Morning. It is 9:01 and I will now call this meeting to order. As is customary for this board, we will begin our meeting with a moment of silence followed by the pledge of allegiance. Okay. I'll note that I have approved the remote participation, Mr. Hansen, under
the board's bylaws 2.23708.3 B3 of the Code of Virginia because his principal residence is more than 60 miles from our meeting location today. Um this morning I would like to welcome our newest board member who was appointed by Governor Yncan in April of
this year. I'd like to welcome Dr. Beth Arian. Dr. Beth Arian lives in Campbell County and serves as the vice president of Rivermont Schools. She has a doctorate in educational leadership for the University of Virginia and an extensive background in special
education. We are so happy to have you with us, Beth, and look forward to serving the children of our Commonwealth alongside you. Um, at this time, I would invite you to say a few words if you'd like to. Sure. There's so much I could say. I'm just so excited to be here. Uh, my
undergraduate degree actually licensed me in elementary education and I did my student teaching at my dream classroom, se cute little second graders at Sandusky Elementary for Lynchburg City Schools. And um that's the classroom I always wanted. That was what I was going
to do my whole life. And uh I experienced this phenomena with my supervising student uh supervisor of my student teaching who um expressed that I needed to keep moving on in my units and not waiting till every child got it. And
that was a real struggle for me. And uh it was kind of the beginning of of knowing my plans were going to change. Uh and then on top of that, I graduated in January. this student teach, this cooperating teacher, by the way, was going to retire and she told me to come back at the end of the year and I could work in that second grade dream
classroom. But I graduated in January and I had to find a job then and this place called Rivermont Schools was hiring. Uh, if you're not familiar with Rivermont Schools, it's a school for kids with special needs with emotional behavioral problems. At the time, we actually didn't have a lot of kids with
autism. This was the mid 90s. And so, um, I went and interviewed for this job, found out the teacher walked out on them that middle of the school year and I'll just never forget that first day on that job. Um, I took it and I thought I'd do it for a semester and, uh, I met eight
boys that changed my heart. Um, and changed my field and changed my trajectory. Eight boys who showed up that day from kindergarten to 8th grade. a kindergartener who climbed my four drawer file cabinet and started dancing on my first day. Uh my eighth grader who
took off his sweatshirt and bare chested laid down on the ground and took a nap my first day first thing in the morning. Uh had no idea what I was doing. So then I just became passionate with the challenge with special education started spe the special ed program at Liberty. So I could go on and on but I'm just uh
humbled that all those opportunities and those eight boys brought me here today. So look forward to being able to participate. Thank you so much. Um so now we will move to approval of our agenda. Is there a motion to approve the
agenda as presented? I approve. Second. Okay. Um Miss Kilgore I. Dr. Northern I. Dr. Ari. Hi. Um I don't know if Mr. Hansen is on yet. Miss
McFersonson. Hi, Mr. Rotherham. Hi, Miss Holton. I and chair votes I. Okay. Um staff has provided the members of the board with the draft minutes prior to this meeting. Is there a motion to approve the minutes as presented to the board?
So move. Is there a second? Miss Kilgore. I. Dr. Northern I. Dr. Arian. I. Miss McFersonson. Hi. Mr. Rotherham. Hi. Miss Holton. I chair
votes I. Okay. Um, as has become customary for us, the board appreciates being able to feature the wonderful arts programs across the Commonwealth by having students perform at our meetings. I will now ask Dr. Northern if she will
please uh introduce our guests this morning. Okay. Awesome. Uh the Turner Ashb Chamber Choir is who we're hearing from today. They are the premier coral ensemble at Turner Ashby High School located in Bridgewater, Virginia under
the leadership and direction of Mr. Ian Dively. The coral group is part of the Blue Ribbon Awarded Music Program. The Turner Ashb Chamber Choir meets before school, which got my attention. These are some early birds here. allowing
students to participate in additional fine arts programs and other academic courses. This past year, members of the group were selected for the summer residential Governor's School for Visual and Performing Arts and Humanities, the Virginia Coral Directors Association
District 5 Honor Choir, the All Virginia Senior Honor Choir, the All Virginia State Choir, and the Virginia Thesbian Festival's Allstate Musical Production of A Chorus Line. Mr. Dively was also selected as the music director for the
allstate music production. The Turner Ashby Chamber Choir has been invited to perform as part of the 2026 National Concert Chorus at Carnegie Hall. That's a big deal. Uh accompanying the Turner Ashby Chamber Choir is
Rockingham Supervisor of Fine Arts Becky Ford, Ashby High School Principal Chris Null, and school board member Sarah H. [Music]
to see. [Music] Open [Music] spaces above me. SC [Music] Space citiz. See, I'm
still Two feet 1 2 [Music] [Music] See, it want to see
what the world see. the change you want to see. Be the change you want to see. Change the change you want to see.
Change the change. Changing what you see. Changing what you see. Want to see my left?
[Music] Be the change. Be the change. You want to see the change to see the change. See, See, jump. Okay. Um, I would now like to introduce
uh Mr. Rob Gilstrap to talk about our principle principles of distinction. Good morning, uh, President Cesy, Superintendent Gelix, and members of the board. Uh this has been a long time coming and and what a tough group to follow of course. Uh but this is
something that we've been working on for two years and they're very excited to take the next step forward. Uh before I go too far into it, I want to make sure that I acknowledge some of our partners that are here with us to uh this morning. Uh uh Dr. Christa Barton Arnold
um VA esp um she's been very instrumental in this process and appreciate her presence here today. Uh Dr. Randy Bareric could not be here today but in hisstead we have Dr. David um Elena he's the director of government
relations for VASSP and a past president and also uh Amy Griffith Dr. Dr. Amy Griffith, deputy executive of VASS, and she also is very instrumental in this process. And I want to say thank you to all three of you uh for being here today. Um this is another way for us to
elevate educators. When we say elevate educators, a lot of times we're talking about teachers. Uh but this is elevating educators as administrators. So uh I'm going to read a little bit of it to you and then I'm going to read off the candidates. Uh this will be the first time. They don't know. They're all well I don't know if they all are but a lot
of them are probably listening and watching right now to see if they made it through the process and are candidates. So that'll be exciting for them and we will make that more public after this event. But this is the announcement. Uh in partnership with the Virginia Association of Secondary School Principles and the Virginia Association
of Elementary School Principles, VTOE announced a new program to recognize and celebrate the achievements of principles of distinctions, highlighting their contributions to education and inspiring others within the educational community. In Code of Virginia, uh the Virginia
Board of Education outlines pathways for a principal to be recognized as a principle of distinction. A building level administrator may seek the principle of distinction level two endorsement in administration and supervision prek through 12 after successfully serving as a building level
administrator for at least 5 years in a public school or an accredited non-public school and successfully completing a formal induction program as a principal or assistant principal. The statewide principles of distinction program is an opportunity for principles to garner recognition as a principle of
distinction while also gaining valuable experiences for professional growth. VDOE announced this opportunity and open the application period in December of 2024. Successful candidates will participate in a professional training symposium and complete a highquality
professional development capstone project at their school. This will be completed in November of 2025. Final applications must have had a letter of endorsement from the division superintendent. Principles must have at least 5 years of experience as a
building level principal and successful applicants displayed strong leadership in the areas of improved student achievement, effective instructional leadership, and developing a school environment that fosters the removal of nonacademic barriers. Priority was
placed on applicants that displayed a focus on student outcomes, not individual outcomes. Data and evidence, especially evidence that shows the impact on their school. The following are the 31 candidates selected to
complete the first class of the principles of distinction program. I'll be reading their names. I will omit doctor since almost every one of them are doctors and you will get tired of hearing me say doctor 31 times. Uh, first we have Megan Arthur from
Rowanoke City. We have Christopher Benson from Rowanoke County, Kristen Bolum from York County, Mary Boon from Rapahhanic County, Liza Berdell Aldana from Arlington Public Schools, Micah
Delo from Virginia Beach, Shawn D. Rose from Fairfax, Victoria Gilbert from Co Pepper, Maril Lee Grub from Or Orange County, Heidi Hagerty Wag uh Wagner from
Alexandria City, Stephanie Hos from Virginia Beach, Cynthia Jackson from Washington, Katie Johnson from Lowden County, Camber Koshaba from Fairfax, Michelle Lutrell from
Lowden, Mark Makovich from Virginia Beach, Daniel Myani from Virginia Beach, Drew Miller from Rockingham, Melinda Morgan from Montgomery County, Candace Merrick
Binham from Suffach Public Schools, Bridget Outlaw from Chesapeake, Angela Ramsey from Danville, Ryan Schubert from Virginia Beach, Michael Sidden Botham from
Stafford, Beverly Smith from Chesterfield, Kim Smith from Rowanoke County, Paul Theon Jr. from Lowden County, Amanda Amanda Vulkar from Chesterfield, John Wheeler from Hanover,
Brandon Wolf from Lowden, and Shane Wolf from Fairfax. The superintendent of public instruction recommends that the board recognize these principles as candidates of the principles of distinction program. Thank you, Mr. Gillstrap. And now, um,
it is the pleasure of the board to accept public comment on all matters related to public education in Virginia. Before we begin our public comment today, I want to share a few comments about the manner in which public comment will be conducted. I ask that you model professionalism, dignity, and respect
for others as you share your thoughts today. As adults, it's important for us to model respectful civil public discourse for our students and children who are either in attendance or potentially watching this live stream now or in the future. When you begin,
please provide your name, role, or affiliation and where you live in Virginia. All remarks will be directed to the chair, not to any other individual. Speakers will have three minutes to share their remarks. You'll notice the green timer on the screens.
We'll begin with three minutes at green. One minute the screen will turn yellow and the screen will turn red when time is up. At that point, please close your remarks promptly. Speakers may provide uh copies of their public comments to Mr. Joe Crook. Joe has his hand
raised. The department's regulatory and board coordinator. All written comments received during public comment will be collected and provided to the board as soon as possible after public comment is over. You may also email a copy of your remarks to the board at
be do oe.vergirginia spelledout.gov. Uh and the first person on our list is Scott Braybrand followed by Kathy Halverson. Well, I'm not Scott, but I'm Amy Griffin speaking on behalf of Scott.
So, good morning, President Cesy, Superintendent Gullixson, and members of the board of education. My name is Amy Griffin. I'm the deputy executive director of the Virginia Association of School Superintendent. I live in Nawway, Virginia. On behalf of VAS, I want to extend our sincere appreciate
appreciation to Superintendent Gullixson and her team for their active engagement at the VASS spring conference last month. We greatly valued the comprehensive updates provided on key initi key initiatives including the 3E readiness indicator, the principal pipeline and the proficiency standard
setting process. Most notably, we are especially thankful for the time dedicated to the superintendent listening session. The opportunity for open candid dialogue was incredibly valuable and we received overwhelmingly positive feedback from our superintendent regarding this experience. We look forward to continued
collaboration with the department on the 3E readiness indicator encourage efforts that promote clarity, flexibility and practical support for school divisions. We are also pleased with the strong response from Virginia educators who volunteered to participate in the particip the proficiency standard
setting process and we are hopeful for continued transparency and consistency as we this work moves forward. As always, VAS remains committed to supporting school divisions through these critical transitions and to partnering with the board and the department in advancing educational excellence across the Commonwealth.
Additionally, I'd like to take a moment to recognize and congratulate Dr. Peter Gretz, the superintendent in Fana County Public Schools. He was named the 2026 Virginia Superintendent of the Year. We are proud to celebrate his exemplary leadership and cont and contributions to
public education. Finally, we warmly welcome Dr. Acriman and look forward to the perspective and expertise you will bring to this work. Thank you for your leadership and ongoing engagement with school division uh divi uh leaders specifically superintendent across Virginia. Thank
you Kathy Halverson followed by Justin Hinsley. Is Justin Hinsley here? Okay. And Amy, I had you on here, but you spoke. Can Stringfield followed by Ant
Tatus. Can Stringfield. Okay. Ant Tatus. Is there a way to have a podium? We don't have My name is Ant Tatus and while I have
founded and run numerous nonprofits, I'm here today strictly as a mother. Um, I hear we hear about suicides in Amelia in Orange County, children dying of drug overdoses. We're looking at the
wrong answers and the we're looking at the wrong solutions. There is so much evidence out there. Anybody in the medical community knows that in order for something to have the potential to do good, it has the potential to do harm.
there is an iatrogenic effect going on an unintended consequence of a behavioral a medical treatment. So when you give universal medical mental health care by untrained not counselors not
psychologists teachers to all children what are you going to get in return a medical term that has long been known an iatrogenic effect. There's also something called the treatment prevalence paradox. The more we give,
the worse it gets. Never in medical history have we given more of anything. And the worse it gets. We keep layering it. Bullying not getting better. Let's do more bullying. Now they need mental health. Now they need restorative circles. Now they need trauma care for
children who aren't traumatized. We're looking at the wrong thing. And children are dying. As a mother, I hadn't to show you what this looks like. The my daughter in in Chesterfield County, this was put into
all eight middle schools in sixth grade. Okay. First, they taught her the names in an opioid module. Codin, fentinil, hydrocodone, morphine, oxycodone. 11 years old, great. Completely a it's really going to stop a problem. By the
way, DARE was proven to make the problem worse about 30 years ago. And then they the slides, methods for use, crushed up pills with dollar bills, foil, and how to smoke it. Once you know
the name, an 11-year-old has been desensitized to orange bottles. Then they sent her home with an assignment. Use Google search to find an image of a medication that can be found in your home. Once you have found it, search the
internet for an post it and send it back to the schools. All eight middle schools, 11 year olds. So, what I will tell you is that you're you're fixing a drug problem. If my child had died because the school gave her the
road map, then the assignment piqued her interest and she was dead and I never knew this happened. Who would be blamed? Me. Who would be at fault? All of you. Every administrator because you're not thinking and you're killing children.
Wendy Little followed by Alexander Halverson. Wendy Little. Alexander Hal Halverson. Ryan C. Tammy C. Dan
Zacharias, followed by Candace Lucas. Thank you, Madame President, and members of the board. I am Dan Zachas. I'm the director of the Old Dominion Association of Church Schools. And those of you who are veteran schools have heard me address the board in the past.
and I bring you an update on a topic that I've talked to you about u recently several times last year and that is a comparison of uh child safety data in different child care
settings in Virginia. And so uh comments I made last year were admittedly based on data that was a bit outdated and we have combed through the most recent data and basically found the conclusions to be the same as what I've said in the
past. Um I'll focus there are two sets of data. one regarding child abuse that occurs in child care settings and another that deals with serious excuse me serious physical injuries that occur in child care settings. The first set of data is uh
collected by the department of social services. the second set of data uh collected by the Department of Education and we looked at a three-year period recently from summer of 21 to the summer of
24 and compared licensed centers to religiously exempt child care centers. In those three fiscal years, according to uh social services data in licensed care uh settings, there
were 175 founded cases of child abuse that occurred in the same three-year period. In religiously exempt settings, there were only eight. Um, additionally, there was a
troubling trend in licensed daycare centers. The annual number doubled during those three years from 35 to 58 to 70. Um, now if you scale for enrollment
using the kindest uh interpretation that we can find, there's still a 4:1 disadvantage license to religiously exempt. In other words, a child in a religious exam setting is more than four times and it's probably more like five or six times less likely
to be a victim of child abuse in that child care setting. And so I don't know if the department of ed is noticing this data and maybe they are behind the scenes but they need to take note of it carefully. And um our point basically is
that increased state control of child care does not automatically translate to increased child safety. That is our point and we take exception to being characterized as unsafe by default. So thank you for taking the time to listen
to my comments. Thank you Candace Lucas followed by Kimberly Ogden. Good, good morning board members. My name is Dr. Candace Lucas. I am a licensed special educator administrator.
I also have a doctorate from Liberty University in educational law specializing in special education. Welcome, Emily. First time seeing you face to face. And welcome to the new board member. Uh I understand that you were at Rivermont. We have a child at Rivermont and Grace knows who that is.
His name is Carter Gun. He was trafficked to RI Rivermont from his grandmother's custody. He is suffering significant restraints and seclusions as a result of being placed in an improper location. I wanted to talk about once
again special education. I've been coming here for over a decade to address that issue and I want to talk about specifically as it pertains Oh, let me state this. I love the opening statement that you made, Grace, regarding the um way we're supposed to handle ourselves
in public comment. I would ask that you practice what you preach because your facial expressions and mannerisms are negatively reflecting on the board. So, thank you for that. And um I also want to talk about special education student trafficking. I have over 8,000 invoices
from the Sans Anderson Law Firm in which they are paid millions of dollars to traffic our children. Millions of dollars to traffic our children. And I'm going to set each of the invoices right here on the stage. The first invoice has
uh four four shareholders, Jason Balum, Patrick Adriano, and uh Matt Green. They build 50 $51,000 to engage in the activities of practicing unauthorized special education to stop Alex Halbertston from
going to private placement that was approved by his IEP. The second invoice I have has a bill of $12,7815651. It has two shareholders, Patrick Audriano, Matthew Green, and then it has
two associates and two parallegals on this. And they're not doing they're not performing the task of attorneys. They're performing the task uh that a licensed special educator should be performing, administrator should be performing. The next invoice I have is
really interesting because it actually has the president of Sans Anderson build on it. And all by the way, all of these monies are coming out of the code of uh the budget code 3120, school improvement. Can someone tell me how how attorneys fighting fate
is improving schools? And this is signed off. Each one of them is signed off. You will see with the code with the budget code and with Beth Tegan's signature, the superintendent. And then we have another one that's $5,66 to stop Brian C from participating
in a $1,500 program online program to get his high school diploma and he finished it in a year and we paid for him to do Thank you. Okay. These are all Excuse me. Don't Thank you. No, don't. Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Kimberly Ogden. Kimberly Ogden. Thank you. Good morning board. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak to you. My name is Kimberly Ogden. I'm the director of the Virginia Community College Career
Switcher Program and we are headquartered right here on the Reynolds campus. So, I thought it would be an appropriate time to come over and speak to you. Educate VA is in its 21st year of preparing teachers for Virginia's classrooms. And in that time, we have
turned out over 2,200 educators who have filled vacancies in Virginia's classrooms. Educate VA is designed to provide both pre-ervice and provisionally licensed teachers an accelerated pathway to meet all the state's requirements for a renewable license. For those of you who are
unfamiliar, the program consists of two phases. The first phase is what I refer to as the coursework semester and that is over 18 weeks our teachers complete the seven required uh courses for all educators in Virginia and then that is
followed on by level two when they're in the classroom and teaching. We continue professional development with them and then we also get into their classroom see them teach and give them feedback in real time. Our faculty includes veteran teachers, instructional coaches,
behavioral specialists, division instructional specialists, building administrators, and central office personnel. As a result of their demonstration of effective instructional practices and the in-depth feedback they provide to program participants, our candidates share that they feel prepared to enter the classroom and have a
positive impact on student achievement. As a com community college workforce program, EducateVA is the only career switcher program whose participants are eligible for the workforce credentials grant. This grant has been in place since 2016 and is written into the
Virginia state budget. It automatically reduces the tuition for Virginia residents to $1,330 for the coursework semester and $400 for the second phase known as level two. Obviously, the math $1,730 for a teacher to be fully
licensed. and when compared to other options is the most affordable in the state. Additionally, we had the program approved for G3 funding last year. So those who fall into certain income brackets can participate for free. Since
2021, we have prepared 307 candidates, meaning that they have completed level one and all the necessary coursework for license. In that same time frame, we have supported 323 firstear teachers across the Commonwealth. And of those 323 teachers, only 13 did not return to
the classroom. Three of which got a reciprocal license in another state. Due to demand, we developed and had approved a lensure pathway for provisionally licensed technical professional teachers, which after a small pilot in Rono City, launched statewide this spring, and we are delivering that to
teachers in nine different divisions. And finally, we are truly looking forward to offering a special education pathway, which Mr. Gilstrap and Dr. Jackson at the VDOE have helped us navigate those final steps and we look forward to having that opportunity.
Thank you for your time. Thank you. Is there anyone else in the audience who is not listed on the signup sheet that would like to speak? You can step behind the microphone, please. Who is the person Good morning. My name is Wendy Little. I am from Chesterfield County. My son
Aaron Little from Chesterfield County has had no access to education or remedy for three entire school years. In your packets are a warning that was received January 17th, 2023 that you would lose your funding if you did not comply with special education
regulations. I hope nobody committed wire fraud sending in an application for 25 to 26 for this year because this is problematic. Um Aaron made a poem for all of you. For
all of the people who have come for years and years and years with significant violations of special education law and rights for years to be ignored is unconscionable. Um I I sent you and there was a copy of the eighth Gster
letter that I have provided under schoolboard commentary. I'm sorry. Virginia Board of Education. Are y'all even getting those? Because I really wonder, are y'all really getting the public comment at all? You know, when people
are handing you, you know, I I when a state complaint about one year of no education, it's Chesterfield Appeals, they lose. What do they do? They sue Aaron, they sue me, they sue you. I want a state complaint about college and career readiness. Chesterfield appealed, they lost. What
did they do? They sued us twice, including VDOE. We're supposed to be on the same side of this fence. They've been keeping us in court forever. And VOE even claims we don't have to do anything because we're in
litigation. The you don't. The hell you don't. So, please refrain from using that type of language. And well, it is my first amendment right and I'm a little upset that nobody has done anything about my son not having education for three
years. is my first amendment right and I have the attorney general's um things on that. So basically what you have become some of you probably do know and some of you may not what you have essentially become over the last six years is a a a
vessel for a significant amount of corruption who are primarily created and designed by Adam Chesterfield, I hope that some of you
received your color of law notifications. This is heinous. This is not This is supposed to be this the board of education, not the board of zero education. It's not every student succeeds. It's almost no students
succeed. Wendy Little, thank you. Is there anyone else who would like to provide public comment that was not signed up? You can go behind the microphone, please. Good morning, folks. How are you doing today? Uh, my name's Todd Skerer and I'm
here just to basically try to get somebody's attention about educating young children. I have a daughter who currently is in school, forced by a judge to go to
school against medical directive. I'm being su I'm being sued for standing up for my daughter's education rights and I don't know how I'm going to deal with that. They're looking for like $200,000 from a family that has no
money. My daughter's in the sixth grade after obtaining A's and B's last year. They retained her. She's doing the sixth grade again. All her friends went forward. Her sister went forward. Nobody seems to
care. She has a mental disability. She has dyslexia. She has ADHD. ADHD, sorry. And I don't understand why nobody's doing anything about
it. I've asked for help from the VDOE. I've filed due process complaints. The reason I'm being sued is for filing due process complaints that you folks review. And they say that they're
frivolous at the hands of the school's lawyers. Yet your department never said that. So why am I being held accountable for something that's false?
