at both fiscal and non-fiscal resources and then the technical assistance so we're looking holistically at technical assistance we are looking to strengthen our partnerships with the professional organizations representing school boards superintendents principals to ensure that we can provide some direct technical assistance to them to ensure

[02:39:35] that they know everything that's going on and they are a part of that conversation and a part of the the school improvement so you'll notice in our ESSA plan that we'll have a piece for school board members for school and division staff and aspiring and current educators because what we know is that we need to prepare that pipeline of educators principals and teachers who are prepared to address those unique challenges in some of our lowest achieving schools and so for next steps we are um we'll be actively engaging uh stakeholders so this is not not over yet no

[02:40:12] decisions have been made this plan will go out for public comment and we want to hear from you we will hold some listening sessions we will attend the superintendent's regional meetings and share this there we want their feedback we are also planning to to go to our school boards to go to our principals associations and we want to get their more in-depth feedback so we are looking forward to um to having all those comments bringing this back uh before the board um at the december board meeting any questions are there any questions for miss booker dwyer here miss

[02:40:49] mcpherson in light of our conversation yesterday in terms of involvement of school boards themselves and making sure that they are aware of what is happening in their area um will your plan include for those visits to various school board meetings or special call meetings so that we can update them on data definitely so we plan to yeah so we plan to share data with them for their area we want to make sure that the school board members know everything that we have shared with superintendents principal every we wanted that that communication to be totally transparent

[02:41:24] transparent other questions dr ackerman um just a funny aside because as you're saying that my sister who's past president of virginia literacy association just asked me to come speak to them but i'm like i don't know if i want to come on the cut scores or not but anyway um i do i do want to point out that um uh because i think you know we're all hearing from our different constituents and so of course i'm hearing a lot from our special ed folks and um and i just want i don't know how to ensure our teachers that everything's going to be okay right there's always angst when

[02:41:59] there's change um and i and and most of them have heard me talk about keeping the standards high for our unique populations like English learners and students with special needs. And so just kind of that assurance that I've heard from you all, I've heard repeatedly, it is there to support. This is all for support. I mean, no teachers, particularly in the field of special education, are going to lose jobs over standards of learning assessments. I mean, we struggle to find them and keep them as it is. And so just kind of making sure people understand that the accountability system

[02:42:34] is a support system and and the way that those points are being laid out that you know kind of calculator of where the weaknesses are is to help the state identify that prescriptive plan um and so i'm excited about it because i mean i can't tell you how often in the field you hear stories that you know as an is an example and i won't just broad broad example how a student with special needs might not be getting pulled to see the reading specialist right because they're not not being identified on the writing assessment reading and writing assessments they're being identified on their special education assessments and so this is good for the field and i'm excited

[02:43:13] about it and i just wanted to kind of share some thoughts behind that board so thank you other comments here questions thank you very much we will move on to item a with dr wallace good morning

[02:43:48] good morning good morning president creasy superintendent gullickson and members of the board Today I have with me again Ann Eaton, lead reviewer for our esteemed partners at UVA and the Virginia Literacy Partnerships.

[02:44:04] Ann and her team of educators spend countless hours reviewing submitted curriculum documents and we want to recognize and thank them for their hard work. This is an endless process and we really appreciate the partnership. We bring to you this morning the final review of additional supplemental and intervention materials to support the implementation of the Virginia Literacy Act as embodied by the standards of quality. There have been two changes to this item from last month. The 30-day public comment brought 11 public comments. Five of them came from reading specialists, two comments from reading supervisors, and one from a second grade teacher, one from a special education teacher,

[02:44:44] one from a parent volunteer, and one that did not include their role. Seven of the public comments are in support of UFLY, one of the programs, being added to the list as an intervention. Commenters report that the program is an excellent option for phonics instruction.

[02:45:00] Two comments are requests for additional programs to be added to the list, and one comment questions the approach of using such programs without a study on long-term outcomes. Of note, since the October board meeting, Lexia Voyager Sorpus has notified VLP that they will be sunsetting the Read Well writing program within the next few months, And so that program has been removed from the final K-5 recommended supplemental program guide and is no longer under consideration for use.

[02:45:32] The superintendent of public instruction recommends that the Board of Education approve the K-8 intervention instructional programs and supplemental instructional programs to comply with the Virginia Literacy Act. Are there questions on this item? Okay. Given that there are no questions, is there a motion to approve the K-8 Intervention Instructional Programs and Supplemental Instructional Programs to comply with the VLA?

[02:46:06] So moved. Second. Are there any comments about this motion? Dr. Northern? I just want to clarify, there will be additional reviews in the first quarter of 2026 for ones that have already been in place back from before we change the standards, correct?

[02:46:26] so we are looking at that review process that hasn't been finalized but um we are in talks of of that as far as we won't re-review but um i'm assuming you're talking about the alignment to the standards the current standards so we will be looking at that yes and we are also going to be doing another core review early on in the first quarter anything else dr ackerman aye mr green

[02:46:59] Hi. Dr. Northern. Hi. Ms. McPherson. Hi. Ms. Kilgore. Hi. Ms. Ashton. Mr. Monk. Hi. And chair votes aye. Thank you very much, Dr. Wallace. We are up for Ms. Berta. Good morning. Good morning, President Creasy, members of the board, Superintendent Gullickson. Before you today is the first and final review of a recommendation regarding the literary fund loan application approval for release and loan funds specifically for Prince Edward County schools.

[02:47:42] The Department of Education conducted a loan application process in fiscal year 2023 and two loan processes in fiscal year 2024 and one loan process in fiscal year 2025 for school divisions to apply for construction loans from the Literary Fund.

[02:47:59] As a reminder, these are loans that have to be repaid to the state in full upon your approval. One school division, Prince Edward County, has applied for a loan during the 2025 application period and has now submitted all of the required documentation needed for their requested loan to be released to the board.

[02:48:18] The item requests that the board approve the release of this literary fund loan requested by the applicant school division as follows. A loan requested by Prince Edward County for the renovation of Prince Edward County Elementary School. The renovation project will focus on improving safety and security, the instructional environment, and will include the demolition of 22,500 square feet of a campus-style building and new construction of a 21,800 square foot secure entry space, ADA improvements, HVAC, and electrical plumbing system upgrades.

[02:48:52] It will also include asbestos containment material abatement and radon testing. Prince Edward is requesting a literary fund loan for the project in the amount of $25 million, payable over 20 years, and is eligible for a 3% annual loan interest rate.

[02:49:08] Super excited about this one because Superintendent and I actually got to walk through this building to see the construction that was happening and the improvements they're making on the campus. So it is recommended that the board today consider this loan for release and approval. I will answer any questions that you may have.

[02:49:25] Ms. Berta, this is one of our MOU divisions, is that correct? I believe that is correct, yes. And just for the board's knowledge, I know that they have a new superintendent this year as well.

[02:49:45] And so, who I understand is doing an excellent job there. So, just wanted to make sure that everyone's acknowledging that. Thank you. Mr. Monk.

[02:50:04] Berta, I appreciate it and agree, looking forward to the work that the new superintendent does in the division. there um looking at the total cost of the loan if i read this correctly or not the loan total cost of the project 44 million thinking about cost of new builds can you speak to maybe the division's desire to go this route as opposed to a total new build yeah absolutely they uh shared with us actually when we visited the desire to change it from a campus style campus which leaves open

[02:50:39] access and the ability to not maintain security in the form that we would like to see security. So they've really been creative and innovative in how to leverage parts of the building that are still functional and can be upgraded versus just demolishing and building on a new site. So I think they've done a great job of analyzing what was working, what could be extended by way of life in the building, and then building new spaces that give them that innovative and great learning environment for students. So I think they've done a great job of mitigating factors

[02:51:11] where a total new bill didn't make sense. They've done a good job. Dr. Northern. Just want some assurance that given our conversation yesterday about declining student enrollment, that these facilities requests are taking consideration what enrollment is going to look like in five and ten years and making sure we're not going to end up with excess space. Yes, ma'am. That's a new component that our team has been looking at as they're reviewing the applications so yes they are still in a spot where they will need this facility long term in the into the future other

[02:51:50] questions or comments here okay so is there a motion to waive first review and approve the release of the literary fund loans requested by the school division based on the loan amounts terms and eligible second eligible annual rates requested in their loan applications as described in the item we have uh a motion and a second is there any discussion of this item dr ackerman

[02:52:24] hi mr green doctor northern miss mcpherson hi miss kilcourt miss ashton hi mr monk chair votes aye thank you miss burda um we are gonna take a couple of our other items up really quickly and then take um we're gonna take item e first and then item g and k and then we'll take a lunch break this is item e thank you dr wallace for being flexible yes absolutely good morning again the

[02:53:02] code of virginia requires the board of education to review and revise the standards of learning at least once every seven years this statutory mandate ensures that virginia's standards remain rigorous current and relevant by aligning to research and incorporating content that strengthens preparation for successful entry into college career and military pathways today the instruction and innovation offices bring to you four timelines to to approve to review and approve the following sets of standards fine arts health family life and digital learning integration these were all

[02:53:42] last approved by the board in 2020 and therefore would undergo the review process during the next calendar year with final approval in 2027. the review and revision process will be informed by research and revised by subject matter experts. SOL review committees consisting of classroom teachers, school leaders, content specialists, parents, community members, workforce representatives, and higher education partners will examine the current research, analyze standards from high performing states and countries, and recommend revisions that reflect best practices. Through

[02:54:20] this process, committees will thoroughly incorporate Virginia's unique context, including its history culture and workforce priorities draft standards will be widely shared through public comment and surveys which support transparency and meaningful stakeholder input before submission to the board for review and approval the superintendent of public instruction recommends that the board of education approve the timelines for reviews of the fine arts health family life and digital learning standards of learning sorry digital learning integration standards of learning this will allow the department to engage with stakeholders for

[02:54:57] the review process to allow for approval of any recommended revisions to take place in 2027. any questions here okay is there a motion to waive first review and approve the timelines for reviews of the fine arts health family life digital learning standards of learning this will allow the department to engage with stakeholders for the review process to allow for the approval of ANY RECOMMENDED REVISIONS TO TAKE PLACE IN 2027. SO MOVE. ANY DISCUSSION OF THIS ITEM?

[02:55:33] DR. ACKERMAN? AYE. MR. GREEN? AYE. DR. NORTHERN? AYE. MS. MCPHEARSON? AYE. MS. KILGORE? AYE. MS. ASCHTON? AYE. MR. MONK? AYE. AND CHAIR VOTES AYE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU.

