Virginia Board of Education - Business Meeting 8/28/25

001Okay, good morning. It's um I guess 9:05. I will call this meeting to order. And as customary for the board, we will 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, with liberty and justice for all. Okay. So, um this morning I would just like to remind everyone that um if you didn't watch us, we took some breaks and went over to the Patrick Henry building to be with the governor and during his announcement for um our so test results um for the last year. Please go and visit uh either his uh Facebook page to see that feed of that press of that press conference

002and or check out the press release after yesterday's event. Um I would also like just to take a moment um we didn't get to formal formally say goodbye to Mr. Rotherham but um would just like to have the opportunity this morning to recognize him. Obviously, um he is no longer a member of this board, but just recognize him for his um infinite contributions to the work that the board has done over the last three years. Um Mr. Mr. Rotherham came on at the same time that I did and I'm just thankful not only for the work that he did in ensuring this board and its work was moving forward but also uh for his friendship and mentorship and collaboration over the years. So um just thankful for him. Superintendent Gullixson, did you have something you'd

003like to add to that? Thank you, President Casy. I also want to just acknowledge um the value and benefit for our education system, our kids and our families from having Andy Rotherham on the board. Um he was our stalwart of making sure that this board stayed honest and kept our eyes on being student centered and focused on what's best for kids and uh new challenge to you as our new board members uh to fill his shoes. And so we're very grateful for his service to the Commonwealth of Virginia and thank you for the moment to recognize his accomplishments and dedication to our kids and this board. >> Thank you, Miss McFersonson. >> Yes. I'd just like to say I appreciated the fact that he was always willing to stand up to a challenge even if

004it was unpopular and he um spoke for the teachers and the students and he was very concerned that we get about the business of closing the honesty gap and so for that we're very grateful. >> Thank you. Um and so the next item that we are going to be discussing this morning are going to be um addressing is uh a resolution combating anti- anti-semitism and religious bigotry in Virginia public schools. And most of you are aware that on May 19th, 2025, Governor Yncan issued an executive order 48 combating anti-semitism and anti-religious bigotry in Virginia public schools and institutions of higher education. This order directs the Virginia Department of Education to develop resources that will help local school divisions to prevent, track, report, and follow up on incidents of anti-semitism and anti-religious bigotry. In addition to

005the steps the board and the department of education have already taken, the board would like to issue a resolution that affirms the governor's leadership in this area and establishes the board's ongoing effort uh support of efforts to comp combat anti-semitism and anti-religious bigotry in Virginia's public schools. So the resolution um as it is written in the end says therefore be it resolved that the Virginia Board of Education continues to build on and support the ongoing comprehensive work of the Virginia Department of Education including providing division superintendent with actionable steps to ensure the intent of the executive order 48 through direct correspondence by superintendent of public instruction providing resources for education professionals and detailed guidance. for curriculum developers emphasizing the international holocaust remembrance alliance working definition of anti-semitism and for teaching and learning about the Holocaust

006and anti-semitism. Finally, be it further resolved that the Virginia Board of Education stands ready to act against anti-semitism and anti-religious bigotry in Virginia's public schools and classrooms. And so with that, I would like to entertain a motion to move this resolution. Some move. >> Second. >> Any discussion on this item? >> Dr. Aerman. >> I. >> Mr. Green. >> I. >> Miss McFersonson. >> I. >> Miss Kilgore. >> I. >> Miss Ashton. >> I. >> Mr. Monk. >> I. >> Dr. Northern. >> I. >> And chair votes. I. >> Thank you very much. Um, so as we move forward here, uh, is there a motion to approve the agenda as presented? >> So move. >> Second. >> Dr. Arian, >> I, >> Mr. Green, >> I. >> Dr. Northern, >> I. >> Miss McFersonson, >>

007I, >> Miss Kilgore, >> I, >> Miss Ashton, >> I, >> Mr. Monk, >> I, >> and chair votes I. >> Uh, staff has approved or has provided, sorry, the board members with the draft minutes. You all have seen those. Is there a motion to approve the minutes as presented to the board? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Dr. Arian, >> I. >> Mr. Green, >> I. >> Dr. Northern, >> I. >> Miss McFersonson, >> hi. >> Miss Kilgore. >> Hi, >> Miss Ashton. >> Hi, >> Mr. Monk. >> Hi. >> And chair votes eye. >> Okay. The board appreciates every month being able to be blessed with um being able to feature our wonderful arts programs from across the Commonwealth. And today we have um some musicians, special musicians with us. I will now

008ask Mr. Monk if he can provide us with an introduction of our guests. >> This is the fun part. Uh, President Cesy. Uh, the Heritage High School Artist Guitar Ensemble from Loun County Schools, uh, under the direction of Dr. Kevin Vhill, known as Dr. V, is an audition group of students ranging from grades 10 through 12. Performance highlights from the 2425 academic uh year include performing the US national anthem for L County Public School Board, the Yale School of Music Guitar Extravaganza and New Haven, Connecticut, and super superior ratings uh from the Virginia Music Educators Association and the Virginia Guitar Directors Association Ensemble Assessment. Dr. V joined faculty of Heritage High School in 2005 and over the last 20 years he is named uh he was named the 2014 Shannondoa University teacher of the year

009for Lowden County Public Schools. He was presented with a Sir Winston Churchill commemorative crown by Helen Sanderson for his work in guitar education in 2017 and was chosen as the Joanne C. Edwards Distinguished Professor in the Arts at Marshall University. He's had several articles published nationally and internationally in the professional music journalist uh journals and is a nationally sought-after clinician and guest conductor. Dr. V currently serves as vice president for the Virginia Guitar Directors Association and uh for the Association of Music Educators Council for Guitar Education. Today, the Heritage High School Artist Guitar Ensemble will perform works of Virginia composers. Uh, Summerswuite by Ramona Harmetz and Fiesta Mediterranean by Miros Slav Lonar. We hope you enjoy the performance. [Music] Super. [Music] Heat. Heat. [Music] So, first I just want to thank you uh for this