At least based upon your own arguments. I know you're not going to respond because you're not supposed to. I want to be very polite to you, but people aren't being polite to my daughter or to me. My daughter has been
victimized. She's been penalized. It's quite a travesty. She actually was on the front page of the Richmond's Time Dispatch last year asking why was her education being taken away. All of this right after her mother died as well. Being locked in a locker
at school, being called a by administrators that are supposed to be standing up for her. She misses time from school last uh two weeks ago and she was supposed to be taking so I wrote
a letter to her case manager and a full week later she still hadn't taken the so. I just don't understand. And I think you should change this. I also think that every child nationwide,
but specifically here before the grade they're over with the third grade needs to be tested for dyslexia. It will change the face of how you spend money to try to rectify this your time. Thank you, sir. Is there anyone else who would
like to speak during public comment today? Okay. With that, we'll close public comment and we will um move to the consent agenda. There's is there a motion to wave first review and approve the items on the consent agenda?
So moved. Second. Okay. Miss Kilgore. Hi. Dr. Northern. Dr. Aki. Hi. Miss Mcfierce, Mr. Rotherham. Hi, Miss Holton. I chair votes I.
Okay. Um, we are going to item C, first review of seat time flexibility action kit and notice form. Um, just so that everyone's aware, yesterday we did skip this presentation and put it to today's agenda. Miss McDaniel was supposed to
provide us with the report yesterday and she will do that today in addition to um the other item she has for us. She can't hear. Okay, let's see what the next item
is and then we can Is Mr. Chapman around and he can jump to his? No. Yeah, we're going to pause here for one second while we mind. Good morning, Madame President Cesy,
members of the board, and superintendent Gullixson. My name is Sophia McDaniel, and I'm pleased to pron pleased to present an update on sea time flexibility. Today, this board will be reviewing the seat flex action kit, notice form, and monitoring template for final review. As
you know, the board has had three HB1477 seat time flexibility presentations prior to this board meeting. The first overview presentation occurred during the July 24th, 2024 work session. And the second HB1477 seat time flexibility
presentation that reviewed terminology and the first version of the seat time flex notice form occurred on December 2nd, 2024. During the December 2nd through 3rd, 2024 meetings, the board provided next steps and feedback to
VDOE. On February 26th, 2025, the board reviewed national models and Virginia guidelines during the work session. On February 27th, 2025, the board reviewed the seat flexibility action kit and notice form on first review.
Since that February review, staff has made intentional revisions to the action kit, notice form, and monitoring templates to align it more closely to the original intent of the legislation, address feedback from the board, address feedback from the field,
and to address feedback from VDOE subject matter experts. In this feedback, VDOE staff heard that the action kit and notice form was far too prescriptive and did not allow the maximum flexibility granted by the legislation. Therefore, I want to begin
with the legislation to set the stage. I pulled out the opening language to highlight HB1 1477 requires that the board of education to provide local school boards with maximum flexibility to wave existing instructional clock
hour requirements by developing guidance and alternative instructional time models in accordance with the board's regulations and guidelines relating to instructional time waiverss. I draw your attention to this point because I want to emphasize the need for maximum flexibility as this will guide the rest
of our discussion and revisions pursuant to feedback from the field. Previously, this board was presented with four proposed flexibility models. Forgive me. I went backwards. Previously, this board was presented
with four flexibility models. As a refresher, these four are model one, alternative hours. These introduce flexibility for when students are learning. This can include options outside of the traditional school day, for example, weekends before or after
conventional hours, and year-round learning schedules. Model two is course innovations. These create flexibility in the amount of time students have to demonstrate mastery. For example, accelerated coursework or additional hours were needed. Accelerated mastery can create time needed for other subject
areas or for hands-on projects or work-based learning time. Model three, flexible learning settings. These provide options for where students learn and earn credits. For example, work-based learning, apprenticeships, externships, and remote learning.
Museums, parks, college campuses all provide motivational context for learning. And lastly, model four, which is blended courses. These provide options for combinations of subjects where students can learn in courses that blend two or more related subjects to reinforce and deepen student
understanding across multiple disciplines as well as allowing standards to be learned and demonstrated through project-based learning. This can also facilitate earning early college credits. So, we've kept these four models and fleshed out additional considerations
for divisions to consider in the action kit, notice form, and monitoring templates. Additionally, pursuant to feedback from the field, VDOE staff are recommending a fifth model, model 5, emerging local practices. Model 5 recognizes innovative instructional
approaches that fall outside of the other four categories or that blend components of more than one model, as each of these four really focus on a single strategy. Further, the point is to allow local innovation, not define innovation for communities. Many innovations are rooted
in local contexts and evolving educational priorities. These practices may be in the early stages of implementation or work as an add-on to an already existing choice model. Model 5 is created to act as a catch-all model to drive and allow innovation under a
broader set of circumstances as the laws language requires. Additional revisions to the action kit and notice form include refined implementation steps to ensure parent and educator feedback prior to submission of the notice form. Guidance surrounding model 5 designed to
be a catch-all to drive innovation. Additionally, staff elaborated that sea time flex is not merely for remediation, but is also for driving student engagement and personalization. Staff also incorporated references to career awareness opportunities and how these tie into
seat time flexibility. Staff also provided more clarity surrounding division planning for seat time. and staff added additional evaluation tools for divisions to consider specifically in the form of monitoring templates so divisions can ensure transparency and
accountability with their innovative models. Monitoring ensures that students are thriving and educators are engaged and feel supported. As discussed, VDOE staff made these revisions pursuant to feedback from the board, the field, including the state superintendent
principles rapid response team, and feedback from various offices across the VOE to ensure the action kit, notice form, and monitoring templates are aligned to agency best practices. Part of this iterative feedback collection process included asking the field very simply, hey, how can we best
support your division as we roll out seat time flexibility implementation? VDOE staff took these suggestions for wraparound support and have compiled the following next steps. One, staff will continue expanding the resource library of
innovations from across the Commonwealth and nation for divisions to use and update the web page. Two, staff will launch seat time flex office hours to provide technical support to divisions. Three, staff will launch monthly lunch and learn sessions to provide divisions
with technical support regarding specific topics relating to seat time flexibility and provide a calendar of events on the same upon board approval of the action kit notice form and monitoring templates. And four, lastly, staff will develop revisions pre
pursuant to early adopter submissions and iterative feedback from VDOE in the field. These efforts will keep all stakeholders engaged as the implementation process progresses. The department is wholly committed to creating a parallel track to support and
uplift divisions while they plan, implement, and monitor this work to drive innovation and move the needle for all students. As a reminder, today this board will be reviewing the C Time Flex action kit notice form and monitoring template for fi final review. VDOE staff
recommends that this board approved the action kit, notice form, and monitoring template on final review. This opportunity expands the ability for local divisions to optimize the valuable resource of time to create the personalized and hands-on learning environments needed to meet the students
individual learning needs and interests. Implementation of HB1 1477 will enable local school boards to implement learner centric models that allow for greater personalization in multiple ways to apply learning and demonstrate understanding. Thank you.
Okay. Are there any questions for Miss McDaniel? Sultan. Not a question, just a comment. Uh thank you Sophia for this uh excellent work and also particularly for the extensive public engagement you all have done on this very impressive. Thank
you. Okay, since this is final review, is there a motion to approve the seat time flexibility guidelines including the action kit and notice form? Second. Any discussion here? Miss Kilgore. Dr. Northern I. Dr. Arian,
I. Miss McFersonson, Mr. Rotherham, Miss Holton, and chair votes I. Thank you, Mr. McDaniel. Thank you. Okay. item uh instead of moving to item D,
um Miss Conway has some uh engagements this afternoon and has asked if we could move M and N up to right now and so if she here she is appears from behind the curtain. Okay. So, we will move quickly
to item N. And these two items are first review just to bring everyone's attention to that. Excellent. Good morning, President Cesy, Superintendent Glicken, and members of the board. I'm Jenna Conway, our chief of early learning and specialized populations,
and very pleased to be here this morning. I'm joined uh with by Chris Meyers who is our director of VQB5 and very pleased to to to present to you an update on where we are on our early childhood unified measurement and improvement system as well as what is in
front of you for first review which is the proposed 2526 guidelines. You also be pleased that my voice is the best that it's been all week. So um I've been saving the saving the best for last. Um, uh, as you'll always see in our presentations, our
world in early childhood, birth to five, uh, we are laser focused on making sure that every child in the Commonwealth has the opportunity to enter school ready. It looks slightly different in birth to five than it does in K12 or higher education. We take pride in the fact
that our families are able to choose across a public private system that includes, like Mr. Zachariah spoke to earlier, faith-based programs, child care, family child care, Head Start, and school-based programs. We support thousands of programs and sites across
the state. We measure everyone, as I'll talk about in a second, but also support them to improve. We measure everyone who takes public dollars and support them to improve. And really, this board speaks with one voice on health, safety, and learning and supports that array of public private programs to meet those
expectations. What this means is that kids have the chance to come into school ready, which is a predictor of future success, whether that's academic success or if you ever speak to a kindergarten teacher, uh, classroom success, right? They can often tell within the first
couple days who are the children that have had the opportunity to benefit from quality early childhood and who may not have. And our kindergarten readiness data results show that. Um, we So, let me orient folks. I know some people are very familiar with BQB5, some folks are less familiar.
Since 2020, the Virginia has had a law that unified oversight of the publicly funded early childhood care and education system under this body, the board of education, created an early childhood advisory committee that's broadly representative of this public private sector, uh, and moved oversight
of all of the programs that take public dollars to the Department of Education. As part of that, it also required a mandatory measurement system. This looks very different than what is presented yesterday in terms of the performance framework because it's never appropriate
to standardize test little kids, right? Just imagine a little six-month-old crawling or 10-month old crawling across the stage and trying to, you know, test them on something. Development is much more fluid at that age. But we also know that it's the period of most rapid brain development. So what the law called for
is a measurement system for every site that takes public dollars. And for many sites, that's a choice in the private sector that it is indicative of child outcomes um and that supports school readiness. In response to that law, the department has worked very closely with the Virginia Early Childhood Foundation,
the Department of Social Services, the Ready Regions, and 3,000 providers across the state to figure out a fair way to measure uh readiness across all of these different settings that supports everyone to improve and will,
if you improve what's happening in those classrooms, you can reasonably predict that kids are going to come to school more ready. That's how we got to VQB5. Fast forward six years and VQB5 measures and supports two very important indicators across these infant, toddler
and prechool classrooms. Mind you, I call them classrooms even if they're in family childare, childcare, right? We see all you have to sort of look out imagine the system is that right now it's about 3,400 sites, right? which can range from a a home to a church to a school to a community- based child care
setting. Across those and roughly about 12,000 classrooms across those 3,000 sites in those 12,000 classrooms, we use a national tool, the classroom assessment scoring system to measure between two and three times a year the interactions happening in every classroom. This is not We talked a
little bit yesterday about walkthroughs. This is not a walkthrough. This is 60 to 80 minutes. It's either three 20 minute cycles or four 20-minut cycles in which there's a prof a trained observer who's had to pass a test who then sort of
evaluates the interactions between all the educators and the children. So very intensive, generally takes between two to two and a half hours to do these. We do every classroom, every infant, toddler, and preschool classroom twice a year. And then we send in a third party
to audit those results for accuracy. Um, and that's sort of the the the vast majority of our system. We also know that supporting our educators, including our educators in family childare and childare to use curriculum, if it's highquality instructional materials, can also help promote children's learning.
And so, we provide some points if a site chooses to use curriculum. And I'll talk more about that in a moment, but those are the two ingredients that we believe will help improve what kids are experiencing across 12,000 classrooms, 3,000 sites. by measuring that precisely
each year, providing that information to families um and um and then supporting improvement across the system. So, as you may remember, those of you who were here back in the fall, I talked a little bit about the launch of the VQB5 quality
profile website. This site launched in October, 3,121 sites listed across the state. Since then, we've had over 81,000 views uh including members of this administration who have used it to find child care for their children in the
greater Richmond area. But you can learn more about VQB5. You can type in your zip code or your community or your program's name and it provides information about VQB5 about your site. You know, it also links to that health and safety information that we have for licensing. So truly in one place, it's
health, safety, and quality for all of the programs that take public dollars. So with that, here's where we are. We uh wrapping up uh this year. Um this is our our second year, 2425, uh
100% of our publicly funded uh programs in Virginia are participating. Last year, the final number was 3,121. We're up to 3,400 this year. So even though it is an accountability system, even though there are things that are asked of our private providers,
we are seeing more growth than ever before in the number of parents who are pursuing these services and we're seeing more private programs than ever before willing to participate in this system. Uh this year just under 16,000 educators
are receiving financial support through recognized five. And this is very important. And I'll talk about uh in a minute why 90% of our classrooms have begun to also indicate which children are in which classrooms. They seek they get parent consent um before doing that.
But that basically allows us as a system as I'll talk about in a moment to understand which kids are in which classrooms, how those experiences are shaping their growth and then how we can tie those experiences to their kindergarten readiness, their third grade reading and math and beyond.
That's really important. Most of this sector, we base judgment on the name of the building or the type of building or the program type or the funding source. But what really matters, the classroom is truly the greatest point of variability. And by being able to understand which kids are in which
classroom and what experiences they're getting, that's how we sort of truly change the game for early childhood. 99.8% of our 12,000 plus classrooms completed their fall observations and they're on track. The spring deadline is May 31st. May 31st. Um so lots of
observations happening as we speak across the Commonwealth. Um and 81 sites percent of sites overall reported using an approved quality curriculum. So huge increases particularly in childare and family child care. U the all of the observations uh that will come in
probably over 31,000 this year will continue to support improvement if you talk to an educator. Um, while mathematically a sample system can give you a sense of what's happening at a site, it does me no good if they observe Miss McFersonson and give her feedback,
but I don't know what's happening in my classroom. Or conversely, as we've heard before, licensing goes in all the classrooms. So, you get health and safety feedback, but you don't actually get feedback on the quality of what you're doing as an educator. So, we make sure that every educator, every classroom gets feedback twice a year.
We've got more than 70 resources approved from birth to five. Um, and we're using kind of across the board, whether it's working with higher ed, our folks who provide co uh coaching, technical assistance, that it's all focused on interactions and on curriculum. And as I spoke with you in
the fall, we have 51 sites that need support. Those are the sites we're most concerned about. Um, and we have created improvement plans. We've hired consultants who work with each of those and on a monthly basis are out there working to get raise the the bore. I hope to be able to come in front of this
body one day and say that we have no sightes in that criteria, right? So that no matter where you go, if you rely on a public dollar uh to support your early childhood care and education, you can choose quality in Virginia. And this gives you a sense of the map. We are now
in every city and county, 300 more sites participating this year than last year. And you'll see the blue are childcare centers, orange is family day home, and red is public schools. Our Head Start programs are either located in homes in uh childcare centers or in schools. So
those are those are okay. So what's in front of you today are proposed updates. As we've said to the field and we've been engaging stakeholders for the greater part of the last three months on this. We start as you always know we start in the fall with a deep dive. We go deep into the data from the prior
year. We do surveys in which we ask educators and leaders uh to let us know what's working and what's not. And then we kind of take that information and begin to say what needs to to shift or to evolve. This is truly an evolution. So this has been multiple years in the working. One of the things that's
important if you're trying to change practice across thousands, right, 20 to to 30,000 educators, changing the rules of the game frequently does not work, right? So this is truly an evolution and we are keeping the majority of the guidelines that are in front of you today are the same guidelines that were
there last year. But they're there are four key shifts. So, the first of which is I'm going to tell you a little bit about Virginia Connects, which is our new integrated data system to connect early childhood to early elementary so that we can truly make sure that we're able to sort of influence outcomes, not
only influence practices, but ensure that that those change in practices results in better child outcomes. We're going to shift and slightly increase the requirement uh for use of curriculum to really encourage folks to choose to use the curriculum in every classroom. We're
going to launch an honor role to figure out how to elevate some of the good work happening uh across our programs in addition to our our rankings and um we want to just make sure everybody we're transparent about the fact that there's no more funding for recognized B5 and we'll talk about kind of where we are
and how we're shifting to a model that's focused on getting the right rates for programs so that they are in turn able to competitively compensate um their educators. So VA connects is basically taking if you were to combine what you
heard yesterday from Dr. Salari uh what you have heard before from Drs. Willilifford and Whitaker it's connecting on the back end all of our work in early childhood and early elementary. So it's taking and sort of modernizing the technology system allowing us to make it sort of one uh
one-stop entry if you happen to be using vowels NBKRP and link B5. So if you're a pre-K teacher in the schools for instance um and it's allowing us to sort of make sure that we're able to sort of track the kids through the system with all due precaution and protecting
privacy so that we can better understand um how these experiences uh influence further outcomes. So for many of our users it will just look like a different frontend um and a different login but it is much more secure it is much more
mobile friendly. So the example we give for folks in our family child care homes, they don't put down the baby and the two-year-old that are top. They often do it on their phone. So they're like, "Here, you know, uh, Sam Jones is in my class, this and that." So making it mobile friendly
means that all those family childcare providers are it's easy for them to enter the information. It also makes sure that we're in compliance with all federal and state law on privacy and outcomes based measurement. Um and ultimately as I described before uh what
this means is that we can connect all of this information. Some of you have seen the slide before that really shows how predictive uh even those PAL scores. So not even the more sophisticated vowels but the PAL scores were of third grade
reading. This is opening up a whole new sort of set of information because we're able to track kids in classrooms and how those experiences promote learning. And we're also able to do this by getting those kids in those classroom lists as you'll see the thousands. So um 300,000
315,000 kids in VL 130,000 children in BKRP that's kindergarteners, three-year-olds and foury olds and then roughly 140,000 kids uh and link B5. We're able to do this and then match those kids. So once they get to kindergarten and the vast majority of our publicly funded kids will end up in
our public schools, we're then able to assign that state testing identifier and track them all the way through uh college and post uh secondary. So really exciting work that has been in the work in in uh in the works for over three years and that launches this fall.
Um, and this is particularly just important and I talked about this a little bit just to understand when we talk about connecting the system. This is not just pre-K in the schools, right? We're like, "Oh, that's great." Like, it's helpful to understand this is literally faith-based programs, Head Start, public schools, and family child
care. Okay, that's number change number one, VA Connects. Change number two is we currently give you 100 points. It's 100 out of 800 points if you're using curriculum in only one classroom. The reason that we do that is because when we looked at the world four years ago
when we first came to you, about 99% of Head Starts and school programs were using curriculum already. And that dropped down to 55% of publicly funded childare and 45% of um of family childare. And we knew that if we just threw out an arbit, you know, a sort of
immediate requirement in every classroom that that would probably have a financial cost and would not necessarily lead itself to a thoughtful implementation of curriculum which as you heard yesterday is really really important. And so, uh, what we're proposing now is that we do increase
that requirement. So, in order to get the 100 points, um, that you need to be using, uh, curriculum in all of your classrooms, not just one of your classrooms. As you see, this will only affect about 5% of sites. So, most places as they've begun to implement curriculum. We've made sure we reviewed
lots and lots of curriculum. You've heard me talk before about Stream and 3, which is our uh state supported resource. It's always a choice, but this is an open educational resource that's free and available and of high quality produced by our partners at UVA. So, there's a free option out there, so you
don't have to shell out thousands of dollars. Um, but we still have been working and we've also trained all of our support partners to support that implementation. But we still have about uh 5% of sites um that are uh uh not using uh curriculum and you'll see that
some some of them because 76% of our sites are using curriculum in all classrooms, 19% are choosing not to use anything. So we're really talking about just that 5% that are using it in only one classroom. We're giving them two years. So, this is not going to effect this fall, but is really the following fall with the idea being we're bringing
it to you now so we can spend a lot of time socializing this. If you think back to my dear friend on her, you know, phone trying to manage three kids in her home, it takes us longer to get that information out there, it takes us longer to work with her to help her understand what curriculum options are
available to her, including free ones. And so we're asking you to approve this now with a two-year window so that there's sufficient time um to get to get in front of everybody and so that if people continue to want to not use curriculum and you can meet expectations and not use curriculum um but if you do
want to use curriculum and get those full points, we want to make sure that you know all of the resources available to you. Uh number three is we're going to add some enhancements to the website that will go out this fall, including um publishing honor roles. And so the state law calls on looking at incentives and
supports for programs. And so one of the things that we'll do is we'll look at folks that do really good work. We think, you know, like as an example, looking at particular subgroups, we know there's tremendous demand for infant and toddler. All of our results right now are average for the site. So there's not necessarily a way to highlight a
particular site that's really, really good at infant and toddler interactions. We also know right now that um although you can calculate your growth as you look at the difference in your three-digit score that there's not a way to kind of honor for example those sites that do uh make the most improvement. So
in addition to the three ratings we will also are proposing that we launch um these honor roles and these different ways of recognizing improvement um and excellence within within the system. they uh no at this point in time no no financial uh incentives attached to that
but we will provide certificates and elevate them on the website and then last but not least we just want to make sure that this board is aware of as we have a final state budget some shifts to recognize B5 and we've been engaging the field going back
to sending letters last summer just in terms of uh what the uh FY26 budget does and does not contain but as you might recollect uh out of a challenge of figuring out how do we keep teachers in classrooms particularly in childcare classrooms. We launched recognized B5.