[02:55:50] SO WE'RE GOING TO HOP TO ITEM G, PLEASE. THANK YOU FOR BEING FLEXIBLE, MR. CHATMAN. THANK YOU SO MUCH, PRESIDENT CREASY, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, SUPERINTENDENT GULLICKSON. what we have is a what i think the board is is used to as a very common item which is a appointment for members of advisory committees today we are asking the board to consider one nominee for the early childhood advisory committee the name is katherine plum who's being nominated as administrator employer board member of religious exempt early childhood care and

[02:56:26] education provider pursuant to article four miss plum is in region five coming out of charlottesville at st mark lutheran preschool and so we we ask that you would be willing to waive first review and appoint this member so that they can start their work on the early childhood advisory committee any questions for mr chapman on this one is there a motion to wave first review and appoint katherine plum to serve on the eca e cac as presented in this item second any discussion

[02:57:03] Dr. Ackerman. Aye. Mr. Green. Aye. Dr. Northern. Ms. McPherson. Aye. Ms. Kilgore. Aye. Ms. Ashton. Aye. Mr. Monk. Aye. Fair votes aye. And then jump over to item K, if you don't mind, sir.

[02:57:20] So item K, what we're asking at the request of the board president is a slight modification to the board's regular meeting schedule for 2025, which we are coming to the end and certainly very quickly. And so this will not alter the December 11th date that is still planned for the business meeting, but in order to accommodate the presentation schedule, the request is to add December 10th to that date.

[02:57:50] the the time will likely start somewhere in the 10 11 o'clock range we're still working out the logistical details but won't be the the normal start time so to add that December date in order to accommodate the board's workload the request is to waive first review and approve this addition to the board's calendar there any questions here comments somebody else um is there a motion to

[02:58:29] first review and approve the revision to the 2025 meeting dates to add the work session meeting on december 10th 2025. so moved second any questions comments dr ackerman aye mr green dr northern miss mcpherson miss kilgore ashton hi mr monk hi and chair votes aye okay thank you very much

[02:58:58] you think that that takes us now to a break um um we will come back at 12 40. we're going to take

[02:59:10] lunch right now and come back at 12 40. thank you okay we are back and we are on skipping back to

[03:59:55] item c is that right yes i'm on the wrong day excuse me item c um miss booker dwyer thank you and good afternoon members of the board so i am pleased to share uh the an update on implementation of the revised cut scores and what has occurred since the last time i came to the board to present so for the last few years the board has worked to increase expectations for students to strengthen their preparedness for college career and military pathways the board approved more rigorous

[04:00:32] standards for all students in math and English. The state fully aligned all test items on the math and reading standards of learning assessment to these more rigorous standards. And the board unanimously approved revised cut scores in September. At that September meeting, we said that we would go out and listen to stakeholders. Over 5,600 Virginians informed the recommendations organizations for implementation and supports. So from August 12th to September 11th, we started

[04:01:10] initially with talking with superintendents at their regional meetings, hearing their feedback and their concerns, and some potential solutions for cut scores. We then kicked off a roadshow from September 29th to November 6th, and this was a true cross-departmental effort. It was not just my team. We had special education. We had all kind of people at the table helping to support to host these listening sessions. We released an online form to allow people to provide

[04:01:44] feedback. And it wasn't just a cross-departmental support. It was cross-agency. We had the Secretary of Education and her staff helping to support these sessions. So it was a true all-hands, all-in approach to these cut scores and finding out the best implementation strategy.

[04:02:08] Presented on the screen are the dates of the listening sessions that we held from September 29th to November 5th. You'll see the number of participants, and we subtracted any of the staff members that were there so the numbers that you see only reflect the external stakeholders and you'll see the different stakeholder groups and so we had 1460 people from across Virginia teachers superintendents principals parents school board members central office staff participate in these

[04:02:42] listening sessions. We had over 4,000, we received over 4,000 feedback through online forms and public comments. So there were forms that were posted on the Raising Expectations in Virginia website, and then we also emailed online forms after each listening session so that participants could share it with their constituents and their communities. And these forms, they were open from September 29 to November 6. We also read every public comment that was submitted to the board regarding

[04:03:22] cut scores. So that was 293 public comments that everyone on my team, we took the time and read every last one of them. And the stakeholders included everyone across Virginia, it felt like it was teachers, principals, parents, we had students, we had representation from education, higher education, and workforce. And there were some common themes that came up. So when we were having these sessions, there were two things that we asked. Number one was the implementation plan.

[04:03:56] We reviewed that four-year implementation model, the five-year implementation model. We shared the projected impact data, and then we asked them about the models or if they had any suggestions for a different type of model. And we heard all kind of things. And what's listed on the screen were the things that really bubbled up to the top that had the most feed that had the most responses so it was very clear that adding that approaching performance level there we did not get any negative feedback everybody wanted that approaching performance level

[04:04:30] overall educators superintendents principals they wanted the implementation year as as long as possible. So from the feedback that we received, we heard a lot around the five-year phased-in model. However, they would support the four-year. And then reducing, and then we also heard counter to that from our workforce and higher ed and parents to say, no, we need to reduce the phased-in period to less than four years. And so we heard both sides of the coin there. And then this really

[04:05:05] ensuring that we are appropriately considering high school students. We want to make sure that we're not setting up high school students to fail, that the supports that are currently in place for high school students remain in place. And so we're going to speak a little bit about that later on in this slide, but we definitely heard about that. The requested support, it was very clear that these increased expectations must come with increased support. And so we went through and We heard loud and clear from parents, from teachers, especially around the communication.

[04:05:43] The parents, they wanna know, when is this gonna happen? How will it impact my kid? And what resources will be available to help to support my child? The teachers really wanted more about just to help them prepare their students for these higher expectations.

[04:06:02] So things like item maps and finalizing performance level descriptors, not just providing sample test questions, but also identifying what are the test questions, the type of items that students are performing well on, what are those types of items that students are not performing well on.

[04:06:19] So just increasing the support to teachers and providing them more information about the assessment. And then there was a lot of requests on just guidance around that when you change the 400 cut score, that's connected to a lot of different policy decisions.

[04:06:37] So they wanted guidance on the verified credit. What will be the retake ranges? What will be the threshold for automatic enrollment in advanced math courses? Which students would be required to have a student reading plan? With students in that approaching category, we now need to give them a reading plan.

[04:06:55] So all the policies that are connected to this 400 test score, they wanted some clear guidance around. And the support, the requested support continues. having those targeted guidance and resources for specific student groups such as students with disabilities making sure that we are not forgetting about them and that we are strengthening our support for them there was a big push around that you know we just we need the conversation around teachers and supporting more of the recruitment and retention of teachers along with that professional development to improve instructional practice and there were some specific items that

[04:07:34] that were requested around that. We heard that they want formative assessments that would help them prepare their students for the SOL assessment. And we have been releasing those through our Office of Instruction.

[04:07:50] We have some quick time checks and some other things that can help students, help teachers use them to identify exactly where students are performing and to kind of pinpoint the areas that they may need some support in, And then some strategies to help them bolster that support for those students so we are already addressing a lot of the things around the formative assessments.

[04:08:13] They wanted updates to some of our instructional guides which that we're also in the process of doing that. And then just be to be really clear on what is the high quality aligned curriculum that connects to this standards of learning, so we know that we have instruction.

[04:08:29] curriculum and assessments, they all need to be in tight alignment. So just taking that next layer, it's not just only about just alignment to standards, but how does it also reflect some of the test items and the things that are happening on that SOL assessment. So we are diving deep into that. And there was some, there was a lot of discussion around high school. And so we're going to take some time to just dive in there. And I just wanted to remind the board of the actions taken at that September board meeting where the cut scores were approved and this multi-year phased

[04:09:06] in approach of no less than four years and to essentially exempt the current graduating class from the revised cut scores. The four-year phased in approach is what is being recommended. This was shared with you at both the September and October board meeting where this year, the current school year that we are in is a preparation year where there's no changes to the cut scores. And then we add a temporary approaching performance level in the 2026-2027 school year. And this

[04:09:43] approaching performance level would count as passing. And what it does is it allows us to better target support. So just not grouping all kids into either proficient or basic. Having that approaching level allows you to identify those kids who are on the cusp of proficiency and to target some stronger supports to them, and then to really intensify the supports for students scoring at the basic or below basic levels. And with that approaching category, we would incrementally

[04:10:14] increase it each year until it is phased out in the 2029-2030 school year. And we want to be clear, we've been hearing a lot that, oh, if you modify the cut scores, you're going to change graduation requirements. So we did take this to our attorneys and modifying cut scores will not change the graduation requirement. There was a precedent set back in when we lowered the cut scores. There was no phased-in approach. There was no adjustments to the implementation. They were uniformly implemented in 2019 when those cut scores were lowered for the reading SOL assessments.

[04:10:53] They were implemented that spring and then in 2021, so 2019 for the math SOL assessments and then 2021 is when those lowered reading cut scores were implemented. And that was done without, there was no change in the graduation requirements.

[04:11:11] So when we're looking at increasing these cut scores, it's very similar in that we're not changing the graduation requirements, we're simply modifying the cut scores. And we want to be clear that this in revising the cut scores, it's not going to impact the requirements of the structure around assessment retakes.

[04:11:36] So what we know is that if a student who passes their course and failed the SOL test, they can retest, they can retake the SOL assessment using the cut score that was in effect at the time of the initial test attempt.

[04:11:55] So if your student took the test this school year and it's a 400 proficiency cut score, they got a 380, then they can retake the test and they pass the course, they can retake the test and only be held accountable for that 400 level.

[04:12:14] And we are prepared at the state to support this. We'll have two different test forms to make sure that the students who need to test at that 400 level, we will be able to calculate that at the 400 level. And the students who are on their initial attempts at the revised cut scores, we will be able to calculate that as well.

[04:12:33] Earning of verified credit, that will not change. And so students who have already passed a course, who have already demonstrated proficiency on an end of course assessment, they will not be required to retake the assessment and to score at the new cut score.

[04:12:52] So the verified credit, that's not going to change. And on the screen, there's an example of a student who took the Algebra I end-of-course assessment. They earned a score of a 400. They met the passing requirements, so they will not need to retake that assessment.

[04:13:09] That was the cut score, the proficiency cut in effect at the time of their test, and that is what they will be held accountable to. So we're not changing anything for students. And the credit accommodations and locally awarded verified credit options.