010opportunity to perform. Uh and I want to also say not only uh that these composers are from Virginia, both of these composers from Ldman County Public Schools. So, uh Ramon Hartz retired a couple of years ago and Dr. Park was high school uh in Sterling. So, that's kind of a cool thing. They're tuning in. [Music] I also like to thank our uh assistant principal, Mr. Matthew Prince, for being here. Thank you for your support. Yeah, absolutely. [Applause] [Music] Heat. Heat. [Music] [Applause] [Music] Heat. Heat. [Music] Heat. Heat. [Music] Heat. Heat. [Music] So, next we're going to be going up there for a picture. Take your guitars, leave everything else here. Okay. We are back and um we are going to begin the public comment section of our meeting. So before we begin our public comment

011section, as stated in the board's bylaws, it is the pleasure of the board to accept public comment on all matters related to public education. But I'd like to share a few comments about the matter before we begin. I just ask you to model professionalism, dignity, and respect for others as you share your comments today. When you begin, uh please provide your name, role, or affiliation, and where you live in Virginia. And all mark all remarks must be directed to the chair. Reminder that you have 3 minutes to speak. We have the screen over here that is green at 3 minutes. Um at 1 minute left we have the screen turn yellow and then when your time is up the screen will turn red. We would ask that you please promptly close your remarks once the

012screen turns red and your time is up. If you do have written comments, please make sure that you provide them to Mr. Joe Crook up here. If they are physical and you would like them passed out to the board, we he can do that for you. Um if you do have comments that you would like to provide us electronically, you can do so at be.vergirginia.gov. Um and with that, I would like to ask Scott Braybrand followed by Candace Lucas to please come to the microphone. Thank you. President Cesy, Superintendent Gellson, and members of the board of education. My name is Scott Raybrand. I'm executive director for the Virginia Association of School Superintendent, and I live in Lynchburg, Virginia. This morning, I'm joined by our vast leadership. We have our president, Dr. Eli Gracie, superintendent of

013Portsman Public Schools. Our president-elect, Dr. Sarah Cal who is superintendent of Caroline County Schools and our secretary treasurer Dr. Rita White, superintendent of Ronaldo City Schools. Today we're pleased to see the continuing support of school divisions through the school construction assistant program grants. We appreciate those additional flexibilities and are hopeful more of our school divisions will be found eligible for that grant assistance. Thank you, Superintendent Gullixson. We also appreciate the updates around increased flexibility for board approved courses that satisfy Virginia graduation requirements, especially for school divisions that have kids taking those IB courses. Thank you. We also welcome the final review of the highquality workbased learning implementation guide. It's a key document for school divisions and we've appreciated the collaboration with Superintendent Gullixson and the VDOE on this document. As we respectfully requested last month,

014this year's seniors, however, should be able to meet their graduation requirements to the original 12 work-based learning experiences. The new six highquality experiences weren't even defined until later in the spring and summer before seniors had to make course selections back in January or February, nor were divisions in a place to be able to know those courses and experiences to offer them. This needed flexibility will allow Virginia seniors to graduate on time and allow school divisions a one-year transition to develop the needed work-based learning experiences. As always, we appreciate support and resources to help school divisions reach these highquality uh work-based learning experiences for uh for our seniors and all students. Finally, as you review and decide final cut scores for the SOS this school year, we respectfully request the following based on transparency, fairness, and

015alignment. transparency. We request a full methodology, a full review of the methodology of determining those cut scores as well as the modeling and impact analysis on of these cut scores on our students and schools be shared and reviewed publicly before any final decision is made. This means sharing how students including by subgroup and how each school division would have performed on these new cut scores on this year's so data including impacts on accountability calculations. Without a thorough understanding of these cut scores and how they were developed and determined and their impact, our students, parents, and educators will not have the transparency needed to fully embrace these new goals. Fairness as well. We request as we did for high quality workbased experiences that our seniors be held harmless this year who are taking the so test.

016Uh under the existing cut scores, they'd be held harmless. the current approach approach for our schools that have 4x4 seniors will be taking the so tests in the fall and have different cut scores than those in the spring. We also ask for alignment. Right now different scores are going to mean different things at different grades. Um and for advanced mathematics the cut score uh right now you'd have folks being automatically enrolled in advanced math who will now have scores of fail and basic. We ask you two to keep the locally verified credit at 375. Thanks as always for your support and we look forward to continuing to work with you. >> Lucas, followed by Wendy Little. I guess this is for tall people. Okay, thank you. Uh, good morning board members. My name is Dr.

017Candace Lucas. I'm a licensed educator, licensed administrator, and I'm also a civil rights activist that works regarding uh works for underserved families regarding special education, specifically IDA. IDA is a civil rights law. And unfortunately, as you all know, uh Virginia is failing our families regarding civil rights as it relates to IDA. Uh, I recently read the review regarding Lowden County Public Schools having to return $29 million in IDEIDA funds uh back to the Virginia Department of Education for one year. One year. And um they conveniently called it them and their attorney Sans Anderson conveniently referred to it as a clerical error. Okay. If there is a clerical error that costs us $29 million, there's something wrong. And we know it was not a clerical error. In fact, I will tell you exactly what occurred with

018LA with Lowden County Public Schools because I warned them of the mismanagement, the embezzlement, the misallocation, as well as the misappropriation of IDA Part B, 611, and 618 funding. all the way back in 2019 when we defended a child, a black male child with with dyslexia who Louden refused to give an IEP to. Okay, they refused and to give him an IEP and provide him services would have cost less than it cost to defend not giving him an IEP and services. Now in Lowden, you can go through their own budget for the last 7 years and you're going to come up with part B IDA funding fraud approximately $457 million. Let that sink in. 457 million. Now, now let me be let me be honest. Louden is not the only one. I decided to check

019out Powatan based on the lot Louden model. Uh Powatan has 24 million over the from 2019 to the present. 24 million in fraud IDA part B. They violated the asurances that they signed in order to guarantee our children would receive those services. All of the money is going to law firms. Sans Anderson, you need to get their invoices. They build for surveilling surveill surveilling me $1,300 an hour. They build for calling hearing officers on behalf of schoolboard employees $150 an hour. They build for writing IEPs in Gland Powatan Chesterfield $450 an hour. This is not about public schools being underfunded. They're being grossly mismanaged. Thank you. Okay. Wendy Little followed by Kina. Thank you. Kina Makavoy. Kina Makavoy. Not here. Lwanda Travis. Lwanda Travis. Followed by Tracy Gibson. >> Miss Gibson isn't here. >> Okay.