We found that a small financial incentive had no effect on teachers in public schools probably because they make a significantly higher wage. It had a tremendous effect on teachers in childare and so we expanded the program. Um, and since 2019, more than hundred more than $15 million has gone directly
to educators, fall and spring or really winter and and summer to support retention in classrooms. Um, we started with 2,000 educators in 2019 2020 and we will reach almost 16,000 this year. Um, we saw the effect of this. I think some
folks say, well, there's still turnover in childare. We still hear about the workforce. You have to understand like the pandemic was catastrophic to the sector and so really recognized B5 was this really important lifeline during that period of time. Direct to teacher
incentives and investment in teachers from our surveys and our other analysis. Folks said they stayed longer. Uh teachers said it made it easier to hire and so there was an impact. Unfortunately, um, at some, you know, at some point, um, it's it's not sustainable to continue to invest in
direct to teacher incentives. And so, the state's priority is shifting to how do we get the rates right? So, you fund each child at a rate that accounts for competitive compensation in order to position your public private sector to pay teachers who are doing well uh to
support kids and support improvement. Um, and as you may have known and was even covered today on Virginia Public Media, we still have thousands of children on the wait list. And so these are very difficult tradeoffs that we face in the early childhood uh world. But we have, as of today, 8,000 birth to
five children sitting on childare wait child care subsidy weight list across the state. And so again, no action needed per se on this. This was a a general assembly and an and uh government sort of decision, but we wanted to make sure that we are fully transparent in our guidelines and didn't
want to surprise any of you with this. With that, let me pause and see if there's any questions for me or for Chris. Are there any questions on this, Miss Holton? Thank you, uh, Jenna, for this presentation and for this really, uh,
remarkable work over over years. Now you and your team of implementing such a high quality quality rating system um uh the uh a couple of questions. One is about
um access. So your your your dual mandate all along has been improving quality access and you mentioned just at the end of your presentation that we still have thousands on weight lists but I don't see where are we how have we
progressed on the number of children served. Yes, usually you have that chart tonight. You can't see it today. I know I'm trying to be more succinct uh Miss Holton, but you know I could talk for hours and hours about this topic. So yes, so this will be that's a great and
this is not a plug. I did not call him a sultan and ask for this question in advance, but this is the state's single largest ever state general investment in early childhood of I believe it is $462 million. When I came to Virginia in
2018, it was $75 million. So a historic investment. I have goosebumps even saying it out loud. in our kids. And thanks to the incredible work of my team in partnership with VCF and the Ready Regions and the Department of Social
Services and our 120 local social services office, every single dollar that was dedicated towards slots and early childhood for FY25 is going into slots. I mean, it is just remarkable. And we are going to come in by the skin of our teeth on June 30th in terms of
those dollars. But we maximized the school division's VPI and then we took the other money and created another thousand child care slots and we made more VCF and our ready regions made the mixed delivery dollars go further and got us up to over 2600 kids instead of
2500 kids. And so um right now I believe uh we are slated to serve 48,000 children on childcare subsidy. uh up from 20,000 pre- pandemic and from our pandemic low of about 12,000 we are slated to serve 2600 children 2630 to be
precise on mixed delivery and just under 25,000 on VPI including four year olds three year olds and kids in community provider settings. So it is truly a historic year. It's a it's it's a balancing act and I work closely with the superintendent on this because on
the one hand we are ecstatic about this investment and seeing all these dollars. We can tell you as I showed you before where every last dollar goes and what you get for it and we can share the information with families. On the flip side, um it's the weight list is really hard, right? And we hear from our
private providers who say like I can't make payroll with a weight list slot and you know some of those families have been on the wait list for almost a year now. And so we are going to put in some policy shifts with this new budget. We're going to make the dollars go further. There's some additional dollars in that pot. Uh our partners at VCF are
looking at additional innovation. So we're trying to figure out how to spread those dollars as far as possible, but the work of the new early childhood care uh and education commission this summer. We'll be continuing to grapple with this only a hypothesis, but I think getting
our key fundamentals right in terms of our rates and sort of supporting public private parent choice, knowing that we have more kids than ever before under the age of six with all available parents in the workforce, our you know how well our economy is doing. And then just BQB5 just knowing that there are
these options and that that all can be quality right across the the variety of choices we think is just driving this historic parent demand. If I may, Miss Halton, a couple of more questions. Thank you. That was 48,000 is the the number we hit
this year. Yes. For subsidy alone, that doesn't include the 25,000. Yeah. And the other I'm sorry. The 48,000 doesn't include what? BPI or or mixed delivery. So really, yes, it's What's the total figure this year? Let me get that for you because it's also got special education and head start in that in terms of all the publicly funded kids, but I believe it's close to 90,000. And
how does that compare to where we were? I that I only know the investment is my talking point, but I will get the number for you for I guess the question is are we do we are we moving up? Are we still Yes. Yes. Yes. That 90,000 close to 90,000 is showing continued improvement.
Excellent. And the the one exception to that is um with Head Start because Head Start has had some unique flexibility in over the last uh since the pandemic. So, not just recently, but over the last few years around uh being able to adjust
their rates so they might take a slightly lower enrollment, particularly if there's not the same parental demand, so that they can get a a a more right-sized amount per child. So, the Head Start numbers statewide have have gone down. Um, but that that reflects oftentimes what's called full enrollment and trying to make sure that they're
actually getting the right amount per kid. We've actually heard because we've moved to a place where we calculate the cost of licensing, the cost of quality, we benchmark and VPI, so we say here's what it should cost to serve and we fund you to meet those expectations. It doesn't work that way exactly in Head Start. So, there's been some adjustment
there. Uh, and then then, uh, I'm I'm distressed to hear, you know, about the recognized B5 not being funded because I just think that that was such an innovative program and it had such an impact and I hear you that it's it's a historic investment. So, I know the the
legislature and the administration were, I'm sure, wrestling with where to put the dollars, but I I'm worried about what the impact of that will be. And so my question to you is ha have you evaluated do you and maybe this goes to what you just said about how you're setting rates but have
the are the rates going up sufficiently to cover uh that salary increment. I mean, if one thing we found in research has found in when teacher bonuses uh in the K12
world, you know, have been used as a device to address retention issues, but sometimes they've been short-term bonuses. And it's no surprise that the research shows if you have a bonus for three years um and then the bonus ends, the teachers leave. Yeah. Especially
once you've gotten it's especially difficult once you've gotten accustomed to I mean a $1,000 bonus for a early childhood teacher that's real money. And so that now goes away for these actual
teachers in actual classrooms 16,000 of them unless the um u their employers are able to pick it up. Uh and that would only be possible if the rates have gone up sufficiently. Yeah, your analysis of are those teachers going to get the that
bonus money continued from their local decision makers on the whole or or are we going to be go back to the days of having turnover issues? Yeah. So, this is this is this again speaks to the the the the the multiple trade-offs that we're we're grappling with. So, we have
a long-standing re policy partnership with UVA in which we look at these things. So they're the ones that first did that RCT back in 2019 and found the impact and they've continued to do surveys and additional analysis. They also were the ones that found that because our rates were so low prior to
the recent shift that on average across four to 5,000 sites that uh programs that took public dollars were paying teachers $2 less per hour, right? And had twice as much turnover and and twice as many vacancies. And so we know that there's a connection there. Uh the general assembly mandated us to put in place cost of quality. We're one of only
three states in the country that is using that best-in-class model. And as of two years ago, you know, the rates were truly the cost of quality, 100% of the cost of quality for family childare and very close to the top for child care. As you've seen, if you've opened
the paper, read the headlines, like we've been able to get teacher K12 teacher salaries up. And so, even though we were in a really good place two years ago, there's a little bit more of a gap now. And so, we're going to continue to analyze that closely. This is the exact thing. in this multiple types of this
analysis. Miss Holton is what we'll take to the commission that will be charged with looking at this financing. So we are now thanks to the general assembly required to do a report where we calculate the cost of quality and put that out there. We explain the gap. We look at the weight list. Um it's just the system is getting pulled on all
facets right now just because there's so much demand. Um we also know that we continue to partner with employers uh with BCF and the business roundt because they also are seeing the benefits in terms of historic workforce participation. So um we will will
grapple with that issue over the course of the summer. We think the higher rates have helped with compensation. Um the question is you know once recognized go boot goes away like do we need to kind of come back to the general assembly in 26 and push again for an adjustment
those rates to get closer to the cost of quality so that they can be compensated competitively. My hope had been my hope had been that we would get uh enhanced minimum wage in place uh before these bonuses went away and sadly we're we're not there yet but
maybe that's part of the future. Thank you for your great work. You're welcome. Thank you Miss Holden. Dr. Northern, thank you. Um I'm particularly excited about the um linking up of the databases. Um that's super exciting. Um I guess my one
question is just around curriculum. Y um I know I I was just doing some quick looking here. Um we have four free curriculum. We have 70 plus approved I think I read. Um and stream and three I know is getting evaluated by UVA which
I'm super excited about. But can you talk to us a little bit about um the the variation in curriculum? I mean do you feel like the bulk of providers are using stream and three or are they equally sort of distributed between the four free ones or is it just all over
the map? Um so it is a I think the right science it's a long tale. So there's basically I believe the top three are stream, creative, and frog, right? Yes. So there's there's three that are probably it's like an 8020 rule. Three that are probably 20 80% of the system.
And that would be uh stream and three um uh creative curriculum and frog street. It this is public information. Anybody can go and you can get a full Excel download of all of the choices. So just if anybody's watching out there and wants to know more, we agreed from the beginning and what we said to providers
was whatever you're using now, if you really like it, we will review that. So you do have like a very long tale of ones like so some of which were created by school divisions who had made investments in early childhood. Uh there's one or two faith-based. So there's a couple there's a there is a
very long tale of which ones that people that really represent places where people wanted to stay with that curriculum. Um we are contemplating and looking right now at sort of you know we're part of the national conversation I went and spoke uh at the was engaged at the national academy of science is
doing a lot of work on early childhood curriculum right now and really grappling with you know should we tar it additionally and provide sort of more differentiated input across those 70 my guess is with that large number that not all are equally predictive of improving
child outcomes and so thinking about kind of that the other one is that there was a rubric, you had to be comprehensive, you had to um align with our early learning development standards as the kind of the core process and every one of those resources has gone through that. There's also more of an
interest in uh what they call domain specific resources right now. Um it is hard to imagine introducing a math and a literacy and a social studies and an arts and like five different domain specific curriculums like family child care. So, uh, we're now at that point,
too, where we're evaluating sort of similar to what you have with like the supplemental, um, in with BLA. Might might we also consider reviewing some supplements that are more geared towards literacy and math in particular? So, we're probably at a point, Dr. Northern, where we're sort of exploring some further tiering of that list, but the
first goal is just to get more people using something rather than using nothing. Superintendent G. Okay. Quick question, Miss McFar give me an idea of what reasoning is provided for nonuse of curriculum
most often given you know I'll answer that and then I'll ask I'll ask Chris I would say that it ranges um you know all of our need support sites are not using curriculum right they were not yes they were not so I think there ranges from folks places where there's some real
challenges with wherewithal in terms of managing just the day-to-day of keeping kids healthy and safe and the idea of intentional learning. You've heard me talk about we never see the sector as babysitting but there are partners out there who are you know as they're struggling a little bit to think about
the primary objective being learning right and sort of they're mostly you know triaging every day is triage miss I think it ranges from there all the way to some of our higher quality sites who whether it's deeply held belief or um uh
other reason who want to make it up or have their educators make it up or some folks are saying I want to follow the child's lead in you know entirely. So it really ranges the it's not just I don't want to make any assumption that if you refuse to use curriculum or don't you
choose not to use curriculum I should say that you're low quality it really ranges I think and many of you as former educators would you know may agree with me there are there are extraordinary educators out there who literally can walk in every day and make magic happen right and whether that's experience or
what it's like what they want to do at night and kind of you know pull that together you know the sort of the you know this was a uh bootstrap sector right so people made up their own curriculum. Um, we're concerned that that's not systemic, right? So, we want to make sure you can meet expectations
and we will never, you know, sort of give you a bad rating if you can do incredible work with kids. That's why interactions is 700 of the 800 points. But we also know that systematically, you know, at the large scale with the compensation that um that
Miss Holton mentioned that like a lot of people need scaffolding. And the idea from curriculum actually came from my work in Louisiana where people after two years of using measuring interactions are like I can help coach my folks on how to improve their warmth and responsiveness. I can help them make the
day more child- centered. My folks need help. If we're talking about six hours of being really intentional about concept development around engaging kids, around how to not be wrote and ask, you know, asking open-ended questions versus like what number is
this? what shape is this? Like they just needed a scaffolder support. And so we actually sort of organically came to curriculum and realized that that would be so important for a large number of childcare and family childcare programs. What would you add, Chris? Uh not a whole lot. There's a few that are
pending. Uh curriculums go through different upgrades and some folks want to stick with a curriculum that they're used to while it's being revised and going through the process. So they're using something. It's just not gone through our full approval yet. And then the last would be programs that are just new to this and they've decided to
really focus on class first, but you can hear them say,"I want to look into curriculum. I'm just really trying to first understand the class tool." Yeah. It's important to remember that the entry level requirement for an educator uh in childare and family
childare is really just what's specified in the licensing regulations. So it is not a bachelor's degree. It is not a particular credential. So again for many folks it is a set of steps and we've when I first agreed to come to uh work in Virginia I said it would take us at least 8 to 10 years right focus on
building the system first then get the sort of box in place support people to use curriculum and then you know hopefully in the two years we'll come and talking with you about more assessment level of kids so that the holy grail is really I come into a classroom I use the curriculum to support the individualized needs of the
kids in the classroom while I'm providing the highest of quality teach interactions from morning to afternoon. Superintendent Gullixson, thank you Jenna for your team's great work on this. Can you just unpack for the board
um why it's so monumental that this year there's not a single dollar that's left going into the end of the fiscal year for slots. That's a new change as a result of legislative action. So just a quick overview. Absolutely. So, um, a
couple of really important points. Uh, we historically have left, uh, including upwards of 20 or $30 million a year, uh, that were state general funds that were dedicated towards early childhood that even after we went to all of our school divisions and they went to their
community uh, uh, provider partners, like we just didn't we there wasn't the demand for those those three and four-year-old slots uh, often in school or or community based settings. And so we didn't have any flexibility to move those dollars over. So they just were quietly reverted back to state general
funds at the end of the year and didn't actually benefit kids. Uh going back more than a decade, um CCDF, the federal childare and development block grant, um there were years where we didn't use all the money. Um, and even I understood before my time where dollars got sent
back to DC, but it we also would roll it over for a sort of three years and the next cycle would come and so you had dollars either being reverted to state general funds up to the tune of it was either 20 or $30 million the two to three years before here um or money sitting in DC and not getting pulled
down to Virginia or even you know losing that that money. And so and a part of it was was truly structural. I don't think that anybody intended this to happen, but it was very fragmented. We didn't focus in on slots. We didn't think about how do we sort of fund this system, right? Say here's our true north,
health, safety, and learning. Here's how we fund the system. Here's how we track the system. Here's how we make sure that every dollar goes where, you know, towards a slot and that we know what those slots are. So, it's really been building those foundational pieces that have allowed us to get to this place.
And then um Senate Bill 54, House Bill 419 by Senator Lockach and Delegate Bulliva uh not only called for doing what uh Miss Holton talked about, but kind of being more transparent about the kind of competitive compensation and the unmet need, but also said if we get
through fall enrollment and our estimates from the spring were incorrect and we have more demand here and less demand here, we can move those over. This is light years from when I came the first year and I went out to Danville and they said, "I'm I'm dying here. I got all these kids on a wait list for
state prek. We have uh a Northern Virginia community that is leaving 3,000 slots that they're not going to use. We couldn't even move VPI within communities, right? So, we would leave the dollars on the table and those 20 kids in Danville would not get started. So we first allowed us to move within
VPI and then thanks to Boliv and the general assembly and the governor, we're now able to even move it across the funding sources. So each year we make our best guess and that's what goes into the budget. Um and then we have this ability to to adjust during the year. So when we get to June, we can confidently look at you look at House appropriations
and Senate finance and see every dollar was spent on kids. Okay. It also keeps me up as we get closer to June 30th. I get the bi-weekly. We pay childcare providers on the bi-weekly and so those those don't go down as we you know summer comes on us but so thank you so much for this
presentation we will accept it on first review and see you in June and I think you have item N as well. Absolutely. Thank you. Excellent. All right. I'm now joined uh by Jeff Williams who is our assistant superintendent for the office of child
care health and safety. You know it as lensure um but we do Jeff and I intentionally work together with the leadership team and the broader team of across our regional offices across the state to really rename the office because its function is around working
with providers to keep all of our kids healthy and safe. also do huge appreciation to our uh Deb and to the attorney generals who support us uh very frequently in this work. Um you've seen this before so I'll move quickly here but you some of you might be saying I've
seen this before and that is true. You have seen this before. We are in the finals first review of the final stages of the proposed action to repeal what are kind of the procedural elements of lensure. So, taking two documents, the general procedures and the background
checks, repealing the background checks, we're not getting rid of them. We're combining into one regulation, taking out the stuff that's already covered in in state laws. Um, we began this process, as I'll describe in a second, back in 2021, right after we moved uh childcare, health, and safety from the
Department of Social Services to DOE. Um, we came, we brought this to you twice. It went back out into the field for public comment. That ended in November of last year. In this second round, um, we received 49 comments from 23 constituents in 14 areas. Your town
hall document, uh, walks you through kind of the gist of all of those, um, of those comments and kind of, uh, you know, what what where folks were pleased and where there were concerns. Um, we've responded to the public comment. We've gone back through and made sure we're aligning with the regulation manual,
connect, uh, correcting all the technical errors, um, and then making sure there just places where we were not clear. So clarifying that uh we then brought this uh uh revised regulation to the early childhood advisory committee on April 17th um and received a full
endorsement in your boilerplate document. I should note that there was an oversight on behalf of our team. Um we accept public comment uh up until the morning of um the uh early childhood advisory committee and due to human
oversight we inadvertently omitted a public comment and so at the ECAC we announced that we did not have any public comment even though we had received one that morning. Um that individual let us know immediately following the ECAC. we sent it out to
the ECAC and then we let that individual um know that we would get her comment directly to you. Um and we uh both were incredibly apologetic. It was 100% our fault and we have put in place a better system so it's not just one person who's checking, but we get an automatic alert
now and there'll be at least two people checking. So I commit to you that as a a a body we take very seriously public comment and we want and we know that our ECAC members want to hear from the public. So we will not let that happen again. But you have that in your boiler plate so that because the ECAC was not
able to review it um prior to the their endorsement. We wanted to get that directly to you. So this um basically this just kind of walks you through the steps. This is not the big kahuna, okay? This is not the like child
safety regulations. You remember our conversations that we had and we made some uh pivots on that. This is just the sort of how do you get a license? How do you renew a license? What if there's a concern? Um all of the kind of the legal sort of apparatus around lensure and
then it combines the background check requirements. Much most of the background check requirements are already covered in federal or state law. So we stripped out content but it's not like we're we're not the federal law is very explicit and very detailed as is the state law. So kids are going to be
kept just as safe in terms of keeping criminals away from children. But this is the sort of you know the the sort of the the nuts and bolts versus the this is not the tool that you use to go in and inspect the child care centers. As you see, what we are putting in front of you today has been through fairly
exhaustive review from Nora to uh rag development to uh governor approval to first round of public comment just on the Nora uh to uh taking the revised uh revisions to the ECAC to your first review in 2022 and your second review in
2022 to our attorney general back to the governor back to public comment and this is the final um version uh that you're seeing. So pretty exhaustive. We decided we would spare you the going section through section because we would be here till tomorrow. Um but just wanted to make sure that you understood that the
thing in front of you today has been through extensive review with thousands of stakeholders across the state. Let me pause there and see what questions you have for Jeff and myself. Questions? Okay, all of that being said, thank you. We will accept this on first review and
see you in June. We'll see you next month. Thank you all very much. Okay, we are moving to item D. Um, we are going to plan on taking a quick break after Mr. Chapman does his 3D and F. So, just to prepare you all
for that. Thank you very much, President Casy, members of the board, and Superintendent Gullixson. Um this item on uh regulatory actions following periodic reviews of regulations is on final review. Um the only comment I would like to make about this is is just to emphasize um a point
that Miss Holton brought up at the last meeting um that one of the actions here uh that we are proposing um is cleaning up what we think is is a conflict here um in the regulations
governing the division superintendent of schools. And for the most part when we have brought these um actions following periodic review they've been very simple cleanup or reductions you know removing unnecessary language. This is a slightly more sub a more substantive policy decision. Although we do think it is is
the correct one um because again the the the department um has not been implementing this section of the regulations. We've been implementing the most recent qualification set by the board in the lensure regulations for school personnel. So that's um 8 VACU uh
20-23. Um that this this removal follows a board action um to remove these rags back in like 2011 um that we were unable to trace out the full uh implication, but it was removed the action was stopped in 2017ish by staff um and was
withdrawn by staff. So, we do think that that previously the board has voted to remove this particular um this particular chapter. Uh so, we again we're not sure why that action wasn't continued through, but we did want to emphasize that one aspect in the
comments questions. Miss Holton, thank you Jim. And and just to clarify the the the regulation in question, there are two conflicting versions in the current regulations. one which says essentially to be a
superintendent you have to come up through um the the the chain of um education administration and the other says a school super someone could be approved for the school superintendent
uh list based on alternative executive experience for instance um running a city or um a business etc. So it allows a broader pool for superintendents and there's two conflicting versions. This is not just a cleanup. We are making a
choice as between those two versions and the department is recommending that we go with the broader definition of who can be a school superintendent. And I have no objection to that. I just think we need to make understand that we're making that choice today.