[04:13:24] we're not taking that away that will still remain in effect so students um so our students with disabilities would still get those credit accommodations and those locally awarded verified credits will still remain available and so what we are asking the board to do today is to can we oh but yeah let's pause a second let's pause before we get here to just um see if there are any questions ashton um just restate what just sorry can you just restate what you said

[04:14:03] about graduation requirements either passing or not passing right so the graduation requirements are not changing we're not modifying the graduation requirements um it's so virginia has set a precedent where they have changed cut scores in the spring of 2026 and there has been someone that it was lowered there was no pushback um and so graduation requirements are not being modified

[04:14:36] only the cut score. Other questions, Dr. Northern? Wait a minute. Hold on. I have more questions over here. I just wanted to restate the modifying slide here. I've read it twice. I think I've got it, but can you say it one more time? And so we're not changing a graduation requirement.

[04:14:59] Sorry, I'm on the retest. Next slide. This one. Yes. Okay. So if a student, and this is currently in effect if you pass the course and fail the assessment you can retake that assess the retake the sol assessment you could retake it so let's say you were a ninth a ninth grader and you failed that algebra one you passed the algebra one class failed the sol assessment at the in the proficiency cut is currently 400. you can take that algebra one assessment grade 10 grade 11 grade 12

[04:15:34] at that 400 cut score or was in effect at that time that the test was taken is what you would be accountable to until the past till you actually pass the right for that initial attempt that you took so example assuming it's 400 then you just keep you're able to keep taking it right so if you take it this spring you would be at the 400 level so everybody should take this test this spring

[04:16:07] dr ackerman i think someone else had a question about which year did someone have a like because there's one of my questions too so if i i don't know if they wanted to go first i don't want to cut anybody off but i said you're saying for clarity there are no changes for the current school year because in the future the cut scores will change so okay so let's say you are a current ninth grader you've passed the algebra one course you failed the sol assessment so 10th grade cut scores have now been increased you are held accountable for that algebra one 400 efficiency

[04:16:44] cut because that was your initial test that was what was in effect at your initial um test administration okay all right see what you're saying but in the future and so like let's say a great so let's say 2026 2027 school year a student takes algebra one assessment so 400 is no longer the cut score 400 is higher so that student they pass the class fail the assessment they can retake that assessment at that revised cut score because that was what was in effect when they took the initial and then i think the the big thing i really would love to see

[04:17:21] is our estimates of people passing the tests based off current data yes so we share that projected impact data um so every school division every school has projected impact data right now for every math and english language arts assessment and we based it off of the spring administration last spring administration of the sol test and that was how we the data was projected and so they could see how many the percentage of students that are expected to perform below basic

[04:17:58] basic approaching advanced right now um so they have all that data so that and we're using that data to inform our support to certain school divisions because there's some school divisions they're going to be okay they are already pushing for that higher expectation they're going to be fine and then we know that there's other school divisions where we're going to have to dig in a little bit deeper there and i'm sorry if i'm anybody wants to interrupt me and i'm hogging up too much time just let me know so are we going to get to see that as a board and i'd love to see it by the categories right the esl the special education categories on how our percentage of

[04:18:36] of students are performing on the new coverings. - Yeah, I think that's gonna-- - But yes, that information, so when we had the one-on-one meetings to go over that projected impact data, those spreadsheets that I shared.

[04:18:51] So that was that data and to get it disaggregated. And so we wanna, so that's forthcoming. - Thank you, sorry. And then let me see, I'm trying to find the slide on the special education that nothing changes for them, but they still do have to pass the algebra and eoc tests the proficient whatever the new proficient rate is correct and and so that's a complex question because there's lots of ways to pass or to to earn that credit and so the the initial answer is if they take that assessment

[04:19:30] then yes they're expected to pass it at whatever the that cut score is if they don't pass it there's all these different opportunities that that students have where they can still essentially demonstrate their proficiency and graduate so the sol test it's not the it's not going to close you don't pass the sol test in virginia and i think this is one of the wonderful things about virginia you get so many opportunities um either through retakes through i mean there's so many different pathways and is that only for students with special needs it's for all students all because

[04:20:05] i read in texas they actually set up a graduation committee and they reviewed these but but they still have to try the test first so that we have that accountability data right thank you miss mcpherson other questions or comments we do have some more slides unless do you want to speak now or wait until we're done okay so what we are what we are asking the board to do today and this is

[04:20:40] very important um to affirm that this school year this 2025-2026 school year is a preparation year without that affirmation without that board vote then it that means the new cut scores will go into effect the spring of 2026 and we are very clear we don't want that to happen just yet we want that preparation time so um so that is our recommendation for today and then just to affirm the your prior statements of not wanting to make any changes for the graduating class of 2026 so this year students and to just affirm the board's prior statements of just ensuring that as a

[04:21:19] department we are strengthening our support to teachers to prepare for implementation of these higher expectations and you know and our support for principal superintendents board members and parents and so the immediate next step so what we are currently working on is that upon a completion of the external validation that's that's currently underway with our university partner of the of our outcomes of the school performance and support framework we are going to share specific

[04:21:53] information with the board on the impact of revised cut scores with a focus on high school we are going to present the supports that have been developed and those that are in development and we're going to provide you with an update on the parent focus groups that we are about to convene focusing on the messaging around these cut scores so that we can get it right for how we are communicating this to parents and then and then review the specific impact data for the student groups and we want to bring the recommendations back to the december 11th board

[04:22:27] meeting for decision and with next steps we are finalizing we're working to finalize these focus groups and um the communication that we'll be releasing to school divisions and into the field around these cut scores we are working to finalize all of our test specific resources that we can that we'll use to train and support teachers we are expanding the content specific support with teachers so we have you know a phenomenal team in the office of instruction who are going deep with math and um and science and in english language arts and we're in the process of hiring it's

[04:23:07] posted now a director of math and regional math specialist and a regional math coordinator so please apply um it is actively posted and um and we've interviewed for new middle school math position so we are working on all those resources and then providing that data-informed professional learning and uh collaborating with divisions on the messaging so we really do want the input of superintendents and principals and school board members so we're looking forward to coming back to those meetings with materials to get them um to get their reaction so that we can refine it

[04:23:40] before it goes wide to the field comments and questions here miss mcpherson notice it in the presentation that there is an indication that in the september board meeting we approved the superintendents recommended cut scores for the reading math sol test and we approved a multi-year phased in approach of no less than four years and to exempt the class of 2026 are we now saying that

[04:24:20] basically we're exempting the class of 2026 we still would do a phased in approach the question is for the students who take the assessment say for instance in algebra next year and say the the score is 400 for algebra.

[04:24:41] They don't make the 400 grade. They can continue to retest for algebra. Is there any point in which the 400 score is going to impact their graduation?

[04:24:56] - And so next year, with the phased in model that 2026, 2027 would be the first year that we're implementing the new cut score. So that 400 will be a little higher for algebra one. So they would need to meet that algebra one requirement.

[04:25:12] that cut score to demonstrate proficiency. So let's say they pass the class, they fail the SOL assessment, then they can execute a variety of different options. So they can retake the test and then if it's still not working out well for them, there's different options that they can pursue to ensure that they get that credit. And so it should not prevent them from graduating.

[04:25:36] Do you have a question? Any further questions on that? Ms. McPherson? You good? Okay. Brandon?

[04:25:54] okay um i think it's important to understand though that if we if this is a preparation year there's really no impact on any grade level so even the exemption of the class of 2026 i mean that's that's already there but understand that if this is a preparation year everyone is still taking the sol tests at the current cut scores next year would be year one and that would

[04:26:28] be an increased approaching score that would the board's already said the approaching score is considered passing that's that's been it but the point is that that is an increased score beyond what is expected this year is that i just want to make sure that's clear because i know you said like next year 400 but that's not going to be the case okay and actually doctor i just wanted to say that i'm glad that we're moving miss mcpherson rapidly with the implementation of the whole

[04:27:06] accountability system and the transparency because that's been the whole mission of this endeavor for parents and students to understand exactly where they are clearly the board has made a statement that we didn't want to impact the graduating seniors with anything that we did because they were already in place based upon tests they've either taken or they're planning to take beyond that we do have a high expectation that all the resources are going to come to bear to bring everybody up to what the new cut scores will be and while we have the approaching and the

[04:27:41] growth measures and all of that in place i just was trying to make sure that everybody understood when and where it was going to impact graduation rates be that as it may as we stand right now we do have a phase in approach for approaching you know better growth and performance and i think that the board would have some flexibility with modification but i kind of look back and i just wanted to say this i thought about this last evening when i when i first entered college and met my college advisor the first thing he did was go over some questions about world history

[04:28:18] geography and things like that and i wanted to pursue political science well he said you're totally deficient in that area and i don't know how you ever going to be able to catch up and what i i don't want that to happen to anybody else because it will impact their scholarships and their ability to get an education fortunately i was able to overcome it but that's why it's very important to me that we raise the level as quickly as possible so the students never have to face that and i'm reminded that martin luther king said they're going to be some difficult days ahead we're not going to like some of the scores that are going to come out but what is important is

[04:28:55] that the joneson they have entrusted us with the funds that they have given us to bring all of the resources to bear to move as quickly as possible and i think we're all committed to that anyone else okay with that is there a motion to waive first review and approve the 25-26 school year will be a preparation year with no changes to cut scores for the spring 26 assessments second

[04:29:27] any discussion here dr northern any discussion here okay dr ackerman hi mr green dr northern miss mcpherson miss kilgore sashton hi mr monk hi and chair votes i thank you thank you um item d

[04:29:52] good afternoon good afternoon to the board once again i am here today uh standing for a first

[04:30:36] review of them. There we go. Good morning board once again. I'm here standing here for a first review of the lab school contract. We're going to change from first and final to first. So pursuant to statute 22.1-349.3 of the code of Virginia, the board is responsible for reviewing and approving lab school applications and entering to contract with lab schools. These

[04:31:13] contracts state that any material change required amendments to board contracts for each lab school. The material change policy and procedure for Virginia College Partnership Laboratory Schools provide the mechanism by which lab schools may request and obtain authorization for significant a change to their approved scope of operations. The proposed policy defines a material change as a change of such magnitude as to the alteration of significance of the lab school's mission,

[04:31:50] goals, legal status, scopes of offering, autonomy, sponsorship, and method of delivery of programming, financial stability, or the locus of control over the lab school, which could include expansion or altering the school's mission or objectives, establishing a new location or branch, adding or discontinuing major program components of grade levels, or significant change to budget or financial or career and technical programs.

