Good morning. It's uh 9:05. I will now call this meeting to order. And as is customary for this board, we'll begin our meeting with a moment of silence followed by the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the
republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, liberty and justice for all. So, >> okay. Um, moving on. Um, is there a motion to approve the agenda as presented?
>> So moved. >> Uh, Dr. Arian, >> hi. >> Mr. Green, I >> Dr. Northern, >> hi. >> Miss McFersonson, >> hi. >> Miss Kilgore. >> Hi, >> Miss Ashton. >> Hi, >> Mr. Monk. >> Hi. >> Chair votes I. Okay. Um, staff has provided the members
of the board with draft minutes before the meeting. Is there a motion to approve the minutes as presented to the board? >> So move. >> Second. >> Dr. Arian. >> Hi. >> Mr. Green. >> Hi. >> Dr. Northern. >> Hi. >> Miss McFersonson. >> Hi. >> Miss Kilmore. >> Hi. >> Miss Ashton. >> Hi. >> Mr. Monk. >> Hi.
>> Chairs. Hi. So, as is customary now for this board, um the board appreciates being able to feature our wonderful arts programs from across the Commonwealth by having students perform at our meetings. So, I will now ask Dr. Acriman to
provide us with an introduction of our guests. Excited to do this. My parents majored in music and we're music educators. So, I would like to welcome Kilgore Gifted Center course this morning. Members of the Gilgore Gifted Center chorus from Hampton City Schools
in Hampton, Virginia will perform under the direction of Mandy Rpoli Galloway. Also in attendance is Kilgore Gifted Center principal Mr. Paul Loris and fine arts coordinator Mr. Kelly D. The Kilgore Gifted Center Chorus
consistently earns superior ratings at the Virginia Cor Director's Association Concert Assessment. There are fourtime recipients of the Virginia Music Educators Association Blue Ribbon School Award for their course and music programs. The Kilgore Gifted Center
Chorus will perform two musical selections. First, Ad Astra by Jacob Narvar. This piece radiates energy with a message of hope and empowerment. The Latin text reads, "To the stars through
difficulties, look up, move forward, leave all cares behind." Second, sees the day by Menkin, arranged by Emerson's features text describing camaraderie and working together towards a common goal, just like our families, our educators,
our administrators, our board members in the community in Hampton, Virginia do every day. You may notice the students wearing gold colored treble cleft music pins to symbolize the bond that music creates when shared with an audience. We hope you enjoy the performance.
Oh Stop. Super soon. Totally. Just know you're not alone. Yeah. Awesome. to the
stone. To the stone. To the stone. To the stone. Don't forget super
Super Show. See, don't be afraid. Don't see the snow. Now it's time to see 7
8 7 and open the gates and be afraid. Don't So, Um, we are back. You guys ready? Back there. Okay. Um, Dr. Northern, will you introduce our next recognition, please?
Thank you. >> Right. I wish we had a drum roll. Uh, it's my honor to recognize an outstanding Virginia educator who has received one of our nation's that's nation, not state, most prestigious honors in K12 education. This is the
Milin Educator Award. Been around a long time. Um, and it's a big deal. Today we are joined by Anna Drew who served as a seventh grade teacher in science department head at Shawville Middle School in McGomery County Public Schools. This prestigious award
celebrates Mrs. Drew's passion for teaching and her commitment to engaging every student in meaningful learning. Her work reflects the very best of our profession, creativity, compassion, and an unwavering belief in the potential of
every child. Mrs. Drew has inspired her students, supported her colleagues, and built a learning community that prepares the leaders of tomorrow. At this time, please join me in welcoming Miss Stephanie Bishop, who is vice president of the Milin Educator Foundation and
Milin Educator Awards, to the podium for the presentation, followed by Mrs. Drew, who will share a few brief remarks. Good morning, members of the Virginia State Board of Education and Superintendent Gullixson. Thank you for
inviting me to join you today as we celebrate the newest Milk and Educator Award recipient in Virginia, Anna Drew of Shawville. I am Stephanie Bishop, a 2001 Virginia Milk and Educator. At the
time of my award, I was a high school theater teacher in Prince George County. And today, I serve as vice president of the Milin Educator Awards. And it is an honor to be here representing the Milin Family Foundation. On behalf of the
foundation, I want to commend the Virginia Department of Education for its continued partnership and support of the Milin Educator Awards Program. This school year, the foundation will present 28 Milk and Educator Awards across the
nation, and we look forward to many more surprise announcements here in Virginia in the years ahead. The Milkin Educator Awards were established in 1987 by Lol Milin, chairman and co-founder of the Milin Family Foundation based in Santa
Monica, California. Inspired by his own teachers and driven by a belief that educators shape the very future of our society, LOL created the awards to honor exemplary K12 teachers, principles, and
specialists who represent the highest standards of excellence in education. Since those first 12 awards were given in California, the foundation has recognized more than 3,000
outstanding educators nationwide. Often called the Oscars of teaching, the Milin Educator Award is the nation's preeeminent recognition for excellence in education. Virginia joined the
program in 1999 and since then more than a million dollars has been awarded to Virginia's greatest asset, its educators. Each recipient like Anna Drew receives an
unrestricted financial award and more importantly becomes part of a national network of excellence dedicated to advancing the teaching profession. This past April, Anna joined fellow Milk and Educators from across the country at the
Milk and Educator Awards Forum in Los Angeles, where she engaged in powerful collaboration and professional learning with other outstanding educators who share her commitment to students and excellence.
Great educators like Anna do far more than teach content. They transform lives. Every one of us can name a teacher who changed the course of our lives through their guidance, their encouragement or belief in our
potential. Milkin educators are those teachers whose influence continues to shape students and communities long after the classroom lights go out. Today we present Anna with the Milin Educator
Award obelisk, a lasting symbol of excellence. It stands as a reminder that our society values and celebrates the work of talented educators and that through their daily dedication, they
have the power to inspire hope, ignite curiosity, and change the future for generations of young people. Superintendent Gullixson, would you please join me in presenting the Milkin Educator Award obelisk to Anna Drew?
>> Yeah. >> Okay, let's make that go on in. >> Yes. I Thank you, Jim. >> Thank you, Superintendent. >> Congratulations. >> And now we're going to invite Anna to make some remarks.
>> Thank you. Thank you so much, Stephanie, the Milkin Family Foundation, and members of the board. I am truly humbled and deeply grateful to receive the Milkin Educator Award. This honor belongs not just to me, but to the incredible teachers I worked alongside
of every day. Their collaboration, creativity, and heart reminded me why I love this profession. I'm so thankful to my supportive administrators, Mr. Keith, who's sitting in the audience, and Mr. Haristen who encouraged me to keep growing and trying new things as a
teacher. I also want to thank my students. You inspired me every day to stay curious, keep learning, and see the world with fresh eyes. You're the reason I strive to be better. To my wonderful husband, Josh, also in the audience this morning, thank you for your endless
patience and belief in me. You have been my biggest cheerleader every step of the way. This award has opened doors I never imagined. I'm now pursuing my PhD in curriculum and instruction and an EDS in instructional leadership at Virginia Tech so I can continue learning and
ultimately help support and empower other teachers. I'm excited to pay forward the encouragement and opportunities that have meant so much to me. Thank you for this incredible honor. It truly inspires me to keep growing, giving, and believing in the power of
education in Virginia. And we're not finished. Um, Virginia would like to also, the Virginia board would also like to recognize in addition to the Milkin Education uh, award um, our very big appreciation for Miss Drew. So whereas
the Milin Family Foundation National Education Awards Program recognizes exceptional educators who inspire excellence, innovation, and serve as role models within their schools. Whereas the Milin Educator Award recognizes Anna Drew for her outstanding
educational practices, dedications to student success, and unwavering commitment to advancing the field of education. And whereas Mrs. Drew has fostered a nurturing and innovative classroom environment where students are encouraged to explore their potential, develop critical thinking skills, and
achieve academic excellence. Now, therefore, be it resolved that the members of the board of education express to Mrs. Anna Drew their sincere congratulations upon this recognition as a Milin educator recipient and extend their heartfelt appreciation for her
devotion to service that's adopted in Richmond Virginia the 13th of November in the year 2025. Oh finally we are pleased to present you with this recognition. We also like to extend our thanks to Principal Keith Brandon and her family for joining us
today and her continued support that they provide that make these achievements possible. Please join me again in recognizing Mrs. Drew and everyone else who's here today. >> Thank you all so much. And I'd like to just say um that pursuing two degrees at
a time, I'm really sorry because I was only pursuing one and teaching at the same time. And I can tell you that is a true commitment um and dedication both to your wife um and to supporting
education across Virginia. So, not just your wife deserving of this honor, but you as well for the support that you've provided to her. So, thank you. Um, and congratulations to her in her uh pursuit of those degrees because it is not easy.
I'm sure many of us in this room know that. So, um, so the board will move into public comment at this time. As stated in the board's bylaws, it's the pleasure of the board to accept public comment on all matters related to public education in Virginia. Before we begin public comment
today, I'd like to provide a few reminders about the manner in which public comment will be conducted. We ask that you model professionalism, dignity, and respect for others as you share your thoughts today. When you begin, please provide your name, role, or affiliation, and where
you live in Virginia. All remarks must be directed to the chair and not to any other individual. Speakers will have three minutes. Um where are we putting that three minute on these um screens back here in the
back? So you you will see three minutes there in green when your remarks begin. A timer on the screen will move to yellow at one minute and then red when your time is up. At that point please close your remarks promptly. If you have
written remarks you may provide those to Mr. Joe Crook who's down here in the front and he will provide those to the board as soon as possible. You may also email a copy of your remarks if you haven't done so already to the board at be.vergirginia.gov.
And so with that um we will begin public comment with Kathy Halerson followed by Chris Jones. No, ma'am. Just one person. He I just have you. He can go after. Yes. God has chosen the poor
children. Awesome. Today mostly education. It's time to have just me that way. We got all the things
coming together. That's when we got all my things. Now we are signing that we should end power for good. Thank you. We hope we will rain community college will
make us better and hopefully we'll have some fun after. Thank you. Good morning board. Kathy Halverson from Powatan. Um I gave y'all some documents.
Um, the first one is a memo that um I found from the attorney general that states that parents have rights, they cannot be retaliated upon. And I sent all of you an email along with a
recording um from Powatan that stated that they did not know where my son was. They filed a chins against me um and my husband the day after I spoke out at a school board meeting. Um I had to hire
an attorney. It was very distraught. Um very emotional to think that somebody would do such things as I had such trust in Powatan. The next one is a letter um from Dr. key
uh from Samantha that was sent to Powatan that stated they had to comply. They did not comply. They had to she was going to refer it. She referred it to Lisa Coons. Lisa said you have to comply within 30 days. It's been this
delay, deny, delay, deny. I received an email just two weeks ago, I guess, from Samantha that stated, "If we can help you with a due process, well, I was taken to federal court and sued for $330,000
because they stated I was filing f um frivolous due processes." That wasn't true. They stated I did not consent. I have my transcripts in here that stated it that everybody agreed to be in you.
Everybody stated it that's where he was going. But the attorneys continued continued. So then they sue me for $330,000. Kept him out of school for three and a
half years. The next one, the due process that uh Virginia dispute resolution for mayor said stated that what was it that the uh due process was
biased. The attorney the hearing officer that we had, Miss Lee, she ruled 0.2% in favor of parents in 13 years. That's a little biased.
CSA consent. Scott Riner, the attorney general, stated, "You do not have to sign a CSA consent." Once again, the school did not want to pay for him to go to private placement. However, they stated they could not educate him.
Le uh Beth Tegan wrote a letter to Lisa Coons that stated they would have to pay for him for 10 years. Thank you. >> That's not fair to him. Thank you, >> Chris Jones, followed by Jean Solowski.
>> Good morning, President Kie, members of the board, and superintendent Gullixson. My name is Dr. Chris Jones, and I'm the executive director for the Virginia Association for Teaching, Learning, and Leading. I am dad of four of Virginia's public school students, and prior to serving VATLL, I was a high school principal and math teacher. Thank you
for allowing me to be here today. It is an honor to do so, and I do not take this privilege lightly. I'm here today to talk specifically about three topics. Cut scores, assessments, and accountability in world geography. As an organization, we are grateful for the work of this board and the administration to raise expectations in
several areas. We appreciate the cut score implementation timeline you will vote on today to include this year as a planning year as you also consider the shift to a 100 point scale. Our organization has also advocating for reducing the number of standardized
tests students are required to take and instead focusing on performance-based assessments and tasks along with classroom assessment practices. Bringing history and social science to the performance and support framework presents an opportunity to implement performance tasks and assessments as
well as the PLAAS outlined in HB1 1957. Modernizing assessments in Virginia is an ongoing priority for VATLL. Finally, we trust that the board will give careful consideration and seek input from schools and divisions as you weigh the option of including world geography
in middle schools. Accessibility, staffing, and LA in lensure will become major points for consideration for many school divisions in Virginia, and we are thankful for this board's efforts to seek input from practitioners in the field. As always, VATLL stands ready to collaborate with the board and the
department. Thank you. >> Jean Sakalowski followed by Ann Tatus. Dr. Jean Solowski, Woodbridge, Virginia citizen. Madame Chair, I've stood before you and your colleagues a number of times pointing out deficiencies in the
history and social science standards of learning for the 10th grade student. These deficiencies include omitting the genocide of the Poles and their valor during World War II. The board can't be faulted for not knowing the facts, and the reason is straightforward.
In the last two years of World War II, Roosevelt and Churchill betrayed Poland and Eastern Europe to Stalin. And for the next 45 years, the Polish people were cruy oppressed under Stalin's brutal communist regime. During that time, the Soviets suppressed all
evidence of Poland's suffering and valor. But in 1989, Poland was the first to eject communist rule and has since endeavored to present the historical facts. Because these facts are not in the standards, but clearly should be, my organization has
prepared for you a teachers guide for 10th grade students on Poland's role in World War II. Allow me to read some of the guides section titles to you. Hitler and Stalin carry out the genocide of the Polish people. Did you know that Poland
was the only country that Hitler and Stalin secretly agreed to annihilate? Poland's extraordinary underground resistance. Read why the Polish underground state had no parallel in any other German occupied country. Polish successes in Allied battles. Did
you know that Poles were instrumental in the Battle of Britain, Falet Gap, Monte Casino, and the Battle of the Atlantic? Polish technologies contributed to the Allied victory. A key contribution was breaking a new Germany's Enigma code and
providing working copies of the Enigma machine to stunned British and French counterparts. Poland's unparalleled rescue of Jews. Only in Poland, anyone eating a Jew was executed together with immediate family.
Read why Poles, despite the death penalty, outnumbered by far all others on Yadv Hashem's listing of saviors. Poland was the first to notify the world about the Holocaust. Unfortunately, Roosevelt and Churchill couldn't be bothered.
Facts you need to know about genocide. Poles were subjected to genocide not only by the Germans, but also by the Russians and Ukrainians. Hitler's Holocaust helpers. Many countries helped Hitler. Poland was the one country that did not.
Poles provided critical intelligence to the Allies. Examples include an entire German V2 rocket and Hitler's plan to invade the Soviet Union. I trust that you will find these and many other facts
in the guide not only directly relevant but highly compelling. Thank you. >> Antatus followed by Eric Ducha. >> No Eric uh no antatus. Eric, sorry if I didn't pronounce your last name right.
>> It's okay. Nobody pronounces it right. >> Good morning, uh, Superintendent Gullixson and members of the board. My name is Eric Duche and I serve as the legislative liazison for the Virginia Social Studies Leaders Consortium. I appreciate the opportunity to speak with you today. Like many of my colleagues, I'm here to respectfully urge the board
to pause inclusion of the social studies in the state framework or state accountability framework until a clear, workable method for incorporating the permissive local alternative assessment can be fully developed. I was encouraged yesterday to hear Mr. Jennings acknowledge that integrating the PLAA into accountability process is not only
possible but already under active discussion. I recognize that building a highquality calibrated system takes time and I appreciate the board's commitment to getting it right. But until that method exists, uh, asking students to demonstrate their learning through a single high stakes test puts us in
direct conflict with what we know about effective assessment. For three decades, educators across Virginia and the nation have documented the unintended consequences of one-shot high pressure exams. narrowed instruction, increased anxiety, reduced opportunities for deep learning learning, and fewer pathways
for students to demonstrate what they truly know. While these new assessments may be more dynamic, their one-time highstake structure still places students at a disadvantage and does not reflect the direction the Commonwealth has intentionally moved uh toward. The VSSSLC has already taken proactive steps
to support the board's work. We have shared with VDOE a detailed outline showing how PLAA framework can be integrated into the accountability model in a way that safeguards uh reliability and comparability while preserving the f flexibility divisions need for meaningful authentic assessment.
Importantly, this model is not theoretical. It builds directly on the locally awarded verified credit process that nearly half of Virginia school divisions already implement successfully. The LAVC system is de demonstrated at scale that performance-based assessment can be scored reliably, moderated across
divisions, and aligned to rigorous state uh expectations while still allowing students to demonstrate learning through inquiry, application, and reasoning rather than single test setting. The PLAA framework extends these proven strengths across all social studies courses and honors the intent of HB1957
to broaden access to highquality performance state assessment statewide by allowing accountability by aligning accountability expectations with the performance-based model. Virginia has an opportunity to lead nationally in assessment innovation, expanding inquiry, strengthening civic reasoning, and measuring the deeper knowledge and
skills embodied in the profile of a Virginia graduate. I urge the board to pause implementation long enough to ensure that we build an accountability system that reflects the values we share uh and the outcomes we want for every student in the Commonwealth. Thank you for your time and thoughtful consideration.
>> Um Neilie Minton followed by Ann Evans. Oh, I'm sorry. I think I missed one person, but go ahead. You're fine. Go ahead. Good morning, Superintendent Golixson and members of the board. My name is Neilie Minton and I serve as
presidentele of the Virginia Social Studies Leaders Consortium. I want to speak today to clarify several points related to the proposed amendment to Virginia's ESSA plan. First, divisions already have clear authority to use alternative assessments through the
state developed locally awarded verified credit process. The LAVC process includes board approved rubrics, a statewide audit system, and four years of successful implementation. It allows rigorous performance assessments in lie
of so tests in all high school end of course courses currently and for the last four years. More than half of Virginia's school divisions use LAVC now and will continue to because it is permitted under current regulations and
explicitly codified in HB1957. These assessments increase rigor by requiring students to analyze evidence, write, and apply historical thinking, not simply recall facts on a multiplechoice test with TEI items or
even short answer questions included. In yesterday's presentation, Mr. Jennings suggested divisions must continue giving so tests until data are standardized. Respectfully, divisions already have standardized test standardized LAVC data
through required local retention and through the existing LAVC audit process that has already been in place for four years. Second, authority for divisions to use permissive local alternative assessments or PLAAS statewide begins
July 1st, 2026 under HB1957, which is a bipartisan law that our organization actually helped to support. HP1 1957 makes clear that divisions are not required to administer so tests in subjects not required under ESSA
specifically and it directs the board to create the shared rubrics, guard rails and expectations needed for statewide use of PLAAS. This means that divisions must be able to implement PLAAS as soon as the law takes effect. They cannot be penalized in accountability for
following state law next school year. The VSSSLC has already submitted a proposal showing how PLAA results can be incorporated into the accountability framework in a rigorous and comparable way. We stand ready to partner with the board and the VDOE. I respectfully urge
the board to delay the vote and complete the required rubrics, guard rails, and data comparison mechanisms outlined in HB1957 with the right people around the table before advancing any changes. We need to continue to do what's best for
our students without delay. Thank you for your time and for your service to Virginia's students. >> Danielle Graham, followed by Anne Evans. >> Good morning, Superintendent Gullixson, President Casey, and members of the board. I appreciate the opportunity to
speak with you today. My name is Danielle Graham and I serve as the president of Virginia Social Studies Leaders Consortium, the professional organization representing those who lead social studies education across the Commonwealth. Our members are not only instructional leaders, but also parents
and community members deeply invested in the success of Virginia's students. Our past president was recently recognized by the National Social Studies Leaders Association as the Social Studies Leader of the Year, reflecting the level of expertise and dedication within our organization.