020Thank you. Good morning board and chair. My name is Lwanda Travis. I'm from King and Queen County, Virginia. Unfortunately, I'm back again and you'll probably see me every month. I am back again asking for your assistance and your help with doing a an investigation and making people responsible for the ethnic ethnical oath, moral oath that we all have taken. As um our president once said, and I'm speaking about Obama, democracy is not free. If you want what is due to you, we have to fight for it. Unfortunately, I went to a school board meeting last night and as an active duty service member was threatened to be thrown out because I was helping citizens do a petition for trespassing on public grounds that my tax dollars pay for. Unfortunately, we had parents come forward. Y'all

021have to excuse me. It hurts my heart to even say this with physical abuse, verbal abuse to students in the county as well as teachers being retaliated against for trying to assist their students and give them the proper education. And for teachers to worry about their jobs because they're doing the right thing is totally appalling right now. I fight for my country to make sure that we all are afforded those rights and to get thrown out of a meeting for assisting parents and students that even my grandchildren who were once going to this school who I had to pull that have IEPs. It is appalling to me and it is time for our state to help us with holding these school boards and these superintendent accountable for their actions. Unfortunately, like Dr. the doctor right

022here said, we are in the same boat with misappropriation with funds, miseducation of children, but the community is coming out and right now and speaking against it. And as it's happening, we are being banded from our own school not to talk to the teachers, not to assist our um children. At some point, it has to stop. I had to at least call the sheriff and tell him a verbatim tell him a law and a code from the VDOE and from the state that we are public citizens and you can't trespass us for merely meeting and talking after a school board meeting. It is abuse of power. I ask that you all would at least try to take a look at that and assist us. Unfortunately, I'm finding out that not only is King and Queen

023going through, but several counties around me. I thank you for your time and look forward to seeing you again. >> Okay. Is Christopher Gibson here? >> No, ma'am. >> Okay. Thank you. Bo Dickinson. Thank you, Chair Cesy, Superintendent Gullixson, and members of the board. My name is Bo Dickinson, social studies supervisor in Rockingham County Public Schools and a member of the executive board of the Virginia Social Studies Leaders Consortium, otherwise known as VSSSLC. VSSSLC and the Virginia Association for Teaching, Learning, and Leading, otherwise known as VATLL, recently submitted a joint letter opposing a statewide mandate to move world geography to the eth grade. The new history social science SOS adopted by this board in 2023 make clear that sequencing is a local decision. Therefore, a mandated course sequence would contradict those standards and unfortunately risk

024uh undermining our collaborative work with the department. Such a change would also push civics down a grade, forcing divisions to teach it to both seventh and eighth grade students simultaneously during a one-year transition. This would create staffing, scheduling, and budget challenges for a majority of school divisions across the entire Commonwealth of Virginia. Now, despite these objections, we do support the idea of expanding advanced coursework, which is why we propose in an honors civics as a strong and exciting alternative to this proposal. This course would actually raise rigor, deepen civic engagement, and prepare students for really active citizenship in a meaningful way. It would also align perfectly with Virginia 250 and the upcoming celebration of American democracy, especially here in the Commonwealth of Virginia, as you know, the cradle of American history. I'm here to share

025a draft for honor civics that was developed by Mrs. Kim Dove. Mrs. Dove is a respected civics educator in Rockingham County where I serve as supervisor and she's also a recent gubanatorial appointee to the library of Virginia board. Her proposal outlines what an honor civics course could look like. I submit it today for your review alongside the joint letter from VSSLC and VATLL. Thank you for your time and your commitment to social studies education across the Commonwealth of Virginia. Thank you. >> Thank you, Ann Tatis. She's not here either, is she? No. Um Dan Zacharias, followed by Kake Fun. That looks good. Thank you. Good morning, President Cesy and members of the board. Dan Zacharias. I'm director of the Old Dominion Association of Church School. And something got in my throat just as I came

026up. Pardon me. Um, and I just want to talk to you briefly about what we believe is a serious uh contradiction in Virginia education policy that has the potential to adversely affect our uh churches and uh schools. Uh, and to do so, I'd like to propose what I hope will sound to you like an absurd hypothetical. So, let's imagine a first grade classroom, six-year-old children, and they are in a private school, not a public school, possibly even a religious or a church-run school. And that first grade classroom is being generously subsidized by the Virginia Department of Education directly. thousands, maybe even tens of thousands of dollars in taxpayer funding going to a private or religious first grade classroom. Uh, in addition, you have Department of Ed licensing inspectors inspecting that first grade classroom regularly. And

027that school is made to align their first grade curriculum with the Virginia standards of learning. Now, all of that that I've stated is not happening in Virginia, and it's I've never heard any public uh education or private education advocates propose such a thing. I would hope it would sound absurd. And yet, if you change it from six-year-old to fouryear-old children, that's exactly what we're doing. Uh we had a situation in one of our schools. Very often in our schools, the four-year-olds and the 5-year-olds are in rooms that are side by side on the same hallway. And the um the licensing inspector can inspect the four-year-old room, but she has no legal perview to inspect the 5-year-old room. And yet we have occasions where inspectors insist to see what they're not legally allowed to in uh