Mr. Rotherham. Yeah, Miss Holton's characterization is exactly correct. Um, and I think it's important that we do call that out. I was on the board when we actually made this change and put it in and the intent was to make the a path to the superintendency for people who
met a set of standards including um some kind of advanced education as Miss Holton said people who had you know various kinds of experience running large enterprises at the sea level whether that's public sector or private sector. I think the assumption was and I think history is borne out it was not
going to be a widely used group but there would be times when divisions would want to be able to avail themselves of this and there there was appropriate flexibility in the whole in the whole process any other comments okay is there a motion to
approve the regulatory changes described in the item and delegate to VDOE staff authority to make changes necessary to comply with the administrative process Act or Virginia Register Act. So move. Is there a second?
Second. Any discussion? Miss Kilgore. Hi. Dr. Northern. Hi. Dr. Aerman. Hi. Miss McFersonson. Hi. Mr. Rotherham. Hi. Miss Holton. Hi. Chair
votes I. Thank you Mr. Chapman. And we will move to E. Thank you, President Cesy. Um, this again is a a type of action that we feel like the board has become very familiar with. We we typically bring this on first and final review because all that we are doing is closing out periodic
reviews of regulations. Um, here we have a few recommendations to close these out. But again, process-wise, we will bring another regulatory action back to the board for consideration and approval on the actual changes to these regulations. Um, in terms of these
periodic reviews, we have six chapters that we are hoping to close. Um, the first chapter 460, which is the regulations governing sick leave plans for teachers, um, we believe should be retained as is. We think it's it's serving a purpose. It's clear and it's understandable. Um, chapter 510, which
is the regulations governing the superintendent of public instruction. Um, we also feel uh, enumerates the responsibilities and we have not received any comments um, you know, indicating that there should be changes. Um the most substantive of the changes that we we think should be made are are in chapter 580 which is the regulations
for the school breakfast program. Um and the the main thing that needs to happen with this chapter is there have been statutory changes since this program was introduced. When the program was introduced it was it was voluntary and so it was really you know governing um school divisions that opted into the school practice program. But state law
now requires that to be mandatory. Um and so uh you know there is some language about um waiverss and things like that that needs to be drawn out of the regulation. Um when when this comes back to you we'll be able to give uh you know more substantive um information about what the particular changes are.
But the changes that that are we will bring to the board are really just removing the language that um that is no longer in accordance with statute and does not make sense at that time. um and making a couple of other uh you know reductions in the language because we we think that there's some overlap with federal policy and when we're
referencing federal policy we don't think we also need to duplicate that language in the state stat in the state regulations. Um we have regulations governing school guidance counseling uh school guidance and counseling programs in the public schools of Virginia. Um, we also think there just needs to be a
slight modification in this chapter to accord with a bill that changed the terminology. Since we don't refer to guidance counselors anymore, but to school counselors, we'd like to align the language. Um, we recommend that the, you know, standards for state funded remedial programs be retained as is. And
we similarly have a um a slight movement that we would like to recommend to the board in the regulations governing scoliosis screening programs mainly because it shares a common user group um with the regulations governing the testing of sight and hearing of of uh pupils. And so we think that we could
effectively combine these into a single chapter. Um we'd likely bring that to the board with a change name, but the the underlying policy we expect to stay exactly the same as it's written out. Are there questions on this? Okay. Is there a motion to wave first
review and approve the closing of the periodic reviews on regulatory chapters identified in this item as presented to the board? Second. Any discussion? Miss Kilgore. I. Dr. Northern I. Dr. Arian. I. Miss
McFersonson. Hi. Mr. Rotherham. Hi. Miss Holton. I and chair votes I. Okay. Item F, Mr. Chapman. Thank you very much, President Cesy. In addition to the work that the board does here as its meeting, the board also oversees a vast number of
advisory committees that range in scope from the early childhood advisory committee, which you just heard Miss Conway um speak of with regard to the regulatory action and in this case the advisory board on teacher education and lens search or um Abtel. um both of which you know are statutoily required
committees um and require people to populate those committees. Um so we have uh annually seats that expire on June 30th um of every year and so a common item that we bring before the board is to to consider um new nominees for
appointment to the board's advisory committees. Um this action has followed the board's process laid out as bylaws. We've solicited nominations. Um staff has reviewed and submitted to the superintendent. The superintendent has made recommendations to the board in this item um which we are now asking for
the board to approve these nominees to those two committees. Um yeah, the superintendent's recommendation is that uh that this we wave first review and approve these nominees. Are there any questions on this?
Okay. Is there a motion to wave first review and approve the recommended nominees to fill the vacancies and expiring positions on Abtel and EAC? Second. Any discussion here? Miss Kilgore. Hi. Dr. Northern. Hi. Dr.
Arian. Hi. Miss McFersonson. Hi. Mr. Rotherham. Hi. Miss Holton. And chair votes. I. Okay. We will take a quick break here. Let's do five minutes and then we'll come back and
um do item G. And remember that we do have the second part portion of yesterday's 3E presentation that we didn't take up that we will take up during this item. Thank you. Um, item G, please.
Good morning, Mr. Jennings. Good morning, board president, Cesy, Superintendent Gullixson, and board members. Thank you for having us here again today. I am Mark Jennings, the executive director for the office of accountability. I am joined by my colleague Dr. Anthony Williams, the director of office of career and
technical education. And today we'll be discussing with you 3E readiness indicator and high quality workbased learning. So today we're going to talk about our vision and guiding principles, the 3E readiness indicator. We'll give you an overview of high quality workbased learning and that's where Dr.
Williams will come and speak. Uh we'll talk about public comment and modeling of the proposed employment section of the 3E readiness indicator and then today we're asking the board to take action on the 3E readiness indicator within our Virginia's consolidated state
plan. So I do want to review briefly I know we did this yesterday but for our audience today our guiding principles for accountability work and we use these internally as well with our stakeholder groups. uh it's it's very beneficial to start and norm ourselves with these. And so our high expectations for all
students. Number two, transparency and access to actionable information. Number three, that we emphasize student academic growth is and proficiency are both important, but the system must prioritize getting every student to proficiency and mastery. And that fulfills uh the Every Student Succeeds
Act which requires that academic achievement uh be weighted more significantly than other indicators which we've done in our system where uh academic achievement is weighted more heavily. Number four, building trust between schools, parents, and students through again transparent, concrete,
easy to understand reporting. We spoke about some of that yesterday. We'll continue to have conversations on that. And then number five uh the importance of stakeholder uh input and feedback throughout this process. You have um in front of you the bifurcated system. On the right side we
talk about accreditation, the inputs and how schools in Virginia, the expectations that all Virginia schools should be fully accredited and the resources they have both from state and local dollars or maybe federal dollars using those to provide opportunities for students and meet those requirements. On
the left side, you see the Virginia school performance and support framework. Uh you see the three models, elementary, middle, and high school. Again, those calculations give you an overall score out of a 100, which leads to a performance category. We use that same information for federal
identification, which then might lead to a school receiving additional support through the office of school quality and additional federal dollars. So, I do want to emphasize the high school model here. uh as you see there mastery is 50%, graduation is 15%,
readiness is which will be our topic today is 35%. You see uh three components and then the indicators within them and so within readiness we have chronic absenteeism. We have our six-year graduation rate with applied studies and then we have our 3E readiness framework at 25%. And this was
weighted such so that we are emphasizing we're preparing students for what comes after high school. They're doing this work for preparation for the next steps. And so our three E stand for enrollment, employment, and enlistment. All of our models include at least two
opportunities for uh indexing. So elementary and middle school have both mastery indexing and growth. High school has mastery and 3. So there's some uh equality there across the board, some balancing where all students have an opportunity to go beyond a one point uh
onepoint value. And this again is an model as you see there. enrollment and employment and enrollment. We wanted to emphasize that students have opportunities exposure across the three E uh as they decide, you know, to explore and think through their futures. So, it's not an or model. We're not
trying to put students on a track here. So, the board adopted last August what you see in front of you the the original three E uh the enrollment, employment, enlistment. Uh and today we're only talking about employment. I mean, you can ask questions on the other ones, but we're only asking for a revision to the
employment. When the board adopted this last August, we had said at that time there would be stakeholder groups throughout the year to do work on highquality work-based learning. Uh the board adopted some of that material in February, which my colleague will talk about. And so, today we're bringing it
back to finalize that. So the original 3E employment had a onepoint value for high quality uh well no high quality workbased learning but for recognized credential in a high demand high wage field had a 75 value or
a credential in a high demand field and a half a point for the industry recognized credential. I'm going to turn to my colleague now who's going to talk about high quality workbased learning. Uh this was one of the attachments. This was the document the board approved in February and he's going to walk through some of
those components uh right now. Excuse me. Can you guys just tell us where it is in the Oh, yesterday. Okay. Sorry. That's where I was getting confused. Were you able to locate it? This is a continuation from yesterday's
presentation. the dates flip on our SharePoint. If you hit see all in the right hand side, you'll get you can choose the dates and then it'll allow you to get back to yesterday. Good. All right. Great.
So what you see before you are the guidelines which includes the evaluation criteria for highquality work-based learning that was approved in February. Uh what's important to note from this document the February document is that we're currently uh in the process of
developing comprehensive guidelines for each unique work highquality work-based learning experience. Uh if you can recall annually we submit to the board our guidelines around highquality work-based learning. These are the in thewe details that support uh our school
divisions, our workbased learning coordinators and our CTE administrators. And so we're currently working on that uh that document. And we hope to have that to you uh at the July board meeting uh for review and approval. Okay. Primary changes uh to
this February document. Uh as you all can recall, previously uh the Department of Education recognized 12 highquality work-based learning experiences. Uh those experiences were paired down to four unique uh experiences that we'll
we'll discuss uh further along in this presentation. And we were able to redefine highquality work-based learning. And by redefining highquality work-based learning, uh you will see here that uh not only do we previously
we currently recognize the the four unique experiences, but in addition to that, we have now redefined the graduation requirement with the inclusion of highquality work-based learning for 3e readiness. And so I want to just take a take a second here to for
a point of clarification. Uh the board approved in February four unique experiences. You're going to hear me address six experiences. Um for example, uh internship included supervised agricultural experiences. Those are two
unique experiences. And so you'll see that when I discuss those, we're we're we're discussing them individually. Uh same thing with entrepreneurship and school-based enterprises. Schoolb-based enterprise was approved in February, but it included entrepreneurial experiences.
They are unique experiences, so you'll hear me discuss those individually. In addition to that, uh in February, we also discussed that uh video we would need to develop a process for the evaluation of these highquality work-based learning experiences. And so
that work uh is also underway uh with that process also uh will be included in that uh workbased learning document that you all will receive in July. High quality work-based learning is is defined as a school coordinated experience within the workforce that
includes sustained or intensive engagement with industry professionals in high demand fields in which students apply coursework learning to a real world setting. And so what sticks out about that definition is high demand fields and how we define what is a high
demand field. And so we have collaborated with the Virginia Office of Education Economics and their high demand uh occupation list. And so we've kind of backwards mapped from there. And so we took the occupation and we aligned our
secondary coursework with that occupation. our industry credentials, our high quality work-based learning experiences are already aligned to the CTE coursework. And so it was a natural alignment once we were able to identify
the high demand occupations and align that and backwards map that to our CTE coursework. And so just wanted to provide background context for that. It is also important to note that the Virginia Office of Education Economics is currently reviewing and revising the
list of high demand occupations. And so we anticipate that the revised list will be published uh December of 2025. In addition, the goals of high quality work-based learning are to lead students to national uh certificates of completion, industry recognized
credentials or post and or post-secary credit. Uh students will also receive direct feedback from uh their mentor or supervisor uh which are industry professionals. This is very very unique for this new definition of highquality work-based learning. And so we're
definitely bringing value back to our students that are participating in these experiences. Okay. From our 12 previously 12, now we're going to discuss the six. Okay. Six experiences moving forward. Uh those six experiences are aligned to CTE completer goals,
post-secary education, and our business and industry uh needs through the Virginia Office of Educ Virginia Office of Education and Economics. These six experiences include registered apprenticeships, internships, select immersion,
supervised agricultural experiences, entrepreneurship, clinical experience, and what we love to consider as a re-imagined school-based enterprise. Uh this would definitely we we're going to discuss this in in in my later slides. Uh but school-based enterprise is has
definitely what we're looking at is more going to be more student centered, student focused as far as a students ability to actually uh engage in that enterprise. components of high quality work-based
learning. Sustained and intensive and some of these we've already uh discussed earlier in the presentation, but sustained and intensive engagement with industry professionals andor post-secondary subject matter experts in high demand fields. Application of coursework in a real world setting.
Building of the five Cs. Got ahead of myself there. acceleration of learning toward the earning of a national nationally certified certificate of completion or industry recognized credential and feedback and guidance through mentoring and supervision from industry
professionals. So to take a deeper dive into the six approved highquality work-based learning experiences. So registered apprenticeship and so previously when we identified the 12 workbas workbased learning experiences you can recall registered apprenticeship
and youth registered apprenticeship and it's important to distinguish the difference between the two which is why now we're just looking solely at registered apprenticeship. The difference the primary difference between youth registered apprenticeship and registered apprenticeship was the related
instruction and where that related instruction was being delivered. And so we see here in that first sentence, it it it it references that it's integrated within the CTE curriculum. Not all registered apprentices are receiving related
technical instruction in the CTE classroom. Okay? If I'm a I could be a 18-year-old high school student and I have a sponsor who is my employer that is providing the related technical
instruction outside of a classroom setting. Okay, that's a registered apprenticeship. I've registered with Virginia Works, but it's not necessarily connected to the CTE curriculum that I'm currently enrolled in. Youth registered apprenticeship. If I'm a high school
student, I'm currently enrolled in the CTE electricity program. That electricity program is delivering the related technical instruction. Okay? Not the employer. And then the students in both cases would receive the on the-job
training. So I wanted to to make sure that we understood the differences and why we're just recognizing registered apprenticeship. Whether you're receiving instruction through our CTE courses or whether you're re receiving instruction through an employer, we still recognize
that as registered apprentichip through Virginia Works. Internship is very similar removing the responsibilities from Virginia Works. Internships is probably one of our most popular uh work-based
learning experiences. Uh within internships, of course, uh you have paid and unpaid experiences. And it's important to also recognize that that previously we recognize two to three experiences that
had minimum hour requirements of 280 hours. And you may remember that. And so one of the primary changes in the approved February document was that that 280 hour requirement was reduced to 90 hours. And so what you will find in the
in the July document will reference 90 hours of highquality work-based learning for each of the six experiences. Additionally, we're currently engaged um and we plan to host a stakeholder meeting uh to discuss
highquality work-based learning for students with disabilities. And so we felt that we needed uh external engagement in order to be able to propose uh the appropriate options for students with disabilities. So more to come uh on
that. Okay. If you all would just stay with me, my presentation is slightly different than what I see on the screen here. I'm not sure what you all have, but remember, we did discuss how we broke out each one of those experiences. So, I'm just going to walk through each one of those unique experiences. The
next one on my list is uh select uh supervised agricultural uh experiences. And so, supervised agricultural experiences, they're two different levels. So we have our foundational SAEES is or what we consider them supervised agricultural
experiences foundational and immersion immersion experiences include the higher level experiences within agricultural education and uh of the immersion saes we've identified uh internship placement
internship ownership entrepreneurship research which includes experimental analysis or invention and then schoolbased enterprise from our initial research of u saes the model around entrepreneurship and school-based
enterprise is definitely a model that we would like to consider duplicating for our highquality work-based learning definition for entrepreneurship and school-based enterprise and so we'll talk about that in in more detail
entrepreneurship entrepreneurship is a student-led business venture And I think it's important to note that in our new definition of entrepreneurship, our new definition of entrepreneurship that it's not just a student who starts a
business. It's one thing to own, it's another to operate. How do we measure that? Okay. Uh previously, uh entrepreneurial experiences could include coursework. Students that were currently enrolled in our
entrepreneurial program. uh and so it does go beyond that. We want a student to learn how to start a business but then at the same time be engage in the operation of that business. Clinical
experiences. We continue to engage with the Virginia Department of Health Professions and the Virginia Department of Health uh to recognize the clinical experience in a number of CTE courses and programs uh to include our dental assistant program, practical nursing,
nurse aid, uh office of EMS for our emergency medical telecommunications programs. And so, as you can imagine, these are regulatory requirements for those programs, and we continue to engage throughou specifically with the Virginia Department of Health Professions to ensure that students are
engaged in meaningful and safe uh experiences. And then finally, school-based enterprise. And so, once again, going back to the point of school-based enterprise as that studentled business enterprise. And so putting that student at the forefront,
school-based enterprises provide goods or services that meet the needs of school's target market through a business and ensuring that that business is that students are engaged with business and industry professionals for
that supervision and mentorship component. And so that's a component that we want to ensure uh students are connected to for each one of our six experiences. Just give us a moment, please. I wanted to get through all of this, but while we have technical things
going on, this will be a good time for any questions regarding highquality work-based learning. uh essentially when Mark comes back to the stage uh he's going to review the proposed criteria and the modifications around the employment section. So I want to make sure that everyone has a good sense and
understanding of highquality work-based learning. So any specific questions around the information presented the overview from the February approval. Are there questions Dr. Acriman? Is is high quality and high demand being used interchangeably?
They're not. No so those are two different things. Okay. Thank you. Yes, Miss Holton, I see you're green. Do you have a question? Yeah. And this may be um um Mark or Mark and you together, but one continuing question I have. I think this you all put a lot of thought into
it and a lot of community engagement and come up with a a a impressive work product. I'm just worried about it's it's complex and there's reasons why it's complex, but I understand just noting how complex it
is. Am I right that we continue to have two definitions of workplace learning? One for what is required to meet the graduation requirement, work-based learning, which all of our students have
to either u complete a a AP course, etc., etc., or uh complete a work-based learning experience. So, we have one definition for the graduation requirement and a different definition for the
accountability system. Am I right? My first question is, am I right that we still have dual definitions? And the second question is, is there any way we can avoid that complex le extra level of complexity for the school divisions having to basically calculate and keep
track of two different workbased learning definitions and apply them to students differentially? Excellent point that I want to clarify on. So in February, the board approved one definition of highquality work-based learning. So this definition is for 3E
and it's also for the graduation requirements. So one single definition for highquality work-based learning. Within the board document, there was a checklist for the evaluation of highquality work-based
learning. It had multiple columns. There was a column for graduation. There was a column for 3e. And I think that that's where a lot of the confusion is coming from for the field. In our July presentation, we're consolidating the
graduation and 3e requirements. And so once again, we have an approved definition for graduation in 3e, but the chart was slightly misleading. And so that will be a point of clarification in the July publication as far as the
specific criteria for graduation and 3e which will be consolidated. Excellent. That's a huge improvement. So if just to be sure I understand if a student's work-based learning meets is sufficient for them to graduate then they are also
u meeting the definition of work-based learning for purposes of the accountability system. That is correct. schools don't have to keep track of two different statuses for their students. Correct. Great. Thank you. And if I'm correct in saying this, I believe that was part of
um discussion that came out of public comment. And so being that we are um flexible and work very closely with those comments, I think if am I right? part of of because I think I had some
had several conversations previous to the February with several schools. That's an improvement we've made. Correct. Thank you. Thank you. Yes. Um lastly, when Dr. Northern, do you have a question that you'd like? I just wanted additional clarity because I remember very well us having this discussion and
I remember like we came up with these two columns because it was my understanding that the definition for 3e readiness and the way it was evaluated was more rigorous than it is for graduation requirements. So I under prior leadership um I remember a
conversation said well we're gradually going to all move towards the 3E readiness definition but right now we're kind of in this transition place because we've got these graduation requirements definition in place. So I guess I'm just trying to figure out how did they merge?
what did we lose or what did we gain um relative to what we used to have them on on one the column looking at the high school graduation rate column and then the three readiness column and I'm just wanting to clarify um how we were able to merge them together okay and what I
can discuss is the proposal because that was going to be part of the July presentation but I would be happy to share just the research behind what we're doing and and how we have arrived there uh if you have the table from the February meeting. Some of you may or may not have that up. There's a column for
three readiness and then graduation requirements. And so specifically, the primary difference is going to be around that feedback from that mentor that that supervisor. And so there has to be a formal process in order to receive that
feedback. That was in the 3E readiness column. That wasn't in the graduation column, but we recognize the value of that. stakeholders recognize the value of that and so that was one of the primary differences between 3E and then
graduation. The second factor and this is all on memory here is going to be around the qualifying career readiness assessment score which was identified for 3e not
for graduation. And so we are currently in the process of trying to determine well what is a qualifying career readiness assessment. Is that a credential? Is it not a credential? Is it an assessment
that we would need to create or adopt? What does that mean? Is a student already satisfying that requirement through their CTE course and program and the stackable credentials that are already available? Okay, those were the
two primary differences between the two columns. And so what we are proposing minus this has not gone out for stakeholder feedback through our workforce agency. So this is continued work in progress. But where we
are is that the inclusion of the feedback from the uh business and industry supervisors and mentorship. There is value there. The inclusion of that for graduation in 3E and the removal of that of the career readiness
assessment score for the assessment that we have yet to define or identify. So currently right now the other line items currently align for 3e and graduation.