Let me be clear. We are not opposed to accountability, but our expertise has been notably absent from the development of this plan. I'm speaking of course about item K and the proposal to add history and social science as an accountability measure. A version of this plan was shared in June. However,
much of the collaboration cited in yesterday's presentation focused on content, not the accountability plan, and that collaboration occurred well over a year ago. This plan has not been taken to a regional or larger consortium meeting and transparency about how stakeholders are identified remains an
ongoing concern. Requests for engagement from our organization have been met with either generic replies or ignored completely. Yesterday's presentation for item K stated, "This plan does not force sequencing. Yet, in order to offer world geography in 8th grade with civics preceding it, divisions would lose
flexibility from the recommended sequencing noted in the 2023 Virginia standards of learning and is in direct conflict with the flexibility guaranteed in that same document. Making world geography advanced coursework in middle school also raises another concern. It
effectively turns world history 1500 to the present into an elective. Students who do not take this elective would miss critical learning opportunities about the global impact of the American Revolution, international impact of the atrocities such as the Holocaust, Rwanda and Cambodian genocides, and the
leadership of figures like Mahatma Gandhi and Nelson Mandela. There is no other point in their Virginia K12 education where they will learn about these topics. The presentation also noted the need for data to support performance assessments and accountability. That data already
exists. Divisions have been implementing the LAVC performance assessments which includes state developed tasks, state developed rubrics, anchor documents, calibration training for scoring and more. And despite repeated offers to collaborate, no effort has been made on the part of the VDOE to engage the state
organization of social studies supervisors and specialists for sharing this comprehensive data. We urge the board to slow down and engage with those who actually lead social studies education in Virginia. Accountability can and should strengthen learning, but it can only be successful is if it is
designed in collaboration with the experts who implement it. Partnering with practitioners will ensure the system preserves depth, rigor, and relevance for every student in the Commonwealth. Thank you for your time and your service to Virginia students. Ann Evans.
>> Morning secret. Is that on? Good morning, Secretary um Gullison and members of the board. My name is Annne Evans. I reside in Suana County, Virginia. I'm a former social studies teacher and K12 social studies coordinator. I was educated in the
public schools. I'm a third generation teacher in our Virginia public schools. I have 17 nieces and nephews educated in the Virginia public schools. Two are also currently teaching. It's kind of a family business. We are very concerned
about um the proposed change to the sequencing and the assessments for history and social science. I have seen firsthand how performance-based assessments and inquirydriven instruction transform student learning. These approaches ask students to think critically, analyze evidence, and apply
knowledge to real world questions. They provide authentic learning experiences that better prepare students for higher education, civic life, and the modern workforce. Just as importantly, performance-based assessments promote equity and access. Students with disabilities, English language learners,
and students living in poverty often thrive when given an opportunity to demonstrate their knowledge and understanding through project-based learning, presentations, and inquiry rather than high stakes multiplechoice tests. These authentic assessments recognize multiple ways to demonstrate
mastery, allowing students to show their strengths, creativity, historical reasoning, and collaboration. They reduce opportunity gaps, helping students see themselves as capable learners and contributors. I urge you to preserve local flexibility in both the
sequence of courses and the types of assessments divisions may use to meet the needs of their learners. Virginia's long-standing support for locally awarded verified credits and the forthcoming permissive local alternative assessment framework offer promising models balancing rigor, authenticity,
and local innovation. I respectfully encourage the board to expand opportunities rather than limit them through additional high stakes tests or prescriptive course structures. World geography when paired at high school level with environmental science courses
or their AP equivalents and complemented by CTE courses such as GIS open additional career pathways and provide cross-curricular opportunities. Limiting world geography as an elective course or forcing it down into the
middle school will dramatically reduce enrollment in all of these vital programs. I'm disappointed the board is looking at such a lastm minute hurried revision to our assessment system during a transition period with new state leadership coming in. It's frustrating as it seems to ignore the voices of
parents, students, and educators who've expressed frustration with overesting and quite frankly politicizing our history standards. This seems like an effort to bury honest history under a mountain of factoids and multiple choice testing
which does not develop critical thinking, problem solving, spatial reasoning, or durable skills. >> Thank you. Um, if anyone else I don't have anyone on the signup sheet, so if anyone else would like to speak, you can line up
behind the microphone, please. Good morning, Superintendent Gullixson and members of the board. My name is Todd Truit, and I'm here today as a parent of two public school students in Arlington to speak in strong support of the plan to raise Virginia's math and reading cut scores. Per the US
Department of Education, Virginia has the nation's lowest math and reading cut scores. That means many students here get told good job when they wouldn't meet standards in any other state. This is not fairness. It's a false promise to Virginia's children. When standards stay
low, the least advantaged children lose the most as they depend the most on the public school system for their education. As one of the first people in my family to graduate from college, I see the difference daily between myself and my own children. With the current
low cut scores, many of these least advantaged kids in Virginia graduate believing they are prepared, only to find out later that the world expected more of them. Um, every year we delay is another year of students walking across
the stage with diplomas that don't open as many doors as diplomas in other states. Virginia is more than 10 years behind other states with this plan to raise cut scores. As noted by ed week, as the V as the federal government stepped back from accountability with
the end of No Child Left Behind 10 plus years ago, states all raised their cut scores, leaving Virginia almost alone at the bottom by 2018, about which Virginia had been publicly notified in 2018. Instead, Virginia lowered math cut
scores even further in 2019 and lowered them further for reading in 2020, putting us at the bottom of the nation. Meanwhile, you saw states like Louisiana and Mississippi go the opposite direction as Virginia did, raising standards and providing great greater
state oversight. When you look at the least and most advantaged subgroups on NAPE, Louisiana, and Mississippi are outperforming states like Virginia, New Jersey, and numerous other states that spend substantially more per pupil than them. Raising standards to the same
level as in Massachusetts is not about punishment. It's about truth and belief in Virginia's children. It tells every child in Virginia that we see their potential and we are willing to teach to it. That's not just my own opinion based on my own lived experience. That's also
the opinion of Denise Fort, head of the leading education civil rights group, the education trust. She has endorsed Virginia's new accountability system and raising the cut scores to be consistent with NAPE levels. Her endorsement was specifically because the benefit to the
most vulnerable students. So, yes, please approve this plan to raise the cut scores because the students who have the least time to waste are the ones depending on us the most. Thank you. Bo Digginson, Rockingham County. I did sign up for public comment. I don't know
why I wasn't on the list, but regardless, I'm here to speak about rigor as well. Uh, I believe that that needs to be in social studies. It just needs to have the right test. So, members of the board and superintendent Gullixson, again, my name is Bo Dickinson. I serve as the social studies
supervisor for Rockingham County Public Schools, I am deeply concerned that landmark assessment proposals were added to yesterday's agenda with less than 24 hours notice. Changes of this scale require transparent, timely disclosure so that the public can understand and
respond. Posting them at the last minute not only limits meaningful engagement, it betrays the public's trust in an open and honest decision-making process. I want to be clear though, I fully support rigorous standards and
standardized assessment. As I said earlier, but the field of education also recognizes that the greatest unintended consequences of the No Child Left Behind Act were felt in social studies where knowledgebased multiplechoice tests
pushed instruction towards coverage and memorization at the expense of inquiry, depth, and critical thinking. Returning to that model, especially with dense content standards, would take us back 20 years.
Yesterday's presentation by Mr. Jennings briefly referenced House Bill 1957 and its expansion of performance assessments, which we are quite excited about and want to lean into, as previous commentators noted. Yet his
presentation, however, dismissed much of the substance of that bill by claiming a lack of data. That is simply not accurate. Our inquirybased performance assessments used for the last four years through the locally awarded verified credits process
already generate robust, reliable data. They are embedded in instruction. They are administered multiple times a year, not just one test in May. They are scored with a state common rubric. They are crosscored by fellow colleagues and other leaders to ensure interrator
reliability. They measure both content knowledge and disciplinary skills far more meaningfully than a single multiplechoice test at the end of the school year. This is not just local innovation.
Virginia's work should be applauded. It is being recognized nationally. I have been fortunate to work directly with Dr. Kathy Swan, one of the most respected voices in social studies education, the lead author of the C3 framework and one
of the architects of the inquiry design model. Together, we authored teaching to a better test, which demonstrates how Virginia's performance assessments can be standardized, how they can be implemented with fidelity, and how they can be used
effectively for yes, accountability. We want accountability, but we want the right test. >> Thank you. >> Thank you so much. >> I am submitting the article as well as my public comment today for your reference. >> Good morning everyone. My name is Sam
Futrell and I am from Richmond and I appreciate the opportunity to be here today. I am the president of the Virginia Council for the Social Studies, the 2024 National Secondary Social Studies Teacher of the Year, and the master teacher of for the Office of Strategic Cultural Partnerships at
William and Mary. I am also a new mom uh to a sweet girl who is currently sick at home. Um, I am also a little bit sick and under the weather myself and I had to leave her um to be here this morning because of the actions of a local politician and his office which at best
can be described as unbecoming of a Virginia lawmaker and at worst the intentional misleading of a group of stakeholders in order to further an individual's political career. When Senator Van Valkenberg's office reached out to the Virginia Council for the
Social Studies asking us to support the reinstating of standardized testing in some Virginia social studies classes, they assured us that this testing would only be supplementary to the more effective and comprehensive project-based assessments that have been painstakingly put into place over the
past several years in Virginia social studies classrooms. The Virginia Council for the Social Studies would never have signed in support of the standardized testing as a singular measure of student performance and let's be honest, teacher performance. Please consider the
Virginia Council for the Social Studies letter of support of this amendment revoked. As an educator, I do support the diversification of assessments. Adding testing as another indicator of a student performance would add to our data of what students understand and how
they come to understand it. But if we are to replace project-based assessments that lead with inquiry and student- centered learning with testing, that will create a vacuum in which students and teachers are held up to a singular measure of their abilities. One test
cannot show us what students understand about the content that they learned in a course. And it certainly cannot show us what skills they have acquired, which is why we which is what we really want to understand if we are to actually prepare them to be college and career ready
citizens. Replacing project-based assessment with testing is an absolute disservice to Virginia students and will certainly be a disservice to Virginia's teachers. I strongly encourage the board to consult with expert groups like the Virginia Social Studies Leaders Consortium, Virginia Council for the
Social Studies, and ATLL to make significant changes to this amendment that will better serve Virginia's students and educators. Thank you for your time and for your service to Virginia education. Good morning, President Cesy, Superintendent Gullixson, and members of the Virginia Board of Education. My name
is Scott Bray Brand, and I'm executive director for VAS, the Virginia Association of School Superintendent, and I live in Lynchburg, Virginia. On behalf of Virginia School Division Superintendent, we respectfully submit the following feedback around the SOL proficiency implementation plan you're
voting on today. We strongly appreciate the designation of the 2526 school year as a planning year. We look forward to closely working with Superintendent Gullixson and VDOE for the remainder of the year to ensure its successful implementation. We also appreciate and
support your total 4year phase in approach to intentional transition planning and to allow for further modeling of metrics by BDOE and school divisions. We respectfully urge the board to extend the existing proficiency and graduation
requirements for all students, not just seniors, who are already enrolled in high school. The requirements in place when students enter 9th grade should be honored through their graduation. We also want to continue to work with
you around concerns regarding advanced math pathways, the new growth metric to replace Vivos. I know you talked about that yesterday. Expedited retakes, alternative credits, double jeopardy due to federal identification, and performance category rounding. We also want to look forward uh to working with
you more deeply as you do communications and supports around the new so proficiency plan. Schools do need communication tools like immigog infographics, parent letters, talking points, and training modules to help teachers and school boards and students and families understand the new
proficiency scale and its implic implications for a focus on raising expectations. Consistent statewide communication will build trust and understanding during the transition, and we ask for these plans to be available for stakeholder review as soon as possible.
The new so cut scores will require ex um extensive student interventions and sufficient staff to design and deliver individualized plans for student to meet these higher expectations. Without substantial state investment to fund and uh provide qualified intervention
personnel resources, implementation will be impacted. So we look forward to working with you on additional state supports. Thank you for engaging with us and so many others and we look forward to continued partnership with you on this very very important work. Thank you very much.
>> Uh, good morning, President Cesy, members of the board of education, and superintendent Gullson. My name is Rodney Jordan. I'm here representing the Virginia School Boards Association, and I live in North, Virginia. During yesterday's work session, you received
and discussed several presentations focused on student outcomes. what students know and are able to do. At VSB at VSBA, we believe strongly that excellence in the classroom begins with excellence in the boardroom. In the
spirit that our school divisions exists with the primary focus on improving student outcomes, I share with you the following comments regarding the so proficiency implementation plan. We support the designation of the 2025 2026 school year
as a planning year. During your discussion yesterday, the challenge that turnover of school board members, division superintendent, and even representation at the state level can have on sustaining and growing student outcomes. Please know that VSBA
reiterates our commitment to partner with the board of education, VDOE, and executive and legislative branch leadership with the goal of setting high expectations of continuous improvement for our students while providing the
supports and resources to undergur every learner to meet and exceed those expectations. Effective schoolboard governance matters and is critically important to ensure strategic alignment toward improving student outcomes in all schools,
including those students in schools subjected to corrective action. We welcome the opportunity to strengthen our partnership with you in support of governance training resulting in sustained cultures of excellence on behalf of Virginia's students. We thank
you for your service. Is there anyone else who wishes to participate participate in public comment today? Okay, I'm sorry. Good morning. My name is Ti Pinknneys. I'm a former school board member with
Richmond City Public Schools from 2012 to 2016. I'm currently working with families across this state as an advocate as you all know in the area of exceptional education.
We've got a lot of work to do. A lot of work to do. So last night I had an opportunity to kind of audit some of the conversation that took place during the work session. And I just wanted to
with that same zealousness remind you that Richmond public schools is under a memorandum of understanding with you. Parents do not know that this board and
I know we've got new individuals on this board. I want to congratulate Mr. Green. um do not know the level of accountability that you are holding the superintendent to
andor even in your training of those school board members in understanding their role of governance. I felt compelled to come down here and say, "Listen, it's got to be a new day. It's got to be a
new day. We cannot talk about wanting to be innovative and assess our gifted students. And I think I heard the comment, you know, we want to do it the same way we do it for the struggling students. Well,
you're not doing it for the struggling students. It's not happening. Richmond public schools has not moved from the bottom 5 percentile over the past 20 years.
And to make parents believe that these small incremental gains is something that they should be celebrating is clear exploitation of their lack of
knowledge that the bar is here. And then when we lower the bar and tell them to celebrate it, as one of the gentlemen said earlier, you're putting our children out there at a disadvantage. So, I'm just here to
say, please hold Richmond public schools accountable to meeting the tenants of theou that you all created. Thank you. >> Anyone else who would like to speak
during public? Come on up. Uh, good morning, Superintendent Gullixson, Cher Gasi, and members of the board. My name is Mim Lraj, and I'm a resident of Arlington, Virginia. I'm here on this cold November morning to speak in support of raising Virginia's
math and reading cut scores, especially for our English learner and economically disadvantaged kids because I grew up as one of them. I immigrated to the US from Laos at four years old and was raised by a single mom who spoke little English and worked long hours. I grew up in the
City Heights neighborhood of San Diego, California, a neighborhood that continues to see high poverty rates. Over 50% of the community population make less than half of the average cost of living in the city. Growing up, I was surrounded by kids of similar circumstances
who immigrated from Latin America or escaped war torn countries like Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, and Somalia to the land of opportunity. And that opportunity starts with education. I'm sorry, it's my first public comment. I'm a little emotional.
While every parent cares deeply about their children's success, economically disadvantaged parents and particularly those that don't speak English, often work long jobs, I'm I'm sorry, long hours or multiple jobs. So, they're often too busy or are illprepared to
help with homework, attend parent teacher conferences, or in this case, board meetings to advocate for their children. more so parents like my mom who didn't grow up in this education system likely do not know where st what standards should be set for college and
career readiness. So, as a product of that community and on behalf of those that can't advocate for their own children, I'm here today to say it's crucial that their children receive an education at schools with standards with high standard with high academic
expectations and real opportunity because for many of them, that's the only place they'll get it. I was shocked to learn that according to the US Department of Education, the beautiful state of Virginia, which I'm fortunate enough to call my new home, has the lowest math and reading standardized
test cut scores in the nation. No matter your background or your family's income bracket, all of Virginia's students are capable of extraordinary things. But right now, our state tells them otherwise. This is especially true for our economically disadvantaged kids who
have limited to no access to tutors or other forms of supplemental education. And so when standards are low, these students lose the most. Raising standards isn't about making life harder for students or teachers. It's about giving them the tools to succeed. With
the right teaching and students and adults who believe sorry with the right teaching and adults who believe in their potential, students do rise to meet high expectations. However, when we label students as proficient for work that would be
considered below grade level elsewhere, we're not helping them. We are holding them back. I believe that Virginia Public Schools Sorry, I'm above Yes. time. Anyone else here today that would like to speak in public comment?
Thank you. We will move on into um finishing a presentation from yesterday. Um we probably need to take a break to get that move back into you guys need to revert back. So let's take a quick five
minute break break. Thank you. from yesterday, please. >> We'll do so. Good morning, President Cesy, Senator Gullixson, and board. Uh, yesterday during the work session, uh, item K, we were discussing proposed changes in accountability to our consolidated state plan. And so, I'll
pick up that presentation. I'm going to do a recap from yesterday. do want to be clear that this item there is no action being requested of the board today. Uh the intent of this as it was in June was to bring this conversation to the public to the board to have conversation on this uh to think through the
implications. Uh it's a multi-year plan. Uh we we will continue to have stakeholder engagement and comments around the different topics. Uh and so today again is a conversation and so I'm sure there's a larger audience today and we welcome that as we talk about the different topics uh as we go through.
So, as you're watching and you're looking at the slide deck, I'm going to go somewhat quickly just because it is going to be a recap. Uh, and so then we'll get to the piece of the presentation uh that we did not conclude from yesterday. And so, the purpose here is very important uh to talk through, you know, where this comes from. Uh,
again, the the items I'm discussing uh do go back to when we adopted the framework. Uh, there were pieces that we knew we'd need more data on. And so the board also had said there are some pieces they wanted to consider for year two uh with full implementation and so we're bringing those to the board and
and for conversation. There's other items that we put in our state plan. It was amendment seven that we said USCD they had requested more information. We'll come back in a year and bring them more information. So this is also uh in alignment with that. And then thirdly, through this year of implementation, we've gotten feedback from the field
about some of the pieces and saying, you know, can we look to make some changes? Uh, and so some of the items I'm bringing the field from thus far in our stakeholder engagement is asking requesting that we do make it for 2526 even though the school year has begun. Uh, and so we can go through those
specific pieces as we walk through them. So stakeholder engagement, you see here, uh, we've engaged with different stakeholder groups. recognize some groups are still, you know, want more engagement. We'll certainly be engaging with them. Uh and so I presented this to different groups around the different
topics. Uh yesterday actually I had an opportunity to speak with the title 3 consortium. Today there's another uh EL conference happening around the recently arrived English learner engagement there. Uh but back in June, we met with the secondary principles uh superintendent association. We presented
a few weeks ago on these topics uh to the groups to have dialogue and think through the different levels. And so you see them listed there. But I want to be clear that with this going into now even more of a public forum, we will engage and have listening sessions and continue to have dialogue. Again, no action is being asked of the board today. Uh but
we want to bring this to the public for full consideration and conversation. So in the mastery component again very quickly we talked about the index and the change in the weights to the balance between the four performance levels and the three performance levels. That was the proposal there. We talked about for
science uh fifth and eighth grade going to four performance levels to be aligned to reading and mathematics. We talked about uh participation very important about our 95% in accordance with federal law. Remember this goes back to our guiding principles uh that
this is a cohesive system and when you look at state and federal and the two systems we had and all the data collection and all the reporting and just the misunderstandings uh this brings it into one which you find in state law that will say in accordance with ESSA and then you'll see in these
slides we talked about uh profile of a graduate the five Cs and we talked about the importance of civic responsibility uh engagement uh the five again five C's around collaboration and critical thinking. There were references here to involvement around the new the 2023
history and social science standards of learning. Uh the instructional guides uh the new redesigned assessments uh which previously have been based off 2015 standards. They were field tested last year but they will go into effect operationally this year. Uh and some of
the changes my presentation this afternoon you'll hear more about changes to the history u so test. I'll say a couple things now around cluster items. Uh really using for example some primary secondary resources and having students use those through multiple items. We
talked about technology and hands but really uh really bringing in that critical thinking element and educators were involved in that process. And so we get to slide uh 11 here in the presentation around the proposal of adding a history indicator uh to the framework and consistently in each of
the areas. And so I want to speak a little bit to that. Uh first we want to be clear that the Virginia studies as well assessment all students are taking that assess currently. So we want to lay that groundwork of the assessments we're talking about. Secondly for civics and economics is another assessment uh
students are all taking. So that that's that's a standardized assessment all students are taking it. Again it's been redesigned uh for using the 2023 standards. Uh at the conversation is around the Virginia US history so test. And so as you've heard the conversations
today, we do have in place based on legislation from 2014 the locally awarded verified credits and divisions taking opportunity in that. And what I'll say to you is it's less than half the state is using that option. So half the state is taking the option of doing the locally awardified verified credits
in history. So what you can do is students again need a number of verified credits for graduation credits and there are divisions who have elected to do that in history. In history, you have the world history one test, the world history 2 test, we have a world geography test, the USVA history test.