028to look at. Uh we had one of our schools in Northern Virginia recently. Uh the inspector demanded to see everything prek to 12. Fortunately, the administrator successfully stood his ground. Um she even threatened to call the police. Um, so we feel like there are uh this pretends some bad problems down the road and we hope that you understand our concerns and appreciate the opportunity to express them to you this morning. Thank you. >> Kakeim Fun followed by Javier Kabas. >> Good morning. My name is Kakeim Fun and I'm an educator living in Chesterfield, Virginia. I wanted to comment on the proposed 2526 proficiency cut scores for the reading and math SOS. I believe it would be mixed messaging to raise the cut scores with the SOS without also looking at some of the substitute tests

029that can be used in place of SOS for graduation. As the public substitute test document shows, students would need a 28 on the KIPP college algebra test, a 30 on the KIPP biology test, and a 60 as a sum of two KPI US history tests to earn verified credit, where the minimum is a 20 and the maximum is 80, leading to less than 20% of the possible points needed to be correct for mainly multiple choice club exams. This leads to pretty much anyone being able to reach the threshold to be able to earn verified credits without really mastering material. I would know because I have piloted KPI before with multiple students who have struggled to pass the corresponding as well as multiple times, many of which have had limited English proficiency. The evidence can be

030seen by the big clims in on-time graduation rates of schools here in the capital of Virginia. The extremely low thresholds for KIPP exams allow for students to basically click their way through and still earn their verified credit and graduate. If the SL cut scores get raised to the levels that the proposal states, many school divisions will pivot to substitute tests, possibly the club substitute test because previous boards have approved the low cut scores that require less than 20% of the points. Correct. This could lead to financial inequities as school systems that can afford to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for club exams will be able to graduate more students in schools that cannot afford to pay for the club exams because of the low thresholds currently in place. This is something that the board

031should keep in mind if the raise in the standards for SO tests but not for others that have low cut scores. Thank you. Javier Cababeszas and then uh Jason, no last name. Good morning. My name is Javier Kavvesus. I'm the high school math specialist for Henriiko County Public Schools, but today I'm addressing the board as the parent of three Virginia students regarding the proposed mathematics so cut scores. As a parent, I understand the importance of high expectations for our children. My primary concern is about the mismatch between these proposed cut scores and the recently passed legislation around mathematics placement based on so performance particularly for fellow parents who do not have my professional background. House Bill 2686 was ratified earlier this year which requires automatic enrollment in advanced or accelerated mathematics of any student who

032receives a score on an endofear standards of learning mathematics assessment in grades 5 through 8 that is in the statewide grade level upper cortile. It also requires school divisions to notify families of the acceleration and provide an opportunity to opt out of the acceleration. How will the proposed cut scores work in tandem with that legislation? This past school year, the upper cortile score for grade 7 mathematics was a 425 and the upper cortile score for grade 8 mathematics was a 421. Both of those scores are below the proposed cut score of 430 for each course. We are now legislated to advance and accelerate students who are simultaneously deemed to be less than proficient. How does a family make heads or tails of the competing messaging about their students performance on Virginia assessments? I'm also concerned

033about the clarity behind what the cut scores represent. The proposed cut scores are not uniform across all tests. They generally decrease from grades 3 through 8 with a sudden uptick for algebra 1 and geometry. Why not use a consistent numerical value for proficiency? In 2019, all tests use a cut score of 400 to indicate proficiency. For algebra 1 and geometry, this equated to 20 out of 45 correct items. For algebra 2, it was 24 out of 45 questions. I was surprised to see a departure from 400 as the proficient mark for each test. Rather than changing the number of correct items needed to achieve proficiency, as has been done historically, the cut score itself has changed. to help clarify what the new scores are. Can the board make explicit what the number of items correct

034needed to achieve proficiency on each so mathematics test is? This would be more forthright and honest for Virginia families to understand what it means to be proficient in mathematics and help families with students in various courses interpret results more clearly. And while cutscores recommendations have been made for the line between fail and proficient, is there a proposed change to what qualifies for a locally awarded verified credit which currently sits at 375? In recent years, there has been an effort to increase transparency and simplify communication for parents and families. I do not see how the proposed cut scores in their current form are any clearer for families when it comes to messaging about student proficiency in mathematics. I thank you for your time today and I look forward to seeing what adjustments to proposed cut scores

035will be implemented before final review and adoption. Thank you. >> Jason, no last name, followed by Nina Schroeder. Neither here. Okay. Is there anyone else in the audience that would like to um speak publicly before we close the com public comment section of our meeting? If you do, you can come up to the microphone. Okay. That being said, we will close the public comment period of our meeting um and move to the consent agenda, please. Um, item A, final review. Item B, final first and final review of meeting dates. Um, is there a motion to wave first review and approve the items on the consent agenda? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Any discussion? >> Dr. Aerman. >> I. >> Mr. Green. >> I. >> Dr. Northern >> I. >> Mr. Hansen. >> Hi. Miss

036McFersonson >> I >> Miss Kilgore >> I >> Miss Ashton >> I >> Mr. Monk >> I >> and chair votes I okay uh to the action item section please item C Dr. Wallace As Dr. Wallace is coming up and getting prepared for her um item this morning, I would just like to remind everyone that the board had a very robust discussion and um also had quite a few documents that I would encourage all um interested parties to please review carefully um yesterday. So, anything um that you see on our agenda from yesterday? Um clearly we had a long and robust discussion about a few items on our agenda and I would just encourage everyone to please look at the corresponding posted documents uh as well as following along with that discussion on our YouTube

037feed. So, Dr. Wallace, please proceed. Thank you. >> Thank you. Good morning, President Greesy, members of the board, and Superintendent Gullixson. Um, I bring before you for the second time the approval of the board of education approved courses to satisfy graduation requirements for the standard and advanced studies diplomas in Virginia public schools. This document offers some flexibility to students in the courses that they can take. It is already an approved document and we would like to um just have approval for the four bulleted changes which um primarily updates language to allow for IB economics to count as the economics and personal finance course for students which increases flexibility in those meeting those graduation requirements. There were some other minor changes as well. Um, but that is the the main takeaway there and uh the superintendent

