Virginia Board of Education Meeting Summary
6-21/22-2017
Accountability Committee Meeting – June 21, 2017
The Accountability Committee received an overview of the proposed changes to accreditation indicators and of revisions to the Regulations Establishing the Standards for Accrediting Public Schools in Virginia, Part VIII as well as a review of the state’s proposed Consolidated State Plan under the federal Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015 (ESSA). The Committee also reviewed the Division-Level Memorandum of Understanding for Richmond City Public Schools.
All three of these items are also regular business Agenda Items at the Board’s June 22nd meeting. The presentations for each item are available at:
http://www.doe.virginia.gov/boe/committees_standing/accountability/2017/meeting_materials.shtml#jun21
and descriptive summary information is available under the related Agenda Item report for the Board’s business meeting.
and descriptive summary information is available under the related Agenda Item report for the Board’s business meeting.
Board Business Meeting – June 22, 2017
Recommendation of the Advisory Board on Teacher Education and Licensure (ABTEL) for a Qualifying Score on the New SAT® as a Substitute Test for the Praxis Core Assessment for Entry Into a Teacher Preparation Program
The Board approved the Advisory Board on Teacher Education and Licensure’s (ABTEL) recommendation that the following qualifying scores on the SAT would be sufficient to allow it to serve as a substitute test for the Praxis Core Academic Skills for Educators Tests:
SAT AS A SUBSTITUTE TEST
• SAT Taken Prior to April 1, 1995 – a score of 1000 with at least 450 on the verbal and 510 on the mathematics test;
• SAT Taken After April 1, 1995 and Prior to March 1, 2016 – a score of 1100 with at least 530 on the verbal and 530 on the mathematics tests; and
• SAT Taken after March 1, 2016 – a total score of 1170 with at least 580 on Evidence-based Reading and Writing Section and 560 on the Math Section.
Per the Department, these scores were derived from the Board’s current policy using data published by the College Board in a concordance study; tables from this study are available for review at: https://collegereadiness.collegeboard.org/pdf/higher-ed-brief-sat-concordance.pdf. Refer to the following appendices: (Appendix A, Table 10, Old SAT to New SAT Concordance Table); (Appendix B, Table 3, New SAT Math Section to Old SAT Math Section Concordance Table); and (Appendix C, Table 14, Old SAT Critical Reading to New SAT Reading Test Concordance Table).
Nominations to Fill Vacancies on Board of Education Advisory Committees
The Board approved nominations to fill vacancies on the following Board of Education Advisory Committees:
• Advisory Board on Teacher Education and Licensure (ABTEL)
• Virginia Advisory Committee for the Education of the Gifted (VACEG)
• State Special Education Advisory Committee (SSEAC)
• Adult Education and Literacy Advisory Committee
• Advisory Committee for Career & Technical Education
Proposed Amendments to the Regulations Establishing the Standards for Accrediting Public Schools in Virginia, Parts I-VIII (8VAC 20-131) (Proposed Stage)
The Board approved its proposed revisions to the Regulations Establishing Standards for Accrediting Public Schools in Virginia, Parts I-VIII, completing the first stage of its ongoing work on the Standards related to graduation requirements and school accountability measures.
The following is a high level summary of changes that have been made to the Board’s draft proposal since May 2017, based on Board discussion and staff review (page number references are made to Attachment B, as found in the agenda item here):
PARTS I-VII
8VAC20-131-5. Definitions
• Reporting group: Added definition of reporting group, as that term is applied to the achievement gap school quality indicator used for accreditation purposes. (p.3)
• Verified unit of credit: added “of the associated course” to clarify that the associated history or social science course must be taken along with the authentic performance assessment. (p.4)
8VAC20-131-20. Philosophy, goals and objectives (all page 6)
• Amended the expectation for students to be equipped “for citizenship” to “to be responsible citizens.”
• Eliminated reference to “social transformation” from board’s objectives.
• Amended “college and career ready” to “college, career, and citizenship ready.”
• Amended language to expand civic readiness by expecting students to attain and demonstrate knowledge and skills necessary for productive citizenship and participation in communities and governments.