We have a number of assessments and we do that to give students more pathways in order to graduate. And I'm going to use the analogy of science. For science, you need a credit, a verified credit to graduate. And so to earn that, students might take earth science in nth grade, but for accountability, we use the
biology assessment for accountability. And so students take the earth science, they get the verified credit, they're ready for graduation. They do have to take biology as well. And so what I want to say to you is that the locally award verified credit is still a pathway. We're not saying that will go away. I do
need to bring bring up 1957, but we're not saying it's going to go away. What we are saying is for the accountability system currently we will use the standardized assessment which meets requirements of ESSA meets the requirements even of our own regulations around the indicator to collect this information. So students could still use
the locally awarded verified credit in world history 1 satisfy that requirement and still take the Virginia US history test again for accountability purposes. And I go back to my example of science. It's what we're currently doing in science as well. It's the same piece here. We're collecting data and then the
board can discuss around, you know, Virginia USA history and having that assessment and collecting the data on that. But want to be clear here around this alternative assessment or performance task, performance-based assessments. We're speaking specifically to one assessment and it's around the Virginia US history test uh typically
given uh in grade 11. So that's what we're speaking about here. Now, I will speak about 1957, House Bill 1957. In that legislation, it does talk about criteria that the board will adopt around content, around guidelines for the assessment, around scoring rubrics.
It is around that legislation that we're looking to bring more standardization to this process because as we've met with USCD to talk about our accountability system, they've given us the steps it will take to be adopted. And so, we will need to have more standardization, more data collection. And I hear about data
collection at the division level, which is excellent for consistency and reliability. it needs to come to the state level. We need to look and make sure across all eight regions of the state that it is consistent and reliable that it meets the criteria. And so that is a pathway we're looking to engage upon. Uh we've talked with USCD about a
timeline for that. Uh but at this time to bring it into accountability and we have like I keep saying newly designed history assessments. The proposal is that next year in history we would use the Virginia US history so test in high school. To be clear, it does not mean
students could not use the locally awarded verified credit. We're just saying for accountability purposes, we want to measure and see how are students doing in Virginia US history. Let me also say going back to 1957, the House bill, uh also for grades 7 through 12,
it becomes part of their grade on the test. And so this goes back, you know, a couple decades where we did if based on a student's performance on the SL test, it might become their final exam. Teachers were saying, "That's a final exam. let me use that in my gradebook as the final exam. And so you see this here
as well. If students are in their Virginia US history course and they're going to take a final exam, then why not use the so test as their final exam. So if you say, "Well, we're testing kids more." They were already taking a final exam. So you do need to look at 1957 broadly. A number of pieces in that
legislation. Uh but I also want to be clear about the pathways. We're not eliminating pathways for students. 1957 will bring in more criteria for the locally awarded verified credits. Uh you're going to hear me later today talk about performance task and innovation. I I am excited about this energy on our
assessments. We want to look at a coherent system. We want to think about redesign. But also to be clear about this proposal before you today. >> Mr. Jennings. >> Yes. >> Um can you clarify a little bit about when the implementation what the implementation timeline is for the use
of uh so tests as an exam grade? >> That would start July 1st, 2026 for next year. >> Part of 195. That's part of House Bill 1957. Currently, the legislation says grades 7 through 12, it is 10% of a student's grade. And that begins July
1st of next year. >> And that was legislation. It had nothing to do with what the board. >> No, we are we are in compliance with the law. We're going to follow the law. Preparing now for the law. We're doing trainings already on it. But I I want to see all the pieces and how they fit together. Absolutely.
for clarification also on that question. Uh the 10% that's being required in legislation, how did it could still be what they determined to be the school system determines to be verified credit or some of the issues they're working on with their standardized test or does it
have to be our so standardized test? What is that 10%? >> It talks about if a for the so assessment it's 10% of their final grade >> the so assessment and it's in legislation. >> Yes, that's in legislation. >> Thank you. This is not Yeah. department. It's well the department's um implementing the laws we do in other areas as well.
>> Uh Mark also um can you dive a little bit deeper into USD's um stance on the local assessments please? >> Yes. And we've talked with them at length about this. We're excited about this idea. You know again my presentation later about the performance
task and thinking a little differently on those as well. We need around at least a minimum of two years of data. We need to show consistent, reliable statewide data and and that is the it's in every student succeeds act. You're looking at statewide consistency. And so we asked them the timeline. What will we need the steps to do it? And so they
laid out for us. We need two years of data. We need to see these steps. 1957 is in alignment with that as far as clear criteria, rubrics. We're going to have to talk about the scoring, how data is submitted to us, auditing all the steps it will take, and then us presenting that to us ed, doing a peer
review, having those conversations, and then two consecutive years of that to then say, can we go forward with this? We want to be innovative. We've we've talked about other states who've tried this and sort of what lessons learned there. Uh, and so it's something we're very excited to pursue. And again, my presentation later will address this. We have an innovative assessment workg
group that's going to talk about this. Uh, we talk about a new assessment system. Uh, but we've also talked about how do we make that happen? Uh and so again, USDA will sit there and look at you and say just like we are, we're bound by the Every Student Succeeds Act. And so these are the steps that have to be followed. Uh and then this is the
pathway you need to do. >> And can you talk a little bit more also about why civics is at that 7.5%. >> Excellent. Yes. So in our proposal, let me go ahead and go to that slide around the weights. That's a great slide to look at. Uh and so what you'll see here is in our weight proposal, we talk
through with different stakeholder groups the waiting. uh you see the 5% for genius studies at elementary and you see the 10% for science at at elementary school. Science is a cumulative assessment three four five third fourth fifth grade content so it's 10%. At the
middle school as you heard me talk about the five C's in profile of a graduate you see the consistency around civics I mean civics is in our five C's. one of them civic responsibility and understanding again our country but also uh we talked about world geography understanding other cultures and
diversity and the respect for that and so given the importance of that and also the economics piece to think around financial literacy is it was decided to make middle school a 7.5 uh science still being again a 10% because it's three years of content but given the importance of civics and econ economics
it was weighted 7.5%. You'll see down at the bottom uh this is in the readiness factor but the integrated reading and writing is 5% in coordination with uh the reading uh it was as we talked through different stakeholder groups they uh were interesting in their feedback initially
they had asked us to pull the points out of chronic absenteeism and then as they've learned more about the system and they've seen more of the power they have in chronic absenteeism and the recovery they said you know it's a whole school effort really think 5%'s too low keep it 10%. Now, this again is going out for public comment. We've talked to
different groups, uh, you know, and and gotten different feedback and that might come back and people say, "No, we really do think 5%'s better there." But thus far, what we've heard is to actually, you know, some of these groups were they saying they were surprised. They're like, "Yeah, if you'd asked me this several months ago, I would have argued for the 5%. Now, I think she'll be 10."
So, we go to high school and again, as I was sharing, biology is a one-year assessment. One content is 5%. the Virginia US history is 5% again uh noting that it is one one year of content there. So that's the differences in the weights but and that's why it
explains the difference in the weights for science science in elementary and middle school 10% because they're three years of content high school is one year of content so it's 5%. >> Madam President may ask Dr. Arian >> um yes I I get all this it was a lot of good clarification for me and I really
appreciate it. Is there kind of once we build this and you get public comment and people agree is there some plugandplay available because I'm hearing it's a little complicated when we were trying to really simplify the system. So when you start getting for example to 0.5%. So is is there going to be an ability to
kind of uncomplicate it through? So when we excellent excellent question when we rolled this out last year um even prior sort of building and talking through it one of the tools that we provide is we have an Excel spreadsheet with all these weights by models and so we provide that for the school divisions and we've
encouraged and we've done trainings on how to use that and so it builds in basically you know how many students and it has the point values and you have the weights and the power of that tool is really to look it calculates your overall score >> and then you look to see sort of where you are and if you're between different performance categories you start to
think what could we do differently? Obviously, we want all kids to have high expectations for them for mastery and advance. And so, you start to see especially around chronic absenteeism, you know, so if you're sitting in March or April and you're looking and you're seeing, okay, we're this close based on preliminary, you know, data, where could
we make some adjustments? And so, when you think about, yeah, it's five points here, five points here, 10 points here. I think that was the shift in thinking from some of the the stakeholders both principles, superintendents and uh the people who oversee attendance were very excited about keeping it 10%. But they saw the power in that because they on
that Excel sheet they changed it to 5% and saw oh that doesn't affect as much as 10%. And they were like we have quite a bit of control over recovery. We are seeing through the all-in initiative we are seeing students come in before school after school. We're seeing students come on Saturday school. We're
seeing it to be very effective. Students are appreciating the small group. Parents are appreciating they're getting this tailorized personalized support. And so, you know, using those resources, chronic absenteeism and and Virginia's leading the nation in this. Every conference I go to speak to, I'm asked around I'm going to talk about
something, but they're like, well, you're here. Do you mind talking about chronic absenteeism? Because you're doing something that's working. We're seeing the results. >> That's great. Thank you. Appreciate it. actually reminds me a little of like when you're doing a mortgage or car and the account you change all the different numbers and you see what you need to fix
in your whatever and how much down payment and yeah so that's what I meant even something that could be complicated if simplified by a neat tool to do >> yeah and those are available to the public they're on the DOE website it's on the road to readiness hub they're available to anyone uh we've done trainings for school division leaders on
how to use them but they are available on the website for the public >> thank you Dr. Northern >> just to clarify the inte integrated reading and writing is that the performance-based task >> it is a it is a type of performance task >> okay >> and did we used to have the
performance-based task I thought at 10% is that right or >> it's talked about again with different weights we talked about not for last year but for the upcoming year there was conversation around should well actually the plan was for year 12 this fits the plan the plan was for year two to do a
performance task and it was going to divide chronic absenteeism to 5% and the performance performance test to 5%. And the again with that one part of the conversation was that chronic absenteeism be 5% in all the models and that is where we were headed and like I shared as we were showing this model to
different stakeholders. They said I really think you should pull the 5% out of reading let chronic absentism say 10% at elementary middle school. So I say that to you again the board this will be your your decision but also I'm very excited to hear from the public on that but initially the intention was to lower
chronic absentis to five so that it was 5% in all the different models >> okay >> uh we can give them to you I mean basically the the difference for this one that you're looking on the slide was uh 5% came out of reading and then the 5% came out of math for elementary so we
can provide for you I can p give you the uh the current weights And then middle school uh you know 5% came from math for the history and then 5% came from reading for the IRW. And then in uh high school it was basically science was
taken from 10% to 5% and uh 5% was given to the history Virginia US history. >> Thank you. >> Any other questions here before Mark moves on? I'll just follow by saying with the weights, again, part of the guiding
principles of the board and part of the Every Student Succeeds Act is that your academic achievement, your mastery be weighted more. Again, you're looking that your school quality success indicators don't overweight because federal law requires that you're putting emphasis on your reading, math, science, those core areas. And so, we're still
maintaining that even with these uh weight distributions. And also, we have ranges in our regulations that still abides by that as well. And so from there we talk about growth. Yesterday we had a conversation around value progress tables. Uh what we're
doing here is a vertical scale. Uh still calling it progress tables. But I know too when you look at this and if you're home watching this you're about to see a number of animations. Uh but the essence of this is again going back to our guiding principle. We want to incentivize the importance of proficiency. We want to make it clear
that proficiency and advanced you know mastery of content is where the value the more value is but we also want to honor growth and so this again purposely may look complicated uh but the intent is to provide more opportunities for students to demonstrate growth and so you get a number of point values through
that whether it's again it's obviously if students are moving backwards on the range there's no points we talked about students if they're not succeeding uh but if they're staying in the same range getting half a point uh if students are proficient one year on the high proficient but then they go back towards
lower proficient they get a 75 and then you see if students are advanced but there's still room to grow they are getting a point value in that on our next slide you have uh we look here about students uh moving from one range to a next uh again not being proficient
but they're still showing growth by moving a range it's a onepoint value uh then you see demonstrated uh next is if students move uh two ranges or if they move sorry from basic not succeeding to proficient it's a 1.25 value. If they
are going from uh proficient to advanced it's a 1.25 value. Again moving performance levels we're incentivizing moving that if they're at the high end uh and they're again there's nowhere to go as far as growth or at the high end of the range then they're stay receiving
1.25 uh we're honoring again that 0.25 25 is additional credit. Every child counts as one, but they're receiving more. And then finally, you see another example of 1.25 where this student has moved two ranges. Again, the student uh did not
pass. They were not proficient. However, tremendous growth was made in that year to move two ranges. And so, our proposal is that those students receive 1.25 as well. And then again, you see the weights. And just what I want to emphasize there is there's no uh recommendation to change
the weights for growth and that's why you don't see it in red. It's sort of stabilized there. The other weight distributions as I mentioned earlier came from pulling some points from reading for IRW, pulling some points for math uh for history uh across and except for high school, we pulled them from
science readiness. We talked through advanced coursework yesterday. We talked about earth science which many divisions are currently using offering uh for students who are ready. We would uh apply for a waiver from USCD uh to bring this in both to the mastery uh points for
students and also to bring it into uh advanced coursework. And you see the denominator there and how that would work. But I also want to be clear that this is from both state uh statute and from federal law. students would need to complete the grade eight science test as
a cumulative test prior to taking the earth science. And then we have the conversation on world geography. And so I want to be clear here again all the layers and pieces. Uh we were talking earth science about being grade 8. World geography. You'll notice on this slide
there is no language around the grade level. Uh state statute is clear about local school divisions have authority around when they offer their sequence of studies. And so students could absolutely take world geography at the seventh grade level and take civics at the eighth grade or they could do civics
in seventh grade and do world geography at eighth grade. Uh we're allowing again according to state statute we're going to follow that allow this flexibility. Uh we're not saying all students take world geography. If you think about currently we have students who are in math 8 and students who are in algebra at the same time. So this is not saying
all students are in world geography. there is a place where students might be in eighth grade civics and other students are world geography in eighth grade. And so again, as you think about differentiation and personalized learning, uh this would be a pathway for those students. And I use the math example because we're doing that. Students are sitting in eighth grade
math, algebra, and geometry at the same time. And they're all in eighth grade. And so how a school or a division does their master schedule around world geography and civics and uh US history uh the decision would be made either at the school or the division level.
And then we discuss IRW uh you'll see a demonstration later on performance task. It is a type of performance task. In this assessment students have a few questions around what they've read. The reading will be on a history or science content and then they have a writing prompt. The standards around this are
accumulating standards. Again, this is given at fifth grade. And so you're looking at K through five standards. Eighth grade, you're looking sixth through eight standards, but also what you've learned around the the rules of grammar, language usage, mechanics, uh, and composing and written
expression. A number of layers there. And again to be clear this is proposed for next year 2627 not for this year but for next year. It's an assessment they've been given uh and looking at data but proposals for next year. And so what you see in the
proposed weights there is again the 2728 year is where the advanced coursework would take effect and it was 10%. And so what we've done is 6% for math 2% for science and 2% for reading. So again, math is being obviously weighted more significantly, but science and history
uh being calculated with that that 10% point. And now we're going to talk about 3e. Uh I want to share that very clearly if you go back and I'm happy to provide the links as we talked about 3E through listening sessions. We did over 16
listening sessions when we presented this to the board around the framework and got feedback from the board and stakeholders. If you go back to those presentations 23 uh year 2024, even the final vote from the board, if you look at the 3E slides at the very bottom uh
under the 3E or on especially on the enlistment, it says the board wants to continue to have conversation around JRTC and the board signaled at that time they were hearing from the public around JRTC. How do we include it? What do we think? We want to do more in enlistment.
And currently, if you look at our 3E, you'll see it on the next slide. I'll show you. Uh currently enlistment does not have a 1.25 value. It is the only category without a 1.25. Uh I was here presenting to the board earlier uh several months back where we brought a
1.25 into employment. So we had it in enrollment, we've added to uh employment. And so today we're going to talk about a path that perhaps we use for enlistment uh to bring a balance across all three. And so this is the current as you see
enrollment, employment, enlistment. uh we're asking for no changes in enrollment, no changes in employment. We're going to discuss today enlistment. And as very clearly, you can see even just looking at it visually, enlistment again has three point values, one point being the max. And even if you just look at the layer of text, uh not as
detailed. Uh and so we're going to talk about a proposal. Again, even when the board adopted this had noted they wanted to talk deeper about enlistment. So current data demonstrates we did looked at a number of state scans and when you know ESSA plans and I want to
be clear about this we looked at both ASVAB and state plans for accountability. We also looked at military readiness. Some states uh use ASVAB and some use if students enlist in the military. So 14 states in the nation use um a ASVAB uh and some states I I
pointed there out Texas does military readiness. Uh they're not using ASVAB currently. um they've reached out to us to learn more about how we're using it. Um but they're currently not using it. So I just want to share sort of this idea of enlistment and how it's being applied. I do want to share with you as we looked at these 14 states very
in-depthly. Uh North Carol North Dakota requires a few things. One that they have to have an eligible score of 31 on the ASVAB. That is your minimum enlistment score uh for certain branches. Secondly, they require quality citizenship measured through discipline.
uh what they look at is if a student does not have any suspensions or expulsions. And thirdly, they look at um the student also has to have physical fitness. The PE teacher has to sign off that the student would be able to pass a physical education exam. And then they go beyond that to say the student also
has to have two other indicators from college and career ready. So, I want to share when we look at Virginia's what used to be the CCCRI, the college career readiness indicator, and then we think about the 3E, you know, we're getting points in all three of the E. Other states say you need to do one in each of
these just to get one point. And so, we've allowed students to really go deep into one or do a cross to get point values. And we honor that. You know, right now you can get up to 3.5 points. But, as you look at some of these states and you just see North Dakota, what's required just to get a minimum of a
point? Wyoming requires an eligible score of 45 on the ASVAB and they require one extra item from either college or career ready and it could be like a CT complete or something like that. Then we look at Illinois, they require three indicators in career ready to include military service or an ASVAB
score of 31. So, as we look to see what other states are doing with ASVAB and how they're doing military readiness, uh, we did find Mississippi, I didn't put it on this slide, but Mississippi was similar to us as far as the ASVAB scores, but I would say to you, they required a higher score to get higher
number of points that our when I looked at their range and our range, our students were getting, you know, a five and they were giving a quarter of a point. Um, so even there where they allowed the ASVAB, we were not as rigorous. Uh, just just as a comparison and
Sorry, Dr. Acriman. >> Sorry, if I could, I just want to commend that you've looked at other states to see what they're doing. I find it really helpful. And I sent you a kind of midnight hour email um and to Tiier as well because I would love to see us see some analysis on what states are
continuing to use verified credits um and how, you know, they're splicing some of the, you know, the alternative type tests that we've heard people mention for social studies um earlier today. So I don't would expect you to break from this one now to do that now but perhaps
in a work session tomorrow or something. I mean next month or something. We can dig into a little bit and have a discussion on that. I think it would be helpful because I'm not completely I I chat GPT it for what it's worth and uh I think it's five other states besides us are continuing to do that. So I think I
would again would love to dig deeper on that. So >> So I'll respond and say there are six states that do use uh verified credits or some form for graduation requirements. We've already begun reaching out to those states. um I'm a part of a group to talk with them and so there's what's available publicly and when their state plans but we want to have dialogue with them around it
because there's things not in their their plan because there's flexibilities and so we're reaching out to provide that information and it's a great conversation to have because we we do want to learn more about them um I meet with them as part of a larger group of 44 states and so we do want to have more dialogue around this and our conversation on verified credits and so
I'll be excited you next president next board meeting to bring our findings on that uh as we think about our system some of those states in particular one of Louisiana has just uh made some major changes to their state plan and so we're having some conversation because they just had theirs approved uh not long ago. >> Yeah, they they would be really
interesting and I'm also since you mentioned 44 states, I'd be curious to see if there's any trend analysis. Are people coming back to the table with the verified credits or are they leaving the table? I'm just curious what the kind of data on that the state of the states on
all that is. So, thank you. >> You're welcome. So, I want to share the proposal that we have. Again, this is intended for there's no action today. Um, this is intended for public comment. We're excited to hear what the field has to say around this. You have on this slide the current enlistment criteria on
the left and then our proposal on the right. And so, I'll go from the bottom up. And so, a quarter of a point would be provided uh for students who take the ASVAB and get a 31 or higher. So, taking this assessment and I'll say with this, the intention was never just take the assessment and walk away from it. If you
look at states and I mean I can name some for you, one being Texas, another one being Kentucky. If you look at what they've done with ASVAB and the support they provide for students and the data and the exploration, it really shows how this is intended. I'll get a little personal and just say when I took the
ASVAB, I learned more about myself. I learned more about a pathway I might pursue, but it gave me different data about myself and skill sets I didn't know. And so we wanted this again 3E uh you know what the E stand for but it's also exploration is to learn about themselves. And so we want students to
to take assessments like this and learn about themselves. Even if they don't have a 31 passing score they still have a score and can learn you know where they're strong and where they're weak and where they can improve. And so there is a point a quarter of a point for students who take it uh and and do a third have a 31 or higher. And again 31
is the minimum enlistment score in certain branches. So now we move up and you see the proposal to bring in JRTC and JRTC is offered for four years. You'll notice in our proposal we're only looking at one year. We're not saying students have to be in there and maybe the board would want that but our
proposal is just a minimum of one year. We did follow what we did in enrollment with a B-grade. That's something we required in dual enrollment courses and so we stood by the B-grade for this as well. And so you see a half a point if you're 31 on the ASVAB and you're in uh complete completed uh JRTC course with a
B-grade uh 75 ASVAB of 50 to 64. Those are percentiles by the way the 50 to 64 uh with a B-grade and then a point if you're at 65 on the ASVAB and a B-grade. Now that 65 is very important because a 65 on the ASVAB is you're the next to
highest percentile or next to highest rank. That means you if you go in you enlist, you get incentives. And so we really do want to honor that that even if they choose not to enlist that they're aware that if they enlist there's incentives there and that they're in the second highest uh rank
there and just the the what a 65 means. And so that's a point value. And then what we are proposing is at 1.25 we're looking at another factors. If a student takes the ASVAB and they have 31 and they enlist, they follow through and they enlist in the National Guard, US
military, or attend a military service academy, which Virginia is proud to have Virginia Military Institute, they would have a 1.25. So, think about maybe a senior who's, you know, gone through high school, is not sure what they want to do. They take the ASVAB, they get a 31 or higher, and they think, I'm going
to enlist. Then the high school is going to have that 1.25. And so again, we're honoring the ASVAB and the different point values, but we're also honoring the students who do, this is about postsecary readiness. And so we want to see that through line all the way through. And so for the students who do
enlist, then the school would get the 1.25 value and the student would see sort of that again that pathway. And we're very proud of Virginia. I mean, we have a number of military bases here. Obviously, our proximity to DC, um, we're a very uh friendly military state. Uh, this is something we are u proud to
offer. >> Mr. Jennings, what I am not seeing here, however, that I'd like to be able to integrate somehow, um, is that we know quite a few of our students that go into JOTC in 9th grade or some as early as 8th grade in different localities, um,
and they complete all four years in the JOTC program. I'd like to see something in in this proposed segment that accounts for, you know, at least one point, maybe even 1.25, I don't know.