038for public instruction recommends that this be approved today. >> Any questions for Dr. Wallace on this item? Dr. Dr. Northern. Yeah, I'm just curious um given our seat time flexibility regulations now, is there anything that we need to put in here to say how those seat time flexibility policies may impact um our graduation requirements or anything of that nature? >> Yeah, I don't I don't think it's necessary at this time because, you know, that's a different legislative piece. Um, and I mean, we certainly could at a future time once it's it's finally through and there's more understanding, but there already exists the 140 clock hour waiver requirement um for classes that require standard and advanced uh, you know, verified credits for standard advanced diplomas. So, that's been in effect for I don't know how long,

039but for a very long time and already exists. So, this really doesn't impact seat time flexibility at all. Um, that's going to be a local option. >> Mhm. >> Any other questions? >> Do we need to add a reference to seat time in here somewhere just in order to make sure that people are keeping that >> edit do a technical edit? >> Let's do that. Is everybody good with that? >> Okay. Thank you. >> We can do that. So um given the need for a technical edit, so we will make sure that that occurs. Is there a motion to approve the updates in addition to the technical edit uh to the board of education approved courses to satisfy graduation requirements for the standard and advanced studies diploma in Virginia public schools? >> So moved. >>

040Second. >> Any discussion here of this item? Dr. Ari. I Mr. Green >> I >> Dr. Northern >> I >> Mr. Hansen >> I >> Miss McFersonson >> I >> Miss Kilgore >> I >> Miss Ashton >> I >> Mr. Monk >> I >> and chair votes I >> and Madame President um the technical edit I would presume would read something like at the bottom of page one the course substitutions within this document do not impede other legislation such as seat time flexibility and we can link out to that legislation. >> That'd be great. Okay. >> Thank you so much. >> Thank you. Okay, Dr. Sorry, didn't mean to hit the mic. Good morning, President Cesy, members of the board, and Superintendent Gullixson. As shared during first review in July, I bring before you for

041final review the revised guidelines for policies on concussions in students. Uh the code of Virginia as well as general assembly legislation directs the board to develop bianually and update school policies related to guidelines for policies on concussions and students that provides guidance to school divisions on the development and implementation of concussion policies that align with those requirements. Um, we also include recommendations to assist school personnel in learning to recognize the signs of potential concussion and ensuring that a student who has been diagnosed with a concussion receives the appropriate care and attention at school to aid in their recovery. The department engaged with key stakeholders for the development of these guidelines, including the Virginia High School Athletic League, institutions of higher education, professionals in the field of neuroscience, and partners representing local school division athletic training.

042Upon board approval, the revised guidelines will be shared in multiple ways, including posting on the health related legislation guidance documents, shared with stakeholders through the Virginia Education Update, and posted and shared with content area specialists across the Commonwealth. The department will also continue to support this work by ongoing professional development and technical assistance that focuses on team and training for traumatic brain injuries for school-based personnel. The superintendent of public instructs that the Virginia Board of Education receive for final review the proposed revisions to the guidelines for policies on concussions and students. Just a itty bitty issue. There are a couple of places that need to be cleaned up. So for technical edits, I think there's some spacing issues and stuff like that. Some words that are not spaced out. So let's make sure that we,

043you know, do a review for technical edits on this one. um because I just noticed that. But um does anybody have any questions for Dr. Highlands on this one? >> Okay. Is there a motion to approve the proposed revisions to the guidelines for policies on concussions and students? >> So move. >> Second. >> Any discussion? >> Dr. Arian. >> I. >> Mr. Green. >> Hi. >> Dr. Northern. >> Hi. >> Mr. Hansen. >> Hi. Miss McFersonson >> I >> Miss Kilgore >> I >> Miss Ashton >> I >> Mr. Monk >> I >> and chair votes I thank you very much >> thank you so much >> Dr. Williams, you're up. >> Good morning. >> President Cesy, members of the board, and superintendent Gullixson. My name is Anthony Williams, director of the office of career

044and technical education, and I stand before you to request final review of the CTE highquality workbased learning implementation guide. During the July 31st board meeting, we presented for first review the CT highquality work-based learning implementation guide. We received stakeholder feedback in order to clarify the criteria for highquality work-based learning experiences. Stakeholder feedback following the July 31st board meeting is located on page 21 of attachment 4. The summary of all revisions to the implementation guide as a result of this feedback is located in attachment three and the redline version of the high-quality workbased learning guide is located in attachment two. Uh at this time I would like to briefly review the redline revisions of the CT highquality workbased learning implementation guide. Starting on page one, the introduction, we added to the second paragraph in order to

045recognize the importance of experiential learning opportunities that may not qualify as a hands-on experience as recommended by the Virginia Manufacturers Association. It is important to note that artificial intelligence is shifting hands-on learning to include interacting with, maintaining, troubleshooting, and programming intelligent machines rather than solely performing manual labor. Page two, redefining high-quality work-based learning. Sustained engagement with industry professionals and/or post-secary subject matter experts in high demand fields is a key component that ensures work-based learning experiences are high quality. The Virginia Board of Workforce Development is responsible for the approval of the high demand occupations list. The Virginia Office of Education Econ Economics develops the methodology in consultation with the Virginia Board of Workforce Development and host the website, but the high demand fields are solely defined by the Virginia Board of Workforce Development. Page six, the

046high quality workbased learning checklist. CTE completers by definition must successfully complete two sequential CTE courses and satisfy all requirements for high school graduation. The removal of completer provides flexibility for students that have successfully completed two sequential CTE courses but have not met all requirements for high school graduation. Also on page six, we discussed at the July board meeting there was a need to clarify the criteria for the six highquality work-based learning experiences. The July draft included the requirement for students to earn a national certificate of completion industry recognized credential or attain post-secary credit. This section has been revised to remove this mandatory requirement by providing students with opportunities to earn national certificate of completions industry recognized credential or post-secary credit. This revision provides flexibility for school divisions that aligns with the point system approved for