So just to clarify we are at at this stage since we haven't yet we aren't yet clear what that career assessment score is for for this purpose. We're removing that requirement both columns so to speak. That is currently what is going to be
proposed, but we have not. There are multiple steps that will take place before you receive that draft in July. And and can I Madam President, can I ask a follow-up question on that? So, I'm I'm confused. You I'm sure you explained this and I just wasn't listening well, but I thought we're being asked to
approve this on final review today and we have done a lot of work on this and yet I'm hearing that we're going to be approving it in July. So help me understand what's on for today versus what's on for July. Sure. So what we're discussing right now is going to be the
criteria for the inclusion of highquality work-based learning into 3E. Okay. And so we're going to discuss the inclusion of that and the point value of highquality workbased learning. In July, as you all may be familiar with the annual review of our highquality
work-based learning guidance document, this is the more indepth 100 plus page guidance document that we provide to you all that goes in depth about each experiences and the requirements for each experiences. What are the roles of
the parent, the the student, the employer? uh what are the appropriate forms that have to be uh signed and approved? This that is the July document that will be presented that will include the checklist revisions for three
graduation a deeper level of detail. But you're we're being asked today to approve on final review the definition of workbased learning for both graduation requirements and for um 3E and because they're the same. So that's our decision today. They are the same.
Yes. Definition. Yes. Yeah. Yeah. That's good. Thank you. Thank you, Dr. Williams. Great questions. We do want to provide that clarity about what's being proposed for today and um and when it's being applied. Uh and so you're looking here uh we're we're back up our our slide
deck here. I know the board has it. You see on the left side here the original employment with the one point value, the 0 75 and the 0.5 and then you see the proposed criteria on the right side with the 1.25 value, a one point a 0 75 and then we're going to ask the board to
discuss and uh take ad action on this 0.5 and we we're going to talk to about stakeholder feedback and um some thoughts around the these 0.5s and the options that were there. I also want to share this is in alignment with
HB2454 which you know has been adopted has been chartered um and will take effect July 1st but this also fulfills that um you might be wondering and that's why the questions were so appropriate about the timeline and what we're doing um I'm jumping a little ahead of myself but I'll say we are asking for this to to have action
because we won't apply this for 2425 the other pieces we were talking about would be for 2526 we had unanimous uh consent and uh request request from division superintendents that we make this effective for 2425. So that is why we're bringing this at this point in the
school year and doing that to bring it into 3E which you'll see from the modeling data why they want it versus us waiting till July and bringing all of this at one time. So that is why it is a little uh the discrepancy or the the confusion was very much appropriate to kind of sort those out. The other piece
I want to make to some of the comments that Dr. William shared is the high demand jobs. We want to be clear. Uh when you go into the VOIE website, you can sort those by region, but I want to be clear here because we get this question frequently. We the expectation in Virginia for the 3E framework is that
any high demand field is acceptable within 3E. We're not going to tell a student who's in Northern Virginia that who's getting a credential in ship building that that's not acceptable because that's not high demand in region four. So it's it's we're looking at it statewide, but we get that question
because people do filter through through through the VOIE database. The other question we get is around um and he shared the process and the timeline. If a student takes their credential and it's high demand, then it's high demand. If for some reason that credential is no longer high demand, we're awarding the
credit for what it was at the time. So we're not going to go back and say, "Well, VOIE then decides it's not high demand, you took it when it was high demand, and now we're pulling those points back from you." We're not doing that. So if it's high demand and it's listed then the students getting uh the credit for that uh within the 3E. So I do want to talk about the
public comment um which we were very excited about. We listed this through the DOE website. It was in our uh Virginia Education Update. We sent emails to school divisions asked them to share it. We had an online form. We went to some conferences the Virginia Association of School Superintendent and
did some sessions there and heard directly from superintendent. Uh we met with the Virginia Association of Secondary School Principles. We have a committee of practitioners which is made up of schoolboard members, parents, principles, um teachers, a range superintendent, and
they gave us feedback on this. And then I do want to uh recognize a group that I work with pretty closely uh that I've not had the chance to share with you, but we call it the accountability advisory group. And I'm sure they're watching right now. These are some dedicated leaders across the state. We meet twice a month and they provide
feedback directly to me about the implementation of the framework. They see uh materials, they help develop reports, they let me know what webinars need to be done. They help me look at the webinars and have been really a very powerful group to help me analyze sort of where we are in the implementation,
what do we need, what questions are surfacing across the field. Uh and so like I said, I want to recognize their hard work. Uh there's about 14 members. They represent all eight regions. uh both small regions and large divisions, small and large divisions. Uh and so really appreciate their dedication
because they they pour through documents and give us great feedback. Uh we have division leaders, superintendents, academic chief officers, uh directors of testing and so I want to recognize them because I know they're watching this and they helped develop this criteria from its infasy and so really appreciate
their work. So we had 126 respondents on our online form that did represent all eight regions. uh that didn't include parents, we had community members, business members, we had K12 educators, higher education uh members, uh we had division leaders, and then we had some
representatives of local state government. So, we we have pretty good, you know, sample size of the feedback we received. So, some themes I want to share with you. Overall, very positive feedback that this criteria is an improvement over the original version. uh they were encouraged that we're
bringing highquality work-based learning into this because it does provide students with more opportunities. Third, we heard some feedback and this came up at the the VAS conference around JRTC. When the board adopted the original framework in last August, there was a note about we're going to have further
conversation about JRTC. We will do that this summer. Uh and so we're not doing it today. We can if you want, but we're going to bring it back to you this summer when we reflect and talk through uh the all three E again. Uh and so that came up in some of the comments. uh developing the criterion and employment section for students with special needs.
So I want to share with you, we're very excited about this is we think about employment, we think about all of our populations. We have some stakeholder groups already set up for June and July where we're pulling transition specialists, directors of special education to talk through what does employment look like for a student with
special needs and especially students with cognitive disabilities. And so we've been working with that. uh when I presented at VAS I shared some of the criteria and what we had is division said we don't want to name a program because divisions said we may not have access to that program and programs change and funding changes for certain
programs we want to come up with a description that meets expectations so divisions might already be meeting expectations or they can enhance their programs and we want divisions to give us that feedback and so you know when I shared this at VAS hands went up in the room and they said would my program
qualify well to make sure that we we are clear about that and we're clear about the programs and how they work within employment. We've got these this stakeholder group. They will meet over the summer and we'll bring this back to the board uh for uh for effect for 2526. We did not want to rush the process and
so you'll see us back here again this summer to share what the stakeholder groups doing, but we do want to develop a criteria uh within the employment section for students with special needs. So, the work has started, but we want to continue that work and we'll bring that back this summer. The other theme that came up was cost and access. And so
again uh you know an Anthony shared some work there about um some resources available and that's something we want to definitely share with divisions sort of how they can network and sort of what this can look like. So the option A and B we wanted to allow them to look at these two options
and we did have them vote. Uh you see the data pretty overwhelming there. 81% selected option B and 19% uh selected option A. Uh the differences here is option A is a CTE completer. So this is they've completed two courses in a sequence uh for graduation requirements
and then they would complete a high quality work-based learning. So that's option A. Option B is a student who complete at least one state approved CT course and complete a high quality work-based learning. Uh and so you see those here. you see some of the feedback specifically uh you know these were some
of the comments about why they selected A over B. So for option A you know students who complete only one course would not have the experience necessary to be successful in the work environment. So these are people who said you need this is why you need uh the CTE completion factor uh aligns with
CTE completion for credential pursuit of pathway really recognizing this alignment piece. And then this third bullet supports learning valuable career skills that require subject matter content necessary for students to explore career pathways in the breadth and depth necessary to make plans and
set career goals. So these were some of the comments around why that CTE completer was necessary with the high quality work-based learning. And then you see for option B uh flexibility was a main theme that we provide flexibility for students to explore courses. you
know, uh, only requiring one CT course would help with with challenges and scheduling and staffing of the courses. And then the the theme of being more inclusive, um, for all students and reduce barriers. We did have a group recommend also an option C, which would
be could we do one CTE course in industry recognized credential. Um, and my colleague can definitely speak to that. I don't know if you want to do that now, but that is something I want to bring to you because it came up through some of the public comment and some of our groups. Um, but I I'm going to ask him to address that because it was something we heard and I do feel it
deserves a response. So Andy, Anthony, if you could speak to that idea of one CTE course with an industry recognized credential. I would say that feedback uh it would be very very similar to the feedback of option A. Uh it takes multiple years in order for students to prepare for
industry recognized credentials. Uh, also it's important to note that we have redefined high quality work-based learning, but we're also looking at redefining industry recognized credentials. And so, we have discussed this with you. Uh, I would say
lastly, it was last year as far as our ability to redefine what is an industry recognized credential. Uh the Virginia Office of Education and Economics is currently also uh looking at identifying high demand credentials uh as part of
their work. And so what they're doing, they're looking at job vacancies, identifying the high demand occupations and then they're pulling out of the job announcements the credentials and certifications that are being requested by employers for the particular
occupations. And so that's also something that we're going to be looking at later this year once that publication is released. Uh and so once again, uh it's just our thinking that uh it's going to a student will need multiple years of instruction in order to uh be
able to prepare uh for such experiences. So I want to share with you some data on the modeling. We did run the modeling of this uh proposed criteria. uh want to share with you again the performance categories. You're familiar with these and again the point values that are associated. So you see that there
distinguished 90 points and above across the whole framework for distinguished on track 80 to 89 points off track 65 to 79 needs intensive support below 65. And so what you see here is our fall
simulation. This is all using 23 24 year data without high quality workbased learning. We had and you see the numbers on your screen and you I know the board has these. You had 68 schools, 68 high schools, combined schools. I want to be clear, we're talking mainly about high schools, but this also would include
your 6 through 12 schools or 7 through 12 school. Any of the combined schools that have 9 through 12 included in that. So 68 of those schools distinguish 154 on track, 98 96 off track and six were needs intensive support. That's without high quality workbased learning. When we
added this both through option A and B, you see the difference and you see why the division superintendent said, "Please make this effect over 2425. We re recognize it's the end of the school year, but you see the impact it would have on these schools." So with option A, which is the CTE completion, 110
distinguished high schools, 144 on track, 64 off track, and seven needs intensive support. I'm going to draw attention to that because you'll say, "Well, wow, we went from six needs intense support to seven. What happened there?" That is because when we brought in high quality work-based learning, our student group numbers increased. And so
previously that school uh was too small and you have to have 15 students in a group to be included. So that school was not included. And so now with bringing high quality work-based learning again you're seeing more students and how they're doing. So that school became needs intensive support. So that's why there's a discrepancy there between the
sixth and the seventh. And then you see option B, the one CTE course, 120 distinguished high schools, 137 on track, 61 off track, and the same seven needs intentional support. So this is why to the earlier comments why we're bringing this to you today because when
this data is shown, like I said, unanimous support to say please make this effective for 2425. So the board's decision will be looking at discussing this employment section of the criteria and specifically asking you
on option A or B uh which one the board would adopt uh so that we can finalize it. Uh we would revise our uh consolidated state plan to with right now it's got all of this in there but then we would highlight the option A or B remove the one that's not being used and then be able to submit that to USCD.
I'll share with you, we've already talked with USCD about this because this is considered a very minor revision. They're expecting just a couple weeks for approval. Uh we talked with them about this, you know, throughout the process. This is what we're looking to do. These are some of the proposals and they said 2 to 3 weeks. This is very
minor. Um we don't see, you know, any hold up and running your accountability system with this, but um so we wanted to ask that in advance just so we can keep things moving smoothly. So at this time I'll turn it to any questions or discussion around this topic.
So Mark, the edits and updates to the state plan are based on the 3E readiness decision. Yes ma'am. So number one together in other words. Yes. And so we we put number two is sort of to give that flexibility. We submit this to USCD
and let's say they want us to make some changes. This would give us the authority from the board to make those changes without having to bring them back. And so that's the edits and sort of updates to the planet. Again, this is a very minor change, but we put that clause in there to say if they said, you know, a technical edit, you need to change some wording or clarify this,
we'd be able to do that. Sometimes they ask us for more data. Um, we've we've already put data in there around this modeling, but sometimes they may come back and say, we need to see data in this way. And so that would be something we provide for them. Questions? Dr. Northern CT completers, three
courses for Virginia, two, two, a sequence of two. Basically, we're talking about the difference between taking one or two courses. And the sequence piece being important because it has to be two that are aligned. And I'm looking to him just because he's the expert on this, but great question. I mean, my opinion is like first of all,
two as a completer is already a low bar. Most other states use three. And I feel like we're trying to, you know, make these experiences high quality um at every turn. So to me, if a completer
is two versus one, um we should be going for the for the more rigorous option, especially when we looked at the data and it really wasn't that big of a difference, you know. Um but yeah, it's I didn't realize it was only two to be a
CT completer. I mean all the research shows that minimum three right but that's another that ship has sailed but um anyway that's my view madam president so we are not deciding between A and B right now we do need or
we are we need to put that in want to be clear we're choosing between A and B uh Miss Holton so uh I Dr. Northern, I hear your point and we're all for uh I'm I'm a big supporter of encouraging CTE completers. However, I actually think
one of the crucial roles our high schools play is helping students explore different career options. And uh you're not a CTE completer. I think Mark, you all can clarify for me, but if you complete one CTE credential in nursing
and one CTE credential in welding because you're trying to figure out what you want to do when you grow up, you are not a CTE completer. It has to be the sequence of courses. Anything you want to add, Anthony? Could you clarify that point of being two
CTE courses and complete them, but they're not aligned? that Miss Kilgore can help me word this better because she knows this world. But yeah, well, I'll just repeat it. If you complete a CTE course in nursing and complete a CTE
course in welding, that is not you're not a CTE completer because you've completed two courses that are not aligned. Am I correct on that? That is correct. A CTE completer are two sequential CTE courses in the
requirements for graduation. That's a CT completer. If a student is to enroll in welding one, for example, we want a student to fulfill the requirements of the welding program, those requirements would not be met until after the
completion of year two. Most students wouldn't qualify for the credential until year two. And so that's where we want to ensure that we're providing options for students in advance starting in fifth grade career explorer career
exploration opportunities academic and career planning to ensure that when students get to 10th 11th and 12th that they're enrolled in these valuable career pathways and they're able to meet the requirements of the program. Uh, one
thing to consider is that if we begin to recognize a single course, then how would we incentivize students to fulfill the requirements of a program? Ma madam
president, Miss Holton, but am I right that to earn a whether under option A or B to earn a full point towards the rating a student must complete a CTE course. So really the option A versus B
that we're talking about here is simply to earn a half point under the rating system. Does a student who has completed a highquality work-based learning experience also need to have
completed one course or a sequence of two? That's really the decision point is what is what does it take to get a half point when you've already met all these other very rigorous definitions of work-based learning experience? what
what CTE course do you also accomplishments do you also have to have met? That's really the decision point here. So remind us though your your public comment from all of your um stakeholders that you involved. What was
their feedback A or B? Option B, it was pretty overwhelming for option B and the reasons were flexibility and scheduling. The opportunities by only requiring one course kids could explore and maybe do welding and realize it's not a fit for me. But now they don't have to do a welding two and complete you know the sequence of courses. So want to provide
that for you and that data. I mean you hear you know the pros and cons there but the public was I think the 81% was um asking for option B. Mr. Rotherham I have uh one question but for two people. One uh Anthony for you just as our
subject matter expert. I'd be interested in what your take is on on this um option A, option B and the trade-offs and then also Miss Kilgor because as Sultan said, she's she's very close to this. It was it was a three-year completer for
a long long time. Back to uh Northam's comment, it used to be threeear completer. So, but I do have strong feelings about it. I mean, I do, but I want to hear what he has to say because it's changed. Um, as far as I think it depends on, you know,
on one hand, is it bad for someone to try one one area like welding and then decide, well, no, that's that's just not for me. I want to do something else. But I also realized that the importance of credentiing because everyone should have some kind of credential when they
graduate. And to get a credential in CTE, it has to be, as we've just discussed, two courses. So, I'm torn even though I know the 81% on the pie chart, you know, was strongly for me. So, I'd like to hear your insight on
that, Dr. Williams. So, it's important to go back to what was approved in February, this high quality workbased learning. And so the intended outcomes of high quality work-based learning, I was trying to
find that earning a national certificate of completion, an industry recognized credential or post-secary credit. And so that doesn't necessarily align with one course and a student
exploring a particular course. The definition doesn't align with this particular opportunity. Um, we also look at economics and personal finance is a CTE course available to every student in
the Commonwealth. If that's the CTE course, then what does that do to high quality work-based learning? Okay. Now, we're not encouraging specific CTE coursework that leads to high demand occupations. That's
the purpose around the one point to aim at the one point. But these are things that unintended consequences that must be considered. Uh in addition, we talked about earlier we talked about the reduction of the hour requirement.
Previously, it was 280 hours. Now, it's a minimum of 90 hours. That's a significant amount of time to be engaged in a high quality work-based learning experience. We do have concerns about how that will be completed in one year
if there's only one CTE course. So just this is new for us at the same time. Um but these are just things to consider. Mr. Rother Hamry done
Dr. Northern That's when I first look at this pie chart, even though I know the one 81% is kind of lopsided, I'm leaning more toward, you know, our original plan was high quality and and our our goal is for students to
um to graduate with credentials of some sort, whether they go on for higher education or what, you know, whatever. And so based on what we talked about in February, as you're saying, that's a whole different
perspective than this pie chart is saying as far as the 81%. Madam President, um I'm going to go with Dr. Northern and then you. Thank you. I was just going to say that um the
experience and the exploring the reason that we have backmapped all these opportunities in the middle school, right? We've already talked about this is the middle school grades are the grades at which you are should be exploring. By the time you get to high
school, like you should have already gotten a pretty good dose of all the different career pathways, what they involve, some exposure to them. Um yeah, I mean I I just feel like um that that we have already um built in some time
for career exploration. I mean of course in theory but then if someone could you know think I know this is what I want to do and then until they take the course and really see what's entailed they could change their minds. We're not saying they have to commit to it in eighth grade. Um and because some
of these courses they can't take till they're in secondary school. Correct. That is correct. But as she's saying, you know, we we provide in middle school career exploration that should help narrow down by using the aptitude test and all those
kind of things that will help narrow down for a student by the time they are ready to take these courses that they could be more selective and it wouldn't have to be a guessing game as to what they are probably wanting to go into.
Right. I would agree. Yeah. Uh and it's also important to note that we've identified these six highquality work-based learning experiences. We have not taken off the table the importance of service learning, job shadowing. Exactly.
Mentorship, the other previous experiences are still going to be essential in career and technical education for career exploration. And so those experiences are still available. They're still on the table. We're only recognizing the supply of high quality.
Dr. Acriman, I'm curious if you've collected any data on the students with special needs being impacted by this and their points. Do you know how, you know, option A or option B would pertain to specific populations? I can have that for you shortly. We can
pull it. I don't have it in the slide deck here, but we did look at that and we definitely saw and you saw the theme of the comments around inclusion that only requiring one CTE course would benefit students. uh English learners were also recognized because uh typically they're having to take maybe some remedial classes in high school, some more English language support
classes. So only requiring the one course with an option B provided more opportunities for them. Um again when we come back in the summer we talk about um this employment um I think actually was earlier on some of the slides that Dr. Williams did. Um there were some programs for students with special needs like will Wilson workforce that is a
high quality workbased learning that would fit the criteria of option I'm sorry to interrupt option A or option B it would fit under option okay thank you the other piece I do want to point as you're having this conversation I I do see your hand is um earlier when I did the slide I'm going to jump back to it I
do want to draw your attention just as you're discussing this because this came up in our feedback as well when you look across all three E um we want to send a message that all three are equally important. And so this was one of the reasons we did we are proposing a 1.25 value for employment. You see enrollment
has a 1.25 and we got some feedback that you know you're sending a message that enrollment has 1.25 but no one else does. And so we're proposing today you know employment going to 1.25 but this is something the field also looked at is sort of the point values and is it equal across these and now you're probably going to say but enlistment doesn't and
I'll say I'm coming back in the summer and we'll talk about that as well. Um but for today for employment I just want to draw your attention to that because that did come up in public comment too as far as uh equating these and sending a clear message that all three of these are very important.