But I do think that we need to account for those students that are completing that four years of JOTC. >> It's great feedback. I'll go to the next slide and pause because I'm reading you know your your responses there and so we'll talk more about some other ideas we're exploring
is we think also about again enlistment getting that that through line that postsecary readiness so enlistment again is about service service to your country service to other areas and so one of the things we're exploring is maybe students enlist in programs such as the peace corp americanore we've listed some
programs there volunteers and service to America the national civilian community corps and we can collect this data where our students again exploring learning more about themselves and their pathways awarding points in enlistment for students who do go into one of these service areas. Uh and so we've just heard your recommendation there. We'll
take that back and then also just want to share with you where we are. We're exploring more about this and looking at other states and looking at these programs where they might fit and we want to bring this to the public and to the board to have that conversation around yes definitely point values but sort of where this might fit in and sort of any thoughts you might have in this
area. Superintendent >> Collins Well, I would like to personally speak to this one, Mr. Jennings, as an Americanore alumni myself. And so, I felt like, um, it's such a rigorous, um,
evaluation and entry program, and that we should also be prioritizing our students who want to graduate and go on for a year or more of service. For me, it helped me pay for future education as well. And so as we think about the long-term trajectory of students on
their pathways, um we're going to be working with our higher ed and workforce partners to get more information on the data trends. What do we know and what's possible here um at our next pathways convening uh uh next week, but we want to start to get input from the field.
I've had uh families say this should also count um because it's quite a high bar to to um get accepted into these programs and so um I appreciate the board's consideration there. >> Any comments here, Dr. Northern? I
>> think it's a great idea, honestly. I mean, these are programs that um are rigorous and I mean, I know I have family members that have participated in some of these programs, too. Um, and it is rigorous and it's it's it it does demonstrate civic leadership, readiness,
all the things that I think we're trying to uh promote in the 3A readiness indicator. >> I just want to respond and say uh thank you for your comments and this we're excited to hear from the public on this and bring awareness. I think again students you know so often we talk with students even guidance counselors or
even parents they say we didn't know that was available. We didn't know that was a pathway. And so by talking about this even today and bringing it to the the surface uh put into your accountability system, it just is going to have more kids exposed to it. So we're excited about that. And so next again you're going to see
some slides here on weights uh the calculation rules and participation rate. uh just want to be transparent about what's in the uh plan as we move to a public comment period and meet with more stakeholder groups and bring back their comments to you so you have some context uh as we talk through. So you've seen this slide before. No changes in
the weights for 2526. Be very clear about that. We're in November. We're not asking for any changes for 2526. This would be changes for next year. You see we we've talked about bringing history into the accountability system and also the integrated reading and writing. So changes to the weights would happen next
year. The next slide shows you the changes in 2728. Uh schools would have you know some time to think about integration implementation around science and history with the advanced courses. Some divisions already doing it. They can learn from each other talk through whether regionally or school to
school around the implementation of earth science and world geography high school mastery calculations. Uh really want to bring this to the surface and uh we've engaged in some conversation. We want more conversation. Currently, Virginia is using a cohort
calculation in reading, math, uh, and science in our accountability system. And so, the conversation has been uh, the pros and cons around moving to an annual calculation. And I'll share with you, you see it on the slide. Well, one, I want to be clear, there's no proposal to do that this year. We're not looking to change anything this year. This would
be in effect 2627 if we move forward. Uh, but you think about why why make this change. you know, one of the pros and cons. And one of the biggest pros that we've heard of is using data, using information for school improvement. And when you're using a cohort calculation, you are talking about students who maybe
have taken algebra in their nth grade year. And now we're looking at those summary results 3, four years later. And so if you're a school looking to make changes or improvement, you're talking about data that is now 3, four years old. Uh, and yes, graduation obviously is a culmination as well. uh but using an annual you'll see sort of where are
we right now more in the moment versus well those results those students were there three four years ago also we have students who transfer within Virginia they bring those results so a school is looking at data from other schools in their cohort calculation versus annually it's just their results so those are
some of the factors I think as we move forward you know we we're having our data validated on the school performance support framework you know as we think about sort of our old systems and our new system you know if we look at are released in August. Those are what we call in Virginia are pass rate reports.
Uh federal law calls them student achievement results. They're required under federal law. That is your baseline. It's a very simple calculation. Students who took the test, did they pass or fail or did they get advanced? So that tells you how schools have done. That tells you how divisions have done. Afterwards,
you get the framework. The framework is going to have some allowances. We can remove some students. We bring in three. We do some other things. But if you're a school division, look at your data from August. And what you're going to see with the framework shouldn't be too far off from that. And I'm saying that to you as an example because the cohort calculation is where you see your
results in high school, but then because a cohort, it could be different. And this board, as we've talked about our guiding principles is around transparency. And so, you know, if I'm a parent and I look and see the results in August and then I see the cohort, it's like, wait, I can understand cohort. But again, it's sort of that explanation. If
I'm a parent, I'm, you know, paying attention, looking at the news and looking at all the information and you're telling me the pass rate now is worth 60%. And then later tell me 80%. Wait, that's not what you just said two months ago. And so moving to annual allows that transparency between the pieces so that parents feel like, oh,
that's what I expected. You know, there will be an adjustment from August to whenever, you know, the accountability systems released. Um, some states do it September. Some states don't do their accountability system release until January. They take a full uh four or five months just to gather the data and
then they use the spring for planning. Uh and so just to share with you where this conversation's coming from, but the connections back to school planning and then our next piece, this is very technical, very technical, but it's know I know it's important to our schools and divisions. Uh we talked yesterday about
the 95% participation. It's a federal requirement in our state plan. You know, federal law requires if a school is not meeting 95% either overall or at the student group, basically what are the consequences? What are you doing? And like many states, Virginia requires a plan, a corrective action plan to say
less than 95% of our students tested, what are you going to do differently? So, what we're proposing is that knowing that an insize of 15 is pretty small, we're proposing to use 40 just in basically for the requirement of the plan. So, that doesn't change the calculations, the results, any of those
pieces. It's simply saying, uh, we're looking to see if you're below 95%, we would use an insize of 40 here. Then you'd have to develop a plan. Now, if the whole school's under 95%, they're still developing the plan. This was specific to the student groups to sort of honor how many students may not have
taken the test. So, it's more just to alleviate some of the paperwork and sort of the thinking there, but only for the student groups. If the school overall is below 95, they'd be required to do a plan. >> Dr. Northern >> to me it seems a little high. Um, but
can you tell me because you've done some other research in other states what other states are doing? I don't want us to be Virginia to have the highest in size. That's not the optics that we want. So I would I'm curious how other states are handling it because I get it's a sensitive >> right. So and to be very clear absolutely we were only would use the in
size of 40 only to calculate should they have to do a plan. And the reason we selected 40 versus 30 is basically this means you could have two students in a student group not take the test versus one. So that's really when you break it down of the percentage of 95 40 that's why 40 was chosen. It's just saying two
students in that student group may not have taken the test versus one. So that's why it's 40. But it's this is really is only about who has to make a plan to say students didn't test. That's it. >> The kids are still taking the test under 15. Is that >> absolutely it doesn't change the 15. I know it's very it's more about a
paperwork reduction versus we're not changing the insize. Not I know >> saw it. >> No, we're not changing the in size. I've got great research when Virginia the board adopted why 15 matters. >> Yes. So not changing in size. I appreciate that clarity.
Uh and English learners. So we we met yesterday with a group a consortium and today there's a conference they're speaking actually here in Richmond talking about this today. This is a piece I'll share with you. I've been talking about plans for 2627 2728 this is one I've heard pretty unanimously please make this effective this year um
and I think as you hear you'll know why and that is first we'll begin with the definition very often we talk about English learners and we do speak very broadly of them uh under federal law when we talk about exclusions or exemptions we speak about recently arrived federal law is very clear that
all students are responsible to take tests expected to take tests to be measured uh you know when we come to excluding students federal ederal law is very very strict based on you know civil rights groups fighting to make sure all students are included. So recently arrived you see the definition from
essays uh students who are enrolled in a US or District of Columbia school not using or not including Puerto Rico for less than 12 months. So we're talking about recently arrived English learners here in the country less than 12 months. And this was the essence of ESSA is that a student would have one year of school
learning instruction and then they'd be in your accountability system to measure how are they doing. So that was the essence 12 months and then how are they doing >> Mark? >> Yes. >> How are we determining the length of time >> the 12 months? >> Yeah.
>> So we use uh it's basically when the student enrolls we're collecting basically their enrollment and bas come from another state it's part of when they enroll in the school and we have their uh records the their history of enrollment it comes into our system so we know the 12 months. Now, school
divisions, it's a it's a two data collection uh process. School divisions will tell us and then we have another data source to verify. Yeah, it's a great question because it's something you know what what are the 12 months and which months count. They are cumulative. Um so we're looking at them
to be sort of students may have been in the country and leave and then come back. So we're looking at 12 months. Um and so yeah, and it it could be any school in the United States. Doesn't have to be a Virginia school. And this is consistent nationwide. is a great question. So, currently we're
doing exception A and exception A uh basically it's it's consistent and a number of states use this 26 of the 50 and and this is what we're doing right now. It basically says a student could be exempt from the reading test one time and then it says in their first year
they take math, science, uh any other applicable assessments in your system and then we report the results on how they do but for the first year uh it's not used in accountability. And so that's that's how it works. There's your 12 months, your one year of learning exposure. Year two, you would count in
the accountability system. So it's year one and year two. That's exception A, sometimes called option one. What we're proposing is to go to exception B. And here's the differences. And the next slide has a nice chart to explain this. Exception B says that uh recently arrived student will take all the
assessments. They will take reading under this proposal. They will take math. They will take science. They'll take all of them. But only to be a baseline. they do not count in the calculations. Uh we show the parents, we show the school how they did, but as far as accountability, they're removed. Um and so that that's again under federal
law, this is exception B. And so you see this slide that gives you a nice chart. So year one, reading and math, they take the assessment, Virginia reports the score. And by reporting the score, we mean we share the results. That's what that means. And then is it in accountability? The answer is no. Year one they take the English language
progress assessment. That's WEDA in Virginia. Um, we take the assessment, we report how they did. We don't use an accountability because you can't measure progress from the year before if they weren't here. So, I mean, that kind of fits. You need a prior year to measure progress. Year one science, they would take the assessment, we report it. Uh,
it would not be an accountability as well. Year two, here's the difference in exception B or exception two based on the literature. Year two, they take the assessment, we report it, and we only look for growth. So, in our system, we call the mastery component the growth component. they would only be in the
growth component. So, we're just measuring from year 1 to year two in reading and math, how much did they grow? Now, if you're asking, well, how are you measuring growth? I go back to some of my slides earlier. We would use the progress tables to measure growth. So, it's the same system, you know, for all students about what does growth mean
here. And then you see for year two, science and history, again, they would uh take the assessment count. And again, Virginia's pathway we really don't have, but we could where students take consecutive science and history tests, but it's possible. Um, they would be including accountability in year three
here, reading and math, they take the assessments, report it, and then they count for proficiency. So, your big difference between exception A and exception B is this extra year just measuring growth. And I think as you hear that, you would I think you can know why division, associations, organizations, school divisions are
asking us, please make this effective for this year. Um it would be a change because currently students may be exempt from reading. They would be need to be assessed this year as a baseline. But the feedback we received is this is one that yes, we would ask the board to adopt this and make this effective for 2526.
>> Any questions here? >> I will share with you just like JROTC and some of these other options. This was discussed when the board adopt that we would explore this further. This was a conversation the board brought up and wanted to know more about English learners as we talked about the 11 semesters and three semesters and we were asked to go back and ex examine
this. So this is again shouldn't be brand new. It's something we've been talking about. I'll move now there's a committee that's going to be meeting in a couple weeks. Uh we have an um alternate access test. This is for dually identified students. These are students who are uh participating in our alternate
assessment program and are also English learners. And this is a newer test. uh we have some baseline data now and what we need to determine for Virginia is what is our exit criteria and how do we measure progress so we now have enough data we have two years of data uh we have an expert who serves on our TAC our
technical advisory council uh who's going to come and help lead some work she's a national leader in this field uh and she's going to work with us on this and I'll say because I know the public's watching um and for the board there's uh I need to share just there'll be some more information on this but there's some concerns around the access
assessment so the access assessment for this year is a brand new assessment. It's been completely redesigned. The WEDA consortium will do their standard setting in July of 2026. Virginia will then do our standard setting in August of 2026. We need their
results and we will re-examine our exit criteria and our progress levels on the access based on their findings. U but I know there's some anxiety in the field and so while I'm talking about this, I thought I would add those comments just that we're very much aware. Uh we will not compare to the old results until the
standard setting is complete. But as I just shared, they're not doing their standard setting till July and actually the 26th and 27th. So late July. We'll need their results and then we'll do ours. So we'll do another group like this, but not until next August. >> Madam President, may I ask a question, >> please? Dr. Acriman.
>> Thank you. Um for clarification, if u a student does access, do they then not take the other standardized test or is it an addition? >> It's an addition because this is part of the screening. This is part of looking to see uh students who are duly identified. where's their English language? And for this assessment, it's
it's paper based. It's very much you might have students who are non-verbal. And so, we're really looking to see sort of is it a language issue or is it an issue around special needs? >> And so, that's why with this new assessment, really trying to determine the two factors. >> And then, but the VAP is separate, right? Absolutely. If it's chosen, it's not >> Yeah, we're not Yeah, just excellent,
excellent point. We're not saying if a student exits um via English learner services, alternate access, they wouldn't also receive um the alternate program, the VAP. >> All right. Because as we're looking at other states, one thing I'm really wrestling with and and trying to, you
know, just wrap my head around is as we allow differentiated instruction or things or if we consider allowing things to replace the standardized tests and everything you're working on, then you start kind of we're going backwards a little bit, right? I mean, the VAP, I
understand that's different, of course, but but uh we start tracking students with special needs different than the general population, right? because I'm going to prepare them for this test instead of that. >> So, um but but then wondering what the verified credits are going to do for students with special needs and those
are kind of butting heads I think in our heads a little bit. Um so that's why I'm so curious what other states have done because truly they're they've wrestled this as well. But um obviously the VAT makes sense, but any other type of alternative that becomes a replacement
to the standardized test, the bar is moving again. So just kind of for the you know the board kind of knows where I am on some of those things. >> Thank you. >> This is another piece that we shared in our amendment that we would bring back to both USCD and the board. And just to
be clear is uh with our framework we have an exit criteria for federally identified schools. Um we were asked to go back and be very clear about schools that were identified previously to 2025. How would they exit? And so we just want to be clear here with the public that if a school was identified for
comprehensive support or additional targeted support uh prior to this year they were in the old system that we use the same methodology of how they entered. We look at the same student groups. We want to honor the methodology that was used the calculations uh and that they can show progress based on
when they entered and how they entered. Again the framework is different with the mastery index and those pieces. And so want to make sure that we're comparing the right data for consistency there. And I'm going to turn to my colleague here, Deputy Superintendent Booker Dwire. She's going to speak to you about
some school improvement um pieces in the uh school plan or state plan. >> Hello board members. >> As we were noticing is Virginia tie. That's what the side call is. >> And so uh Mr. Jennings, he talked a
little bit about the accountability side of the of our um state plan that's being revised and we're actually going through the entire plan to um to make some minor updates to align with what we are doing now in the the uh direction for school
improvement. So what you will see is um for the more rigorous interventions section and this is more rigorous interventions for comprehensive support and improvement schools. we are going to focus on with school divisions um that school level needs assessment root cause
analysis process and having that team to support school improvement efforts and at the department level we are going to increase you'll see the the monitoring visits data sessions so that so that section of the ESSA plan will look a little different to align to all the
different presentations I've shared with the board from August up until now um With resource allocation review, there's a section that is required um for us to to look at how resources are distributed to schools. Um and once
again, this is going to emphasize the cross departmental team uh led by the office of school improvement looking at both fiscal and non-fiscal resources. And then the technical assistance. So we're looking holistically at technical
assistance. We um are looking to strengthen our partnerships with the professional organizations representing school boards, superintendent, principles um to ensure that we can provide some direct technical assistance to them to ensure that they know everything that's going on and they are
a part of that conversation and a part of the the school improvement. So you'll notice in our ESSA plan that we'll have a piece for schoolboard members, um for school and division staff and aspiring and current educators because what we know is that um we need to prepare that
pipeline of educators, principles and teachers who are prepared to address those unique challenges in some of our lowest achieving schools. And so for next steps, we are um we'll be actively engaging uh stakeholders. So
this is not not over yet. No decisions have been made. Uh this plan will go out for public comment and we want to hear from you. Uh we will hold some listening sessions. We will um attend the superintendent's regional meetings and share this there. We want their feedback. We are also um planning to uh
to go to our school boards to go to our um principles associations and we want to get their more um in-depth feedback. So we are looking forward to um to having all those comments bringing this back uh before the board. um at the December board meeting.
>> Any questions? >> Are there any questions for Miss Booker Dwire here? Miss McFerson, >> in light of our conversation yesterday in terms of involvement of school boards themselves and making sure that they are aware of what is happening in their
area. Um will your plan include for those visits to various schoolboard meetings or special call meetings so that we can update them on data? >> Definitely. So we plan to Yes. So we plan to share data with them for their area. We want to make sure that the
schoolboard members know everything that we have shared with superintendent principal every we want that tr that communication to be totally trans transparent. >> May I may >> other questions Dr. Acriman? Um, just a funny aside because as you're saying
that, my sister who's past president of Virginia Literacy Association just asked me to come speak to them, but I'm like, I don't know if I want to come on the cut scores or not. But anyway, um, I do I do want to point out that um, uh, because I think, you know, we're all hearing from our different constituents
and so, of course, I'm hearing a lot from our special ed folks and, um, and I just want I I don't know how to ensure our teachers that everything's going to be okay, right? I there's always angst when there's change. Um and I and and
most of them have heard me talk about keeping the standards high for our unique populations like English learners and students with special needs. And so just kind of that assurance that I've heard from you all I've heard repeatedly it is there to support. This is all for
support. I mean no teachers particularly in the field of special education are going to lose jobs over standards of learning assessments. Um I mean we we struggle to find them and keep them as as it is. And so just kind of making sure people understand that the accountability system is a support
system and and the way that those points are being laid out that you know kind of calculator of where the weaknesses are is to help the state identify that prescriptive plan. Um, and so I'm excited about it because I mean I can't tell you how often in the field you hear
stories that you know as an as an example and I won't just broad broad example how a student with special needs might not be getting pulled to see the reading specialist right because they're not being identified on the writing assessment reading and writing assessments they're being identified on
their special education assessments. And so this is good for the field and I'm excited about it and I just wanted to kind of share some thoughts behind that board. So >> thank you. Other comments here, questions? >> Thank you very much. We will move on to
item A with Dr. Wallace. Good morning. This one that's one or not. Good morning. Good morning, President Greasy, Superintendent Gullixson, and members of the board. Today, I have with me again Anne Eaton, lead reviewer for our esteemed partners at UVA and the
Virginia Literacy Partnerships. Ann and her team of educators spend countless hours reviewing submitted curriculum do documents and we want to recognize and thank them for their hard work. This is an endless process and we really appreciate the partnership.