8VAC20-131-51. Requirements for Graduation
• 8VAC20-131-51.A -- Amended “college and career readiness” to “college, career, and citizenship readiness.” (P.17)
• 8VAC20-131-51.A. -- Amended requirements for graduation pathways to include workplace skills to also include citizenship skills. (p.17)
• 8VAC20-131-51.A -- Eliminated “work-based learning” from guidelines, as such guidelines also may include service-based learning. (p.17)
• 8VAC20-131-51.B.2 and C.2 – Language added to clarify that the content of the associated course in history or social science course must be mastered along with the authentic performance assessment used to earn a verified credit. (pages 18 and 22)
• 8VAC20-131-51.B.2 and C.2 – Verified credits required for English increased from one to two - so that a verified credit must be earned in both reading and writing. All references to “English” verified credits changed to “English (reading and writing).”(pages 18, 19, 22, and 23)
8VAC20-131-90. Instructional program in middle schools
• 8VAC20-131-90.A – Language added to clarify that the alternative means to deliver the career investigation course must also provide the foundation for students to develop Academic and Career plans. Examples of potential alternative means are also described: online courses, incorporation into exploratory and weaving course content into to other courses. (p.36)
8VAC20-131-100. Instructional Program in Secondary Schools
• 8VAC20-131-100.A.1 – Language added to require career and technical education choices to incorporate knowledge of regional workforce needs and opportunities. (p.38)
8VAC20-131-110. Standard and Verified Units of Credit
• 8VAC20-131-110.B.4 -- Language added to clarify that the content of the associated course in history or social science course must be mastered along with the authentic performance assessment used to earn a verified credit. (p.40)
8VAC20-131-140. College and career readiness; career exposure, exploration, and planning; and opportunities for postsecondary credit
• 8VAC20-131-140.B.2 – Language added to clarify that the career investigation course may be delivered through alternate means. (p.43)
PART VIII
8VAC20-131-370. Expectations for School Accountability and Accreditation
• 8VAC20-131-370.A.2.-- wording edit (p.70)
• 8VAC20-131-370.B.3. -- Added reference to the Individuals with Disabilities Act (p.71)
8VAC20-131-380. Measurement of School Quality for Accreditation
• 8VAC20-131-380.A – Removed specific descriptions from the general list of school quality indicators and relocated specific descriptions to the table of school quality indicators at subsection E.1. (p.72)
• 8VAC20-131-380.A and E.1 – Added civic readiness to the college and career readiness indicator. (p.72)
• 8VAC20-131-380.B – Clarified that EL students with fewer than 11 semesters may only be removed from school quality indicators related to academic achievement. (p.72)
• 8VAC20-131-380.B.3 – Deleted references to passing rates, as the new academic indicators are based upon a combination of passing students and students demonstrating growth. (p.73)
• 8VAC20-131-380.D – Deleted references to guidelines for establishing performance level benchmarks, as benchmarks will be established through regulations. (p.73)
• 8VAC20-131-380.D and D.2 – Removed “Improvement from Level Three” from the name of Level Two for consistency. (p.74)
• 8VAC20-131-380.D.1, D.2, and D.3 – Eliminated all references to colors associated to performance levels to provide flexibility to determine how to display performance in the future. (p.74)
• 8VAC20-131-380.E.1 – School quality indicators and performance levels reorganized and described in table, as guidelines are no longer proposed. Each individual indicator and performance level is now described in a single row in the table. (p.75)
• 8VAC20-131-380.E.1 a-c – Academic achievement indicator benchmarks for Level Two now include a floor level of performance to recognize Level Three growth. Also referenced in D.2. (p.75)
• 8VAC20-131-380.E.1.h – Chronic absenteeism description revised to exempt students who are receiving homebound instruction from the calculation. (p.77)
• 8VAC20-131-380.E.1 and E.2 – Performance levels are described based on minimum levels of performance, which can be adjusted through board guidance as schools continuously improve, with adequate notice provided to school boards. (pages 75-78)
• 8VAC20-131-380.E.3 – Permits the board to adopt special provisions for any indicator. Previously, only dropout rate included language for special provisions. This language is relocated from 8VAC20-131-420.E. (p.78)
• 8VAC20-131-380.E.4 – Permits the board to add or remove assessments, and to adopt special provisions for school quality indicators when assessments are revised or phased in. Language moved from 8VAC20-131-420.E. (p.78)