Just uh by way of further consideration I'm I'm I think it's wonderful that our middle schools are working so hard to expose young people to career options these days. I think that high school continue that role in a major way and any of the for those of you who have
young people in your lives many of our young people I will say including myself when I was a young people had no idea what we wanted to do until well into our college years. So I think it's wonderful that our high schools are doing so much more to expose kids to career options. I
I um um I I don't think that u the only uh reasonable option is for students to be CTE completers. And that'll bring me back to this the scoring we're looking at here. I think you uh thank you Mark for pointing out that what we're talking about here is it's really a a mass like
our mastery index on the so score waiting. It's not um either you you get credit or you don't. The the to get the 1.25 point credit you have to be a CTE completer. To get the one point you have
to be a CTE completer. To be a 75 point you have to be a CTE completer. So the question is, are we going to give any credit at all to a school who helps a student complete a high quality work-based learning experience and has
completed a single CTE course but not a a is not a CTE completer. It's not whether they're going to get full credit. It's are they going to get any credit at all for that work-based learning experience if they have if they are not also a CTE completer. I think
I'm right that there's no other way anybody gets credit for that that the school's rating system gets any credit for that workbased learning experience unless they're under one of these options. Right? I mean, there's not another page where the work-based learning
counts at this time. That is correct. We and during the summer that was in our public comment that could we use high quality workbased learning in enrollment or enlistment at this time we're not bringing that before you but over the summer that would be a discussion item that we've received some feedback. So, so, so if we want every student's
highquality work-based learning rigorously defined through all the other uh provisions we've we've adopted to count um at all towards the school's rating u that's what option A or B is providing
and that's really all we're talking about. Dr. Acriman, I I I think you had some really good points and when I think about my own children, but going back to some of the original intent on slide seven, that's when maybe if you don't if you're leaving high school and you don't know what you want to do, maybe
enrollment is the next step, right? Like so this is for the folks that enrollment may not be the next step. So we would want them to leave high school with some career readiness. Um, and I I I feel
like uh option A still including kids with special needs um by having some of those, you know, I think the Woodro Wilson was one of the examples, but um gives me some assurances that they have options because you just if I I have seen in the past the second schools see
that certain populations aren't going to give them points, they start getting neglected. um and uh hasn't happened in recent years, but we don't want to open up an avenue for that. So, uh as long as there's an option, I think for all the different populations to gain options,
um I mean, yeah, I'm good. Miss McFersonson on the I'm looking back at the high quality work-based learning um per the code and it says the high quality workbased learning is also one
of three options students have for meeting graduation requirements. So one is completing an advanced placement honors international balor or dual enrollment course. So you could actually complete one class and does it rank the
same as all of these points that you have on the 3e readiness and two because it says second option is completing a high quality workbased learning experience. So are you saying that a student that took one AP
class ranks the same as a student that did all of the work under the 1.25 or the 0.5? because I'm hearing you say we ought to have two classes, but somebody who is
able to complete an AP class would really only complete one class. So, I that weight kind of concerns me a little bit. Or am I mixing apples and what? I I think we're looking at slide seven.
Is that Is that what we're She's slide 11. Yeah. And Anthony, if you want to speak to that one, I can address it. Um, she's referring to the definition of high quality workbased learn. Well, before the definition, there was this slide that talked about per the code, high quality workbased learning is also one of the three options for students to
meet graduation requirements. I believe you're looking at the differences as far as how each is weighted. Oh, right. And how we're recognizing, for an example, 1.25 25 for an associates degree, one point for a
dual enrollment course and how that aligns to the CTE requirements for employment. Right? We have researched and we have discussed this and there are some discrepancies and that's what we're going to continue to look at the other areas in the near future. Okay. Uh for
the purpose of this conversation, we're looking at employment only, but there there are some differences between the two. They do not directly align. Right. And I I got it. And that's what I just want us all to be clear about that somebody who takes the AP class only has
to take one. But also I wanted to ask one more question. Miss McFerson is simple. It's a simple one on the um credentials program and it kind of goes back to your other slide.
Can they do the can you obtain the credential online? So, say I'm going to my regular classes, but I decide that I'm going to do a online class from home and get a credential in something. Is that permissible? Very cool. So say say for
instance like here J Sergeant could somebody take an online course okay in you know welding or something and would that qualify if I received a credential for it? We did not present well we're we're
going to have to present a credential uh list to you all in July. So that's coming too. Uh but it won't be until 2026, spring of 2026, where we will uh at that time present the new criteria for industry recognized credentials which will
include credit for students who have earned credentials and how they will substitute for CTE courses. Okay. And so that was a bill that came out of 2024 and so we're actively engaged with the identification of that as well. uh
important to note and understand that there's still going to be an instructional component, right? Um it's not I can just sit for this examination, but it is possible that a student may receive instruction outside of that classroom that earns them that, right? And also, I know you want the feedback
as as a part of it, so you'd have to have some instruction. Okay. I'm just trying I'm just thinking ahead. I just don't want want the the students that are engaging in workforce learning to be disadvantaged just because they're not
taking an AP course. You follow me? because it's important in the 3E readiness that we recognize that the students that are not necessarily going to pursue the whole collegebound track are still important
sectors of our society in terms of what they do. And like our scientist said yesterday, a lot of them will make a whole lot more money than a lot of people go to the four-year program. Okay, any other questions? Miss Holton, just one more discussion item. I'll just
make sure everybody saw there is a public comment uh that I think is thoughtful from the uh an administrator in Chesterfield County in support of the option B that I think just explains the why the
81% of the the stakeholder group uh expresses the views of the 81% stakeholder group. So if you haven't had an opportunity to see that in our public comment, it's on the U Excel spreadsheet. Thank you, Dr. Northern.
I have a just a comment. Thank you, Dr. Northern. Um, Mr. Rotherham, uh, I do think we want to be very careful here as we think about this. Just like high demand and high wage are two different things and it's very easy when somebody comes in, there are very compelling
examples to uh, to be moved by that. When you look at the aggregate data, the returns still are higher ed and we should be if we want people to make informed choices and college is not for everyone and there are amazing ways to
have very purposeful lives um outside but we should just make outside of that path but we should just make sure we are being very clear about sort of what the data show and that high demand jobs there's an element of job security there high wage jobs is a different thing and
there's obviously a van overlap there, but it is not there is some diff dissonance in some of the highest uh uh highest demand uh jobs and not necessarily in the highest wage sectors. And so just as we think about this and we say well we want everything to be
valued and so forth. It should all be valued but we do want people part of this and I completely agree with Miss Holden. I mean, like, you know, anyone anyone who's had kids or anyone when you're 18, you have to start making choices, but the only people who are probably worse than 18-year-olds and
making decisions are 16-year-olds. You're still learning. I mean, I 50-year-olds aren't great at it either, but you at least have a little more experience. Um, and so we just want to be I think we just want to be very careful here making sure people are fully aware um as much as we can. I get I get uncomfortable with some of the
pathways just speaking as one board member that you want kids to be able to make different choices when they realize maybe you're 19 or 20 and you realize what you thought you wanted to do you've lived a little bit more and we I think we we want to be sensitive to the data. We want to be sensitive to that. So that that's just a a comment from one board
member on I think we should we we need to tread lightly. Dr. Northern. Well, as I'm inclined to do, um I'll just state I I did kind of look at the look at the latest research. We've done quite a bit on CTE. Um so
when you look at the benefits to taking one versus two for the participants, uh one leads to I mean the there's no doubt you've got introductory exposure but limited depth and credentiing. Um but two courses is um highly and some of
these are correlational. Don't get me wrong because we don't have a lot of like randomized trials. Uh but the correlational studies show that versus two you have higher eligibility for indust industry certifications. They have shown enhanced preparation for
post-secary education and direct entry into the workforce and increased likelihood of graduation and college enrollment and rates compared to students taking only one CTE course. So I think the research does support more is better. Um and I appreciated uh Mr.
Williams very tactful response to us which what I heard as um if we go with one course we undercut the standards we've set for the other um you know pathways and and points and that there could be some perverse incentives to um
you know to getting rid of the completer at that stage in the game. So, um, at least that's that's the way when I was listening to I think you were very tactfully trying to explain to us that, um, we might want to go with the higher, uh, option. So, Dr. Acriman, I I do want
to be sensitive to the public comments. However, was that all administrators, school administrators or parents, business? It was that that 126 comments represents community members, parents, um, organizations. And I tried to highlight for you. I do want to share with the public. All comments were
shared with the board. 126 um so associations yeah community the range we put this out soliciting feedback from u those stakeholders and and so in our if if this group which seems like it's leaning towards a is there any kind of
avenue for comm communicating that that's what was in the original proposal and that's what we're going back to that we'd have to go back and change the original prop I just want to be sensitive to communicating back to such you know overwhelming
uh opinions. Um if we go against the overwhelming opinions, uh I don't know if if that's our area, if that's something we want to give thought to. I don't know. But yeah, I think we can certainly direct the department to do that communication for sure. And did Mr.
Rotherham, did we hear the comments that was very helpful the way you had that linked in yesterday's um agenda for the work session, but I'm trying to remember and I and I don't was was there any pattern to the comments? Did we get any like was business uh more inclined one way or the other? Business leaders we
heard from most business members uh selected option A because again they want to see the full CT completion and going to the pathway you're leading to a credential and sort of so so okay so the people who are on the sort of receiving end of this if you will um for lack of a
better term they they were saying they want to see option A that to to Dr. Northern's point about they want to see the rigor Madame President, Miss Holton, uh if you're ready for a motion, I'm happy to make one. Uh I would just say by final
comment that I'm all for encouraging full completers and that's why I think it's great that both options award 75 points, one point and 1.25 points only for full completers. And that really the remaining question is do
we give any credit for highquality work-based learning experiences that have not yet that are not yet u accompanying CTE completers. Uh and with that I'm ready if you're ready for a motion I'd be happy to make
one. If that's your will go right ahead. So I move that we accept the proposed amendment to the consolidated plan in item G with option B. Is there a second? Okay, that motion fails for lack of a
second. So that means that we would then make have someone make a motion to use option A in that um 3E readiness employment section for the school performance and support framework would go with option A and
include those edits and updates in the consolidated plan. So moved. Second. Any discussion? Just briefly, Madam President, even though even though I prefer item B, option B over item A, I
just want to explain that I will vote for the consolidated plan because I do think it's an improvement over where we are now. Thank you. Any other comments? Madam President, Miss Kilgore, I think it's important that we do respect the 81% who felt strongly for option
B, but I also think it's important that we respect their opinion of the people who are going to be trying to hire our students in the future. And from what you said, they were going with option A. So if we're
trying to prepare students for the future, you know, I think that's that's how we should go. Mr. Rotherham. Yeah, I'll just piggy back on that and just I mean it is we have this pie chart is 81 to 19. This is public comment though. We I just want to
be very clear. We we should respect we should respect the view of every educator in the state. Whatever they think on various questions, but this wasn't I want to make sure we're very clear. This was not a survey across the state. this was people who decided to respond to public comment because they
felt strongly or motivated to or professional obligation. Um but it is not a random sample of sort of where sentiment across um uh across the Commonwealth is that we don't anything
further okay Miss Kilgore I Dr. Northern Dr. Ari, Miss McFersonson, hi Mr. Rotherham. I Miss Holton I and chair votes I. Okay. Thank you gentlemen very much and we're going to take item H and
then take lunch. You ready? All right. Good afternoon, President Cesy, members of the board. Um, before you today is a first and final review of recommendations regarding the literary fund loan application approval for the release of loan funds. The literary fund
provides lowinterest loans for new school construction and for additions of permanent improvements or additions to existing schools to help provide a students with safe and secure learning environments. The Virginia Department of Education conducted one loan application
process in the fall or in the fiscal year 2023 and two literary loan application processes during fiscal year 24 for school divisions to apply for construction loans through the literary fund. One school division, Bedford
County, that applied for two loans during this loan application has now submitted all of their required documentation needed for the requested loans to be released by this board. The item requested of the board is to approve the release of two literary fund
loans requested by Bedford County as follows. A loan requested for a gymnasium edition at Bedford Primary School. Bedford is requesting a literary fund loan for this project in the amount of $2.8 million payable over 20 years
and is eligible for a 3% annual loan interest rate. The project application is shown in attachment one of your board document. The second loan requested also by Bedford County is for an auditorium renovation and addition at Liberty High School. Bedford is requesting a literary
fund loan for this project in the amount of le 11,27,000 payable over 20 years and is eligible for a 3% annual interest rate. This application is shown in full on attachment two of your document.
The recommendation today is that the board wave first review and approve the release of these two literary loan fund loan applications for Bedford County based on the loan amounts, terms, and eligible annual interest rates requested in their loan application and as
outlined in your executive summary. Happy to entertain any questions that you may have. Are there any questions? Okay. Is there a motion to wave first review and approve the release of the two literary fund loans requested by Bedford County School Division based on
the loan amounts, terms, and eligible annual interest rates requested in their loan applications as indicated in the item as presented to the board by Miss Ba. So move. Any uh
discussion? Miss Holton? I Oh, I'm sorry. I I thought you had a question. No. Okay. Miss Kilgore, hi. Dr. Northern, hi. Dr. Arian, hi. Miss McFersonson, hi. Mr. Rotherham, hi. Miss Holton, hi. And chair votes I. Thank you
very much. And we will take a 30 minute break for lunch. We will be back at 1. We are back, ladies and gentlemen. Um, and we're going to go to item I and Mr. Gillstrap. Good afternoon, uh, President Casey,
Superintendent Gillixson, and other members of the board. Uh I bring to you a combination of partnerships that come together for this this pretty simple action. Uh during the April 7th, 2025 meeting for the ABtail board, uh Va Ve
staff gave a presentation on the need to create more accessible pathways to lure for early childhood special education teachers. Over the past two years, Virginia has seen a 24% increase in the number of children identified with a disability for ages 2 through five
attending preschool. The need for additional teachers with early childhood special education endorsement has been long-standing with the percentage of vacancies or individuals teaching out of their endorsement area ranging from 7 to 9% over the last six years. This early
childhood special education endorsement is a combination of two top 10 critical shortage areas. Data from 202425 indicate it identifies elementary and special ed as the top two critical shortage areas on the list and this is a
combination of those. What we are asking Abtel, VDOE and uh the superintendent is a proposed removal of an arbitrary graduate level course requirement as opposed to undergraduate level for those wishing to add this
endorsement to their license outside of an approved program pathway. This would be item two if you were looking at the lure pathways. This change and other proposed future changes could fill at least 70 hardto-fill positions in the future. And furthermore, this change
would align the requirements with all other special education endorsements. If you have your boiler plate um on the background, you can see that all of the other special ed requirements only require an undergraduate uh level of work. Whereas for what we believe is a
mistake, uh this one endorsement asks for graduate level. So all we're asking is to remove the word graduate and align it with all the rest of the special education endorsements and make a pathway that is easier to fill for early childhood special education.
Are there any questions for Mr. Gilstrap? Is there a motion to wave first review and accept for final review the ABTEL recommendation to take regulatory action to open the compliance pathways in 8VAC
2023540 by removing the requirement for coursework earned towards an elementary or an early childhood special education endorsement to be at the graduate level. So moved. Second. Any discussion here? Miss
Holton. Madam President, just to uh clarify everybody, including the public, we're not removing any coursework requirements. We're just saying that the teacher candidate can meet the requirements by taking special
ed early childhood coursework in undergraduate courses, that courses don't all have to be labeled graduate courses. and uh Abtel had a robust discussion on the on the issue and um I I think have wisely recommended that this comes soon and I'm guessing if you
could just um answer this question for me. I'm guessing that's based on the fact that we didn't used to have early childhood special education coursework in undergraduate programs.
They really only existed in graduate programs. And as you know, we didn't do a whole lot of teacher prep in our undergraduate programs until fairly recently. But I don't know whether we uh in Abtel and uh Mr. Gilstret may be able to address this, but whether we were able to parcel out whether that was why
this language was there in the first place or whether it was simply a mistake. We believe it's actually a mistake. It makes sense. You your suggestion was the same suggestion that I left Abtel in search of, but we don't find evidence that that actually was the case. We believe that it was just the
misplaced word. Okay, sounds good. Any other discussion here? Miss Kilgore. Dr. Northern, hi. Dr. Acrian, I Miss McFersonson. Hi, Mr. Rotherham. Hi, Miss Holton. Chair votes I. Thank you, Mr.
Gilstrap. Now on to Mr. Chapman. Thank you, President Cesy, members of the board, Superintendent Gullixson. Um, the action before you in this item we think is just a a fairly simple and straightforward cleanup item. Um, the
essential thing that happened as, as you all know, the regulatory process can be long. Um, and sometimes when you have different moving parts, it creates slight discrepancies and this is one of the discrepancies we like to correct. Back in uh
2020 two um this board approved uh changes to the lensure regulations governing school personnel um following uh guidance at the federal level to remove uh the word regionally in front of a credit institutions. So as one of the basis for a teacher license or a
school you know any other kind of school personnel license we're no longer looking for a regional accreditation but simply this came from a credit institution. Um, in general, we think that this is was a a helpful move for the teacher pipeline in Virginia as well as in other states because it opened up the the number of bases that um could
count for lensure qualification. When that was approved in 2022 at the exact same board meeting, we had a uh an item going through at the final stage to add a dual language endorsement. And as you you know the between the proposed stage and the final stage we really don't want
to see regul um changes in the regulatory language um otherwise that can delay. By the time those both went both went through and became effective. We now have a a number of uh these dual language requirements that still say reg still reference regionally accredited institutions. And so what we'd like to
do is strike the word regionally as we did before um to make sure that the the 2022 action and this regulatory action started in 2019 um can be aligned for with with the board's policy. Um so as a result the the recommendation from the superintendent is that the board wave
first review and approve this just to make sure that the board's regulations are consistent across the board. Any questions on this item? Okay. Is there a motion to wave first review and approve the proposed regulatory changes as well as delegate to VDOE staff the authority to make
changes necessary to effectuate this action or comply with the requirements of the Administrative Process Act and the Virginia Register Act? Second. Any discussion here?
Uh Dr. Northern, I just had a quick question. Jim, is there any reason why we um in put in institution instead of college or university? Uh yes, because we have a definition of an accredited institution just to cover both of those.
Um so we're we're working off of federal language, but the the word institution is and accredited institution is inclusive of both colleges and universities. Gotcha. Other questions or comments? No. Okay, Miss Kilgore.
Dr. Northern Hi, Dr. Arian. Hi, Miss McFersonson. Hi, Mr. Rotherham. Hi, Miss Holton. Hi. And chair votes eye. Thank you, Mr. Chapman. Thank you. And now we will take item K.
Two days in a row. I know. Good afternoon, President Cesy, members of the board, and Superintendent Gullixson. My name is Amanda Nvetrol and I am pleased to present agenda item K, an update to the procedures for initiating an academic year governor's school. An
academic year governor school is a regional high school for gifted and advanced students under code of Virginia section section 22.1-26 joint and regional schools. Currently, there are 19 academic year governor school models operating
throughout the Commonwealth of Virginia. These schools vary in focus area, size, and length of daily program and are sponsored by the Virginia Department of Education and participating localities. Programs are operated by joint boards as detailed in chapter
281, also known as regional governing boards. The regional governing board oversees the creation and adoption of the bylaws and policies that govern an academic year governor's school. In 1998, the board of education approved
the process outlined in the procedures for initiating an academic year governor's school. Although several code and regulatory changes have been made to Code of Virginia section 22.1-26 and chapter 281 since 1998. The
original process approved by the board has not been updated. The 1998 document includes language about the department issuing a contract with the governing board and fiscal agent for the academic year governor school. This is not in compliance with current regulations and
has potential to create confusion in the field. Specific updates to the new document include removal of language associated with proposed programs entering into a contract with the department, addition of expectations for technical support, including an
evaluation timeline for new programs, realignment of the document into part one and part two for easier usability and updates to the requirements for administrative procedures to align with current best practices. This document was sent to governor's school directors
as well as a prospective new governor school planning committee for review and feedback. This document has also been reviewed by department staff in the office of the attorney general. If approved, the update to this document will be communicated in the Virginia Education Update and Department staff
will provide technical assistance on this updated document to stakeholders as needed. The amended process will also be sent to the prospective new governor's school applicant and made publicly available on the department's website. The superintendent of public instruction recommends that the board of education
received this item for first and final review. The department has received its first governor's school application since 2009 and the existing governor's school process is outdated and unworkable for the department and board of education to properly review. The
school would like to be considered to open to students as soon as fall 2026. So amended approval processes to align with current code regulations is urgent. And I'm happy to take any question. Are there any questions? Miss Holton.
Yes. Thank you, Amanda. Uh the uh my understanding is that the applicant for a new governor's school uh is ready to go once we approve the new application process. And my understanding based on my conversation
with Superintendent Gullixson last week is that we can fully address this new application in timely fashion if we wait for final review in June on this. Is that accurate? Yes, that's how I understand it as well. So, is there any
reason why we need to do first and final review today? Well, this is a procedural document that hasn't been updated since 1998. So, the revisions are very minor. um we really took out language that didn't align with current regulatory language, but the item is largely the
same. And the um as far as the New River Valley Governor School, um they will need to secure funding after approval. They're eager to do curriculum planning and work with their faculty to really prep for fall 2026. So, is there any reason why this uh proposal could not have been brought
before us for first review last month? Um well the process was in in you know the works but not finalized and wasn't reviewed by all parties at that time. And finally, am I right that in this uh
proposal you've not yet met with stakeholders such as the schoolboard association, the superintendent association, the PTA, uh um the VA or other parent groups,
etc. hasn't been vetted with those groups. No, it has not. But it is a procedural document that has minor updates. Well, but it does have changes as to the expectations for technical support, including evaluation timelines, etc.