We bring to you this morning the final review of additional supplemental and intervention materials to support the implementation of the Virginia Literacy Act as embodied by the standards of quality. There have been two changes to this item from last month. The 30-day public comment brought 11 public
comments. Five of them came from reading specialists, two comments from reading supervisors, and one from a second grade teacher, one from a special education teacher, one from a parent volunteer, and one that did not include their role. Seven of the public comments are in
support of you, one of the programs, being added to the list as an intervention. Commenters report that the program is an excellent option for phonics instruction. Two comments are requests for additional programs to be added to the list and one comment questions the approach of using such
programs without a study on long-term outcomes. Of note, since the October board meeting, Lexia Voya Voyager Sorpus has notified VP that they will be sunsetting the read well writing program within the next few months. And so that
program has been removed from the final K5 recommended supplemental program guide and is no longer under consideration for use. The superintendent of public instruction recommends that the board of education approve the K8 intervention instructional programs and supplemental
instructional programs to comply with the Virginia Literacy Act. Are there questions on this item? Okay. Um, given that there are no questions, is there a motion to approve the K8 intervention
instructional programs and supplemental instructional programs to comply with the VA? >> So move. >> Second. >> Are there any um comments about this motion? >> Dr. Northern I >> just want to clarify there will be
additional reviews in the first quarter of 2026 or or ones that have already been in place back from before we change the standards. Correct. >> So we are looking at that review process that hasn't been finalized. >> Okay.
>> But um we are in talks of of that as far as we won't re-review but um I'm assuming you're talking about the alignment to the standards the current standards. So, we will be looking at that. Yes. And we are also going to be doing another core review early on in the
first quarter. Anything else? >> Dr. Arian, >> I Mr. Green, >> I. >> Dr. Northern, >> hi. >> Miss McFersonson. >> I >> Miss Kilgore. I miss >> Ashton. Hi, >> Mr. Monk. I
>> and chair votes I. Thank you very much, Dr. Wallace. We are up for Miss Ba. >> Good morning. Good morning, President Cesy, members of the board, Superintendent Golixson. Before you today is the first and final review of a recommendation regarding the literary
fund loan application approval for release and loan funds. specifically for Prince Edward County Schools. The Department of Education conducted a loan application process in fiscal year 2023 and two loan processes in fiscal year
2024 and one loan process in fiscal year 2025 for school divisions to apply for construction loans from the literary fund. Um, as a reminder, these are loans that have to be repaid to the state in full um upon your approval. One school division, Prince Edward County, has
applied for a loan during the 2025 application period and has now submitted all of the required documentation needed for their requested loan to be released to the board. The item requests that the board approve the release of this literary fund loan requested by the
applicant school division as follows. A loan requested by Prince Edward County for the renovation of Prince Edward County Elementary School. The renovation project will focus on improving safety and security, the instructional environment, and will include the
demolition of 22,500 square ft of a campus style building, and new construction of a 21,800 square ft secure entry space, ADA improvements, HVAC and electrical plumbing system upgrades. It will also include asbestous
containment material abatement and radon testing. Prince Edward is requesting a literary fund loan for the project in the amount of 25 million payable over 20 years and is eligible for a 3% annual loan interest rate. Um super excited about this one because superintendent
and I actually got to walk through this building uh to see the construction that was happening and the improvements they're making on the campus. So um it is recommended that the board today consider this uh loan for release and approval. I will answer any questions that you may have.
Miss Burda, this is one of our divisions. Is that correct? >> I believe that is correct. Yes. >> And just for the board's knowledge, um I know that they have a new
superintendent this year as well. Um >> and so who I understand is doing an excellent job there. So, um just wanted to make sure that everyone's acknowledging that. Thank you,
>> Mr. Monk. I appreciate it and agree. Looking forward to the work that uh the new superintendent does in the division there. Um looking at the total cost of the loan, if I read this correctly, or not the loan, total cost of the project,
44 million. thinking about cost of new builds. Um can you speak to maybe the uh division's desire to uh go this route as opposed to a total new build? >> Yeah, absolutely. They uh shared with us actually when we visited the desire to
change it from a campus style campus which leaves open access um and the ability to not maintain security in the form that we would like to see security. So, um, they've really been creative and innovative in how to leverage parts of the building that are still functional
and can be upgraded versus just demolishing and building on a new site. So, I think they've done a great job of analyzing what was working, what could be extended by way of life in the in the building um, and then building new spaces that give them that innovative and great learning environment for
students. So, I think they've done a great job of um, mitigating factors where a total new build didn't make sense. So, they've done a good job. Dr. Northern, >> just want some assurance that um given
our conversation yesterday about declining student enrollment, um that these uh facilities request are taking consideration what enrollment is going to look like in five and 10 years and making sure we're not going to end up with excess space. >> Yes, ma'am. That's a new component that
our team has been looking at as they're reviewing the applications. So, yes, they are still in a spot where they will need this facility um long term in the into the future. Other questions or comments here? Okay.
Um so, is there a motion to wave first review and approve the release of the literary fund loans requested by the school division based on the loan amounts, terms, and eligible? >> Second. >> Let me continue to read. eligible annual rates requested in their loan
applications as described in the item. We have uh a motion and a second. Is there any discussion of this item? >> Dr. Arian, >> hi. >> Mr. Green, >> I >> Dr. Northern. >> Miss McFersonson. >> Hi. >> Miss Kilgore.
>> Hi, >> Miss Ashton. >> Hi, >> Mr. Monk. Hi, >> Chair BS. I Okay, thank you, Miss Ba. Um, we are going to take a couple of our other items up really quickly and then take um we're going to take item E first
and then item G and K and then we'll take a lunch break, please. This is item E. Thank you, Dr. Wallace, for being flexible. >> Yes, absolutely. Good morning again. Uh, the code of Virginia requires the board of education to review and revise the
standards of learning at least once every seven years. This statutory mandate ensures that Virginia's standards remain rigorous, current, and relevant by aligning to research and incorporating content that strengthens preparation for successful entry into
college, career, and military pathways. Today, the instruction and innovation offices bring to you four timelines to to approve to review and approve the following uh sets of standards: fine arts, health, family life, and digital
learning integration. These were all last approved by the board in 2020 and therefore would undergo the review process during the next calendar year with final approval in 2027. The review and revision process will be
informed by research and revised by subject matter experts, so review committees consisting of classroom teachers, school leaders, content specialists, parents, community members, workforce representatives, and higher education partners will examine the
current research, analyze standards from high performing states and countries, and recommend revisions that reflect best practices. Through this process, committees will thoroughly incorporate Virginia's unique context, including its history, culture, and workforce
priorities. Draft standards will be widely shared through public comment and surveys, which support transparency and meaningful stakeholder input before submission to the board for review and approval. The superintendent of public instruction
recommends that the board of education approve the timelines for reviews of the fine arts, health, family life, and digital learning standards of learning dig sorry, digital learning integration standards of learning. This will allow the department to engage with stakeholders for the review process to
allow for approval of any recommended revisions to take place in 2027. >> Any questions here? Okay. Is there a motion to wave first review and approve the timelines for reviews of the fine arts health family
life digital learning standards of learning? This will allow the department to engage with stakeholders for the review process to allow for the approval of any recommended uh revisions to take place in 2027. >> So move.
>> Any discussion of this item? Dr. Arian. Hi >> Mr. Green. >> Hi >> Dr. Northern. >> Hi >> Miss McFersonson. >> Hi >> Miss Kilgore. >> Hi >> Miss Ashton. >> Hi >> Mr. Monk. >> Hi. >> And chair votes. Hi. >> Thank you very much.
>> Thank you. >> See so we're going to hop to item G please. Thank you for being flexible Mr. Chapman. >> Thank you so much. President Cesy, members of the board, Superintendent Gullixson. Um what we have is a what I
think the board is is used to as a very common item which is a appointment for members of advisory committees. Um today we are asking the board to consider one nominee um for the early childhood advisory committee. Um the name is uh Katherine Plum who's being nominated as administrator, employer or board member
of religious exempt early childhood um care and education provider pursuant to article 4. Um Miss Plum is in region five uh coming out of Charlottesville at St. Mark um Lutheran Preschool and so we we ask that you would be willing to wave
first review and appoint this member so that uh they can start their work on the early childhood advisory committee. >> Any questions for Mr. Chapman on this one? >> Is there a motion to wave first review and appoint Katherine Plum to serve on the ECA ECAC
as presented in this item? Second. Any discussion? Dr. Aerman. >> Mr. Green. >> Hi. >> Dr. Northern. >> Miss McFersonson. >> I. >> Miss Kilgore. >> Hi. >> Miss. >> Ashton. >> Hi. >> Mr. Monk. >> Hi.
>> Chair votes. I >> And then jump over to item K if you don't mind, sir. >> Yes. Item K. Uh, what we're asking at the request of the board president is a slight modification to the board's regular meeting schedule for 2025, which we are coming to the end. uh in in and
certainly very quickly. Um and so this will not alter the December 11th date. That is still planned for the business meeting, but in in order to accommodate the the presentation schedule, um the request is
to add uh December 10th um to that date. Uh the the time will likely start uh somewhere in the 10 11:00 range. We're still working out the logistical details, but um won't be the the normal start time. Uh so to add that December
date in order to accommodate um the board's workload. Um the the request uh is to wave first review and and approve this addition to the board's calendar. >> There any questions here, comments? Okay.
>> Um, is there a motion to wave first review and approve the revision to the 2025 meeting dates to add the work session meeting on December 10th, 2025? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Any questions, comments?
>> Dr. Arian. I >> Mr. Green. Dr. Northern. Miss McFersonson. Hi. >> Miss Kilgore. Miss Ashton. >> Hi, Mr. Monk. >> Hi, >> and chair votes. I Okay, thank you very
much. You >> I think that that takes us now to a break. Um um we will come back at 12:40. We're going to take lunch right now and come back at 12:40. Thank you. Okay, we are back and we are on skipping
back to item C. Is that right? Yes, I'm on the wrong day. Excuse me. Item C. Um, Miss Booker Dwire. Thank you and good afternoon, members of the board. So I am pleased to share uh the an
update on implementation of the revised cut scores and what has occurred since the last time um I came to the board to present. So for the last few years the board has worked to increase expectations for students to strengthen
their preparedness for college career and military pathways. The board approved more rigorous standards for all students in math and English. The state fully aligned all test items on the math and reading standards of learning assessment to these more rigorous
standards and the board unanimously approved revised cut scores in September. At that September meeting, we said that we would go out and listen to stakeholders.
over 5,600 Virginiaians informed the recommendations uh for implementation and supports. So from August 12th to September 11th, we started initially with talking with superintendent at
their regional meetings, hearing their feedback and their concerns and some potential solutions for cut scores. We then kicked off a road show from September 29th to November 6th. And this was a true crossdep departmental effort.
Um it was not just my team. We had special education. We had all kind of people at the table um helping to support um to host these listening sessions. We had um we we we released an online form to allow people to provide
feedback. And it wasn't just a cross departmental uh support. It was cross agency. We had the secretary of education um and her staff helping to support these sessions. So it was a true
all hands all-in approach to uh these cut scores and finding out the best implementation strategy. Presented on the screen are the dates of the listening sessions that we held from September 29th to November 5th. Um you'll see the number of participants
and we uh subtracted any of the staff members that were there. So the numbers that you see only reflect um the external stakeholders um and you'll see the different stakeholder groups. And so we had 1,460 people from across Virginia, teachers,
superintendent, principles, parents, schoolboard members, central office staff um participate in these listening sessions. We had over 4,000 uh we received over 4,000 uh uh feedback
through online forms and public comments. So there were um forms that were posted on the raising expectations in Virginia website. Um and then we also emailed online forms after um each listening session so that uh participants could share it with their
uh constituents and their communities. Um, and this these forms, they were open from September 29th to November 6th. We also read every public comment that was submitted to the board regarding cut scores. Um, so that was 293 public
comments that everyone on my team, we took the time and read every last one of them. And the stakeholders included everyone across Virginia. felt like it was teachers, principals, parents, we had students, we had uh repres representation from um education, higher
education and workforce. And there were some common themes that came up. So when we were having these sessions, there were two things that we we asked. Number one was the implementation plan. We reviewed that four-year implementation model, the
five-year implementation model. We shared the projected impact data and then we asked them about the models um or if they had any suggestions for a different type of model and we heard all kind of um all kind of things and what's listed on the screen were the things
that really bubbled up to the top um that had the most feed that had the most responses. Um so it was very clear that uh adding that approaching performance level uh there we did not get any negative feedback. Everybody wanted that approaching performance level
overall. Uh educators, superintendent, principles, they wanted the implementation year as as long as possible. Uh we so from the feedback that we received, we heard a lot around the five-year phased in model. Um however, they would support the
four-year. Um and then reducing and then we also heard counter to that from our workforce and higher ed and parents to say no we need to reduce the phase in period to less than four years. And so we heard both sides of the coin there.
And then um this really ensuring that we are appropriately considering high school students. We want to make sure that we're not setting up high school students to fail. Um that the supports that are currently in place for high school students remain in place. And so we're going to speak a little bit about
that um um later on in this slide, but we definitely heard uh about that. The requested support, it was very clear that these increased expectations must come with increased support. And so
we went through and we heard loud and clear from parents, from teachers, especially um around the communication. The parents, they want to know this when is when is this going to happen? How will it impact my kid and what resources
will be available to help to support my child there? The teachers really wanted more about just to help them prepare their students for these higher expectations. So things like item maps and finalizing performance level descriptors. um not
just providing uh sample test questions but also identifying well what are what are the test quest questions the type of items that students are performing well on what are those types of items that students are not performing well on. So just um increasing the support to teachers and providing them more
information about the assessment and then there was a lot of requests on just guidance around you know that when you change the 400 cut score that come that's connected to a lot of different policy decisions. So they wanted guidance on the verified credit, what
would be the retake ranges? Um what what will be the threshold for automatic enrollment in advanced math um courses? Which students would be required to have a a student reading plan? What students in that approaching category would we now need to give them a reading plan? So
all the policies that are connected to this 400 test score uh they wanted some clear guidance around and the support the requested support continues. um just having those targeted guidance and resources for specific
student groups um such as students with disabilities making sure that we are not forgetting about them and that we are strengthening our support for them. There was a big push around that you know we just we need the the conversation around teachers and supporting more of the recruitment and
retention of teachers along with that professional development to improve instructional practice. And there were some specific um items that were were requested around that. Um we heard that they want you know formative assessments that would help them prepare their
students for the so assessment and um and we have been releasing those through our office of instruction. Um we have some quick time checks and some other things that can help students help teachers um use them to identify exactly where students are performing and to
kind of pinpoint the areas that they may need some support in um and then some strategies to help them bolster that support for those students. So we are already addressing um a lot of the things around the formative assessments. Um they wanted updates to some of our instructional guides which that we're
also in the process of doing that. And then just be to be really clear on what is the high quality aligned curriculum that connects to the um standards of learning. So we know that we have instruction um curriculum and assessments. They all need to be in
tight alignment. So just taking that next layer, it's not just only about just alignment to standards, but how does it also reflect some of the test items and the things that are happening on that so assessment. So we are um diving deep into that.
And there was some there was a lot of discussion around high school. And so we're going to take some time to just dive in there. And I just wanted to remind the board of the actions taken at that September board meeting where the cut scores were approved and this
multi-year phased in approach of no less than four years and to essentially exempt the current graduating class from the revised cut scores. The four-year phased in approach is what is being recommended. Um, this was
shared uh with you at both the September and October board meeting where this year, the current school year that we are in is a preparation year uh where there's no changes to the cut scores and then the uh and then we add a temporary approaching performance level um in the
2026 2027 school year. And this approaching performance level would count as passing. And what it does is it allows us to better target support. So just not grouping all kids into either proficient or basic. Having that
approaching level allows you to identify those kids who are on the cusp of proficiency and to target some stronger supports to them and then to really intensify the supports for students scoring in at the basic or below basic levels.
And with that approaching category, we would incrementally increase it each year until it is phased out um in the 2029 2030 school year. And we want to be clear, we've we've been hearing a lot that if you modify
the cut scores, you're going to change graduation requirements. So, we did take this to to our attorneys and modifying cut scores will not change the graduation requirement. There was a precedent set back in when we lowered the cut scores. There was no phased in
approach. There was no adjustments to the implementation. They were uniformly implemented um in 2019 when those cut scores were lowered for the reading so assessments. Um they were implemented that spring. Um and then in 2021, so
2019 for the math so assessments and then 2021 is when the those uh lowered reading cut scores were uh implemented. Um and that was done without there was no change in the graduation requirement. So when we're looking at increasing these cut scores um it's it's very
similar and that we're not changing the graduation uh requirements, we're simply modifying the cut scores. And we want to be clear that this in revising the cut scores is not going to impact the requirements of the the
structure around assessment retakes. So what we know is that if a student current who passes their course and failed the so test um they can retest they can retake this the um so assessment using the cut score that was
in effect at the time of the initial test attempt. So, if your student took the test this school year, um it's a 400 proficiency cut score, they got a 380, then they can retake the test and but they and they pass the course, they can
retake the test at the and only be held accountable for that 400 uh level. And we are prepared um at the state to support this. will have two different test forms um to make sure that the students who need to test at that 400 level uh we will be able to calculate
that at the 400 level and the students who are on their initial attempts attempts at the revised cut scores we will be able to calculate that as well earning of verified credit that will not change and so students who have already
passed a course who have already demonstrated proficiency on an end of course assessment they will not be required to retake the assessment or they um and to score at the new cut score. So, the verified credit that's not going to change. And I and on the screen there's an example of a student
who took the algebra 1 end of course assessment. They earned a score of a 400. Um they they met the passing requirement. So, they will not need to retake that assessment. That was the cut score, the proficiency cut in effect at the time of their test and that is what they will be held accountable to. So,
we're not changing anything for students. And the credit accommodations um and locally awarded verified credit options, we're not taking that away. Um that will still remain in effect. So, students um so our students with disabilities would
still get those credit accommodations and those locally awarded verified credits will still remain available. And so, what we are asking the board to do today is to Can we pause? >> Oh, yeah. Let's pause. >> Second. Let's pause before we get here to just um see if there are any
questions. >> Ashton, um just restate what just Sorry. Can you just restate what you said about graduation requirements either passing or not passing? >> Right. So the graduation requirements
are not changing. We're not modifying the graduation requirements. Um it's so Virginia has set a precedent where they have changed cut scores in the spring of 2026 and there has been so it was lowered there was no push
back. Um and so graduation requirements are not being modified only the cut score. Other questions? Dr. Northern, >> what year is a >> Whoa, wait a minute. Hold on. I have more questions over here. >> I just wanted you to restate the um the
modifying the slide here. I've read it twice. I think I've got it, but can you say it one more time? >> And so we're not changing a graduation requirement. >> I'm sorry. I'm on the um I'm sorry, I'm on the uh retest next slide. >> This one. Yeah.
>> Yes. Okay. So if a student and this is currently in effect, if you pass the course and fail the assessment, you can retake that assess the re retake the so assessment. You could retake it. So let let's say you were a ninth a ninth grader and you
failed that algebra 1. You passed the algebra one class, failed the so assessment at the and the proficiency cut is currently 400. You can take that algebra one assessment grade 10, grade 11, grade 12 at that 400 cut score
>> or was in effect at that time that the test was taken is what you would be accountable to until the pass till you actually pass the >> right for that initial attempt that you took. So example,
assuming it's 400, then you just keep you're able to keep taking it, >> right? So if you take it this spring, you would be at the 400 level. >> So everybody should take this test this spring. >> Dr. Acriman, >> I think someone else had a question about which year
did someone have a like go because it was one of my questions, too. So if I I don't know if they wanted to go first. I don't want to cut anybody off, but but you're saying for clarity there are no changes for the current school year cuz in the future the cut scores will change.