0473e readiness employment. Page eight, developing workbased learning programs. We revised the monitoring and evaluation section to include metrics for assessing program effectiveness. Metrics such as student job placement, students trained, program cost, and cost per participant align to our statewide metrics for measuring program quality in career and technical education. The Office of Career and Technical Education is responsible for submitting annual data as part of the Virginia Works Commonwealth Workforce Metrics Data Dashboard. This revision establishes consistent metrics at the local and state levels. Page 10, workbased learning coordinator design. Revisions recognize the need for each school division to have a work-based learning coordinator or design and that the workbased learning coordinator or designate can include the CTE teacher of record. Getting down to the end, the appendix section toolkit resource links have been added to include the

048Virginia 2024 high demand occupations dashboard and the Virginia college and career outcomes explorer. We have also for clarity uh included additional forms that are required for work-based learning experiences. Technical edits include the remaining revisions of the CT highquality workbased learning guide. Upon approval, the revised guide will be submitted to the Virginia regulatory town hall for a 30-day public comment period pursuant to the administrative process act. A superintendent's memorandum will notify school divisions of the highquality work-based learning implementation guide and where the document will be posted on the Virginia Department of Education's Career and Technical Education website. In conclusion, uh the Superintendent of Public Instruction recommends the Virginia Board of Education receive for final review the proposed revisions of the CTE highquality workbased learning implementation guide for school year 2526 and delegate authority for the department

049to make any final technical revisions. Okay. Any questions for Dr. Williams here? >> Yes, M. >> McFerson, >> I noticed that we referenced the entire program as being high quality workbased learning. But in the dashboard of the occupations, we go to high demand um categories of work. So high demand categories of work are not necessarily the high quality bills. So my concern is is that what about the students that really ought to be preparing for the high quality work as opposed to just high demand? I realize high demand. We need a lot of people in a lot of categories, but part of what we're trying to do is to make sure that the students are prepared for the new innovative technologies that are coming along. So why couldn't we have the credit being for high

050quality as well as high demand? So what I don't want to see happen is a lot of students end up in professions that are not going to pay them a lot of money when they have the skill set to perform them. So can it not be an either or a high demand or a high quality workforce training program? >> I do know we discussed this quite a bit last month. Dr. Williams, do you want to give us the high level of that? >> Yes, sure. Um I can tell you now that we are currently working on a consolidated definition of highquality across all workforce agencies. Uh the reality is the way that we define highquality we are aligning uh to the uh Virginia Office of Education Economics high demand occupations dashboard that was published in

0512024. As we know those occupations are going to be changing every approximately every two years and the purpose of that is to align to CTE courses and programs and industry recognized credentials or credentials of value. Uh and so the goal is to promote those opportunities whether industry credentiing or work-based learning experiences for students. These are typically going to be uh occupations that uh from the spectrum may be uh we used the example last meeting of uh child care workers. They are essential in the Commonwealth of Virginia, but they may not be uh high wage occupations, but they're critical occupations in which we have coursework and opportunities and high demand credentials that align to those very diligently with our other workforce agencies to ensure a consolidated definition and I assure you that there will be some

052changes in the near future. >> Mr. just want to I share those concerns because I think at a certain point you're chasing your tail because if you're only looking at a specific sector that is currently high demand you work in that and then in a couple years if you're forgetting some other sectors then you're going to see that pop up then we're going after that category so I appreciate the looking into that. >> Can we just get >> Dr. Northern? So, are they only considered getting credit in high demand if there is a um IRC an industry recognized credential tied to that profession? That's kind of a silly question, but I think that's a big point I'm not sure about. >> Well, what we have provided the flexibility in this revision is to provide opportunities

053and those opportunities could be towards a national certificate of completion which could be an apprenticeship for example. Um, it could be an industry recognized credential, it could also be post-secary credit. Uh, and so once again, we're still in alignment with 3E uh, attempting to promote industry recognized credentials and the ability for students to earn dual enrollment credit. >> So, in other words, a waiter, a waitress, a janitor. I'm looking at the very high demand, honestly. And those are the top three, right? That we need waiters, waitresses, janitors, cleaners. I mean, that's what we see. It's high demand. So, we're not inadvertently in uh motivating kids, right? They'd get no credit, right? There's no IRC tied to being a waitress or a a janitor or some of these other high demand careers that we definitely need,

054but we're not incentivizing that because there's no IRC tied to that. Correct. >> I could go even further to say there's not a specific CTE course or program that is tied to that. And so one of the requirements that's recognized in this in the checklist is going to be the connection to the CTE coursework. And so there's going to be a direct connection to state approved CTE coursework. In that particular uh example, that does not exist. >> Okay. So that's how we're getting around it a little bit because there aren't um certifications tied to some of these. Okay. Thank you. >> Have a question. >> Miss McFersonson. >> Thank you. if a student had an opportunity for work in a in an industry where they were doing um repairing robots. Okay. And I don't necessarily

055see that on this list. I mean, I could probably get somebody to decide to keep from being eliminated that one of these categories met that. But could not a a school division superintendent or principal recommend to your office that that person be allowed to get the 1.25 credit because that is a high demand high high quality uh internship or apprenticeship. Did didn't we discuss last month that there will be some localized needs that would that this would provide flexibility for in that regard? >> Well, I want to make sure I'm I'm getting clarification here. Are you referring to the point system for 3e readiness and the 1.25 that's being allocated for a student that completes the IRC and the workbased learning experience slide. >> Okay. So for the student that completes the IRC and high