[04:32:23] The proof of this policy ensures that lab schools operate under clear, consistent expectations when proposing changes that could result in modifications of their contract. This framework strengthens the oversight, ensuring compliance with statutory requirements under Statutes 22.1-349.2 of the Code of Virginia, provides a process for determination and notice of material change and promotes transparency in decision-making across the lab school network.

[04:32:56] The Superintendent of Education recommends that the Board of Education approve the material change and procedures for the Virginia College Partnership Laboratory Schools on the first review. If there are no questions here, first I'll ask, are there any questions?

[04:33:21] We did talk about this yesterday. So if there are no questions, we will take this for first review and see you in December. Thank you so much. Thank you. Okay. All right. So now we need to go to item F, as in Frank, everyone. And just for a reminder, Ms. Velasquez provided us with an extensive presentation yesterday. We talked about

[04:33:52] the board's standards of quality prescriptions, and there was diligent work done overnight to accommodate the board's um edits and amendments and um that amended document is up on um the website and on the sharepoint site for board members um miss velasquez if you could give us the high level overview changes and additions um so that we can help move this right along for you

[04:34:29] thank you mrs creasy members of the board superintendent gullickson i have made the requested edits that i received yesterday during my presentation and the subsequent conversations at the publicly noticed lunch time so i'm not going to go through the entirety of the presentation that was can be found at item a from yesterday and then today item f has the revisions so i'm going to just jump to page within the document itself i'm going to jump to page four where in

[04:35:07] the recommendation for student information uh revised student information system um there was discussion about the need for excuse me i'm on student-weighted funding formula i apologize there was discussion about teacher compensation needed to be factored into the student-weighted funding formula because as we know teachers are the most critical part of a child's education and so i went back and added some language as the general assembly has recommended to consider the student weighted funding formula that they also factor that teacher weighted compensation into that funding formula to really compensate teachers at those hard staff schools high-risk schools and

[04:35:47] high-risk areas where there are substantial vacancies so that is the green language on page four and please stop me as we go along if you have any questions or changes that you would like so melissa can i jump in here for a second so knowing that our vacancies are down i would just say that um you know we've worked really hard in that area the governor's certainly put a lot of effort into that and that effort has certainly paid off um but i will say that i am very excited

[04:36:20] about this because in these areas of you know specifically in those schools that are high risk and at higher risk of more vacancies than others ensuring that we're getting really high quality and in many cases you know teachers are often going into those vacancies or into those higher risk areas at earlier positions in their career and then graduating on hopefully this can kind

[04:36:58] of turn that tide and maybe we'll get some more experienced educators into those areas that might make some real differences not that our brand new educators so that was one at one time don't make major impacts it's just uh those hard to staff positions are really really critical to oftentimes get that experience in there so i'm excited about this particular item so thank you for adding that thank you and you know just as is ms um kilgore said in the past if you wanted to stay in the classroom and we want those experienced teachers in the classroom and hopefully this will help

[04:37:33] incentivize that um the next item is on page five dr northern excuse me yeah i'm just i'm just wondering um and i don't know the implications of this and maybe we don't have good measures of school poverty? How do we, do we just measure that with FRL status? That is not a question for me. I don't know if the superintendent has answered that, but we can find that information out. Okay, yeah, there's a community service provision, which is related to the benefit, whether you eligible for

[04:38:07] federal benefits. I'm just trying to say, I just want to make sure that we're also talking about the high poverty campuses and how we measure that and I'm not exactly sure whether we're measuring it accurately but if we are it would be nice to have that measure in there so would you like that information incorporated into the report or is the recommendation standalone still is what you would like to see the same information on the data collection itself okay I just want to make it's

[04:38:46] not necessarily experienced teachers it's just the um again it's rewarding teachers no matter if they have five ten or thirty years um if they are willing and going into these higher um you know harder to staff positions other questions or comments here okay then moving on uh the next prescription related to the modernized data collection system i know mr monk is particularly interested in that and after some discussions and my ability to translate those discussions

[04:39:25] i added in language into the modernized data collection system to support the information that was already there related to financial management of our antiquated data system not just for student collection and information but it is also the financial management system that the department has to uses is also antiquated and um we can't give student uh school divisions good data we can't get the public good data in real time without a better financial management system as well and if there are growing issues within school divisions for financial management we

[04:39:59] cannot address them as necessary in a in a short amount of time if we don't have real-time data so i did add that language in and i have heard from mr monk that he um agreed with that language and so um if there aren't any questions i will move on from the financial management update that is in green on page five questions here um and then now moving on um in prescription three of

[04:40:37] related to gifted education there was just an addition um i made some changes i guess into the enactment cause um so that i believe that's where i made the changes and this may be slightly influenced by a lack of sleep tonight so i do apologize are there any questions about any changes um after uh into prescription 3 about the gifted education not i'll move on questions here

[04:41:13] it's on page 15. page 15 um number six you know there was discussion about a handbook of resources and so i added that to the enactment clause so the department will be required to create that handbook and there was discussion about the need to assess at sixth grade but there was the concern about the fiscal impact so i did add that as a component of that resource document to encourage school divisions to test again as needed um especially in the sixth grade or the middle school i called it because as you pointed out some medical middle school start at sixth grade some start at seventh

[04:41:52] grade and all of the changes are in green um again so the third enactment clause is the new language for uh the gifted moving on we added standard four uh yesterday um there are uh the the language is set out for you in green it's about the improvement of um the school accreditation system and the idea that while school divisions um the schools are accredited currently under the the regulations

[04:42:26] uh schools are often um making and affected by the decisions uh from their school boards and their division leadership and so those entities are are generally not held accountable in the same way that the accreditation of the schools holds school buildings accountable so language has been added in to standard three that language is laid out for you about the accreditation at the school division level in addition to the school building level and the opportunity for the board to prescribe third-party evaluators that discussion was yesterday afternoon

[04:43:02] regarding the need to do those division level or school level reviews questions or comments here thank you melissa and finally going to the background checks for educators and part-time full-time temporary employees of school divisions i added in the i left out the five-year renewal of the checks for the child founded complaints of child abuse and neglect so i i made that

[04:43:41] change to make it consistent with the background check statute so that there will be a five-year of renewed background check and a five-year check of the founded cases of abuse and neglect database questions or comments on this one thanks for that addition melissa perhaps to make that consistent I believe that's the total of the the edits um to the to report okay before we um move on this is

[04:44:16] there are there any other questions or comments around this particular document dr northern to comment to thank you I I know you were working at after midnight 1201 and um I told you this personally but I wanted to say this in front of our other board just how much we appreciate the time that you put in to turn this around so quickly my pleasure and so the superintendent's recommendation of course is to waive first review and approve the 2025 prescriptions and authorize the board president superintendent to make final edits like the edit mrs uh dr northern has

[04:44:48] requested mr rock or miss i also want to go for your extra time and your great listening skills because you took a lot in yesterday and implemented it all overnight and thank you so much thank you mr monk thank you again i want to echo those sentiments but and appreciate the board as well for the support potentially here at a few moments of specifically you mentioned some key areas of interest for me on the modernization of the financial management system i just think that's really key for us to really provide that accurate timely data that not only this body but other

[04:45:24] stakeholders can utilize and of course prescription for with this full division level component there so i think that's going to be huge for us to ensure that as we communicate with localities and stakeholders we could feel confident about um the information that's shared anything else here okay is there a motion to waive first review and approve the 2025 prescriptions on the standards of quality and related legislative package included in this item and delegate authority for any final edits to the board president superintendent second any discussion

[04:46:03] dr ackerman hi mr green doctor northern miss mcpherson miss kilgore miss ashton hi mr monk hi and chair votes i thank you very much again miss alaskos okay and with that we are going to item h on the agenda mr gilstra good afternoon president creasy members of the board superintendent

[04:46:40] Gullickson. Today I bring to you a first review of a notice of intended regulatory action to add a special education early childhood add-on endorsement. As you might remember earlier this year we did other work with a special ed endorsement. That work should go into effect January 1st.

[04:46:58] That was changing a graduate degree requirement down to a bachelor's degree and this is the next step in our iteration to try to address the shortages in early childhood special education teachers i have a brief presentation for that as well in your documents are the town hall documents as well this is only first review we will be back in december if that's your pleasure any questions for mr gilstrap here okay thank you we will accept this item for first review and see you in december

[04:47:35] okay thank you item i okay we may need a two-minute break here thank you okay thank you

[04:49:57] Dr. Williams, you're up. Good afternoon, everyone. President Creasy, members of the board, and Superintendent Gullickson, thank you for the opportunity to present our recommendations to reestablish the Career and Technical Education Advisory Committee. The Advisory Committee for Career and Technical Education membership was based on business and industry representation from each of our former 17 career clusters as identified by the National Career Cluster Framework, Advanced CTE, with regional representation for our eight superintendents' regents.

[04:50:29] In July 2021, a non-voting member representative was added from the Virginia Association of Career and Technical Education. Currently, the CTE Advisory Committee does not have a board-approved chair, as the past chair retired in June 2025.

[04:50:45] There are four board-appointed members of the CTE Advisory Committee, each on their second term, that represent the advanced manufacturing, digital technology, healthcare and human services, and marketing and sales career clusters. Unless otherwise determined by the board, one member's term will expire in June 2026, and the remaining three member's terms will expire June of 2027.

[04:51:11] The board has historically appointed the members of the CTE Advisory Committee, but minimal evidence exists as to how the membership was selected. We recommend that the board reconstitute the Advisory Committee for Career and Technical Education by adopting the following membership categories.

[04:51:28] 14, a total of 14 business and industry leaders from each of the 14 modernized national career clusters with statewide representation across the eight superintendents regions. Current vacancies include agriculture, arts, entertainment and design, construction, education, energy and natural resources, hospitality, events and tourism, management and entrepreneurship, financial services, public service and safety, and supply chain and transportation.

[04:51:58] Two parent group representatives from school appointed groups, parent associations, parent teacher associations, and other related support groups. Two professional trade organization and agency representatives. One post-secondary representative, one school division superintendent, two school division CTE administrators, Virginia Department of Ed representative, and a representative from the Virginia Association of Career and Technical Education.

[04:52:25] As required by the Strengthening of Career and Technical Education for the 21st Century Act Perkins V, the Advisory Committee for Career and Technical Education should include members from education, business and industry, and the community, and their role is to ensure CTE programs are aligned to workforce needs.

[04:52:44] Key functions include providing input on secondary curriculum and ensuring curricula is aligned with the latest industry practices, bridging the gap between education and business and industry, and advising on how to meet industry expectations. This reconstruction of the Advisory Committee of Career and Technical Education will provide the support that we need to receive expert advice, guidance, and recommendations to the VDOE in support of career and technical education.