>> So, okay. So, let's say you are a current ninth grader, you pass the algebra 1 course, you failed the so assessment. >> Okay. >> So, 10th grade cut scores have now been increased. >> Okay. >> You are held accountable for that algebra 1 400 proficiency cut because
that was your initial test. that was what was in effect at your initial um test administration. >> Okay. All right. I see what you're saying. But in the future >> and so like let's say a grade so let's say 2026 2027 school year a student takes a algebra one assessment. So 400
is no longer the cut score. 400 is higher. So that student, they pass the class, fail the assessment, they can retake that assessment at the that revised cut score because that was what was in effect when they took the the initial.
>> And then I think the the the big thing I really would love to see is our estimates of people passing the tests based off current data. >> Yes. So we share that projected impact
data. Uh um so every school division, every school has projected impact data right now for every math and English language arts assessment. Um and we based it off of uh the spring administration, last spring
administration of the so test and that was how we the data was projected and um so they could see how many the percentage of students that are expected to perform below basic basic approaching advanced right now. Um, so they have all
that data. So that and we're in using that data to inform our support to certain school divisions because there's some school divisions they're going to be okay. They are already pushing for that higher expectations. They're going to be fine. And then we know that there's other school divisions where we're going to have to dig in a little bit deeper there.
>> Okay. And I'm sorry if I'm anybody wants to interrupt me and I'm hogging up too much time, just let me know. So are we going to get to see that as a board? And I'd love to see it by the categories, right? the ESL, the special education uh categories on how our percentage of
students are performing on the new cut rates. >> Yeah, I think that's >> but but yes, that information. So, when we had the the one-on-one meetings to go over that projected impact data, those spreadsheets that I shared, so that's um that was that data and um and to get it
disagregated and so we want to so that's forthcoming. >> Okay. Thank you. Sorry. And then um let me see. I'm trying to find the slide on the special education. Um that nothing nothing changes for them. Um but they
still do have to pass the algebra and EO EOCC tests the proficient whatever the new proficient rate is. Correct. >> And and so that's a complex question because there's lots of ways to to pass um or to to earn that credit. And so the
the initial answer is if they take that assessment, then yes, they're expected to pass it at whatever the that cut score is. If they don't pass it, there's all these different opportunities that that students have where they can still essentially demonstrate their
proficiency um and graduate. So the so test, it's not the it's not going to clo if you don't pass the so test in Virginia and I think this is one of the wonderful things about Virginia. You get so many opportunities um either through retakes through I mean there's so many different pathways
>> and is that only for students with special needs or for all students parents and because I read in Texas they actually set up a graduation committee and they review these but but they still have to try the test first so that we have that accountability data. >> Right. Okay. Thank you, Miss
McFersonson. >> Discussion, >> other questions or comments? We do have some more slides unless Do you want to speak now or wait until we're done? Okay. So what we are what we are asking the board to do today and this is very
important um to affirm that this school year this 2025 2026 school year is a preparation year without that affirmation without that board vote then it that means the new cut scores will go into effect the spring of 2026 and we are very clear we don't want that to
happen just yet we want that preparation time so um so that is our recommendation for today and then just to affirm the your prior statements of um not wanting to uh make any changes for the graduating class of 2026. So this year's
students and to um just affirm the board's prior statements of just ensuring that as a department we are strengthening our support to teachers to prepare for um the implementation of these higher expectations um and you know and our support for principal,
superintendent, board members and parents and so the immediate next step so what we are currently uh working on is thaton upon a completion of the external validation that's that's currently underway um with our university partner
of the of our outcomes of the school performance and support framework. Uh we are going to share specific information with the board um on the impact of revised cut scores um with a focus on high school. Uh we are going to present the supports that have been developed
and those that are in development. And um we're going to provide you with an update on the parent focus groups that we are about to convene uh focusing on the messaging around these cut scores so that we can get it right for how we are communicating this to parents. And then
um and then review the specific impact data for student groups. And we want to bring the recommendations back to the December 11th board meeting for decision. And with next steps, we are finalizing we're we're um working to finalize these
focus groups and um the communication that we'll be releasing to school divisions and um into the field around these cut scores. We are working to finalize all of our test specific resources that we can that we'll use to train um and support teachers. We are
expanding the content specific support with teachers. So we have, you know, a phenomenal team in the office of instruction who are going deep with math and um and science and and English language arts and we're um in the process of hiring. It's posted now a
director of math and regional math specialist and a regional math coordinator. So please apply. Um it is actively posted and um and we've interviewed for new middle school math position. So we are working on all those resources. um and then providing that data informed professional learning and
uh collaborating with divisions on the messaging. So we really do want the input of superintendent and principles so and schoolboard members. So we're looking forward to coming back to those meetings with materials to get them um to get their reaction so that we can refine it before it goes wide to the
field. comments and questions here. Miss McFersonson, >> I was noticing in the presentation that there is an indication that in the September board meeting, we approved the superintendent's recommended cut scores
for the reading and math so test and we approved a multi-year phase in approach of no less than four years and to exempt the class of 2026. Are we now saying that basically we're exempting the class of 2026?
We still would do a phased in approach. The question is for the students who take the assessment say for instance in algebra next year and say the score is 400 for algebra.
They don't make the 400 grade. They can continue to retest for algebra. Is there any point in which the 400 score is going to impact their graduation? And so if so next year, so with the
phased in model that 2026 2027 would be the first year that we're implementing the new cut score. So that 400 would be a little higher for algebra 1. So they would need to meet that algebra 1 requirement uh that that cut score um that to demonstrate proficiency. So,
let's say they pass the class, they fail the so assessment, then they can execute a variety of different options. So, they can retake the test, um, and then if it's still not working out well for them, we there's different options that they can pursue to ensure that they get
that credit. And so, it should not prevent them from graduating. Do you have a question? Any further questions on that? Miss McFersonson, you good? >> Okay, Brandon.
>> Okay. Um, I think it's important to understand though that if we if this is a preparation year, there's really no impact on any grade level. So even the
exemption of the class of 2026, I mean that's that's already there. But understand that if this is a preparation year, everyone is still taking the so tests at the current cut scores.
Next year would be year one and that would be an increased approaching score. That would the board's already said the approaching score is considered passing. That's that's been it. But the point is
is that that is an increased score beyond what is expected this year. Is that I just want to make sure that's clear because I know you said like next year a 400, but that's not going to be the case. Okay. >> And and actually Dr. I just wanted to
say that I'm glad that we're moving >> Miss McFersonson, >> we're moving rapidly with the implementation of the whole accountability system and the transparency because that has been the whole mission of this endeavor for
parents and students to understand exactly where they are. Clearly, the board has made a statement that we didn't want to impact the graduating seniors with anything that we did because they were already in place based upon test. they've either taken or they're planning to take. Beyond that,
we do have a high expectation that all the resources are going to come to bear to bring everybody up to what the new cut scores will be. And while we have the approaching and the growth measures and all of that in place, I just was trying to make sure that everybody
understood when and where it was going to impact graduation rates. Be that as it may, as we stand right now, we do have a phase in approach for approaching, you know, better growth and performance. And I think that the board will have some
flexibility with modification. But I kind of look back and I just wanted to say this. I I thought about this last evening. When I when I first entered college and met my college advisor, the first thing he did was go over some questions about world history,
geography, and things like that. and I wanted to pursue political science. Well, he said, "You're totally deficient in that area and I don't know how you ever going to be able to catch up." And what I I don't want that to happen to anybody else because it will impact their scholarships and their ability to
get an education. Fortunately, I was able to overcome it. But that's why it's very important to me that we raise the level as quickly as possible so the students never have to face that. And I'm reminded that Martin Luther King said there going to be some difficult
days ahead. We're not going to like some of the scores that are going to come out. But what is important is that the general assembly has entrusted us with the funds that they have given us to bring all of the resources to bear to move as quickly as possible and I think
we all are committed to that. Anyone else? Okay. With that, is there a motion to wave first review and approve the 2526 school year will be a preparation year with no changes to cut scores for the spring 26 assessments?
>> Second. >> Any discussion here? Dr. Northern. Any discussion here? Okay. Dr. Aerman. >> I. >> Mr. Green. >> Hi. >> Dr. Northern. >> Miss McFersonson. >> Hi.
>> Miss Kilgore. Miss Sashton. I >> Mr. Monk >> I >> and chair votes I >> thank you very >> thank you >> um item D Good afternoon. Good afternoon to the board once again.
I am here today uh standing for a first review of the >> There we go. Good morning board once again. I'm here standing here for a first review of the uh lab school contract. We're going to
change from first and final to first. Um so pursuant to statute 22.13-349.3 of the code of Virginia, the board is responsible for reviewing and approve approving lab school applications and entering into contract with lab schools.
These these contracts state that any material change required amendments to board contracts for each lab school. The material change policy and procedure for Virginia College uh partnership laboratory schools provide the mechanism
by which lab uh schools may request and obtain authorization for significant change to their approved scope of operations. The proposed policy defines a material change as a change of such magnitude as
to the alteration of significance of the lab school's mission, goals, legal status, scopes of offering, autonomy, sponsorship, and method of delivery of programming, financial stability, or the locus of control over the lab school,
which could include the expansion or altering the school's mission or objectives, establishing a new location, ation or branch adding or discontinuing major program components of grade levels or significant change to budget or
financial or career uh and technical programs. The proof of this policy ensures that lab schools operate under clear consistent expectations when proposing changes that could result in modifications of their contract. This
framework strengthens the oversight ensuring compliance with statutory requirements under statutes 22.1-349.2 of the code of Virginia provides a process for determination and notice of material change and promotes
transparency in decision-m across the lab school network. The superintendent of education recommends that the board of education approve the material change and procedures for the Virginia college uh partnership laboratory schools on the
first review. >> If there are no questions here, first I'll ask are there any questions? We did talk about this bit yesterday. Um, so if there are no questions, we will take this for first review and see
you in December. >> Thank you so much. >> Thank you. Okay. All right. Now we need to go to item F as in Frank everyone. And just for a reminder, Miss Velasquez
provided us with an extensive presentation yesterday. We talked about um the board's standards of quality recommend or prescriptions and there were um there was diligent work done overnight to accommodate the board's um
edits and amendments and um that amended document is up on um the website and on the SharePoint site for board members. Um, Miss Velasquez, if you could give us
the highlevel overview, changes and additions um so that we can help move this right along for you. >> Thank you, Mrs. Casy. Um, members of the board, Superintendent Gullixson, I have um made the requested edits uh that uh I
received yesterday during my presentation and the subsequent conversations at the public notice lunch um time. So, I'm not going to go through the entirety of the presentation. That was uh can be found at item A uh from yesterday. And then today, item F has
the revisions. So I'm going to just jump to page um within the document itself. I'm going to jump to page four where um in the recommendation for student information
uh revised student information system. Um there was discussion about the need for excuse me I'm on student weighted funding formula. I apologize. Um there was discussion about teacher compensation needed to be factored into the student weighted form funding
formula because as we know stu teachers are the most critical part of a child's education and so I went back and added some language as the general assembly is recommended to consider the student weighted funding formula that they also factor that um teacher weighted compensation into that funding formula
to really compensate teachers at those hard to staff schools high-risisk schools and high-risisk areas where there are substantial vacancies. And so that is the green language on page four. And please stop me as we go along if you have any questions or um changes that
you would like. So Melissa, can I jump in here for a second? So knowing that our vacancies are down, I would just say that um you know, we've worked really hard in that area. The governor has certainly put a lot of effort into that and th that effort has certainly paid
off. Um but I will say that I I am very excited about this because um in these areas of um you know specifically uh in those schools that are high risk um and
at higher risk of more vacancies than others. um ensuring that we're getting really high quality and in many cases um you know teachers are often going into those
vacancies or into those higher uh risk areas at earlier positions in their career and then graduating on. Hopefully this can kind of turn that tide and maybe we'll get some more experienced educators into those areas that might
make some real differences. Not that our brand new educators cuz I was one at one time uh don't make major impacts. It it's just uh those hard to staff positions are really really critical to oftentimes get that experience in there.
So I'm excited about this particular item. So thank you for adding that. >> Thank you. And you know, just as as Miss um Kilgore said in the past, she wanted to stay in the classroom and we want those experienced teachers in the classroom and hopefully this will help incentivize that.
Um the next item is on page five. >> Dr. Northern, >> excuse me. >> Yeah, I'm just I'm just wondering um and I don't know the implications of this and maybe we don't have good measures of school poverty. How do we do we just um
measure that with FRL status? That is not a question for me. I don't know if the superintendent has answer to that, but we can find that information out. >> Okay. Yeah, there's a um community service provision which is related to the benefit whether you eligible federal
benefits. >> It relates to title one. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> I'm just trying to say um I just want to make sure that we're also talking about the high poverty campuses um and how we measure that. Um, and I'm not exactly sure whether we're measuring it
accurately, but if we are, um, it would be nice to have that measure, um, in there. >> So, would you like that information incorporated into the report or is the recommendation standalone still is what you would like to see, but um, information on the data collection itself?
>> Students, add that in there. >> Okay. >> I I just want to make it's not necessarily experienced teachers. It's just the um again it's rewarding teachers no matter if they have five, 10 or 30 years um if they are willing and
going into these higher um you know harder to staff positions. >> Other questions or comments here? >> Okay, then moving on. Uh the next prescription related to the modernized data collection system. I know Mr. monk is
particularly interested in that. And after some discussions and um my um ability to translate those discussions, I added in language into the modernized data collection system to support the information that was already there related to financial management of uh
our antiquated data system. Not just um for student collection and information, but it is also the financial management system that the department has to use is also antiquated. And um we can't give stu uh school divisions good data. We can't get the public good data in real
time without a better financial management system as well. And if there are growing issues within school divisions for financial management, we cannot address them um as necessary in a in a short amount of time if we don't have real-time data. So I did add that
language in and I have heard from Mr. Monk that he um agreed with that language. Uh and so um if there aren't any questions, I will move on from the financial management update that is in green on page five. >> Questions here.
>> Okay. >> Thank you. Um and then now moving on. Um, in prescription three related to gifted education, there was just an addition um, I made some changes, I guess, into the enactment
clause. Um, so that I believe that's where I made the changes and this may be slightly influenced by a lack of sleep tonight. So I do apologize but yeah are there any questions about any changes um after uh into
prescription three about the gifted education? Not I'll move on >> questions here. It's on page 15. >> Page 15 um >> number six. you know, there was discussion about a handbook of resources
and so I added that to the enactment clause. So the department would be required to create that handbook and there was discussion about the need to assess at sixth grade. Um but there was the concern about the fiscal impact. So I did add that as a component of that resource document to encourage school
divisions to test again as needed. um especially in the sixth grade um or the middle school I called it cuz as you pointed out some middle middle schools start at sixth grade some start at seventh grade and all of the changes are in green um again so the third enactment
clause is the new language for uh the gifted moving on we added standard 4 uh yesterday um there are uh the the language is set out for you in green. It's about the improvement of um the school
accredititation system and the idea that while school divisions um the schools are accredited currently under the the regulations, uh schools are often um making and affected by the decisions uh from their school boards and their
division leadership. And so those entities are are generally not held accountable in the same way that the accredititation of the schools holds school buildings accountable. So language has been added in to standard three. Um that language is laid out for
you about the accredititation at the school division level in addition to the school building level and the opportunity for the board to prescribe third party evaluators. That discussion was yesterday afternoon um regarding the need to do those division level or
school level reviews questions or comments here. >> Okay. >> Okay. Thank you Melissa. Then finally going to the uh background checks for educators and uh part-time, full-time, temporary employees of school
divisions, I added in the I um left out the 5-year renewal of of the checks for the child um founded complaints of child abuse and neglect. So, I I um made that um change to make it consistent with the
background check statute so that there will be a 5-year renewed background check and a 5-year check of the um founded cases of abuse and neglect database. >> Questions or comments on this one? Thanks for that addition, Melissa.
perhaps to make that consistent. I believe that's the total of the the edits um to the the report. >> Okay. Before we um move on this, is there are there any other questions or comments around this particular
document? Dr. Northern, >> just a comment to thank you. I I know you were working at after midnight 12:01 and um I told you this personally but I wanted to say this in front of our other board just how how much we appreciate the time that you put in to turn this around so quickly. >> My pleasure.
>> And so the superintendent's recommendation of course is to weigh first review and approve the 2025 prescriptions and authorize the board president superintendent to make final edits like the edit Mrs. uh Dr. Northern has requested. >> Mr. or miss
>> I also want for your extra time and your great listening skills because you took a lot in yesterday and implemented it all overnight and thank you so much. >> Thank you >> Mr. Mon. >> Thank you again want to echo those sentiments but uh and appreciate the board as well for the support uh
potentially here in a few moments of specifically you mentioned some key areas of interest for me on the modernization of the financial management system. I just think that's really key for us to really provide that accurate timely data that not only this body but other uh stakeholders can
utilize and of course prescription for with this whole division level uh component there. So I think that's going to be huge for us to ensure that as we communicate with localities and stakeholders we could feel confident about um the information that's shared. >> Absolutely.
>> Anything else here? Okay. Is there a motion to wave first review and approve the 2025 prescriptions on the standards of quality rel and related legislative package included in this item and delegate authority for any final edits
to the board president superintendent? >> So second >> any discussion Dr. Aerman >> I >> Mr. Green >> Dr. Northern Miss McFersonson >> Miss Kilgore Miss Ashton >> Hi Mr. Monk >> I
>> and chair votes I. >> Thank you very much again Miss Velasquez. >> Okay. And with that we are going to item H on the agenda.
Mr. Gilstra. >> Good afternoon President Cesy members of the board. Superintendent Gullixson. Um, today I bring to you a first review of a notice of intended regulatory action to add a special education early childhood add-on endorsement. Uh, as you might
remember earlier this year, we did other work with a special ed endorsement. Uh, that work should go into effect January 1st. Uh, that was changing a graduate degree requirement down to a bachelor's degree. And this is the next step in our iteration to try to uh address the
shortages and uh early childhood special education teachers. I have a brief presentation for that as well. In your documents are the town hall documents as well. Uh this is only first review. Uh we will be back in
December if that's your pleasure. >> Any questions for Mr. Gilstrap here? >> Okay. Thank you. We will accept this item for first review and see you in December. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Item I Okay, we may need a two-minut break
here. Thank you. Okay, thank you. >> Dr. Williams, you're up. >> Good afternoon, everyone. President Casy, members of the board, and Superintendent Gullixson. Thank you for the opportunity to present our recommendations to reestablish the career and technical education advisory
committee. The advisory committee for career and technical education membership was based on business and industry representation from each of our former 17 career clusters as identified by the national career cluster framework advanced CTE with regional representation for our eight
superintendence regions. In July 2021, a non- voting member representative was added from the Virginia Association of Career and Technical Education. Currently, the CTE advisory committee does not have a board approved chair as
the past chair retired in June 2025. There are four board appointed members of the CTE advisory committee, each on their second term that represent the advanced manufacturing, digital technology, healthc care, and human services, and marketing and sales career
clusters. Unless otherwise determined by the board, one member's term will expire in June 2026 and the remaining three members terms will expire June of 2027. The board has historically appointed the members of the CTE advisory committee,
but minimal evidence exists as to how the membership was selected. We recommend that the board reconstitute the advisory committee for career and technical education by adopting the following membership categories. 14 a total of 14 business and industry
leaders from each of the 14 modernized national career clusters with statewide representation across the eight superintendent regions. Current vacancies include agriculture, arts, entertainment and design, construction,
education, energy and natural resources, hospitality, events and tourism, management and entrepreneurship, financial services, public service and safety, and supply chain and transportation. Two parent group representatives from
schoolappointed groups, parent associations, parent teacher associations and other related support groups. Two professional trade organization and agency representatives. One post-secondary representative. One school division superintendent.
two school division CTE administrators, Virginia Department of Ed representative and a representative from the V Virginia Association of Career and Technical Education as required by the strengthening of career and technical education for the 21st century act Perkins 5. The advisory
committee for career and technical education should include members from education, business and industry and the community and their role is to ensure CTE programs are aligned to workforce needs. Key functions include providing input on secondary curriculum and
ensuring curricula is aligned with the latest industry practices, bridging the gap between education and business and industry and advising on how to meet industry expectations. This reconstruction of the advisory committee of career and technical
education will provide the support that we need to receive expert advice, guidance, and recommendations to the VDOE in support of career and technical education. The superintendent of public instruction recommends that the board of education receive for first review the
recommendation to reconstruct the CT advisory committee by ensuring representation across all membership categories. At this time, I would uh welcome any questions >> questions here. >> Mr. Monk,
>> appreciate this uh Dr. Williams and laying it out. One thing recognizing first review may consider um current and technical student organizations uh as an inclusion of one of those groups as well but appreciate the list
that's here currently. Other comments? Yes, >> Miss McFersonson, >> I appreciate the work you all have done too regarding advisory committee, but I think that the committee ought to consider uh raising a number of representatives
from the parent group because as it stands now, it's basically two and that can be a parent or parent association or PTA and then I think the second one needs to be postsecary education. And there ought to be more representation on the committee in that regard because we
are talking about students you know making decisions about college versus a career. Um so if you would take that into consideration in terms of representation >> other comments here Mr. truck
>> and and hope this is in uh the spirit of what you were saying as well not only for uh the traditional four-year institutions or two-year but community college or other preparatory programs u included as that >> other comments
>> I know to have school division superintendent >> maybe um you know representing the different areas of the state I mean not that many but maybe one more rural urban or whatever because there's you know big
difference there in a lot of time a lot of ways and I and I echo the student organization representation also I think that's great but thank you other comments or questions for Dr. Williams on this item
okay um superintendent >> um thank you Dr. Williams oh speaker. >> Sorry to those in the audience. Uh I just want to reaffirm not only is this so timely for us to reestablish and
enhance this bridging between families, educators, business, and higher ed for the Perkins plan. But this just reaffirms what our agency heads are already doing of cross collaboration through the education continuum from birth through adult. um as well as the
uh collaboration we've emphasized before in close alignment with our workforce agencies, aligning on terms, aligning on metrics and vision. And so I'm hopeful that not only will this help us in the short term, but also long term for the impacts we want to see with our students
and families. >> Thank you. We will accept this item for first review and see you in December. And you have item J as well. Okay, first review of the industry recognized credentialists. Industry or trade association certification
examinations, professional licenses, and occupational competency assessments are continually reviewed, revised, or discontinued to stay current with the needs of business and industry. Our proposed list of 2627 industry recognized credentials includes 110
board approved credentials listed in one or more CTE program areas in our student catalog representing over 240 individual examinations. This is a significant reduction from the existing 301 board approved credentials
representing over 520 individual examinations. Many of these credentials are part of suites made up of multiple examinations that are stackable and enable our students to continually progress and achieve advanced certification. An example includes the automotive
service excellence certification suite that includes 22 individual examinations such as the automobile and light truck engine repair and the collision repair and refinishing painting and refinishing certification examinations.
