(The Center Square) — Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin has spearheaded several news-making education initiatives since taking office, drawing ire from some and loyalty from others.
However, it’s the new school performance and support framework that a state policy analyst recently described as potentially the governor’s “most consequential and important education legacy.”
The state Board of Education approved the new framework at the end of August after approving new accreditation standards in July. Previously, Virginia’s accountability and accreditation systems were combined into one, obscuring how schools were performing, according to spokesperson for the Virginia Department of Education Todd Reid.
“Combining these systems into one measurement makes it virtually impossible to really determine how the students are academically performing at that school and how the school is shaping educational outcomes,” Reid told The Center Square.
The department has now split them into two systems: accreditation, which measures “inputs focused on operational compliance,” and accountability, which measures “outcomes focused on how schools support student learning.”
Under the former system, only about 10% of Virginia schools weren’t fully accredited (“accredited with conditions”). The new accountability system (which, again, is now separate from accreditation) reflects, based on partially modeled data, that 55% of schools in the 2023-2024 school year were either “off track” or “need[ing] intensive support.”
While president of the Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy Derrick Max believes many of Youngkin’s education policies have been advantageous for Virginia students, he thinks this one will likely have the greatest impact.
“Knowledge about performance is foundational,” Max told The Center Square. “We want parents to have a voice, but if they don’t know their schools are struggling, will they speak up? Will they use their voice? No.”
Not only does inadequate data mislead parents, but it also allows ineffective teaching methods to go unchecked and disincentivizes school improvement. Accurate and transparent data will do the opposite, according to Max.
“Critical race and gender theory undermine student performance and will be reflected in the new accountability measures. More importantly, truly failing districts, like in Richmond and Petersburg, will have greater pressure to adjust their teaching to get better results,” Max said.
And even if others try to reverse the changes after Youngkin’s term, they won’t be able to undo the effects of the data that will have already been released, according to Max.
The new accountability system evaluates schools by three summative measures: mastery, growth (graduation for high schools) and readiness. Mastery is weighted at 65% and 60% of elementary and middle schools’ overall and 50% of high schools’ assessments, whereas growth is weighted at 25% and 20%. Graduation is weighted at 15% for high schools. The previous system placed more of an emphasis on growth.
The Virginia Schools Boards Association, along with many other education organizations in the commonwealth, thinks growth should count for more in schools’ assessments, according to Jason Kessler, the association’s director of legislative services.
“We are concerned about the low percentage of weight that student growth has been assigned in the performance framework,” Kessler told The Center Square. “We believe weighting growth and mastery at an equal percentage in the performance framework for elementary and middle school would better reflect what is happening in our schools.”
Regarding the increased number of schools that won’t be meeting expectations according to the new framework, Kessler said it could work to the schools’ advantage – if it led to more funding for them.
“If resources are dedicated to these schools, as is the design of the framework, it could be a positive. However, Virginia’s school funding model has been shown by the Joint Audit and Review Commission to be inadequate… If schools are identified as needing more supports and resources, where will the funding come from to meet these needs?” Kessler said.
Schools will also be required under the new accountability framework to include English language learner students in their test results after three semesters. Under the previous system, English language learners’ test scores weren’t included for 11 semesters.
Chris Jones, executive director of the Virginia Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, believes this feature and others sets commonwealth schools up for failure.
“The nuances and intricate details of the new framework, including how growth is calculated and the accelerated testing for English learners, create a system that will continue to identify our schools as not meeting the standard,” Jones told The Center Square.
Others have decried the speed at which the changes have been made.
Though Jones, like Max, considers the framework “consequential and important,” Youngkin’s board appointments will ultimately have had the greatest impact after his term ends.
“This has paved the way to push through all of the education initiatives with overwhelming velocity,” Jones said, “and without oversight or checks and balances.”
This article was originally published at www.thecentersquare.com