[04:53:13] The Superintendent of Public Instruction recommends that the Board of Education receive for first review the recommendation to reconstruct the CTE Advisory Committee by ensuring representation across all membership categories. At this time, I would welcome any questions.

[04:53:31] Questions here. Mr. Monk? Appreciate this, Dr. Williams, in laying it out. One thing, recognizing first review may consider current technical student organizations as inclusion of one of those groups as well.

[04:53:50] I appreciate the list that's here is currently. - Other comments? - Yes. - Ms. McPherson. - I appreciate the work you all have done too regarding the advisory committee, but I think that the committee ought to consider raising a number of representatives from the parent group because as it stands now, it's basically two, and that can be a parent, a parent association, a PTA.

[04:54:18] And then I think the second one needs to be post-secondary education. There ought to be more representation on the committee THAT REGARD BECAUSE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT STUDENTS, YOU KNOW, MAKING DECISIONS ABOUT COLLEGE VERSUS A CAREER. SO IF YOU WOULD TAKE THAT IN CONSIDERATION IN TERMS OF REPRESENTATION.

[04:54:36] OTHER COMMENTS HERE? MR. MONK. I HOPE THIS IS IN THE SPIRIT OF WHAT YOU WERE SAYING AS WELL, NOT ONLY FOR THE TRADITIONAL FOUR YEAR INSTITUTIONS OR TWO YEAR, BUT COMMUNITY COLLEGE OR OTHER PREPARATORY PROGRAMS INCLUDED AS THAT. OTHER COMMENTS?

[04:54:58] miss kilgore good to have school to be a superintendent maybe um you know representing the different areas of the state i mean not that many but maybe one more rural or urban or whatever because there's you know big difference there in a lot of times a lot of ways and i and i echo the student organization representation also i think that's great but thank you other comments or

[04:55:27] questions for dr williams on this item um superintendent um thank you dr williams oh sorry to those in the audience I just want to reaffirm not only is this so timely for us to re-establish and enhance this bridging between families educators business and higher ed for the Perkins plan but this just reaffirms what our agency heads are already doing of cross collaboration

[04:56:00] through the education continuum from birth through adult as well as the collaboration we've emphasized before in close alignment with our workforce agencies aligning on terms aligning on metrics and vision and so i'm hopeful that not only will this help us in the short term but also long term for the impacts we want to see with our students and families except this item for first review and see you in december and you have item j as well okay first review of the industry

[04:56:38] recognized credential list industry or trade association certification examinations professional licenses and occupational competency assessments are continually reviewed, revised, or discontinued to stay current with the needs of business and industry. Our proposed list of 2627 industry recognized credentials includes 110 board approved credentials listed in one or more CT program areas in our student catalog representing over 240 individual examinations. This is a significant reduction from the existing 301 board approved credentials representing over 520 individual

[04:57:16] examinations. Many of these credentials are part of suites made up of multiple examinations that are stackable and enable our students to continually progress and achieve advanced certification. An example includes the automotive service excellence certification suite that includes 22 individual examinations such as the automobile and light truck engine repair and the collision repair and painting and refinishing certification examinations.

[04:57:46] Industry-recognized credentials validate a student's skill and knowledge in a specific field and are included in Virginia's 3E readiness framework and graduation requirements. These credentials are developed and evaluated by external organizations, ensuring they meet industry standards and are relevant to employers.

[04:58:03] Earning these credentials is essential for career readiness and success for several reasons. Employability. Credentials signal to employers that a student has achieved a certain level of competency in a specific area. This can make them more attractive candidates in the job market. Career advancement. Credentials can lead to higher wages and better job opportunities.

[04:58:24] They often serve as stepping stones to further education and training. Alignment with industry needs. In Virginia, credentials are aligned with industries such as advanced manufacturing, information technology, and healthcare. This ensures that students are gaining skills that directly applicable to the workforce stackable credentials build on previous skills and can lead to higher level certification or degrees this flexibility allows students to continue their education and career development over time the proposed list includes approximately 100 industry recognized credential included from the 2526 board of education approved industry certifications

[04:59:03] occupational competency assessments and professional license list that was approved in july of 2025. 73 of the 110 total credentials that we are recommended aligned to the Virginia Community College System Workforce Credential Grant Program/Fast Forward list of credentials.

[04:59:23] In collaboration with the Virginia Office of Education Economics, Virginia Works, State Council of Higher Education in Virginia, Virginia Community College System, our research led us to other leading states that value industry recognized credentials including Colorado, florida indiana north and south carolina ohio tennessee and texas with consultation from advanced cte a structured process for validating the list of industry recognized credential was identified based on the following criteria data-driven outcomes which includes evidence of positive

[04:59:59] outcomes such as improved employment rates wages or continued education industry recognition endorsed or required by employers in a specific industry or career cluster and is widely accepted as the standard of competency. Additionally, the credential aligns with in-demand occupations.

[05:00:19] Affordable, recognized across multiple employers, regions, or states, the credential reflects current and emerging workforce needs as reflected in job vacancies. Program quality, earned by passing an examination through a VDOE CTE approved program of study that proves skill proficiency. Credentials are developed or vetted by industry experts and meet a recognized standard of excellence.

[05:00:45] stackable. Credentials build on previous skills and can lead to higher level certifications and or degrees. And third party validated. The issuing body should be accredited or recognized by a reputable independent third party organization or governing body. The VDOE recognizes this list of credentials as meeting the industry recognized credential definition and criteria because each serves as a verification of qualification or competence, is accepted by multiple employers within the industry or sector involved and is accepted preferred or required for screening

[05:01:22] hiring retention or advanced purposes pending additions to this list of credentials includes the designation of credentials that align to the 2025 virginia office of education economics high demand occupation list stackable credentials and the credentials that will qualify for meeting high school course credit as required by House Bill 1345 of 2024. The Superintendent of Public Instruction recommends the CTE industry-recognized credential list for first review to the Board of

[05:01:57] Education. After first review, any technical or editorial edits will be made by the department staff before we present this document for final review. At this time, I welcome any questions. um answer questions here dr northern just maybe i missed it but is there a link to actually all the industry recognized the numbers of them yeah um it's the item j

[05:02:34] okay sorry i was all right no no the wrong thing was coming up for me okay attachment one there okay sorry i was missing it thank you it should be it yeah okay mr monk we appreciate it dr williams thank you i know we had a conversation uh yesterday about it and still have some similar

[05:03:09] concerns around it appears to me that most of only backtrack appreciate the work to consolidate and ensure that the credentials are relevant and industry recognized right because i think in a mix years ago there was this desire to just pile on as many credentials as possible and sometimes industry didn't recognize those so i i appreciate the spirit of the work and trying to get us to a place where when our students are earning these credentials they're meaningful they're stackable relevant all those components i do have some concern that the list that we have

[05:03:45] before us really for the most part there's a few exceptions but is trade and industrial heavy as well as health care heavy for the reasons that as we use these for calculations for students and their academic progress some folks who may not see value in particular cluster areas if there's not a credential there thinking counselors administrators etc may seek to go towards programs that have credentials in these spaces so can you speak a little bit to

[05:04:21] i looked at a few of the states that are mentioned here within the memo and think there may be some other opportunities for credentials outside of those clusters, and they've got kind of a tiered approach there. Maybe can you speak to why maybe some of those were less off outside of the health care and trade industrial components? I can speak to our research as specific credentials that we currently have approved on our 25-26 list. We found that many of the credentials that we currently recognize in those 520 examinations were not recognized in some of our other states. There are

[05:04:58] critical and important CTE courses and programs that we want to continue to stand up that either lead to post-secondary opportunities or for stackable opportunities that may not happen until a student graduates from high school. And so it's important to promote those programs. What I would say is that in cases where there is not a designated credential or a specific CTE course or program, this is where we see or could see an increase in high quality work-based learning experiences to support students in that transition. We would see an increase in

[05:05:34] student opportunities for dual enrollment that would lead to further opportunities in post-secondary education. I think that this is a critical step one in the process. I feel that with this new criteria in place, it does open the door for other credentialing vendors to be able to present other viable credentials that would qualify and that are meeting workforce demand. I think one of our challenges previously is not having a specific criteria in place to evaluate what

[05:06:06] truly is a workforce valid credential. Further comments or questions? Mr. Muck? If I may, appreciate that and definitely want to ensure that, you know, we're opening up to folks.

[05:06:22] When I look at a few, Texas and Tennessee were two of the states that I saw in the memo there, a vet tech credential. To me, that's something that seems as if it would have high application related to one of the current pathways we have, but don't see it within ours.

[05:06:42] And so I guess maybe offline can share some opportunities potentially and just really want to understand why it seems to me that a lot of our pathway areas are not in here. And so I think what we might inadvertently be doing is encouraging folks to be in one pathway or the other when it comes to a counseling or graduation decision based upon those pieces.

[05:07:09] I look at credential that North Carolina offers in horsemanship. Again, a little unique, not anything that I'm connected to, but students receive college credit for that. And so to me, if they're already taking that, there might be some avenues there. So I think I agree with the idea of having the rigor and making sure that these are really course relevant. But I also want to make sure that we're not just excluding a large swath that we could potentially engage. And so I think as we look at some of these other states, maybe there's some others that we could pull over

[05:07:41] or even consider its hearing path that it looks like Tennessee and Texas have just a few states that I looked at. Thank you. Other comments or questions here? Mr. Green, do you have a question?

[05:08:01] Anything further, Mr. Monk? Okay. Okay. Dr. Williams, we thank you and we'll take this item for first review and then see you in december thank you okay um so we have a closed session on our agenda and will not be using that today and so that ladies and gentlemen brings us to

[05:08:36] the end of our agenda no no it doesn't because we have to do the presentation from yesterday um on performance tasks mark how could i forget you oh my lord i could not ever forget you mark yeah in the world okay go right ahead please sir well good to see you again good afternoon president creasy board members superintendent gallickson uh today i'm joined by my colleague director of assessment jason ellis will be presenting on performance task

[05:09:11] and innovative item types this was a presentation from yesterday's work session and i think it goes well with what we talked about earlier i know they're getting it ready so we can have it on the screens for you as well but it was item j from yesterday that you have access to in the public and see it as well and so i'll go through these and give you some background and give you some examples to look at this very excited about this is its ongoing work again i'll give you some history and uh and then share again where we're moving towards so in our overview slide again i'll give you some background on the purpose we're going to look at a performance task together

[05:09:46] we'll talk about a science simulation then give you an example of a performance task and then talk about some next steps and so to give you some background uh house bill 585 directed the secretary of education in the department to convene a work group and that work group over several months worked together really examined our assessment practices uh and just how virginia operates looking at federal state law and made a number of very important recommendations and each year we look to that report we provide updates around basically the recommendations the opportunities and you're going to see some of those highlighted today but i wanted to ground it

[05:10:25] in sort of this work and honor that work group and their findings then also want to draw your attention to you see the legal language there around item 119 a3d it talks about the secretary of education superintendent public instruction to procure an assessment vendor so this is work that's been ongoing we have an innovative assessment work group that's going to work with our contractor to again think about virginia's assessment program a coherent assessment program think about innovation our conversation earlier around performance-based assessments uh thinking about alternative assessments, competency-based assessments, sort of thinking very broadly

[05:11:00] about where Virginia is as a leader in this work, and really wanting to personalize learning. This is the example, or this is the report itself, and again, every year we provide updates to the progress that's been made on our assessment program.