• 8VAC20-131-380.E.5 – Added language permitting school boards to appeal performance level designations in limited circumstances that would warrant special consideration. (p.78)
8VAC20-131-390 – Accreditation
• 8VAC20-131-390.B.3 – Language added to articulate how a school would exit “Denied Accreditation” status. (pages 81-82)
• 8VAC 20-131-390.C.—Wording edits. (p. 82)
• 8VAC20-131-390.E – Enforcement language is relocated to 8VAC20-131-400. (pages 82 and 87)
8VAC20-131-400 Application of the School Quality Indicator Performance Levels to Actions
• 8VAC20-131-400 –Language added to link SOQ-required school-level comprehensive plans to comprehensive needs assessments, and multi-year improvement plans. (p.82)
• 8VAC20-131-400 – Clarified language regarding confirmation of actions required by plan. (p.83)
• 8VAC20-131-400 – Language added to articulate that actions required to be taken by schools and school divisions are to be led by principals and superintendents. (p.83)
• 8VAC20-131-400.A and B.2 – Plans would no longer be required to be submitted to VDOE, rather they would be reviewed through a department established process, which could include peer review, or random selection by VDOE for review. (p.83)
• 8VAC20-131-400.C – Level Three reorganized so that all actions under Level Three are outlined, generally in the level of department and board direction, oversight, and intervention. (pages 84-86)
• 8VAC20-131-400.C – Language added to provide for a state superintendent to local superintendent agreement process, depending on the level of direction and intervention. (p.85)
• 8VAC20-131-400.C.3 – Language added to provide that “Accreditation Denied” occurs following a board review for failure to implement corrective action plans with fidelity. Language added to specify that a school board shall be given an opportunity to correct failure to act on corrective action plan and if successful in a timely manner, may have the denied accreditation status rescinded. (p.86)
• 8VAC20-131-400.C.5 – Inserts language from existing SOA and SOQ related to board authority to pursue additional remedies including court action to seek compliance with school laws. (p.87)
8VAC20-121-410. Recognitions and Rewards for School and Division Accountability Performance
• 8VAC20-131-410.B. Language added to provide examples of exemplar performance categories. (p.88)
8VAC20-131-420 E. – This language was relocated to 8VAC20-131-380.E.4 and 5 as it relates to the application of assessments and school quality indicators. (p.89)
The full proposal is available here: http://www.doe.virginia.gov/boe/meetings/2017/06-jun/agenda-items/item-c.pdf
Consolidated State Plan under the Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015 (ESSA)
The Board received for first review the draft Consolidated State Plan as required for federal accountability under the Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015 (ESSA). The proposed plan includes three critical elements: selection of academic indicators, long term goals and interim measures of progress, and identification of schools for support and improvement.
Selection of Academic Indicators
Each state’s federal accountability system must include four academic indicators and one indicator of student success or school quality. The academic indicators – academic achievement, academic progress or growth, graduation rate, and progress in English Learners (ELs) towards gaining proficiency in English – must carry significantly greater weight than the indicator of school quality. The indicators included in the proposed state plan are:
• Standards of Learning (SOL) tests – to measure academic achievement;
• Progress tables – to measure academic growth for elementary and middle schools;
• Federal Graduation Indicator (FGI) – to measure high school graduation rate as required by ESSA;
• ACCESS for ELLs 2.0 – to measure progress in ELs towards gaining proficiency in English; and
• Chronic absenteeism – to measure student success/school quality.
Long Term Goals and Interim Measures of Progress
Long term goals and interim measures of progress are required for each indicator. Virginia’s accountability benchmarks were selected as the long-term goals for reading and mathematics. A combined rate which integrates academic achievement, growth for elementary and middle schools, and progress for EL students towards gaining proficiency in reading, was used to develop the interim measures of progress. Using the combined rate, a student will be counted in the numerator of the reading or mathematics pass rate if:
• The student passes the assessment; or
• The student does not pass the assessment but demonstrates growth using the value tables; or
• For the reading assessment, the student does not pass the assessment or demonstrate growth, but is an EL and demonstrates progress as measured by the ACCESS for ELLs 2.0 assessment.