056quality work-based learning experience then once again that those credentials and experiences have to be related to the CT coursework that's part of the criteria and so we've identified and crosswalk the coursework to the high demand occupations. So we have clearly made that visible and public facing to our stakeholders, students, parents, uh business and industry professionals. And so that correlation is there and so students have the opportunity to not only uh complete the coursework which could lead to post-secary credit, it could lead to industry recognized credential or a high quality work-based learning experience. All of those options are still available. >> Dr. Northern >> I just wanted to bring up the point that was made earlier in public comment. I mean are this year's seniors going to be like when does this come into play? >>

057Uh as approved in February the 2526 school year will be the year for implementation. >> Okay. So I mean that was a good point right that that he made in in other words these some of these weren't initiated or figured out right until these seniors were already making these decisions. I mean, should we allow any flexibility for this year's seniors? >> I would leave that to the board's discretion, but I I would uh also note that they are other opportunities uh for uh work-based learning experiences in addition to industry credentiing requirements that are also an option for graduation. So, keeping in mind students have the opportunity to earn industry credentiing opportunities or participate in I think it was honors, IB, dual enrollment, uh or high quality work-based learning. So there are options that are available

058for students to still meet and satisfy these requirements as well as other CTE requirements. >> Okay. So there's there's enough flexibility where they're not going to get in a trap. In other words, to this is not going to prevent them because >> we believe that there are options available. Yes. Yes, ma'am. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Monk. >> So you answered you kind of hit on what my next question was. So example, if we do have someone who completed one of the previous um you know recognized work-based learning opportunities, so service for instance, that would no longer qualify them. So they would during their high school or academic career, they would then have to complete two. So one under the previous recognition and then one under the six. Is that what I'm understanding now? In

059order to graduate. >> Yes. And I think the what we have to understand just to provide some background context of how we uh landed on the final approval for for 3e is that there was no criteria or guidelines for the previous work-based learning experiences. And so did they truly meet or satisfy a true service learning experience? We we don't know. Um, we have a concentrated focus now for work-based learning that's high quality in which they're validated by by industry professionals. Students are receiving feedback directly from industry professionals. Uh, and they're correlated directly to career and technical education coursework that was missing previously. Uh, and so we have a measure now that we did not have before. So it's it's it's difficult to say through data whether they're completing it over because you know that was

060the challenge is that we were missing the quality. Now we have established that metric and we have a means of supporting students in the near future. >> Mr. completely agree I think uh the establishment of that is super helpful but I would just caution I do think maybe that one year of latitude may be helpful. wanted to share thankful for the flexibility around the uh workbased learning coordinator position knowing that different divisions have different capacity there um and the inclusion of SAPE after the initial draft and then also wanted to ask a question around the um the metrics that are included here of what is a high quality work-based learning opportunity. it it shares the number of placements and so just from a high level thinking rural communities there may not be a high number

061of placement for some of those opportunities. How does that factor into that's new? >> We're not measuring for quantity. We're measuring to to have a tracking mechanism to determine what a locality how students are performing in any given locality. So, this isn't a measure that's going to be used in a in in a negative sense by not by any means, but at the same time, we're able to determine whether a division is making significant pro progress across multiple high-quality work-based learning experiences. And once again, this is this is data that we're responsible for reporting annually, but we're doing it from the state perspective. We don't have access to what the localities are truly doing. We're looking at a sense of how many students are completing CTE courses in general, but it would be great to

062know of those students how many are actually being placed at the local level. So, it really does provide a more reliable data source in the future. >> Wonderful. Thank you. >> Okay. Is there a motion to approve the CTE highquality workbased learning implementation guide? >> Second. Okay. Unless you think that's do it later. Um, okay. Is there any discussion of this item before we take the vote? >> Dr. Arian, >> I Mr. Green's not here. >> Dr. Northern >> I. >> Uh, Mr. Hansen. >> Hi, >> Miss McFersonson. I >> Miss Kilgore. >> I miss Ash. >> Miss Ashton. >> Hi, >> Mr. Monk. >> I >> and chair votes I. Thank you. >> Thank you. Um, okay. Okay. Item F, Miss Burda. >> Good morning, President Cesy, members of the board, Superintendent Golixson, Christina

063Bura, chief operations officer. Um, before you today is the first and final review recommendations for two literary fund loan applications. Um, as a reminder, in order for school divisions uh to be able to apply for loans through the construction through the literary fund, VDOE conducts open application periods. We have conducted several um one in fiscal year 2023, two during fiscal year 2024 and one in fiscal year 2025. Two school divisions, Giles County and Pennsylvania County have both applied during the 2024 and 2025 application periods respectfully respectfully and have submitted all of the necessary and required documentation needed to support their requested loan to be released by the board. This item includes a request for release for Giles County for the purpose of renovation of an existing classroom, an addition of an accommodating up to 11

064classrooms, renovating and replacing an elevator, upgrading a safe school's entrance, and improvements at Macy McClarty Elementary School. Giles County is requesting a release of the literary fund for the project in the amount of $12,475,000 payable over 30 years and is eligible for a 2% annual loan interest rate. The project application is attachment one in your board item. Secondly, a loan requested by Pennsylvania County for the purpose of constructing four additional classrooms at Union Hall Elementary School. They are requesting a loan in the amount of $3,549,838 payable over 18 years and are eligible for a 2% annual loan interest rate and their full application is attachment to in your agenda item. The superintendent of public instruction recommends the board wave first review and approve the release of the literary phone fund loans requested by Giles County

065and Pennsylvania County based on the loan amounts, terms, and eligible annual interest rates requested in their loan applications and indicated in the executive summary of your agenda item. Happy to answer any questions. >> Miss Bird, I have a question. >> Yes, ma'am. >> So, um, which was it Pennsylvania, I think, that you said. Um, okay. I'm sorry, it's Giles. So, upgrading a safe school's entrance. Um, wouldn't I mean, couldn't they apply for a grant a diff a safe schools grant that would cover that and then maybe some of this could go towards another piece of a project that they have >> potentially. They're probably trying to leverage the same contractor, which is why they're joining it all together. It's part of an overall renovation. So, there may be a >> a time value of >>