[05:11:19] This is the group on the latest report we put out on the statewide assessment vendor, and so our assessment, the Innovate Assessment Workgroup, has been meeting. We discussed a number of topics around innovation, but even around policy and sort of Virginia and its assessments, federal law, and where it sits.

[05:11:35] So we're excited about the contractor coming on board and that'll be able to help organize these thoughts and synthesize them, prepare reports, engage stakeholder groups, and more to come on that. And as I mentioned, the 585 workgroup recommendations are fully underway. Again, each year we provide an update.

[05:11:53] Those opportunities are listed there. So you see these five pieces, clear and more rigorous standards. And so you're seeing there the through line, assessments don't happen in isolation. You need strong, clear, rigorous standards to then be assessed through more rigorous assessments. Then it leads to number three, more timely, clear, and actual reporting. We're going to bring back to you a revised parent report with our assessment system so that the data is understandable and parents know where their children are.

[05:12:20] Number four, improved system coherence. We have to think very broadly. While Virginia has one accountability system, you know, we have federal, we have state, we still have other assessments that are used, which we talked about earlier. And so we think about that coherence. Where do they fit? How are they scored? Are they reliable? What data is it giving us? And then five, innovative assessment design. So we think about the individual items, but also the bigger piece.

[05:12:42] And so, you know, where Virginia was several years ago, and now currently through this work group and other pieces where we are today. So when we talk about opportunity to more rigorous assessments, this is some updates for you. They talked about in the work group, they should, we should go beyond selected response questions.

[05:13:02] And so just beyond, obviously, multiple choice items there with more rigorous assessment items to align to our more rigorous standards. And so you see some of the thoughts there in bullets requiring writing on assessments, ensuring that constructed response questions align to the standards for the grade level, maximizing the value of every assessment item.

[05:13:22] 2B talks about maintaining rigorous critical thinking expectations. So again, we welcome educator input on this. We want good instruction and we want good assessments that align the good instruction. And so you see there about making sure we're being accessible. We think about all students.

[05:13:38] We think about our English learners, students with special needs. significant cognitive disabilities, sort of where they are and having accessibility to the assessments. You also see there too, A, that the assessments should go beyond selected response questions, and we're going to give you some examples. So I've been mentioning to you the integrated reading writing, and this is one such example. It is a performance task where students are asked to, you know, interact with this piece in different ways. They're reading, they're writing, they're responding. It's from a reading class, but they're reading on history and science and being asked to think a little differently there.

[05:14:12] In science, we've, and this again is just a snapshot over the past year. In science, we've developed cluster items. And again, this helps with how we have instructional practices. And so you have a stimuli that could have three to six questions on it.

[05:14:30] And so again, you're seeing sort of the length of that. So students work with, for example, a lab. The stimuli might be around a lab that a student would do and sort of the questions around what data comes from this. How could you think around this? And so it's not just here's a question that you've memorized, respond to it.

[05:14:46] It's giving students a new sort of task or a stimuli and then having them think around it with a few questions to really go deeper into it. So it builds on prior knowledge from the item. And so you see examples there, interactive science experiments, analyzing data, reporting on outcomes.

[05:15:03] And then you see here a history. We've been talking about innovative test item types were field tested in spring of 2025. They'll be included in the spring 2026 operational test item bank. And so we're going to have history cluster sets. So one to three stimuli, such as a primary secondary source text, and then students would have questions around that. It could be a photograph, a map, data tables, charts. It's not, again, rote memorization. It's not just, you know, did you memorize this? What year was a war? You know, where can you find this? It's really asking the kids to engage and to think deeply and then they have other questions around that so you really

[05:15:38] have to go back to that initial stimuli and make sure your thinking aligns and you'll see this in all of our new designed assessments world geography world history one and two virginia u.s history virginia studies and civics and economics so in all the history assessments we're very proud to say they've had these new innovative test item types and work they've been field tested and they'll be operational this spring. So 2B, maintaining rigorous critical thinking expectations while

[05:16:14] ensuring accessibility. You have some notes there about accessibility. Again, we think about students' American Sign Language, speech-to-text, word prediction, pop-up glossary, translations. The idea is if students need support, it's happening within the test platform. You know, it's one thing when you ask a child to take a test and then they have to have a dictionary on the side or they have to pull this out or pull that out. The more interactive it is and the more in their experience, the better they're going to do. And the less that other students may look and say, you've got something different. And so really making sure the experience for them is cohesive.

[05:16:45] You see some other notes there, color contrast settings, magnification, other opportunities to make sure students have accessibility. And we really are measuring the content versus are they understanding what's being asked of them. And on opportunity five, the innovative assessment design, the recommendation was to plan for future innovation. You know, Virginia must first align its assessment system again with best practices rigorous expectations for students and so they listed a number of ideas for the the work group asked to be considered again you see their listed performance tasks or project-based assessments how could we use those how could they fit into a

[05:17:22] coherent assessment system having interactive engaging and reflective of real-world scenarios in the assessments thinking about interdisciplinary which you'll hear of an example of here shortly Using technology, levering best practice accommodations and accessibility features, connecting directly to classroom instruction and curriculum.

[05:17:41] Again, we want to be cohesive and have that alignment. And then minimizing testing time and disruption with tests that happened throughout the year as part of the learning process. You'll see these recommendations that came out in 2023 in the report. And then again, as we mentioned earlier, House Bill 1957, it picks up on these.

[05:17:56] Many of these, when you look at the legislation, especially the one of minimizing testing time, that was one of the goals articulated in that legislation. And so you see partnership between these pieces of legislation. I want to give you some updates from the Opportunity 5 Innovative Assessment Design.

[05:18:13] Again, the Secretary of Superintendent of Public Instruction, they've assembled an Innovative Assessment Work Group. They're going to be providing recommendations to inform this new Innovative Statewide Assessment System. we also the department released a request for proposal to procure an innovative assessment consultant this consultant will look at other states listen to different stakeholders around virginia will be listening sessions doing research and providing reports back on their findings to help you know think differently around a new statewide assessment system and then the department has met with its technical advisory council to review innovative assessment type items such as

[05:18:49] the science simulation that you're going to see performance task and we discuss how these might fit in our current assessments so again you're hearing from different stakeholders but i want to bring the process to you and so now i'm going to share with you an example of a science simulation you're getting a look at this we've shown our innovative assessment work group and we'll also be providing to the public an opportunity that they can also engage with this and give us feedback about how this could be used in virginia's program so i'm showing you a great eight example today you're going to see screenshots obviously in the real simulation there'll be movement you'd be able as a student to interact. And also we should tell you that if a student was taking this,

[05:19:29] there would have been prior experience. They would have tested this in the classroom, understood how it functions. There's training videos. There's a number of measures that take place. So what you're seeing would not be the first time a student's interacting with it. So a little background is these were designed using the same test development process for Virginia's SOLs. This would be something, again, would fit in alignment with how we operate. It is intended for potential in grade 5, 8, science, and of course biology. Those are our main assessments in science. That's where it would fit in. Again, Virginia already has, you know, yes, uses multiple choice, multiple select, technology-enhanced items. Again, this would be

[05:20:06] using that. And then science simulations will be scored using machine scoring. This is the process that would be used. So science simulations engage students in real-world tasks or phenomena. It's getting connected to content. So it's designed to measure student knowledge.

[05:20:23] So it's trying to recreate, again, through instruction what would happen, and then look to see sort of with students individually applying this, sort of the data that comes and what they know. And so they'll have a series of questions that will be scored. They're supposed to prompt students to demonstrate what they know through scientific knowledge and inquiry.

[05:20:41] The tasks are delivered to students using the same software program. They're not leaving it and going somewhere else. Again, accessibility tools are comparable. And then last year, each science simulation is created for use within the assessment. And it replaces some of the standalone or cluster set items. So the goal would be to not increase testing time.

[05:20:59] You see this and you might see the number of items with it and sort of the test is just going to get longer. This would replace some of the other items. And so what you're going to see now is the demonstration. So grade eight science, we're going to look here around the battery life of an electric scooter. So this would be a prompt, some background to give the student context.

[05:21:17] In this example, Maya and her family member Samuel are going to the tech museum. They're both riding electric scooters to give the students some background, sort of the purpose of what are we studying, where is this coming from? And the intent is, is this is real life. This is a student or child who's, you know, naturally going about their day, maybe know they're gonna go learn more about science, but, you know, they're naturally curious and it's something that we wanna foster.

[05:21:42] And so this example, the child, Maya, realizes that her battery's at 50% and her family member, he's at 25%. And so he realizes we need to charge these before we leave the museum. And she wonders naturally, Well, why is mine 50% and yours is 25%? What's the difference there?

[05:21:58] And that's, again, we want to encourage that natural inquiry. And so next, she realizes in the museum that they have a whole exhibit on electric scooters. And so there's going to be a simulation. We're in the perspective of her that we're going to be able to try to figure out the question that she raised. Why is mine 25% and yours is 50%?

[05:22:16] And so we've got some background knowledge here. Welcome to the simulation. You know, this is where the battery holds chemical potential energy. And, you know, again, giving the background of what the simulation is going to be. Now, on this screen, again, the child, the student would have practiced with this before, so they understood, because, you know, you can look at them, I think that's quite a bit of information, but that's what you want.

[05:22:36] You want a child at the eighth grade level to be able to take multiple pieces of information and be able to demonstrate their knowledge. And so what the student's going to do is you're going to be able to manipulate at the bottom the mass and the forward force. They're going to be able to set the settings based on the prompt. It tells you there on the right side what the goal is.