Students who failed the reading or mathematics test the previous year but who pass the reading or mathematics test in the current year are counted as two passing scores to acknowledge the work of the school in remediating the student. The combined rate gives credit for students who are not passing the test but are making progress, and ensures that the schools identified for support and improvement will be schools that not only have low pass rates, but schools in which student are also not making progress. This gap-closing model places the federal accountability focus on reporting groups that have historically failed to meet growth targets, and emphasizes the importance of improved achievement for low performing reporting groups.
Identification of Schools for Support and Improvement
ESSA requires states to identify multiple categories of schools for support and improvement.
Identification is based on the long term goals and interim measures of progress for all indicators.
Schools identified for Comprehensive Support and Improvement would include the lowest 5 percent of Title I schools based on the performance of all students in the required indicators, any high school that has a federal four year cohort graduation rate below 67%, and Title I schools identified for Additional Targeted Support and Improvement that fail to meet the exit criteria after three years. Such schools would be identified every three years beginning with the 2018-2019 school year
Schools identified for Additional Targeted Support and Improvement would include any school in which any subgroup of students, on its own, would lead to identification as a Comprehensive Support and Improvement school. Such schools would also be identified every three years beginning with the 2018-2019 school year
Schools requiring Targeted Support and Improvement would include any school with one or more “consistently underperforming” subgroups of students, based on the required indicators. These schools will be identified from the schools identified for Additional Targeted Support and Improvement, and would be identified annually beginning with the 2019-2020 school year
The full draft of the plan as it would be submitted on the required federal template is available at: http://www.doe.virginia.gov/boe/meetings/2017/06-jun/agenda-items/item-d.pdf
Final review of the Consolidated State Plan is expected at the Board’s July 27, 2017, meeting. Upon Board approval, the Consolidated State Plan will be submitted to the Governor for a thirty day review period. The Consolidated State Plan will be submitted to USED by September 18, 2017. Pending USED approval of Virginia’s Consolidated State Plan, federal accountability determinations will be implemented for the 2018-2019 school year based on 2017-2018 assessment results.
NOTE: related to both of the previous Agenda Items, the Board is holding a series of public hearings from June-August to receive feedback on its proposed Standards of Accreditation, as well as on the Virginia Profile of a Graduate and the State’s Consolidated Plan under the Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015 (ESSA). The first of these occurred on June 27th at Luther Jackson Middle School in Fairfax County. The last of the sessions is scheduled for August 23rd in Mecklenburg County.
Division-Level Memorandum of Understanding for Richmond City Public Schools
The Board received for first review the division-level Memorandum of Understanding for Richmond City Public Schools. Per the Standards of Quality (SOQ), local school boards are required to maintain Fully Accredited schools and to take corrective actions for schools that are not Fully Accredited. When the Board of Education determines through the school academic review process that the failure of schools within a division to achieve full accreditation status is related to division-level failure to implement the Standards of Quality or other division-level action or inaction, the Board may require a division-level academic review, which in turn can lead to the development and implementation of a divison-level Memorandum of Understanding.
Proposal to Establish the Governor’s STEM Academy at Osbourn High School (Manassas City)
The Board received for first review the proposal from the Manassas City Public Schools to designate Osbourn High School as a Governor’s STEM Academy. The proposed Governor’s STEM Academy would provide rigorous academic and technical STEM coursework concentrating in three career clusters and pathways as follows:
• Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM): Engineering and Technology
• Information Technology: Networks Systems
• Transportation, Distribution, and Logistics: Facility and Mobile Equipment Maintenance
As proposed, the Academy would have the capacity to enroll 140 students, grades 9-12. During the initial school year (2017-2018) 35 students will be admitted. The proposed beginning date for the Governor’s STEM Academy is school year 2017-2018.