Industry recognized credentials validate a student's skill and knowledge in a specific field and are included in Virginia's 3E readiness framework and graduation requirements. These credentials are developed and evaluated by external organizations, ensuring they meet industry standards and are relevant
to employers. Earning these credentials is essential for career readiness and success for several reasons. Employability. Credentials signal to employers that a student has achieved a certain level of competency in a specific area. This can make them more attractive candidates in the job market.
Career advancement. Credentials can lead to higher wages and better job opportunities. They often serve as stepping stones to further education and training. Alignment with industry needs. In Virginia, credentials are aligned with industries such as advanced manufacturing, information technology,
and healthcare. This ensures that students are gaining skills that are directly applicable to the workforce. Stackable credentials build on previous skills and can lead to higher level certification or degrees. This flexibility allows students to continue their education and career development
over time. The proposed list includes approximately 100 industry recognized credential included from the 2526 board of education approved industry certifications, occupational competency assessments, and professional license
list that was approved in July of 2025. 73 of the 110 total credentials that we are recommended align to the Virginia Community College System Workforce Credential Grant Programforward list of credentials
in collaboration with the Virginia Office of Education Economics, Virginia Works, State Council of Higher Education in Virginia, Virginia Community College System. Our research led us to other leading states that value industry recognized credentials including
Colorado, Florida, Indiana, North and South Carolina, Ohio, Tennessee, and Texas with consultation from advanced CTE. A structured process for validating the list of industry recognized credential was identified based on the following
criteria. datadriven outcomes which includes evidence of positive outcomes such as improved employment rates, wages or continued education. Industry recognition endorsed or required by employers in a specific industry or career cluster and is widely
accepted as the standard of competency. Additionally, the credential aligns with in- demand occupations portable recognized across multiple employers, regions or states. The credential reflects current and emerging workforce needs as reflected in job vacancies.
Program quality earned by passing an examination through a VDOE CTE approved program of study that proves skill proficiency. Credentials are developed or vetted by industry experts and meet a recognized standard of excellence.
Stackable credentials build on previous skills and can lead to higher level certifications and/or degrees. and third party validated. The issuing body should be accredited or recognized by a reputable independent third party organization or governing body.
The VDOE recognizes this list of credentials as meeting the industry recognized credential definition and criteria because each serves as a verification of qualification or competence, is accepted by multiple employers within the industry or sector
involved and is accepted, preferred or required for screening, hiring, retention or advanced purposes. Pending additions to this list of credentials includes the designation of credentials that align to the 2025
Virginia Office of Education Economics high demand occupation list stackable credentials and the credentials that will qualify for meeting high school course credit as required by House Bill 1345 of 2024.
The superintendent of public instruction recommends the CT industry recognized credential list for first review to the board of education. After first review, any technical or editorial edits will be made by the department staff before we present this document for final review.
At this time, I welcome any questions, >> comments or questions here. >> Dr. Northern, >> I just maybe I missed it, but is there a link to actually All the industry record the numbers of them.
>> Yeah. >> Is item J >> item J attachment. Okay. Sorry. I was No, the wrong thing was coming up for Okay. Attachment one. Yeah, there. Okay. Sorry, I was missing
it. Thank you. It should be it. Yeah. Okay, >> Mr. Monk. >> Appreciate it, Dr. Williams. Thank I know we had a conversation uh yesterday about it and still have uh some similar concerns around it appears to me that
most uh let me backtrack appreciate the work to consolidate and ensure that the credentials are relevant and industry recognized right because I think uh in a mix years ago there was this desire to just pile on as many credentials as
possible and sometimes industry didn't recognize those so I I appreciate the spirit of the work and trying to get to a place where when our students are earning these credentials, they're meaningful, they're stackable, relevant, all those components. Um I do h have some concern that the list that we have
before us really for the most part there's a few exceptions but is trade and industrial heavy as well as healthcare heavy for the reasons that um as we use these for calculations for students and their academic progress. um
some folks who may not see value in particular cluster areas if there's not a credential there um thinking counselors, administrators, etc. um may seek to go towards programs that have
credentials in these spaces. Um, so can you speak a little bit to I I looked at a few of the states that are mentioned here uh within the memo and think there may be some other opportunities for credentials outside of those clusters and they've got kind of a tiered
approach there. Maybe can you speak to why maybe some of those were left off uh outside of the healthcare and trade industrial components? I can speak to our research of specific credentials that we currently have approved on our 2526 list. Uh we found
that many of the credentials that we currently recognize and those 520 examinations were not recognized in some of our other states. uh there are some critical uh and important uh CTE courses and programs that we want to continue to stand up that either lead to post-secary
opportunities uh or for stackable opportunities that may not happen until a student graduates uh from high school. And so it's important to uh promote those programs. Uh what I would say is that in cases where there is not a designated credential or a specific CTE
course or program uh this is where we see or could see an increase in highquality work-based learning experiences uh to support students in that transition. We would see an increase in student opportunities for dual enrollment uh that would lead to
further opportunities in post-secary education. Uh I think that this is a critical step one in the process. uh I feel that uh with this new criteria in place, it does open the door for other credentiing vendors to be able to present uh other viable credentials uh
that would qualify and and that are meeting uh workforce demand. I think one of our challenges previously is not having a spe a specific criteria in place to evaluate what truly is a workforce valid credential.
>> Further comments or questions? Mr. Monk? If I may appreciate that and definitely um want to ensure that you know we're open it up to folks. When I look at a few Texas and um Tennessee were two of the states that I saw in the memo there
um a Vette uh credential to me that's something that seems if it would as if it would have high application um related to one of the current pathways we have but don't see it within ours. And so I I guess maybe offline can share
some opportunities potentially and just really want to understand why u it seems to me that a lot of our pathway areas are not in here. And so I think what we might inadvertently be doing is encouraging folks to be in one or one
pathway or the other when it comes to a uh counseling or graduation decision based upon those pieces. Um, I look at credential that North Carolina offers in horsemanship. Again, a little unique, not anything that I'm connected to, but students receive college credit for
that. And so, to me, if they're already taking that, there might be some some avenues there. So, I think there's I agree with the idea of having the rigor and and making sure that these are really course relevant. Um, but I also want to make sure that we're not just excluding a large swath that we could
potentially engage. So, I think as we look at some of these other states, maybe there's some others that we could pull over or even consider a tearing me um path that it looks like Tennessee and Texas have just a few states that I looked at.
Thank you. >> Other comments or questions here? Mr. Green, do you have a question? >> Oh, your mic. Okay. Anything further, Mr. Monk?
Okay. Okay. Um, Dr. Williams, we thank you and we'll take this item for first review and then see you in December. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Um,
so we have a closed session on our agenda and will not be using that today. And so that ladies and gentlemen brings us to the end of our agenda. No, no, no, it doesn't because we have to do the presentation from yesterday um on
performance tasks. Mark, how could I forget you? >> Oh my lord. >> Time. >> I could not ever forget you, Mark. >> Yeah. >> Why in the world? Okay, go right ahead, please, sir. Well, good to see you
again. Good afternoon, President Cesy, board members, Superintendent Gullixson. Uh, today I'm joined by my colleague, director of assessment, Jason Ellis will be presenting on performance task and innovative item types. Uh, this was a presentation from yesterday's work session and I think it goes well with what we talked about earlier. Uh, I know
they're getting it ready so we can uh have it on the screens for you as well, but it's was item J from yesterday that you have access to and the public can see it as well. Uh and so I'll go through these and give you some background and give you some examples to look at this. I'm very excited about this as it's ongoing work. Uh again,
I'll give you some history and uh and then share again where we're we're moving towards. So in our overview slide again, I'll give you some background and the purpose. We're going to look at a performance task together. We'll talk about a science simulation. Uh then give you an example of a performance task and
then talk about some next steps. Uh and so to give you some background, uh House Bill 585 directed the Secretary of Education and the department, uh to convene a work group. And that workg group over several months worked together, really examined our assessment
practices, uh and just how Virginia operates, looking at federal state law, and made a number of very important recommendations. And each year we look to that report. We provide updates uh around uh basically the recommendations, the opportunities and you're going to see some of those highlighted today. But
I wanted to ground it in sort of this work and honor that work group and their findings. Then I also want to draw your attention to you see the legal language there around item 119 A3D. Uh it talks about the secret of education superintendent public instruction to procure an assessment vendor. So this is
work that's been ongoing. Uh we have an innovative assessment workg group that's going to work with our contractor to again think about Virginia's assessment program a coherent assessment program think about innovation our conversation earlier around performance-based assessments uh thinking about you know
alternative assessments competency based assessments sort of thinking very broadly about where Virginia is uh as a leader in this work and and really wanting to personalize learning. So this is the example or this is the report itself. Uh and again every year
we provide updates to the progress that's been made on our assessment program. Uh this is the group on uh the latest report we put out on the statewide assessment vendor. And so our assessment the innovative assessment work group has been meeting. uh we discuss a number of topics around
innovation but even around policy and sort of Virginiaian and its assessments federal law um and where it said so uh we're excited about the contractor coming on board and that I'll be able to help organize these thoughts and synthesize them prepare reports engage stakeholder groups and more to come on
that and as I mentioned the 585 workg groupoup recommendations are fully underway again each year we provide an update uh those opportunities are listed there so you see these five pieces clear and more rigorous standards. And so you you're seeing they're the through line. Assessments don't happen in isolation.
You need strong, clear, rigorous standards to then be assessed through more rigorous assessments. Then it leads to number three, more timely, clear, and actionable reporting. We're going to bring back to you a revised parent report with our assessment system so that the data is understandable and
parents know where their children are. And number four, improve system coherence. We have to think very broadly. While Virginia has one accountability system, you know, we have federal, we have state, we still have other assessments that are used, which we talked about earlier. And so we think about that coherence. Where do they fit? How are they scored? Are they reliable?
What data is it giving us? And then five, innovative assessment design. So we think about the individual items, but also the bigger piece. Uh, and so you know, where Virginia was several years ago and now currently through this workg group and other pieces where we are
today. So when we talk about opportunity to more rigorous assessments, uh this is some updates for you. Uh they talked about in the workg group they should we should go beyond selected response questions. Uh and so just beyond obviously multiple choice items there
with more rigorous assessment items to align to our more rigorous standards. Uh and so you see some of the thoughts there in bullets requiring writing on assessments ensuring that constructed response questions align to the standards for the grade level. maximizing the value of every assessment
item. 2B talks about maintaining rigorous critical thinking expectations. So again, we welcome educator input on this. We want good instruction and we want good assessments that align the good instruction. And so you see there about uh making sure we're being accessible. We think about all students.
We think about our English learners, students with special needs, significant cognitive disabilities, sort of where where they are and having accessibility uh to the assessments. You also see there too a that the assessment should go beyond selected response questions and we're going to
give you some examples. So I've been mentioning to you the integrated reading writing and this is one such example. It is a performance task where students are asked to you know interact with this piece in different ways. They're reading they're writing you know they're responding they're it's from a reading class but they're reading on history and
science um and being asked to to think a little differently there. In science, we've uh and this again is just a snapshot over the past year. In science, we've developed uh uh cluster items. And again, this helps with how we uh have
instructional practices. And so, you have a stimuli um that could have three to six questions on it. And so, again, you're you're seeing sort of the length of that. So, students work with, for example, a lab. uh the stimuli might be around a lab that a student would do and sort of the questions around what data
comes from this, how could you think around this? And so it's not just here's a question that you've memorized, respond to it. It's giving students a new sort of uh task or a stimuli and then having them think around it with a few questions to really go deeper into it. So it builds on prior knowledge from
the item. And so you see examples there. Interactive science experiments, analyzing data, reporting on outcomes. And then you see here a history. We've been talking about innovative test item types were field tested in spring of 2025. They'll be included in the spring
2026 operational test item bank. And so we're going to have history cluster sets. So one to three stimuli such as a primary secondary source text and then students would have questions around that. Could be a photograph, a map, data tables or charts. It's not again rope
memorization. It's not just, you know, did you memorize this? What year was a war? You know, what where can you find this? It's really asking the kids to engage and to think deeply and then they have other questions around that. So, you really have to go back to that initial uh stimuli and make sure your your thinking aligns. And you'll see
this in all of our new designed uh assessments, world geography, world history 1 and two, Virginia US history, Virginia studies and civics and economics. So, in all the history assessments, we're very proud to say, uh, they they've have these new innovative test item types, uh, and we're they've been field tested. They'll
be operational this spring. >> Uh, so 2B maintaining rigorous critical thinking expectations while ensuring accessibility. Uh, you have some notes there about accessibility. Again, we think about students American Sign Language, speechto text, word prediction, pop-up glosseries, transl
translations. The idea is if students need support, it's happening within the text plat, the test platform. You know, it's one thing when you ask a child to take a test and then they have to have a dictionary on the side or they have to pull this out or pull that out. The more interactive it is and the more in their experience, the better they're going to do. Um, and the less that other students
may look and say, you've got something different. And so, really making sure the experience for them is cohesive. Uh you see some other notes there. Color contrast settings, magnification, uh other opportunities to make sure students have accessibility and we really are measuring the content versus are they understanding what's being
asked of them. And on opportunity five, the innovative assessment design, uh the recommendation was to plan for future innovation. You know, Virginia must first align its assessment system again with best practices, rigorous expectations for students. And so they listed a number of
ideas for the the work group asked to be considered. Again, you see they're listed performance task or project based assessments. How could we use those? How could they fit into a coherent assessment system? Uh having interactive, engaging and reflective of real world scenarios in the assessments.
Uh thinking about interdisciplinary, which you'll hear of an example of here shortly. using technology, uh, leveraging best practice accommodations and accessibility features, connecting directly to classroom instruction and curriculum. Again, we want to be cohesive and have that alignment, and then minimizing
testing time and disruption with tests that happen throughout the year as part of the learning process. You'll see these recommendations that came out in 2023 in the report. And then again, as we mentioned earlier, House Bill 1957, it picks up on these. Many of these when you look at the legislation especially
the one on minimizing testing time that was one of the goals articulated in that legislation and so you see partnership uh between these pieces of legislation. So I want to give you some updates from the opportunity 5 innovative assessment design. Uh again the secretary and
superintendent of public instruction they've assembled an innovative assessment workg group. Um they're going to be providing recommendations to inform this new innovative statewide assessment system. Uh we also the department released a request for proposal to procure an innovative assessment consultant. Uh this
consultant will look at other states listen to different stakeholders around Virginia. There'll be listening sessions uh doing research and providing reports back on their findings to help you know think differently around a new statewide assessment system. And then the department has met with its technical
advisory council to review innovative assessment type items such as the science simulation that you're going to see performance task and we discuss how these might fit in our current assessments. So again you're hearing from different stakeholders but I want to bring the process to you. And so now I'm going to share with you
an example of a science simulation. Um you're getting a look at this. we've shown our innovative assessment workg group and we'll also be uh providing to the uh the public an opportunity that they can also engage with this and give us feedback about how this could be used in Virginia's uh program. So I'm showing
you a grade eight example today. You're going to see screenshots. Obviously, in the real simulation, there'd be movement. You'd be able as a student to interact. And also, we should tell you that if if a student was taking this, there would have been prior experience. They would have tested this in the classroom, understood how it functions.
There's training videos. There's a number of measures that take place. Um, so what you're seeing would not be the first time with students interacting with it. So, a little background is these were designed uh using the same test development process for Virginia's SOS. This would be something again would
fit in alignment with how we uh operate. Um it is intended for potential in grade 5, 8 science or end of course biology. Those are our main assessments in science. That's where it would fit in. Again, Virginia already has, you know, yes, uses multiple choice, multiple select technology enhanced items. Again,
this would be using that. Um and then science simulations will be scored using machine scoring. This is the process that would be used. So science simulations engage students in real world task or phenomena. It's again connected to content. So it's it's designed to measure student knowledge.
Uh so it's trying to recreate again through instruction what would happen and then look to see sort of with students interact individually applying this sort of the data that comes and what they know. And so they'll have a series of questions that'll be scored. Uh they're supposed to prompt students to demonstrate what they know through
scientific knowledge and inquiry. The tasks are delivered to students using the same software program. they're not leaving it and going somewhere else. Again, accessibility tools are comparable. And then last here, each science simulation is created for use within the assessment and it replaces some of the standalone or cluster set
items. So the goal would be to not increase testing time. You see this and you might see the number of items with it and sort of the test is just going to get longer. This would replace some of the other items. And so what you're going to see now is the demonstration. So grade eight science, we're going to look here around the battery life of an
electric scooter. So, this would be a prompt, some background to give the student context. Um, in this example, Maya May Maya and her family member Samuel are going to the tech museum. They're both riding electric scooters to give the students some background. So, where the purpose of what are we studying? Where is this coming from? And the intent is is this is real life. This
is a student or child who's, you know, naturally going about their day. Maybe know they're going to go learn more about science, but, you know, they're naturally curious and it's something that we want to foster. And so this example, this the child Maya realizes that her battery is at 50%. And
her family member, he's at 25%. And so we realizes we need to charge these before we leave the museum. And she wonders naturally, well, why is mine 50% and yours is 25%. What's the difference there? And that's again, we want to encourage that natural inquiry. And so next she realizes in the museum
that they have a whole exhibit on electric scooters. And so there's going to be a simulation where in the now perspective of her that we're going to be able to try to figure out the question that she raised. Why is mine 25% and yours is 50%. And so we've got some background knowledge here. Welcome to the simulation. You know this is
where the battery holds uh chemical potential energy. And you know again giving the background of what the the simulation is going to be. Now on this screen again the child the student would have practiced with this before so they understood because you know you can look at and might think that's quite a bit of information but that's what you want.
You want a child the eighth grade level to be able to take multiple pieces of information and be able to demonstrate their knowledge. And so what the students going to do is you're going to be able to manipulate at the bottom uh the mass and the forward force. They're going to be able to set the settings based on the prompt. It tells you there
on the right side what the goal is. And then they're going to run different simulations. If you notice at the top we have A, B, C, D, and E. And so every time that run that simulation, it's going to take the data that's going to appear in those tables, the green and orange tables, and it's going to move it to the top. So that way they can run it,
and it s stores the data for them, and they can pull up the different reports. And so they're going to be looking at how does mass and forward force affect uh how quickly the scooter changes speed. So they know the prompt, and again, they're going to run this multiple times. And then when they get to part B, it's going to ask them a
question there around, you know, basically what conclusion could you draw? You've done these simulations and the student, you know, there's five examples here. They can change and go back. You know, they're told sort of what to set. It tells you there, change the mass and forward force settings for rider two and observe the results. And
so it tells them exactly what to do. And the student again could play around with it, but they're going to have five sets of data to look at. And then they're going to use that information in part B to then answer that response. So in the situation rider two is staying still what happens to the net force rider two
from one to two seconds what's this that's the situation you know what's the net force and so again they're going to drag and drop their response but it's also building to deeper learning that's going to come moving on they still have again the same datas carried over um they're going to
go a little bit deeper they've got a a chart here that they're going to end up graphing and so they're going to be asked to again use that information and part B, they're going to there's a drop down there. Um, you know, how could you produce the graph above with the greatest difference in the change in
speed of two riders? So, they're going to use the data from before thinking about how they responded and then now what could we do, you know, given the task there. And so, you're seeing the application around the data in the chart. Now, these were just a few uh slides around the
science simulation. We're going to demonstrate this for the public and get feedback. Um, the the presentation or the simulation does go on. the students actually do generate a graph um on their own based on the data that they find and are asked to draw some conclusions.