[05:22:53] and then they're going to run different simulations. You notice at the top, we have A, B, C, D, and E. And so every time that run that simulation, it's going to take the data that's going to appear in those tables, the green and orange tables, and it's going to move it to the top. So that way they can run it and it stores the data for them and they can pull up the different reports. And so they're going to be looking at how does mass and forward force affect how quickly the scooter changes speed.

[05:23:18] So they know the prompt. And again, they're going to run this multiple times. And then when they get to part B. It's going to ask them a question there around, you know, basically what conclusion could you draw? You've done these simulations and the student, you know, there's five examples here they can change and go back. You know, they're told sort of what to set. It tells you there, change the mass and forward force settings for Rider 2 and observe the results. And so it tells them exactly what to do. And the student again can play around with it, but they're going to have five sets of data to look at. And then they're going to use that information in part B to then answer that response so in the situation rider two is staying still what happens to the net force

[05:23:55] rider two from one to two seconds what's this that's the situation you know what's the net force and so again they're going to drag and drop their response but it's also building to deeper learning that's going to come moving on they still have again the same data's carried over they're going to go a little bit deeper they've got a chart here that they're going to end up graphing and so they're going to be asked to use that information and part b they're going to there's So drop down there, you know, how could you produce the graph above with the greatest difference in the change in speed of two riders?

[05:24:28] So they're going to use the data from before, thinking about how they responded, and then now what could we do, you know, given the task there? So you're seeing the application around the data in the chart. Now, these were just a few slides around the science simulation.

[05:24:43] We're going to demonstrate this for the public and get feedback. The presentation or the simulation does go on. The students actually do generate a graph on their own based on the data that they find and are asked to draw some conclusions. So I just wanted to talk a little bit about this performance task piece because this is not, so I met with Trent at Pearson and he showed me all of these things.

[05:25:12] These are really amazing performance tasks. I mean, I was truly blown away from where we are today in our testing to where we can be in this is just so beyond even thought.

[05:25:28] And kind of what's the most, I think, distressing piece to me is that we could have been here long ago. We could have been in a place. I mean, these kinds of test items have been adopted in other states for years now.

[05:25:46] And so if there's any kind of plea that I can make to the General Assembly, it is please, please, please put money specifically into this testing opportunity here because it is only going to serve to help our students better and deeper in their understanding of each content area.

[05:26:09] mean this is just this is a way different way to explain how a student knows and understands the content i mean students that may not be able to to that may not be as successful in the way that we are testing them now that is going to change dramatically with this type of item on an assessment. I think we're going to truly see that data prove the point I just made. And they have seen that in all of the different states where these test items are being used in this particular

[05:26:47] capacity. It's just really kind of a cool thing to see, you know, go through in a mechanical sense, you know, through the process of this particular type of item. It's just so fun. So I really hope it actually takes the uh out of taking an assessment because we we already know that our students really do enjoy you know manipulating you know using yes they're using technology but the manipulation that they're doing while they're using the technology is just so much different

[05:27:25] here and so i'm not saying anybody's looking forward to being assessed but it actually might be a little bit more enjoyable um to to take an assessment in this way i know i would certainly enjoy it more um so i'm really really really excited about these opportunities so dr ackerman just to echo that i mean there's so much negativity and just around unfortunately standardized testing when the when people are developing tools that counter some of those concerns and criticism and And this is a perfect example of that.

[05:28:04] And I wholeheartedly agree because it has the critical thinking elements. It has the real-life application. It has all those things that standardized testing used to not do. So thank you. And I'll share with you some of the feedback we received when you show this to a group.

[05:28:19] And it's great to have groups sort of, you know, show them as we just sit back and listen and just have that honest dialogue. Again, accessibility, some of the layout and the pictures, the format. But, you know, again, as children explore with this, again, they're learning even in the moment as they learn to use the tools and the features and see the data and they go oh the data shows me this i need to back up because that doesn't line up with this answer and so you're really having them go deeper in their thinking as they're applying the skills and taking the assessment i'm going to turn down my colleague on performance task uh what we'll say here and he'll be able to speak to it is this again is something we're excited about as a demonstration again you'll see what's been developed but also how it might fit in different content areas and

[05:28:57] so that's part of the piece here we're not trying to say this fits in history science math but that's one of the things we're asking the public as we have these engagement sessions is to give us feedback to say how can we make our assessments more innovative we have technology enhanced items we have cluster sets that help the design but we want to look at different ways to assess and really go deeper in our thinking and have some really strong data on what students know and are able to do good afternoon it's a pleasure to be with you to talk about performance tasks the performance to and mark kind of got to show you the ferrari you know the all the moving

[05:29:37] parts all the different things that the students can do in terms of manipulating the simulations this performance task that we're going to talk about it's a little bit different in regards to it's asking students to provide more information it's more of a written context to the performance tasks that we're going to be talking about. So it's a different way for them to express themselves and interact with the assessment content. We did in the we I'm referring to, the Office of Student Assessment, we worked with Pearson some to develop some performance tasks in the event that we would

[05:30:16] be able to utilize those in the future on some assessments. So unlike what Mark was just showing you those were kind of some borrowed uh screenshots um things that we can do things that we can work with our vendor and do these are some things that and again we'd have to go through the process of field testing and all those kinds of things with students but these are some things that that we have the ability to uh to move on fairly quickly if we if we chose to in wrong direction all right so um first off um you know we did develop these items uh or we we worked with pearson to develop

[05:30:53] these items. So they're not completely Virginia specific. They're not 100% the way that we might have created them if it was all in our shop. But these are some pretty good examples. I think it's important kind of as a stage setting to let you know that we could actually utilize these types of items in multiple ways, in multiple content areas. Mr. Ellis, can you be more specific about that like in other words it's just because it's not maybe something specific maybe the subject

[05:31:28] matter within the item is not specific to Virginia like you would have created it perhaps or is it because I don't want anybody to think that they're not aligned to standards correct any any item that we would put on any assessment in Virginia would be aligned to the would be completely aligned to the Virginia standards of learning. We would not, we wouldn't, it has never been our practice to put anything on our tests that students and teachers wouldn't have been expected to interact with during the school year. That was completely understand, completely understand. So sorry, I'm working two

[05:32:03] two laptops. But basically, the performance tasks that I'm going to show you, it takes a student through a through a process, they'll interact with a couple different pieces of stimulus that could be it could be something like an interview that they watch, a recorded video, it could be a newspaper article or some kind of newsletter, and they're going to take the information from those pieces, they're going to answer some questions about those items, and then they're also going to have what is referred to as a capstone project at the end, where they kind of synthesize all of

[05:32:39] the information that they've created and gathered into a kind of a final product that could be that could be utilized. In this case, it'll be utilized in their community. And what I meant by what you're going to look at, we don't really have a content area that I would say this is a math or a science or an English or a history. A performance test could be built for any content area. So even though I'm going to show you something that probably is a little more rooted in history social science from a civics perspective you could really create a performance

[05:33:16] task for any of our content areas it doesn't have to be exclusive to any one content area all right so in in the case of Virginia we would provide these opportunities to students through test nav which is the current platform that we use that's how these were developed so they wouldn't have to learn anything new that way they would have access to the the tools and such that they're familiar with in the testing platform. So all of our accommodations, the accessibility tools, all of those things students would still have access to and wouldn't

[05:33:51] have to learn anything new in order to interact with these items. So this particular item that we're going to talk about, it's based in grade five. So it would be something that students in grade five, content that students in grade five would be familiar with. And you can see it starts very similar to the science simulation in in regards to there's some kind of some contextual information at the beginning um they they talk about um you know what are some things that that we might want to do how are some what are some things we might interact with and here it talks

[05:34:28] about um that they're going to be using their using some of their skills such as citizenship communication critical thinking and creative thinking in order to answer the items that that they're gonna be presented with. So it's pulling in at least four of those five C's that we talk about in our profile of a Virginia graduate.

[05:34:51] All right, sorry, Mark's computer doesn't like me as much as it likes Mark. All right, so this is just an example of one thing that the student may interact with. It talks about, you know, one afternoon, you're walking in your neighborhood, you pass an old playground and you begin to wonder, is there a better way to use that space?

[05:35:09] And so you can see on your screen, hopefully, that there's a place where they can enter their information, their ideas. It tells them to enter two ideas in the box. They have 1,000 characters.

[05:35:25] The characters will count down as they're entering information so they know how much space they have. But this is really an opportunity for the student to express their own thoughts and ideas about what belongs in here. So they're not picking from a list. It's not a preset loading of ideas in their mind about what they might do at this space.

[05:35:42] It's their genuine reaction to this question or this prompt. So from there, it takes them to another prompt. It says, in this activity, you're going to learn about community spaces and how people might plan them. So from there, they're going to talk about, you know, it gives them a definition of what the community space is so that they have a better understanding of what they're going to be asked to talk about.

[05:36:07] And it says, read the magazine article to learn more about the community spaces. So from that magazine article, there's an article they're going to read talking about the community spaces and a variety of different community spaces and how things might be used, then they're told to draft a, or excuse me, they're told to read a letter to the editor.

[05:36:29] So they're going to have a letter to the editor that also talks about a community space where they're going to talk about building a community skate park. And after that, they're going to be asked to, they're going to be prompted to answer some questions about what they just read. And when they're asked to respond to those questions, and I'm sorry, I'm not keeping up. And when they're asked to respond to these questions they're actually going to have access to both of the items that they've already read so that's what's on the left hand side of your screen and then you see there are some multiple choice questions but there's going to be some additional open-ended

[05:37:09] response where they're going to be able to provide a short answer to answer some of their questions it talks about in this one what is one other feature that could be part of a community space besides what they've already read. So they have the opportunity again to enter their own thoughts and ideas about these community spaces. And one thing we have learned, and I know it's come up in a couple of the presentations you've seen today, is about students having the opportunity to provide their own thoughts and ideas, having more writing involved in the test that we have.