There's some substance in there, right? Sure. Well, the first docu, the original document did not describe how new programs were evaluated or how often they would receive technical support from the department. And so really with those new programs, felt it was
appropriate to provide them um a detailed explanation of the technical assistance they would receive. Thank you. Um, Madame President, if I may just jump ahead to a comment, Miss Hton, though, I I think that what the work the department's done on this looks good.
Um, I I just you all know and you've heard from me before that I think we need to resist the urge to do everything on first and final. And I have withheld um objecting to earlier items where they truly seemed totally technical. This is
a substantial document. Hasn't been updated since 1998. there may be other updates that the field might tell us need to be added into this work and where something has only been made public less essentially a week ago less than a week of less than uh seven
business days anyway um I understood from the superintendent that the department had no objection to doing this on only first review today and maybe I misunderstood that but I think that our normal process of first review one month final review the next month
allows parents to weigh in, allows teachers, allows uh administrators, allows schoolboard members to weigh in if necessary. And they may have no comment whatsoever. And it may be that this document is exactly as we ought to finalize it, but I think it's u wrong to
be hasty when there's no need. Okay. Um I I will let this be the will of the board. So, um, the item says first and final I will ask if there's a motion to wave first review and approve the governor's school
process approval process. I have a clarifying question, Dr. Northern. So, the doc the attachment that we've been given that's oddly says approved by the board on May 22nd, 2025, is this the new document that you've
already made the changes to? Yes. Yes. Do we have a redline version that actually shows the changes that were made? No, I don't have that available. I could provide that if needed. Okay. Yeah, that would that would have that would help me a lot just to see the changes because I got confused that you know seeing that it was a confusing um
the way it was. So, um would you like to make a motion to only accept this item for first review? Yes. Okay. Thank you. So, uh Madame President, I don't think a vote is required for right No, but um as
long as we're all good with how this is going to progress, we will take this for first review and then see it again for final review next month. Okay. Thank you. Wait, whoa, whoa, whoa. Hold on a second. He has a question. I have a question. Mr. Rother, I just want to
know is this the full document that you want us because I only have looking at what we have in the presentation, it's not very long. It says it is procedures for initiating an
academic year governance school and it what we have is how many pages we got? It it is a shorter document. Yes. The original document is fairly short as well. And this is it. Yes. So the
changes that were made are just going to be red line on what we see right in front of us now. You'll bring us back. Yes. Okay. Mr. Rotherham. Thank you, Madam President. Amanda, thank you for this. Um, for next month, could you just be We don't need to do it now. Just be
prepared to speak to this. Goes a little bit to Miss Holton's comment. What are once once uh it starts, I know like some of the criteria that's in there includes things like um uh you have to demonstrate that all the um uh regional school divisions have had a chance to give input. if you could just uh be a be
prepared to tell us like what are all the opportunities for public input once somebody wants whether it's the this proposed new river valley one or whatever anywhere else what is what are the opportunities for public input in in the process what does that look like I think that'd be helpful thank you Sure thank you madam president miss if I can
just speak to that I appreciate that and but I don't want to suggest that you all need to go through a whole lot more homework the sheer fact that we wait a month and that we accept public comment means that if there's some glaring um um concern or something omitted, then the
field can come forward and tell us. It can come forward and tell you if they choose, but can come forward and tell us through public comment. And there may well be none. It may well be that this is exactly what we need to approve next month. Thank you all.
May I just ask if there are any specific stakeholder groups you would like to get feedback from? If I may, my suggestion is that I mean, well, no. Well, here's what I would suggest. The sheer fact that we wait a month means those who care about this issue and are concerned about it can
come forward and identify themselves. If you do want to uh choose to, and maybe Mr. Rotherham has thoughts on this want to do further outreach. the there is a group the the Virginia public education stakeholders group I can't remember what it's the VPC includes the superintendent
association the principal association the sup the um VA the PTA the schoolboard association I think those are the usual um stakeholder groups yeah yeah I'm less concerned with that
thank you miss hold and just um uh just so people are clear what are the like when one of these is moving, what are the opportunities? Including like this. Obviously, this is a publicly noticed agenda item and in my experience, the various groups have never been shy about coming and telling us what they think about items on our agenda. Um, if they
have time, which the month of delay gives them, right? But, um, just for this, just for the public to realize once one of these schools gets moving, what are the opportunities? Obviously, all those affected divisions, there'd be a schoolboard process, whatever else I think would be helpful. Thank you. Thank
you. Okay. Item L. Are we ready? All right. Good morning or good afternoon. Sorry, it's a blur today. Good afternoon, President Cesy, board members, and Superintendent Gullixson. My name is Calypso Gilstrap. I serve as the associate director of the
Office of Educational Technology and Classroom Innovation. And today we are going to be reviewing the model policy on internet safety. During our discussion, we will explore the adoption process, gathered insights from our stakeholders, and identify key steps to ensure the policy remains strong and
responsive to safeguard both our students and our educators. Since the adoption of the model policy in June of 2024, VDOE has proactively engaged stakeholders to gather valuable feedback and enhance the policy. Furthermore, the General Assembly has passed two significant bills strengthening internet
safety education and oversight. Today, we will explore these important advancements and collaborate on the next steps to ensure safe and supportive digital learning environments for our students and our educators. The board has made thoughtful and strategic efforts to ensure the successful implementation of the policy.
Since its adoption, the policy and instructional resources have been distributed to school boards across this commonwealth, supporting school divisions and promoting internet safety for both students and educators. To further strengthen this initiative, the VDOE has actively sought stakeholder
feedback on the model policy and instructional practices. We anticipate internet safety will stay at the forefront of our work as Senate Bill 905, which mandates the reestablishment of the Internet Safety Advisory Council, will continue to annually review, develop, and update the
policy and instructional practices. House Bill 2460 encourages the board of education to thoughtfully integrate media literacy and digital citizenship standards and supporting instructional guides during our regularly scheduled revision of the standards of learning, which will begin
with science this summer. In an effort to refine and strengthen the policy, VDOE has engaged in a range of stakeholders including educational organizations, digital safety and advocacy groups, school leadership associations, and school divisions. These have been there have been requests
from our schoolboard members for to incorporate artificial intelligence into the model policy to align with the new computer science standards of learning and the executive order 30 which has guidance on AI education. Overall, our stakeholders
found the policy to be in pretty good shape. Here's a few examples that we received from VAS. They said that they liked the policy. They thought it was effective and they appreciated the flexibility that PR provided to school divisions. So as we revised we wanted to make sure we maintain that flexibility.
VAC our virtual learning advisory committee suggested a tiered approach to the training clarifying u more things about student device use and aligning it with life instruction skills life skill instruction. There we go. and Vassel, the school librarian association, recommended that library
inclusive language identifying school librarians as key instructors on topics like copyright and media literacy. We recommend the following revisions to reflect the evolution of the landscape and the technological advances that have happened in the last year. One of the key updates is to
restructure the guiding principles. This revision emphasizes the positive influence that the internet safety training will have on schools, highlighting its impact on students personal lives. By fostering enhanced awareness, responsible online behavior, improved cyber security practices,
digital footprint management, collaboration with parents, and ethical considerations, students will not only be better equipped to work in a digital world at school, but also at home. Another crucial addition is guiding principle F, which will now explicitly
address the responsible and ethical use of generative artificial intelligence. As AI continues to shape the way we interact with technology, the updates throughout this policy underscore the importance of integrating ethical guidelines into our practice as teachers. To ensure alignment with the
broader governmental directives, the policy has also updated to include relevant executive orders in the laws and regulations section. Additionally, new definitions have been introduced like AI defining its capabilities ranging from problem solving to decision-making and stressing the
growing need to have AI literacy among students to prepare them for the future workforce in Virginia. And the digital learning component reinforces the importance of digital fluency, critical thinking, and ethical technology use by equipping students with the foundational skills of digital citizenship. This
update ensures that they will be wellprepared to thrive in these high demand jobs that we've been talking about today. More recommendations include our ongoing commitment to the safeguarding student data. So, we have added a new subpoint that will explicitly address
access to student data, ensuring that data privacy agreements, DPAs is what we call them at the department, are utilized when procuring products in schools, including AI driven products. This update reinforces the important of protecting student data first,
reflecting our dedication to the ethical use of technology. Additionally, our new policy expands the definition of educators to formally include our specialists such as school librarians and ITRTS or our instructional technology resource teachers. By recognizing their vital role in their
professionalism, we acknowledge that their contributions should be guiding students towards digital fluency, media literacy, and responsible internet use, and they should be serving as the internet safety leaders in schools. Providing um sorry, our
recommended revisions also include um building a strong foundation of responsible digital practices. The policy now mandates training. So this last year we kind of were a little vague about training and our stakeholders asked for more specific things. So now we are asking for them to conduct
training prior to or at the time of device distribution. Uh this would be also have additional refresher courses throughout the year. Uh this the department of education will create a example of what that training would look like through our public media stations.
U we would also like to see a big library with specifically talking about acceptable use student conduct and data privacy and then when school divisions are seeing specific problems like let's say cyber bullying is becoming a problem those resources be available for schools to use when it is needed at the time.
Additionally, the policy expands schoolwide programs to include guest speakers. So before we ask for law enforcement to be invited, but we also think it'd be really great to see industry leaders that are in their communities talking about how does internet safety work at their work. So maybe somebody from NASA can come talk
to their school and say this is what internet safety looks like at NASA. Uh to ensure that students also um have the skills necessary to thrive in the um technologydriven world. We want to make sure that digital learning integration standards are actually
ingraded into the the instruction. Like we talked yesterday, it should no longer be like the icing on the cake. It needs to be the salt in the cake. It needs to be in in the cake, not just afterthought. Um, additionally the policy induces um produce introduces the principle of responsible communication
that it's really important with the AIdriven world that we have honesty, integrity and civility in all things we're doing on the computer at all times. Equally vi vital is making sure that our computer science standards of learning which promote the understanding
of data network and cyber security. By embedding AI literacy and computer science education into our everyday instruction, students will be able to have the skills necessary to navigate this increasingly driven uh increasingly technologydriven world responsibly and
ethically. Equally important is the responsibility of school leaders to support and monitor the effective use of the digital learning and computer science standards. So, how are school principles walking into classrooms and seeing that being taught? um where is it documented on lesson plans and in
curriculum. By providing professional development opportunities, really clear guidance, and consistent oversight, we hope that leaders are feeling empowered to ask their teachers to seamlessly embed digital learning principles into their everyday content. Overall, these recommendation recommendations enhance
the model policy concerning internet safety, reaffirming our unwavering commitment to equipping students with the knowledge and skills needed to navigate the world safely, ethically, and effectively to ensure that we um properly operationalize this policy. We
will continue to provide personalized support to school divisions. We will also include training of our governing board members, expand professional development opportunities for our educators, continue to curate and distribute instructional resources, establish or reestablish the internet
safety advisory council. We are going to work with our public media stations to launch a family digital citizenship and media literacy package. Um, we will integrate digital citizenship and media literacy into the standards of learning and instructional guides. and we will
read uh we will submit a report to the general assembly in October. I'm sure you're all looking forward to reading that report. In closing, I don't know if that was last night. Okay. In closing, internet safety remains uh a critical priority. And through collaboration with our stakeholders, school divisions, our
school board, law enforcement, and policy makers, we ensure that our students and educators will have the tools that they need to do what's best in our digital world. Thank you. And I'm open for any comments or questions about the policy. Are there any
questions? Mr. Rotherham, you go. Or Dr. Northern, you guys flip a coin. Okay. Um, I just was curious whether there was anything on email fishing. Um, I feel like that's something that people are getting smarter and smarter about how to take your And I I did a word search and didn't see it, but it's
probably it may be in there. that I don't think we used the word specifically about fishing, but we talked about unverified information in in a little because we were also talking about like misinformation, disin like we don't want to get too in the weeds because it is a policy and it's a model policy and we'll let school division
fill in what they feel is appropriate. Also, this has to be kindergarten through 12th grade. So, but we certainly can add specific language about fishing um and be more specific. Um, we agree 100% and that will definitely be one of the topics that we have in those instructional resources. Like we would
let the instructional resources kind of guide the don't click on that. Um, and what would be appropriate at kindergarten versus 12th grade because 12th graders are being fished. Hopefully kindergarteners don't have email. So, uh, so we want to make sure we do age appropriate, but certainly we'll make
sure we have fishing in and emailing uh, communicating with unknown people be a really important part. Um because originally this bill was passed to reduce human trafficking and building education skills so that kids know don't talk to strangers online and so that's
definitely important part of this. Mr. Rotherham Clipo thank you great presentation. Thank you for all your work on this. Um uh I have a question about so when we initially passed this I asked the uh then superintendent of public instruction um uh superintendent
Gullixson's predecessor to run the spice and free speech groups particularly fire uh it's unclear that that happened there back to us in 6 months. We never heard back. We have never heard back but we have reached out several times to several advocacy groups for children um
including the ACLU as you specifically requested but also a few others. Uh I if you can get them to call me I'd be I would love that's we can talk about that after meeting. Um, I also did specifically request the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, which is has sort of emerged as sort of the
real sort of downthe-middle free speech group whether all sides. And the reason I asked that is because I noticed in here we have some stuff on misinformation, which is obviously important and it's important for students in a digital environment, but as we've learned um, the past few years, sometimes things that are called misinformation are simply just different
viewpoints or places where empirical evidence conflicts and so forth. And so I'd be more comfortable if we both had that review and then if there's anything else we need to put in here because you students, you know, their first amendment rights don't end at the schoolhouse door and we need to be both
uh very diligent about protecting them but also respectful of that. Absolutely. Thank you. Absolutely. Happy to work with whoever you ask me not to work with. Other questions or comments here? Miss Holton, thank you for this good work. Uh uh the
uh I've got several particulars and one is I'm so happy it's here on first review because that gives us an opportunity for input and one in particular is uh as I'm sure you know the uh take it down act bipartisan act u that went through congress expeditiously
this spring and was just signed by law into law by the president last week this week um may well deserve adding to your list of federal acts uh consideration of whether there's any other additions that that may prompt in. That would be wonderful. We will add that to our list
of federal uh laws and then also we do have that resource already in our instructional resources on the VDOE website. You know, as you know, it it's designed to prevent um the AI deep fake problem that's scourge in our schools right now.
So um um uh another fairly specific suggestion I wanted to make was on page nine I believe under section D. Uh um there's language added the
sentences local education agencies can prevent schools from accessing social media platforms and other non-instructional applications. You propose to add the language artificial intelligence tools. I don't think you mean to be saying that local e LEAs can
prevent students from accessing any artificial intelligence tools. It's the non-approved ones or some. So, I think the addition of the word non-approved would capture your meaning there. We absolutely hope our schools are going to be helping our students understand how
to use uh appropriate artificial intelligence tools. And so, you don't mean to lump them in with all social media platforms that way. Absolutely be happy to have the link. Um uh a third
specific is um um let me find the spot. Oh, in your list of orders you include executive orders, both state and federal executive orders. And there have
been some useful executive orders at both the state and federal level. But as you know, executive orders, as we all know, executive orders are not legally binding on local divisions um the the policy as written frankly
suggests that they are. And so I think that one one way to deal with this would be to address in uh section A on page six, it says policy must comply with federal, state, and local laws,
regulations, and orders. Um, it adds in the regulations and orders. And my suggestion would be that we consider an amendment that says laws reg law laws and regulations, and that divisions are encouraged to comply with executive
orders, applicable executive orders, and then goes on. So that would be one language suggestion. And related to that is I'm discou uh um especially with that language being what it is now. The language on page seven under number one
purpose. The current policy says this document has been developed for local school boards to enable such school boards to better support blah blah blah. While this document offers recommendations specific implementation is left to the discretion of local school divisions. you are proposing to
delete that language and um particularly in connect you know as you're listing orders that are not binding um I would want I would suggest that we restore some kind of language acknowledging local school division authority in these
matters absolutely um I think that's all of my language suggestions the the only other specific I would have is yeah I assume Oh, on groups you may want to consult. There's a an organization called Children and Screens that's done some good work in
this area. They're it's a national organization. It's not somebody you're by any means mandated to communicate with, but you may want to consult them to see if they have any helpful suggestions. This is their specialty. Um, and I have connections there if you
need um an introduction. Um and then um finally in your presentation you listed an extensive list of stakeholders you consulted which is wonderful. I didn't see the teachers association mentioned. I assume that was just a oversight on the presentation. Were they part of your
outreach this time but I I we they were part of our first policy revision. I mean the first time we went through but we will be happy to reach back out to them after I make the revisions you guys have suggested today and get their feedback. Great. Thank you.
That's all I got. Any other comments or questions? Superintendent Gullixson. Thank you so much, Calypso. I just wanted to flag for the board. We were getting requests, uh, including prior to my hat as superintendent, to
have an AI model policy. And so, um, huge kudos to Calypso and the team for recognizing it makes more sense to incorporate those AI elements in this model policy for internet safety and those nuances. Thank you, Member Holton, on that addition of the not approved AI
tools so that we are definitely moving our youth towards um those high demand skills. Um, but I have received good feedback from some individual board members on appreciation that they'll have this as a tool to navigate with their um, local school divisions.
Okay. Thank you. All right. Be back. See you in June with vision. Um, as you can see, we have under presentations and written reports uh, written report O and P. And then we have,
um, Melissa Velasquez coming to give us the legislative report that we did not have yesterday. Is she back there? You know, I only aspire to be 5t tall, so podiums are very intimidating to me.
So, I hope everybody can see. Okay. Uh, well, I know that I'm standing between uh you and the end of two very long days, so I will try to be brief. I'm the uh cleanup batter on the uh in the agenda. So, I'm here to present to you on the um legislative session. I'm
sure you've all heard many many things about it. Um but just a short synopsis of of some of the things that we did during the session. And I apologize if I have to get used to this clicker. Um, I understand I'm supposed to hit it at the
glass. I also have bad aim. There we go. So, um, if you're not aware, this was, um, the short session because we have a short session during an odd number of years. And so, um, that doesn't mean any less work. It just means more work in less number of days.
So, the short session was 46 days. And, um, you can see just a short summary of what's in the, um, presentation there. Um uh I accidentally deleted the source for this when I was revising the PowerPoint, but this is taken straight from the LIS
statistics for the session that they produce annually. Um you can see there, like I said, not any less work. It was just less time. There were over 3,000 bills uh introduced during the session. And um this chart lays out for you how um those bills were addressed, both the
House and the Senate, um throughout the process. Um during the session as I go through all 3,000 of those bills um as they're being introduced to look for anything that impacts uh your policy K12 early childhood. We look for FOYA bills that
may impact the work of the board or the work of the department. Um administrative process act bills that would impact any of your regulatory um actions. Uh mental health um because it usually has a tie into the department. health bills, safety bills, and of
course any studies that while the department may not be doing those studies, um we may be asked to assist um via JARK or other um commissions in the general assembly. So, as you can see, we tracked 158 House bills. Um there were two
resolutions, including I think some um board appointment confirmations. 86 Senate bills were tracked and um some Senate resolutions. Your staff uh at the department were very busy and about a 12-day period which included two
weekends and a holiday. 267 legislative action summary documents were prepared. Um during that time period, people lose sleep, they lose time not getting to eat, they lose time with their families. So it was, you can see, a very dedicated effort uh to make sure all the um
governor had um legislative action summaries um to make decisions on. So needless to say, we were super busy. Of the um early childhood and K12 bills that we tracked, 57 House bills passed, uh one resolution um and the
Senate bills 33 and one Senate resolution. and the House and the Senate resolution were companions regarding a Jark study on uh library books. So we will be hearing from Jark on that and many of those House bills and Senate bills were also companions. So
while it's you know um 77 I think bills passed there it's not that you know truly in volume when you start looking at the companion bills. Now, um I was asked to bring out in some highlight um areas of the legislation.