>> Uh so I just wanted to talk a little bit about this performance task piece because um this is not I mean so I I met with um Trent at Pearson and he showed me all of these things. >> These are really amazing
performance tasks. I mean I was truly blown away. I mean, from where we are today in our testing to where we can be in this is just so beyond even thought and kind of what's the most I think
distressing piece to me is that we could have been here long ago. Um we could have been in a I mean this is these kinds of test items have been adopted in other states for years now. Um, and so if there's any kind of plea that I can
make to the general assembly, it is please, please, please put money specifically into this testing opportunity here because it is only going to serve to help our students better and deeper in their understanding
of each content area. Uh, I mean this is just this is a way different way to explain how a student knows and understands the content. I mean students that may not be able to to that may not
be as successful in the way that we are testing them now that is going to change dramatically with this type of item on an assessment. I think we're going to truly see that data prove the point I just made and
they have seen that in all of the different states where these test items are being used in this particular capacity. Um it's just really kind of a cool thing to see, you know, go through in a mechanical sense, you know, through
the process of this um this particular type of um item. It's just so fun. Um, so I really hope that it actually takes the uh out of taking an assessment because we we already know that, you
know, our students really do enjoy, you know, manipulating, you know, using yes, they're using technology, but the manipulation that they're doing while they're using the technology is just so much different here. And so I'm not saying anybody's looking forward to
being assessed, but it actually might be a little bit more enjoyable um to to take an assessment in this way. I know I would certainly enjoy it more. Um so I'm really really really excited about these opportunities. So
>> Dr. Acriman, >> just to echo that, I mean, there's so much negativity and just around unfortunately standardized testing when the when people are developing tools that counter some of those concerns and
criticism and this is a perfect example of that and I I wholeheartedly agree um because it has the critical thinking elements, it has the real life application, has all those things that standardized testing used to not do. So, thank you. >> And and I'll share with you some of the
feedback we received when you show this a group and it's great to have groups sort of, you know, show them and we just sit back and listen and just have that honest dialogue. Um, again, accessibility, some of the layout and the pictures of format. But, you know, again, as children explore with this, again, they're learning even in the moment as they learn to use the tools
and the features and see the data and they go, "Oh, the data shows me this. I need to back up because that doesn't line up with this answer." And so, you're really having them go deeper in their thinking as they're applying the skills and taking the assessment. I'm going to turn now my colleague on performance task. Uh what we'll say here and he'll he'll be able to speak to it
is this again is something we're excited about as a demonstration. Um again you'll see what's been developed but also how it might fit in different content areas. And so that's part of the piece here. We're not trying to say this fits in history, science, math. Um but that's one of the things we're asking the the public as we have these
engagement sessions is to give us feedback to say how can we make our assessments more innovative. Um we have technology enhanced items. We have cluster sets that help the design, but we want to look at different ways to assess and really uh go deeper in our thinking and have some really strong data on what students know and are able
to do. >> Good afternoon. Um it's a pleasure to be with you to talk about performance tasks. um the performance and and Mark kind of got to show you the Ferrari, you know, the all the moving parts, all the different things that the students can do in terms of manipulating the
simulations. Um this performance task that we're going to talk about, um it's a little bit different in regards to it's asking students to provide more information. Um it's more of a written context to the performance task that we're going to be talking about. Um, so
it's a different way for them to uh express themselves and interact with the assessment content. Um, we did and the we I'm referring to the office of student assessment, we worked with Pearson some um to develop some performance tasks um in in the event
that we would be able to utilize those in the future on some assessments. So, um, unlike what Mark was just showing you, those were, um, kind of some borrowed, uh, screenshots, um, things that we can do, things that we can work with our vendor and do. Um, these are
some things that, and again, we'd have to go through the process of field testing and all those kinds of things with students. But, um, these are some things that that we have the ability to, uh, to move on fairly quickly if we if we chose to and wrong direction.
All right. So, um, first off, um, you know, we did develop these items, uh, or we we worked with Pearson to develop these items. So, they're not completely Virginia specific. They don't they're not 100% the way that that we might have created them if it was all in our shop.
Um, but these are some pretty good examples. I think it's important kind of as a as a stage setting um to let you know that we could actually utilize these types of items um in multiple in multiple ways in multiple content areas. >> Mr. Ellis, can you be more specific
about that? Like in other words, it's just because it's not maybe something specific. Maybe the subject matter within the item is not specific to Virginia like you would have created it perhaps or is it because I don't want anybody to think that they're not
aligned to standards as >> correct. Any any item that we would put on any assessment in Virginia would be aligned to the V would be completely aligned to the Virginia standards of learning. Um, we would not we wouldn't it has never been our practice to put anything on our test that students and
teachers wouldn't have been been expected to interact with during the school year. >> That was completely understand. Completely understand. So, sorry I'm working two two laptops. Um, but basically the performance task that that I'm going to show you, um, it takes a
student uh through a through a process. They'll interact with a couple different pieces of stimulus. It could be um it could be something like a an interview that they watch um a recorded video. It could be a newspaper article or some kind of newsletter. And they're going to
take the information from those pieces. They're going to answer some questions about those items. And then they're also going to have uh a what is referred to as a capstone project at the end where they kind of synthes synthesize all of the information that they've created and
gathered into a kind of a final product. um that could be that could be utilized um in and in this case it'll be utilized in their community. And what I meant by the what you're going to look at um we don't really have a content area that I would say this is a a math or a science
or an English or a history. Um a performance test could be built for any content area. Um, so even though I'm going to show you something that probably is a little more rooted in um, history, social science from a civics perspective, um, you could really create
a performance task for any of our content areas. Um, it doesn't have to be exclusive to any one content area. All right. Um, so in in the case of Virginia, we would provide these opportunities to
students through TestNav, which is the current platform that we use. That's how these were developed. Um, so they wouldn't have to learn anything new that way. They would have access to the the tools and such that they're familiar with um in the testing platform. So um, all of our accommodations, the
accessibility tools, all of those things students would still have access to and wouldn't have to learn anything new in order to interact with with these items. So this particular item that we're going to talk about um it's a based in grade five. So it would be something that
students in grade five content that students in grade five would be familiar with. And you can see it starts very similar to the science simulation in sorry in regards to there's some kind of some contextual information at the
beginning. Um they they talk about um you know what are some things that that we might want to do? how are some what are some things we might interact with? And here it talks about um that they're going to be using their using some of their skills such as citizenship, communication, critical thinking, and
creative thinking in order to answer um the items that they're going to be presented with. So, it's pulling in um at least four of those five C's that we talk about in our profile of a Virginia graduate. All right. Sorry, Mark's computer doesn't like me
as much as it likes Mark. All right, so this is just an example of one thing that that the student may interact with. It talks about, you know, one afternoon you're walking in your neighborhood, you pass an old playground, and you begin to wonder, is there a better way to use that space? And so, you can see on on
your screen, hopefully that um there's a a place where they can enter their information, their ideas. is it says tell it tells them to enter two ideas in the box. They have a thousand characters. The characters will count down as they're entering information so
they know how much space they have. But this is really an opportunity for the student to express their own thoughts and ideas about what belongs in here. So they're not picking from a list. It's not a preset um uh loading of ideas in their mind about what they might do with this space. It's their genuine reaction
to this question or this prompt. So from there it's going to it takes them to another prompt says in this activity you're going to learn about community spaces and how people might plan them. So from there they're going to talk about um you know it gives them a
definition of what the community space is so that they have a better understanding of what they're going to be asked to talk about and it says read the magazine article to learn more about the community spaces. So from that magazine article, so there's a article they're going to
read talking about the community spaces and a variety of different community spaces and how things might be used. Then they're told to draft a or excuse me, they're told to read a letter to the editor. So this they're going to have a letter to the editor that also talks about a
community space where they're going to talk about building a community skate park. And after that, they're going to be asked to they're going to be prompted to answer some questions about what they just read. And when they're asked to respond to those questions, and I'm
sorry, I'm not keeping up. And when they're asked to respond to these questions, they're actually going to have access to both of the items that they've already read. So that's what's on the left hand side of your screen. And then you see there are some multiple choice questions, but there's going to
be some additional um open-ended response where they're going to be able to provide a short answer to answer some of their questions. Talks about in this one, what is one other feature that could be part of a community space besides what they've already read. So
they have the opportunity again to enter their own thoughts and ideas about these community spaces. And one thing we have learned and I know it's come up in a couple of the presentations you've seen today is about students having the opportunity to provide their own thoughts and ideas. Um having more writing involved in the in the test that
we have. With that comes some additional responses and I'm I'm glad to hear President Cesy um asking for the ability to do this will require funding because it it's more expensive to to score um student responses that are open-ended. So that is a part of this that will be
very helpful. But you'll notice that we can still incorporate some of the item types that we already use that students are familiar with. This would be a drag and drop item where we students interact with the question. Instead of having a list of choices, they pick, you know, A, B, C, or D, they actually are able to to
click on these options and drag them to the appropriate space um to answer this item. So again, not just a a question of u a question that's is multiple choice. It's just another way of interacting with the content.
Sorry. Again, we continue. They continue going down the road. Talk about a few weeks later, Max decides he's going to write a letter to the editor of his local newspaper about uh building a rock climbing wall. And again, he has some information asking them, "Well, what
would you need to do? um what are some considerations you would have to have again interacting with some other questions as they as they go through. So we eventually get down to where sorry I might have clicked too far
where they're going to answer some more questions again open-ended responses where we're asking them to put some more of their own ideas um in these in these spaces and eventually we get to the point and this is where that capstone piece comes in. So everything they've
done so far is in reaction to the articles that they read. And now we're going to ask them to take their thoughts and ideas. And you'll see there's a part A, a part B, and a part and sometimes, sorry, there's a part C. But here the part A and part B where they're going to
answer or give their description of what should happen in their community space and why they chose these features of their community space. So really taking what they read and making their own original authentic
document um that that will inform their community on what they think they should do for for a space. And again, you'll see additional questions and additional ideas. We're prompting them to give us more information, but they're going to create that their own thoughts and
ideas, their own information. And you'll see that final piece of part C. um we provide an opportunity to answer more or to we give them more characters to respond. Um so it really allows them to kind of summarize all of their thoughts
and ideas about this particular uh performance task. Again, we have uh a a bank of these and I'll say a bank, we have a few of these at grade five and grade eight that we worked on this past year. Um nothing's been field tested. Um
so it's not a situation where we could take these right now and and put them in play somewhere in you know in in some area. Um we would also have to consider if we incorporate these into an so test we would have to give some consideration is how do we weigh what we're putting in
against what's already there. Do we make test shorter? How how do we incorporate these um so that it makes the most sense and values the students time as much as possible. So all things that we would have to that we would have to consider as part of this process. >> Mr. Ellis, can a couple of questions?
Sure. >> So um number one, >> uh just the capability of these questions to identify a lot of the characteristics, the skills, the um
expertise that we're looking for in the readiness category. How are like between mastery and readiness, right? I'm seeing a lot of things that that are going to indicate particularly in the open-ended responses. You know, when we ask kids to
identify the the main idea or the theme or whatever it is, you those opportunities are more about how we're judging their readiness. And so is that do we have a mechanism by which to to categorize
um those questions for the purpose of sort of grading them on readiness in that through um this how successful they are on each of these particular items. So that's question one. I'll let you answer that first and then I have two more. I I
think what we would have to do and again because we we were in the very early stages with these I I think if that's the direction that the board wanted to go I think what we would have to do is make sure that we're aligning the standards that get to those those items
I think we would have to align those standards with the individual pieces of the performance task. Okay. So if if we wanted if we were looking for things more from a readiness perspective, I think looking at the standard saying, okay, this standard really aligns nicely
with readiness. So when we create our performance task, we want to make sure that we have pieces of the task that will kind of speak the students performance will speak directly to to that aspect. So I think that's possible. Um, I think that that's one of those
things again where we would need to when when we decide to go with these, I think part of that decision is going to really be sitting down and looking at our standards and and what what do we want to gain out of the performance task again because of how this was developed
initially that that wasn't completely the focus. So then my next two are kind of related because >> um like when is the earliest we could field test at least a couple of these in the next I could could we potentially field test a couple of these in the next
test administration? >> It would be extremely difficult to field test these in spring. Um and part of that's because we're already in form development for spring. >> Okay. >> Um so that would and that's to embed them >> in in in a test. So go ahead.
>> The other piece is and it's kind of what I was I was referring to is there's a lot in the performance task and these were developed to kind of be standalone and we're looking at them now and this came up during our technical advisors meeting that maybe we shouldn't don't
look at these as standalones. Look at these as embedding in what you already have. So I think it also goes back to in order to field test we would have to make some decisions about how we want to field test whether we whether we field test as standalones knowing that eventually they're going to go into a
form because again there's the there's the weight that this would carry versus a bunch of individual test items. So we would have to I think we would need to work psychrometrically um in order to figure out exactly where's the sweet spot of how many items do we remove because of this item. Um,
so I think there would be a lot a lot of discussion would have to be had for that. >> So I like the idea of doing sort of like a standalone almost a pilot to sort of see what what for our purposes in Virginia, you know, what this what these
items give us. Number one, what kind of data and information does it give us? Um, and then, you know, I guess second of all, I think I always had, and maybe it was just the way that Trent presented it to me, but I always had the idea that
we would be embedding them into the current tests, >> that we would or wouldn't >> we would that that was the um uh that was always my thought that that's that's how we would do that. Not that they would ever stand alone. Um, so that's
sort of where my mind was always with that. Um, just because I think that when you give kids multiple means by which to express all that they know, you have a greater chance of hitting all of, you know, getting as much as you can from
them um while at the same time testing their different um both strengths and weaknesses in in testing. So, um, the other thing that I had a question about was I mean, and we may not be far enough
down the road to to truly be able to express this, but you may have already spoken with Pearson about like how do we then um train kids and teachers on these items because of course it's going to be something different that's coming to
them um both from an instructional standpoint as the classroom teacher and then also from the standpoint of the student and the expectation of these being in so how has that um sort of been integrated in the past in in other
states? Uh can you give me a little bit of information on that? >> So as as part of our preparation over the last year or so. Um we do have some practice items already um that if we decided that this is a direction we wanted to go that we could make those
available. Um we have we also have um some of the alternate test forms large print and braille um that that could be made available as well. Um so in in terms of other states I'm not familiar with how many other states are using a performance test similar to what we just
looked at. I think one of the things for us to remember is the the performance test you just saw um was intended to be no more than 90 minutes. um we try to keep our test times low and so if we
incorporated this with our current test then we're we're looking at a situation that's not really tenable for for students. So that's why when I was talking about taking a look at um our standards and really deciding where we want that alignment to be would be super important.
>> And then at the same time adding additional test sessions is just also another >> correct >> issue to overcome. I I think the the field testing piece the most successful field testing and
I'm thinking when we went many years ago and we did a writing you know we did writing online that was a field test we did many years ago and when we when we did that it was a the whole state did that um that gives us the most robust data it gives us the most information
about the test and how students performed and we use that information to help build the exemplars that we use then to have training materials for people to train our uh the automated scoring engine that helps score the writing assessment. Um so I think if we
if we head down this road, I think a very thoughtful process about how we want to introduce this to schools and to students. Um like I said, we can have some resources ready for students to start practicing with. The good part is
we've done this before. um you know we our integrated reading and writing we field tested that in spring of 23 before it went operational. Um lots of good information you know came out of that. So we can we can do it. Um it's really just the thoughtful planning um and
understanding what what how will we embed this in our test and what do what do we want to see in regards to the outcomes. >> Dr. Dr. Northern >> I missed sort of part of this unfortunately, so I'll um I may this may
have already been covered, but um is this meant to I mean I know we've got integrated reading and writing, but what subject areas are these performance tasks supposed to be assessing? >> We could build a performance task for any content area. >> So I think and and maybe it's maybe I
just haven't seen the integrated writing and reading in a while. Um but um I would love it if these uh and there was a reference earlier that these that we have non-fiction passages that would then serve as a springboard for the
writing prompt. Um and in this case um I found that the first one I really like the example I looked over >> science simulation. >> Yeah. But the second one for me personally just completely missed the mark. I felt like um you could answer those questions without having read
anything. It was like what if in this park you know what would you put in this park or something like it was it was content agnostic. So I would just encourage us no matter what direction we go to make the um to make sure that kids get have to um bring uh support from the
text you know which is obviously in our standards evidence based from the text um and also close reading that forces them to do close reading all those wonderful things we put in our ELA standards around reading. Um, I think we need to, no matter what what subject we're we're assessing here, that we need
to make sure that we're using a complex test for that grade level, um, that they're doing close reading and that we're push putting them back, referencing them back to the text evidence. I think we would have the ability through scoring models to to ensure that their answers weren't
completely off topic that we would be able to to to make sure that their responses are contextual with what we expected them to read. But I I understand your point entirely. I think um Louisiana they've done some uh I
think uh nice work around trying to make items um contextbased and uh evidence based and all the things that we now have on our ELA standards if we wanted to use those uh you know to get some ideas. Thank you. >> Superintendent Gixson.
>> Yes. So, with the new board members, um Jason and Mark add on here, but just to contextualize, um two years ago, this was originally designed as a readiness element. One for elementary school around the five C's
because that had long been an expectation here in the Commonwealth. How do we really capture if students are growing around communication skills, critical thinking skills, creativity? And then the um eighth grade version was
to also do a um way to demonstrate their kindergarten through 8th grade around the academic and career plan on actually applying. So building off of the five C's elements on how do we then demonstrate that critical thinking um
exposure to high demand pathways etc and applying it. That was where phase one of the buildout of these began. And so they really were a full stand um alone effort with the innovation assessment group um
with additional feedback from our brilliant TAC members um and feedback to date. Um there's now a shift um as well as with uh more agency um team members, subject matter, expertise and input on
how do we take elements of this to apply um so that they're not viewed in just a silo because we recognize the five C's should be applicable across subject matter areas etc. and how do we then demonstrate that elevated level of
analysis and application that we would expect from an eighth grader instead of a fifth grader. So for the newer members, that's where the original vision was. When we started this, there were only a few states who had really leaned in to that kind of holistic
demonstration. Um and so we're still in the early adopters of state just um the core subject content and really how do you
that isn't done just at the local level from a state snapshot of where are there gaps where we need to provide additional resources to um some of those more subjective skills. So, we're still in those states
sort of in the leading edge on this, but have really benefited over the last six months getting a lot more input from experts and our technical adviserss on how to adapt and really capture what we're
looking for as background. >> Thank you. I'm sorry, Mr. Alice. Did you finish up or did I did I uh interrupt you? >> So, great conversation. It's ongoing. You've heard where we are now, where we're headed. So, you see the next steps
there. Uh we'll continue with the assessment vendor and the department are going to host some information gathering sessions, show what you've just seen except the interactive actually pieces with the science simulation and get feedback. We'll just be listening to hear what uh and it's open to all stakeholders. Uh that invitation will go
out. Uh it's going to go out in the Virginia education update there. The innovative work group continues to meet and have great conversation like you just did around a coherent assessment system and as we think forward uh what that should look like and we'll come back and present to the board the updates of where we are now and what
we're hearing uh and so we'll look forward to that in future conversation. >> All right so much any other questions or comments here on this item thank you both Mr. Mr. Ellis and Mr. Jennings. Okay. As we are wrapping up, um I would
like to make sure that we keep the public informed of the membership of the board's college partnership laboratory school standing committee. So under article 8 section one of the board's bylaws, it's respon the responsibility of the board president to appoint all
members to serve on standing committees. In accordance with that duty, I have appointed Mr. Antoine Green to replace former board member Andy Rotherham on the lab school standing committee. We are grateful for Andy's service to the standing committee and to the board and
are delighted that Mr. Green has agreed to continue the careful attention to our lab schools that was given by Mr. Rotherham. So, um I I do appreciate Mr. Green's willingness to serve further and um look forward to hearing some updates
from him in the future. Um again, we also have another board member that sits on that committee, Mr. Hansen sits on that committee as well and he will continue his service there. So, thank you again to him and that continued service. Um and I guess if you don't
have anything further and if there's not anything further from the rest of the board, um then we will adjourn this meeting. If I can get a motion to do so. >> So moved. >> Second. >> We are journed.