[05:37:40] With that comes some additional responses, and I'm glad to hear President Creasy asking for the ability to do this will require funding because it it's more expensive to to score student responses that are open-ended so that is a part of this that will be very helpful but you'll notice that we can still incorporate some of the item types that we already use that students are familiar with this would be a drag and drop item where we students interact with the question instead of having a list of choices they pick you know a b c or d they actually are able to to click on these

[05:38:14] options and drag them to the appropriate space um to answer this item so again not just a a question of uh a question that is multiple choice it's just another way of interacting with the content all right again we continue they continue going down the road talk about a few weeks later max decides he's going to write a letter to the editor of his local newspaper about uh building a rock climbing wall and again he has some information asking them well what would you need to do what are some considerations you would have to have again interacting with some other

[05:38:51] questions as they as they go through so we eventually get down to where all right i might have clicked too far where they're going to answer some more questions again open-ended responses where we're asking them to put some more of their own ideas in these in these spaces and eventually we get to the point and this is where that capstone piece comes in so everything they've done so far is in reaction to the articles that they read and now we're going to ask them to take their thoughts and ideas and you'll see there's a part a a part b and a part in sometimes sorry

[05:39:29] there's a part c but here the part a and part b where they're going to answer or give their description of what should happen in their community space and why they chose these features of their community space so really taking what they read and making their own original authentic document that that will inform their community on what they think they should do for for a space and again you'll see additional questions and additional ideas we're prompting them to give us more information but they're going to create that their own thoughts and ideas their own

[05:40:06] information and you'll see that final piece of part c we provide an opportunity to answer more or to we give them more characters to respond so it really allows them to kind of summarize all of their thoughts and ideas about this particular performance task again we have a bank of these and i'll say a bank we have a few of these at grade five and grade eight that we worked on this past year nothing's been field tested so it's not a situation where we could take these right now and and put them in place somewhere in you know in in some area we would also have to consider if

[05:40:44] we incorporate these into an sol test we would have to give some consideration is how do we weigh what we're putting in against what's already there do we make tests shorter how do we incorporate these so that it makes the most sense and values the student's time as much as possible so all things that we would have to that we would have to consider as part of this process mr ellis yes a couple of questions so um number one uh just the capability of these questions to identify a lot of

[05:41:21] the characteristics the skills the expertise that we're looking for in the readiness category how are like between mastery and readiness right i'm seeing a lot of things that that are going to indicate particularly in the open-ended responses you know when we ask kids to identify the the main idea or the theme or whatever it is you those opportunities are more about how we're judging their readiness and so is that do we have a mechanism by which to to categorize um those

[05:42:00] questions for the purpose of sort of grading them on readiness in that through um this how successful they are on each of these particular items so that's question one i'll let you answer that first and then i have two more i think what we would have to do and again because we we were in the very early stages with these i i think if that's the direction that the board wanted to go i think what we would have to do is make sure that we're aligning the standards that get to those those items i think we would have to align those standards with the individual pieces of the

[05:42:36] performance task okay so if if we wanted if we were looking for things more from a readiness perspective i think looking at the standards saying okay this standard really aligns nicely with readiness so when we create our performance task we want to make sure that we have pieces of the task that will kind of speak the students performance will speak directly to to that aspect so i think that's possible um i think that that's one of those things again where we would need to when when we decide to go with these i think part of that decision is going to really be sitting

[05:43:11] down and looking at our standards and what do we want to gain out of the performance task. Again, because of how this was developed initially, that wasn't completely the focus. So then my next two are kind of related because when is the earliest we could field test at least a couple of these in the next? Could we potentially field test a couple of these in the next test administration? It would be extremely difficult to field test these in spring. And part of that's we're already in form development for spring okay um so that and that's to embed them in in in a test

[05:43:51] go ahead the other piece is and it's kind of what i was i was referring to is there's a lot in the performance task and these were developed to kind of be standalone and we're looking at them now and this came up during our technical advisors meeting that maybe we shouldn't don't look at these as standalones look at these as embedding in what you already have so I think it also goes back to in order to field test we would have to make some decisions about how we want to field test whether we whether we field test as standalones knowing that eventually they're going to go into a form because again there's the there's the weight that this would carry versus a bunch of individual test

[05:44:30] items so we would have to I think we would need to work psychometrically in order to figure out exactly where's the sweet spot of how many items do we remove because of this item um so i think there would be a lot a lot of discussion would have to be had for that so i like the idea of doing sort of like a standalone almost a pilot sort of see what what for our purposes in virginia you know what this what these items give us number one kind of data and information does it give us um and then you know i guess second of all i think i always had and maybe it was just the way

[05:45:08] that trent presented it to me but i always had the idea that we would be embedding them into the current test we would or wouldn't we would that that that was the um uh that was always my thought that that's that's how we would do that not that they would ever stand alone um so that's sort of where my mind was always with that um just because i think that when you give kids multiple means by which to express all that they know you have a greater chance of hitting all of you know getting

[05:45:45] as much as you can from them um while at the same time testing their different um both strengths and weaknesses in in testing so um the other thing that i had a question about was i mean and we may not be far enough down the road to truly be able to express this but you may have already spoken with pearson about like how do we then um train kids and teachers on these items because of course it's going to be something different that's coming to them both from an instructional standpoint as

[05:46:22] the classroom teacher and then also from the standpoint of the student and the expectation of these being in so how has that um sort of been integrated in the past and in other states can you give me a little bit of information on that so as as part of our preparation over the last year or so um we do have some practice items already um that if we decided that this is a direction we wanted to go that we could make those available we had we also have some of the alternate test forms large print and braille that that could be made available as well so in

[05:47:00] in terms of other states i'm not familiar with how many other states are using a performance text similar to what we just looked at i think one of the things for us to remember is the the performance test you just saw was intended to be no more than 90 minutes we try to keep our test times low and so if we incorporated this with our current test then we're we're looking at a situation that's not really tenable for for students so that's why when i was talking about taking a look at um our standards and really deciding where we want that alignment to be

[05:47:35] would be super important and then at the same time adding additional test sessions is just also another correct issue to overcome i i think the the field testing piece the most successful field test and i'm thinking when we went many years ago and we did a writing you know we did writing online that was a field test we did many years ago and when we when we did that it was a the whole state did that that gives us the most robust data it gives us the most information about the

[05:48:10] test and how students performed and we use that information to help build the exemplars that we use then to have training materials for people to train our the automated scoring engine that helps score the writing assessment so i think if we head down this road i think a very thoughtful process about how we want to introduce this to schools and to students like i said we can have some resources ready for students to start practicing with the good part is we've done this before um you know we are integrated reading and writing we field tested that in spring of 23

[05:48:48] before it went operational um lots of good information you know came out of that so we can we can do it um it's really just the thoughtful planning um and understanding what what how will we embed this in our tests and what do what do we want to see in regards to the outcomes dr dr northern i missed sort of part of this unfortunately so i'll um i may this may have already been covered but um is this meant to i mean i know we've got integrated reading and writing but what subject areas are these performance tasks supposed to be assessing

[05:49:25] we could build a performance task for any content area so i think and maybe it's maybe i just haven't seen the integrated writing and reading in a while um but um i would love it if these uh and there was a reference earlier that these that we have non-fiction passages that would then serve as the springboard for the writing prompt um and in this case um i found that the first one i really liked the example i looked at simulation yeah but the second one for me personally just completely missed the mark i felt like um you could answer those questions without having read anything it

[05:50:03] like what if you're in this park you know what would you put in this park or something like it was it was content agnostic so i would just encourage us no matter what direction we go to make the um to make sure that kids get have to um bring uh support from the text you know we've obviously seen our standards evidence-based from the text um and also close reading that forces them to do close reading all those wonderful things we put in our ela standards around reading i think we need to no matter what what subject we're assessing here that we need to make sure that we're using a complex test for that grade level that they're doing close reading and

[05:50:39] that we're putting them back referencing them back to your text evidence i think we would have the ability through scoring models to to ensure that their answers weren't completely off topic that we would be able to to to make sure that their responses are contextual with what we expected them to read but i understand your point entirely uh sienna leap they've done some uh nice work around trying to make items um context based and uh evidence-based and all the things that we now have on our ela standards if we wanted to use those uh you know to get some ideas thank you

[05:51:23] yes so with the new board members um jason and mark add on here but just to contextualize um two years ago this was originally designed as a readiness element one for elementary school around the five c's because that had long been an expectation here in the commonwealth how do we really capture if students are growing around communication skills critical thinking skills creativity and then the eighth grade version was to also do a way to demonstrate their kindergarten

[05:52:00] through eighth grade around the academic and career plan on actually applying so building off of the five c's elements on how do we then demonstrate that critical thinking exposure to high demand pathways etc and applying it that was where phase one of the build out of these began and so they really were a full stand alone effort with the innovation assessment group with additional feedback from our brilliant TAC members and feedback to date there's now a shift

[05:52:39] as well as with more agency team members subject matter expertise and input on how do we take elements of this to apply so that they're not viewed in just a silo because we recognize the the five C's should be applicable across subject matter areas, et cetera. And how do we then demonstrate that elevated level of analysis and application that we would expect from an eighth grader instead of a fifth grader? So for the newer members, that's where the original vision was.

[05:53:12] When we started this, there were only a few states who had really leaned in to that kind holistic demonstration and so we're still in the early adopters just the core subject content and really that isn't done just at the local level from a state snapshot of where are there gaps where we need to provide additional resources some of those more subjective skills so we're

[05:53:52] still in those states sort of in the leading edge on this but have really benefited over the last six months getting a lot more input from our technical advisors on how to adapt and really capture what we're looking for this background i'm sorry stralis did you finish up or did i uh interrupt you great conversation it's ongoing you've heard where we are now where we're headed so you see the next steps there uh we'll continue with the assessment vendor and the department are

[05:54:30] going to host some information gathering sessions show uh what you've just seen except the interactive actually pieced with the science simulation and get feedback we'll just be listening to hear what and it's open to all stakeholders that invitation will go out it's going to go out in the Virginia education update there the innovative work group continues to meet and have great conversation like you just did around a coherent assessment system and what as we think forward what that should look like and we'll come back and present to the board the updates of where we are now and what we're hearing and so we'll look forward to that in future conversation so much any other

[05:55:07] questions or comments here on this item thank you both mr ellis and mr jennings okay as we are wrapping up um i would like to make sure that we keep the public informed of the membership of the board's college partnership laboratory school standing committee so under article 8 section one of the board's bylaws it's resp the responsibility of the board president to appoint all members to serve on standing committees in accordance with that duty i have

[05:55:44] appointed mr antoine green to replace former board member andy rotherham on the lab school standing committee we are grateful for andy's service to the standing committee and to the board and are delighted that mr green has agreed to continue the careful attention to our lab schools that was given by mr rotherham so i i do appreciate mr green's willingness to serve further and look forward to hearing some updates from him in the future again we also have another board member that sits on that committee mr hansen sits on that committee as well and he will

[05:56:22] continue his service there so thank you again to him and that continued service and i guess if you don't have anything further and if there's not anything further from the rest of the board then we will adjourn this meeting if i can get a motion to do so second we're adjourned

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Coraggio Consulting · aguyonx.com