So, um these bills are included in the back of your presentation in numerical order, but just to highlight a few. Um there were health and safety related bills. Um the cell phone bills that passed um of course the administration was the leader in getting out ahead on
cell phone policies and then the de assembly decided to codify that. Initially the introduced bills were not um identical to what the administration had um issued in the executive order and then the department's policy guidelines but the um bills were amended over time
and conformed to the executive order and the um department's policies. So that's um good bills for kids and for school divisions. the uh school connected overdose bills. You know, you've seen in the news with there's been great progress in Virginia in the in in dealing with opioids and the reduction
of of crises in that area. But this bill is another um way to protect students in both public schools and private schools. Uh when the event occurs, um whether it's a public school or a private school, parents have to be notified within 24 hours. And then either the Department of Education or VCP for
private schools also have to be notified of an event. um and it defines what those um events are. The um nutritional standards, we've all heard about the federal government looking at the dyes in foods. Um always
um Virginia is a leader in in getting out ahead of things. So, this um piece of legislation will ban uh I think it's nine different um nutritional items uh colors uh and dyes in food. School divisions do have time to prepare in terms of their contracts because this is
a delayed effective date of July 1, 2027. So, this is not going to hit school divisions immediately. They'll have time to work with their vendors and um start working on those products that they sell in the cafeterias and vending machines. And then finally, just another safety bill giving school divisions more
authority and flexibility in meeting and working with their local partners and meeting on um uh school campus and um to talk about safety issues with their local law enforcement. um non-custodial parents. HB2226 just a further safety measure to
protect the address of a foster care parent before being released uh student information to a um custodial uh to a um parent um because we all know kids end up in foster care for various reasons and we want to protect the safety of the foster parents and children's locations.
uh the model memorandum of understanding for counseling that opens up teleaalth to not just teleaalth providers but the school counselors themselves. Another good service for kids. Um and then uh the heat safety standards that the two
bills HB1663 and Senate Bill 11404 to protect those kids participating in their athletic and intramural activities um so that health uh heat standards are are augmented um and more um resources are
provided so that students um remain safe during those very important extracurricular activities. teacher pathways. Um we've heard uh I think some about some of this yesterday, but House Bill 1829 is creating a new
endorsement uh for mathematics teachers and um lessening some of the burdens of that endorsement so that um we can um open up more opportunities to have more um trained licensed math teachers in the classrooms. um eliminating some of the classroom
course work um requirements for certain categories of teachers as well as um adding in the practice algebra one as an alternative to taking some uh of those requirements in the classroom and achieving a certain score on that practice. And then more pathways for
career um um teacher um career, excuse me, career and technical education pathways to allow those individuals that have the skill set already but need to uh complete uh some coursework. It allows them to receive a provisional license if they have that CTE
background. uh gives them more time to do so and allows them to substitute some co coursework in lie of others such as classroom management, curriculum and instruction in CTE and human growth and development or educational technology in lie of some of the other courses that
were required. As we move on to highlights for high expectations, um HB1 1957 is probably the the the mediest bill we'll call it for the session. It is a substantial bill. Um there are a number of provisions within
it. Uh it is not effective until July 1 of 2026. So the department is thoughtfully working on that bill. We will be communicating with school divisions. We will have multiple rollouts of information so that that we don't overwhelm the school divisions with the requirements of the bill. Um we
will have lunch and learns. We'll have webinars. Uh we will have uh we've done a I've actually helped draft a detailed synopsis of this bill working with the assessment office instruction will have a piece of it uh so that we can summarize the bill for um the school
division so they don't have to flip back and forth between the legislation and the synopsis um and that will give them the first opportunity to get that big chunk of information. Uh all of our synopsis will be posted on our website, including this one. And hopefully, I
don't know if the superintendent's heard anything, but hopefully we'll have the opportunity to talk to our or have the school divisions um talk to the legislators who patroned Delegate Helmer patron HB1957, but Senator Van Balkenberg had a companion that um didn't pass out of Senate um finance,
but equally involved in that bill. So, but this is going to be a year-long process. Um, school divisions are going to be updated and um, lots of different audiences in the school divisions are going to have the opportunities to hear from the department and receive communication and training um, that'll
help guide them through this. There are two subsections within the bill, subsections K and L that do not become effective related to local audits and local assessment um, permissive assessments. They do not become effective unless reenacted by the 2026 general assembly. So we will be keeping
an eye on that for 2026. I do believe yesterday you heard about the accelerated mathematics course in detail. Um school divisions will need to develop a policy to allow students to who score in the highest cortile the upper um cortile of mathematics to um
take upper level mathematics courses with automatic enrollment. parental options to opt out of that automatic enrollment and to open up additional pathways to students who may not um score in that upper cortile but still um have the opportunity to to involve themselves in higher level mathematics
and the department will receive data from school divisions and publicly report on that data once received. One behind Apologize for the delay, but as the PowerPoint catches up, um, we were talking about Virginia is always the most friendly nation to friendly state
in the nation to our military families. So, there were three bills in particular we wanted to highlight. um related to military families. One of very important ones for um Jenna Conway and the um appointment of a of a a veteran to the commission on early
childhood that will be beneficial to both the military community and early childhood to have that perspective available. Uh there's also the opportunity that school divisions start to work on that child if they come from a military family into the school division with an
IEP that you know sometimes record transfers take a long time and so the school divisions can immediately start working on getting the child the services that they need um based on what the parents present to the school division um as they wait for that official record to be
transferred. And um finally, just uh for school divisions, they have the authority to um enroll us uh child with their family uh information and consent if they don't reside in the school division. I don't know that um that was ever prohibition, but this is an affirmative statement that they can do
that. Um they do have to get certain information from the family member, but we know that, you know, military families need as much support as they can get, and this gives school divisions another tool in their toolbox to provide that. And then finally on transportation um a
bill passed that um gives stu uh you know it's it's limited to a certain um number of students um in average daily membership in school divisions uh with of 4500 or below but allows them alternative transportation options. They're going to be able to enter into contracts. Um, this bill does have an
expiration date of July 1, 2027, but I I would venture to guess that as we see it become more and more successful in the next couple of years that we'll see this revisited and that sunset clause um eliminated potentially and the number of students um that 48500 limitation raised
or even lifted. So, we'll be keeping an eye on that for the school divisions. Now, just at the towards the end of your um packet, there are all the House bills and all the Senate bills that we tracked and passed um in numerical order. So, those that are their highlights um they're they're also
in this order in case you want to look at additional legislation. They're hot linked. So, you can click on any bill and look at the chaptered bill. Um it should have an act of assembly number as the final piece of legislation. Um those synopsis, as I said, will be posted on our website. They're being gradually
rolled out in the newsletter and will be posted once they appear in the newsletter. And of course, I'm always available if school divisions have questions about the legislation and there are plenty of capable staff members who are subject matter experts on this legislation that I consult when I answer those questions. So, I always
have to extend a thank you to them for tolerating my um emails and phone calls. So, with absent that, I'm not uh I'm not going to go through each of those bills. that's there for your um reference and um I'll be glad to answer any questions but I do understand it has been a long day for both of you. Any
questions or comments? Dr. Yes. Um the one on page nine on high expectations. I'm just hearing a lot on the field from the folks the students with disabilities um and their grades being impacted by the so assessments and I know this doesn't going to impact this doesn't
impact anybody for another year but don't know if there's any language that can calm fears that are happening out there around that um if there's been thought put into that. Um well the department is in its initial phase of working on the roll out and there's there's going to be there are internal
workg groups being formed project management taking place. Each one of the elements of the bill has different impacts for different um children from third through 7th through 12th grade. Um the impact of the the twoe window at the end of the school year for testing has
instruction impact and pacing impact for teachers. So we're just in the initial phases of that. Um and so all I can say is stay tuned. But um you know our special populations office is very thoughtful in the materials that they roll out for parents and students with
disabilities. Um so that and for the our teacher lure office for the supports and trainings that we're going to give for professional development. So this as I said this is this is going to be a year-long process and it will have you know a significant amount of information that has to come from the department to
to school divisions. Um, and then we also have to wait to see with those subsections how they are reintroduced in the 2026 session. And if subsections are reintroduced, we may end up seeing revisions to other portions of the bill
um with the new legislation in 2026. So, I won't be I I wouldn't predict what we're going to do now in terms of what's going to kind of happen in 2026 because it's early early days, but um there will be supports and and and and resources rolled out um that all the school
divisions will be able to utilize and benefit from. Great. Thank you. You're welcome. Other questions or comments? Bton, thank you, Miss Vasquez, and and kudos to your team. That is quite a impressive workload. I know Superintendent
Gullixson understands the impact too having done her share of it. U very impressive work. Um I have three pieces I want to ask about. First the overdoses bill HB2774. Uh does that conform ex
uh to the actions we took earlier this year or will there be a need for us to address what we did to conform to the legislation? I'm trying to think back as we worked on the synopsis. I do believe there may be some revisions to the to the documents
that have been produced and uh Joe Warf is working on those um amendments to the um previously produced documents from the department that have come to the board. Um it's nothing substantial that I believe that it is some minor minor amendments that will change in those data but they will be brought back as
needed to um to uh add the details from the bill. Thank you. Um uh the second thing I wanted to ask about is in the budget. Uh we heard from your colleague yesterday about the the math um uh language in the budget. But another
piece in the budget addresses assessment. Can you tell us just give us the overview of uh the actions taken in the budget with respect to assessments? Um I'm actually not prepared to do that. Christina Verda is going to give you a detailed analysis of the budget. Um,
HB1600 is linked here in the um, um, PowerPoint for you if you want to look at that in advance. But Christina, superintendent, is that in June or July that Christina is going to um, come back? Well, it's July, but we can move it up to June. And that's, you know, but
Christina will be um, reviewing the budget with you and the contents of the budget. Well, wonderful. in particular because of this board's responsibility for assessments. I just think it's important that the board here uh both I think there was a an increase in the
allotment but also there was a specification of a study and some kind of oversight of the study all that to be going on during this calendar year so as to inform future legislative actions about assessment which is a topic as I
say this board's intimately involved in. So it would be helpful whenever it happens that this board be informed in some detail on that study. Superintendent Gullixson. Yes. And I will also be speaking on all things assessment to the House Appropriations Committee 2 days before the board
meeting. So we can just do an assessments update to the board in June and probably the larger budget items in July. Great. Um, and the final item as to um HB1957, um, I I think it's an impressive
piece of legislation. You're right that it's going to have some real impact on our divisions and be some work for all of us to make it work, but in particular, I think it's appropriate that our students have some skin in the game as to the SO assessments. Um, that's a new addition as to some of
those courses. Um already students have some skin in the game as to the high school end of year courses but not the middle school courses that are added in here. Um and yet that does raise questions. So and and particularly following up on Dr. Aerman's question
about special ed kids requirement which will go into effect for the 2627 school year if I understand it correctly. So not this coming year but the following year that so assessment shall account for at least 10% of the students final
grade. Combining that with the information we heard yesterday that the anticipated changes to in the standard setting process may well result in a doubling or a tripling of the percentage of students who fail their SOS. Meaning
that we may have twothirds of our students failing their SOS. Um, can the department address what consequences that could have for students earning special ed students and other students earning their verified credits in those
courses um going forward um and what we need to do to attend to that potential consequence. Well, as I said, it is very early days. We don't we are you know we are starting that work. Uh grading policies are the the purview of the of the school divisions.
Um and interesting enough about the bills, the bill language has um a number of exceptions for students with disabilities. This particular area did not have that carve out. Um and so we will see if if anything is is changed in the 2026 session related to that.
However, um as I said, the department will provide supports and resources to the divisions both in the assessment area to support um the results that you were speaking about in in terms of assessment of results as well as what to do to support students as they face this
different challenge um of the legislation. But as it's early right now and we want to be thoughtful in how we plan and we don't want to put information out there that we're going to have to go back and revise. We don't want school divisions to be any more confused or stressed over this bill. And
so we want to be thoughtful, roll out information and um in stages and address each component of the bill. So it's now May, we have a year um that before the bill is implemented and we want to make sure that we prep the school divisions well in advance, but there's a lot of
inside work in the department that will have to be done in terms of adjusting systems, revising resource documents, planning, and how that's going to be rolled out. So, it's it's a heavy lift for the department as well as the school divisions, but we're up for the challenge. Well, may I just miss May I
suggest that the department add this to the list? Potential consequences of the anticipated changes to the grading scale u that u the this board is contemplating over the next couple of months. And I do
point I do uh um recommend um to my colleagues that you take a look at the public comment submitted submitted by the Virginia Public Education Coalition which includes all those stakeholder groups we've talked about school board u
superintendent uh teachers PTA parents uh that uh are asking that as you consider as we consider changes to the cut scores ers that we contemplate the consequences including um I think they
identify three u um graduation rates, funding streams that are tied to so scores and the accountability framework and so really some of this needs to wait until we hear the recommend all of it needs to wait until we hear the
recommendations from the standard setting committee certainly but before this board acts on the new standard setting which is ultimately this board's responsibility. Um it my hope is that the department can help us think through
all the potential consequences and I've asked for that um for many months now actually that we have a list of all the different places in the budget all the different places in our regulations etc where so pass
rates are implicated and that we be aware of those before we make these uh dramatic changes. And so this one I would suggest that we just add to the list of potential consequences that uh the board may want to take into consideration as you contemplate changes.
Well, I'm just going to add a piece here that considering we're discussing this particular bill. Um, I don't hear a lot from parents in particular about things that are going on as it relates to SOS,
but I have had overwhelming outreach on this particular legislation that parents are overwhelmingly not in support of it. And I don't know if you guys looked at any of the um social media articles that
were put out by or articles that were posted on social media by some local media outlets, but it is shocking to me the amount of parents that are vehemently opposed to this legislation.
Um I don't know how it'll work out um once we get to 2026. Um, I I for one hope that there are some other pieces put into this to I mean many local school divisions already
either require this or allow for their teachers to do this. That that to me should be somewhat the autonomy of the teacher to make that decision. Um, and so that's kind of where I I sit on this one. Um, are there any other comments
about this presentation? U, Mr. Mr. Rotherham. Yeah. I have a I think there's many elements of this bill that are exciting. It was exciting to see a bipartisan education bill. Um uh my thing that's want to flag for you all is I think in some of the stuff on assessment quality and so forth is
great. 100 point scale sounds intuitively like oh well that's but there's a potential that that's going to create confusion for people because I think we all anyone who went through school we have a an assumption of 100 point scale and what it means and that's not necessarily going to equate with what what an assessment looks like what
an assessment cut score looks like and so I think it's going to behoove us to figure out how to communicate that because I know it is a it is a well-intentioned effort to clarify if not communicate depending how it plays out it could end up actually confusing and I think that's a part of this legislation that it really behooves us
to pay attention to and really learn about some best practices around um communication there. Yes, President Cre Mr. Rotherham, I had a very um extensive conversation with folks in assessment yesterday about that very topic about the 100 point scale and how that will
equate with our score, our testing um so assessment scoring. Um but people do understand 100 point scale is what you're often used. You know, you know, this question is worth two points and I'm going to have 50 questions and then I'm going to get there to 100 points. So we did we had a very we've had about three lengthy conversations on that same
topic. So it is very much on our radar. Madame President, if anybody else wishes to speak, uh, I'll come back to you, but I'd like, uh, Dr. Northern. Yeah, I've got a couple just observations. So on the 10% with
the so am I to assume that districts have the decision to calculate that however they would like it's got to be 10% but they can then decide okay if a kid gets X score then you know they they
pass by our standards and so this 10% could counted as as this score. Um you know you're wandering a bit outside of my area of expertise. we may need um the assessment folks to answer that question. Um but generally the school divi the school school divisions in
Virginia have maximum flexibility in those areas. Um but it will all depend on the types of the information we roll out as we um work through developing how this bill works with our assessment system and the information we convey to school divisions because we need
consistency across the state. That's right. Um and so we want to make sure that we um properly uh advise school divisions on the best course of action related to that. But yeah, I a bit out grading and assessment categories are that's a might need the expertise of
Mark Jennings or Dora Val to truly answer your question there. Yeah, I northern I'm sorry. I do think that's a that's a big deal. Um, and we should probably be collecting those data by district relative to the decisions that they make on that
10%. Um, and I think my other just other comment is on page 10. I see that we're have a bunch of new things that we're required to post on the division on the VDOE website by school, by district, so on having to do with the mathematics
acceleration, which is great. Um, but I will say that that should I'm assum I'm assuming we're already thinking about actually having to add that relative to the conversation we had earlier about reporting on the website. And also I'd love to see this they you have to uh
include the option the if if parents decide to opt out which is what I was actually saying we should be thinking about that and that's a big deal and and we actually are now mandated to collect the opt out data. So that's that's good. Um but yeah it's it's a lot
in here. I I uh I will concede that we have and you guys have a lot of work to u make all this happen. Miss Holton, uh I just wanted to add that um u madam madam president to your
point about public feedback. I have been hearing plenty of feedback from the Virginia PTA and other organizations from parents about the uh changes uh to the uh standard setting to the grade level. And I predict that if and when we
in fact go through with a decision to double or triple the failure rates up to six twothirds of our students failing the SOS, we'll hear more. Thank you. Anybody else? Superintendent Gixson. All right. Well,
I'm going to be the outlier on this bill. Uh we are going to implement it with great fidelity and appreciate both of the patrons for really leaning into some of the recommendations that had come out of the bipartisan work group um of
HP585 and are laser focused on how do we build student agency, how do we increase rigor, how do we maximize learning time. They were very accommodating on accounting for those divisions wanting to move towards competency based
learning models and what it might look like from an agency side where we need to help schools be able to proof point with students who are ready to demonstrate mastery at different points than just the very last point of the school year. And we have a lot of work
to do. Uh that is for sure. but um they are laser focused on working to improve uh student outcomes. And I also just want to address um while the very thoughtful and uh
national best practices underway in our proficiency standard setting is moving forward. Yes, more kids may in fact be identified as not proficient, but we are working towards being truly honest with
the students of the Commonwealth that we can then target very intentionally resources, tools, and technical assistance to divisions and schools and teachers to ensure that those kids truly leave middle school,
elementary school, and high school ready to succeed. And so I I understand the claims that there will be more kids that are not proficient or quote failing, but the honesty is they are already not
there. And so we are going to ensure that every kid is seen and gets the supports that they need. So this bill will help us also do that. Okay. Uh thank you so much, Velasquez.
All right, that brings us to um my reminder of review of the written reports and then um discussion of current issues. Does anybody have anything that they want to comment about
before we adjourn? Miss Holton. Yes, thank you. Um I just wanted to u uh I don't know that we had an opportunity to join in you in welcoming our new board member and how delightful it is uh to have Dr. Arian joining us
today. Um um and also I wanted to uh draw everybody's attention to the uh public the written public comment. Uh there was a recent add-on to that that I hope we'll have an opportunity to address at a future meeting. a letter
from the Richmond public schools asking to be relieved from theirou. Uh I don't I'm sure we'll hear from uh Superintendent Gullixson at an appropriate time on what the criteria are for that and how we respond to that. But I did want to point out regardless
of how we formally respond to it that the the the letter demonstrates some really remarkable success statistics that need to be applauded and celebrated including uh key achievements such as reducing chronic absenteeism. Um and
this is last year's stats so it's not updated uh yet but basically cutting their chronic absenteeism rate in half. Um um you know it was high uh immediately post pandemic 37% but bringing it down uh to 18.6% which was
almost down to the statewide average um increasing their um uh academic performance significantly on some of the metrics. In particular I see that the um math performance increased by more than 10 percentage points. uh the science
increased by um I'm doing my own math here 12 percentage points um uh etc etc and you know again they they were they were um had a lot of room for improvement but uh I think have made major improvement and
one thing this board has attended to uh over the years is issues of governance um and the board has made a remarkable turnaround on their governance structure um and their um operational stability as the as the letter identifies it. Um and
um whatever action we formally take or don't take, I encourage us all to u read that letter and and be sure that we take an opportunity to commend those extraordinary efforts and accomplishments. Yes. And just so you're aware, I've communicated back with the
superintendent and told him that we would be addressing those things in July that he's requested as our one-day board meeting in June is already pretty well packed. So, any other comments before we
adjourn? Dr. Northern, I just missed maybe I missed it, but we'll hear about the charter school update next meeting or the meeting after. Yes. Yes, you have a written report right now and we'll have another report that will actually be a physical report given next month.
Yes, Dr. Arian, I just want to thank everybody for the warm welcome. It's been wonderful and um to the superintendent just how hard your team works and I've just been overwhelmed with their reports and how much they want to report that they can't report and um so it's just great to see the
wonderful things happening in Virginia. So, thank you, Mr. Ratherham. Yeah, we've had out of time and know we have a busy meeting in June. I just want to just take a minute to also um congratulate uh the new state superintendent on how much she has hit
the ground running. Our last meeting was her was her first meeting um and just the amount of the volume of stuff on her plate and yet her responsiveness um to the field, her responsiveness to us. where the we're hearing great reviews and um you know she's she's juggling a
whole lot of plates and she's doing it with a plum and it's a difficult role to step into at any point and so I just wanted to just elevate that and you know I have the privilege of around the country working with a lot of um a lot of state chiefs uh in in different parts of the country different stripes and
we're just incredibly lucky to have this one. Yeah, Mr. Rotherham, thank you for bringing that up. I think that I get lost in the day-to-day with our superintendent in terms of uh how we um interact with one another, but I will
say that um it is a breath of fresh air. um the amount of work that is being done and I think from the vision that I'm getting um that the team at DOE is uh
being truly embraced for the level of expertise that they bring every day to the jobs that they do. That's something that's um you know when you're embraced as an employee for your expertise and your knowledge um that's thanks enough
that really gives people a wonderful feeling about the job that they do and I'm seeing that on the faces of of those employees at the department every day and I'm so thankful for the leadership that you are providing this department.
So thank you And good. And if there is nothing else, um, Superintendent Gixson, do you have anything or nothing else? We will move to adjourn. Well, I, uh, thank you for all of the kind remarks and, um, I am so
impressed with our team and what we are doing to move the needle for kids. I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge uh just all of the great uh convenings that have been happening in the last week uh to recognize the anniversary of
Brown versus Board of Education. Many of our board of education members have attended student driven events as we heard yesterday uh and others uh including seven of our uh former and current governor uh at an event this weekend. And it uh is a good reminder
that we have made progress, but we have a lot of work to do, including uh how we can best support the field in navigating some of those continued barriers uh from historic redlinining in regards to uh
school division enrollment policies and what we can do to make sure that our public schools are truly public for every child. So, uh, more more guidance to come and so I really appreciate everyone's time and we will have a full
packed June single day board meeting uh with more snacks because we have a lot to accomplish for kids. So, thank you. Great. With that, I would uh accept a motion to adjurnn. Is there a
second? Second. All right. We are adjourned.