066Okay. all inclusive. >> Just wanted to bring that to light in case. >> Yep. >> Uh Dr. Northern, did you have a question? >> Yeah, I'm just looking at again at Giles County. It says up to 11 classrooms may be added to accommodate the anticipated growth within the attendance zone. So, I'm just curious what's going on in Giles County that they think they're going to be um anticipated growth within their attendance zone. >> It's a great question. I don't know that answer right off the top. I can certainly go back and find out so that you can have that information. Yeah, it I'm actually very curious because we're seeing declines across the state and the nation. So, >> yep, I will find out. >> Um I guess one more question around this. Let's just say,

067you know, accommodate this this language says accommodating up to 11 classrooms. Let's say they do four, but they have the money for the 11. Do they send that back to us? >> It's another great question. I'll find out. We need to make sure that we're accounting for that very strictly, please. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Any other questions or comments here? Um, so does that does that mean that we need to hold on this or can we go ahead and get those questions answered sufficiently? >> I'm happy to do whatever the pleasure of the board is if you're comfortable approving it with those responses or we can delay. Uh if it's okay with the board, I'd like to get those answers for Giles County. Um my question and Dr. Northern's question. So if we could please

068um just pause on number or on one. I'm happy to go ahead and um entertain a motion on the Pennsylvania county. So if we could separate those two, please. Um, I'd like to entertain a motion on the Pennsylvania County request and hold on the Giles County request. So, if someone would like to make a motion in that regard, I would appreciate it. >> Mr. I'll move uh for the Pennsylvania and hold on Giles uh to wave first review and approve. >> Thank you. Is there a second? >> So moved. >> Okay. Any discussion here? So, um, we are holding on Giles County and we are only moving on the Pennsylvania county as first and final. >> Dr. Arian, >> I >> Mr. Green, >> I >> Dr. Northern, >> hi >> Mr. Hansen. >> Hi,

069>> Miss McFersonson. >> Hi, >> Miss Kilgore. >> Hi, >> Miss Ashton. >> Hi, >> Mr. Monk. >> Hi. >> And chair votes I. >> Thank you so much, Miss Bura. Sorry to complicate your day. No complications, >> Mr. Chapman. Thank you, President Cesy, members of the board, Superintendent Gullixson. Um, item G is one of our the board's regular items regarding periodic reviews of regulations. Um, as a a brief refresher, under the administrative process act, agencies are required to conduct periodic reviews on chapters of regulations every four years. Um, before about 2024, the board had never uh the agency had never done periodic reviews of regulations. So this is part of an ongoing effort to make sure that the the responsibilities under statute are fulfilled. Um this month we are are would like the board

070to close out four periodic reviews. And if I'm correct, this is uh the full balance of all the periodic reviews that we have requested over the last year and a half or so. Um it's been been quite an adventure uh for the board. But in these chapters, we have three chapters we're requesting some very minor amendments to. Um, chapter 441, the regulations governing the employment of professional personnel. Um, chapter 560, which is the regulations governing the reporting of acts of violence and substance abuse in schools. And, uh, chapter 740, the regulations governing n uh, nutritional guidelines for competitive food sold in Virginia public schools. And the issues underlying these are are extremely common. Um, and you know, between them, basically, these chapters were promulgated some number of years ago. There have been a few statutory

071updates and we would like to you know bring back to the board and a future amendments in order to account for um for the statutory changes. Um again that will be the subject of a new action. This is just asking for permission to close the periodic reviews. We will bring full strikethroughs of the of the edits but we expect those to be really minor um in order to bring the the regulations in alignment with statute. one chapter 660 which is the regulations governing the enrollment uh of students committed to the department of juvenile justice. We expect to be more extensive um and we will likely bring that back in a full regulatory process. We think this is likely beyond what we can do in a fasttrack rulem um and the rationale there the reason is

072because the statutory change was a little bit more extensive. The the department that was referenced in those regulations no longer exists. um the I think the department of juvenile corrections is that is that the right term Joe? Yeah, thanks. Um and so as a result there's some interactions between agencies in that chapter that that really need to be rethought. We have already begun that work with internal to change very much of the underlying policy but just the the extent of the revisions is going to be a little bit more substant. going to take about a a year and a half to two years to complete for the full regulatory action. Um that's a the summary of the changes. Uh we are asking that the board wave first review um and approve the closing of the

073periodic reviews again with uh the the regulatory actions to actually make the change will be coming at a future meeting. >> Any questions for Mr. Chapman on this one? Is there a motion to wave first review and approve the closing of the periodic reviews on the regulatory chapters identified in this item as presented to the board? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Any discussion? >> Dr. Arian. >> Hi. >> Mr. Green. >> Hi. >> Dr. Northern. >> Hi. >> Mr. Hansen. >> Hi. >> Miss McFersonson. >> Hi. >> Miss Kilgore. >> Hi. >> Miss Ashton. >> I. >> Mr. Monk. >> Hi. >> And chair votes I. Thank you. Mr. Chapman. Thank you. >> And item H, please. >> Thank you, President Cesy. Um, this is a regulatory action that we expect to um is

074really just an alignment matter. Um, a few months ago, the board had approved the the repeal of chapter 150 and moving that into uh chapter 720, which is the regulations um governing local schools and school boards, school divisions and school boards. um in the process of that action going through the regulatory process. So 150 has not been repealed yet. We're still working that out. Um in order to facilitate that change, we need to take one additional definition from 150 and move that into 720. Um the section of code that's referenced in the title, which is 22.1-288.2, um contains a reference to the board's definition of a disciplinary record. And so we want to make sure that that this definition from the current chapter 150 that's still active uh goes into 720 in order for that

075statute to make sense um in order for there to be no drop in um in in board policy. So again this is a zero sum game on terms of board policy. It's a a straight even line. Um but in order to facilitate the repeal of chapter 150, we would just like to move this definition as well into uh from the chapter that's being repealed into 720 where the other um the remnants of 150 are going. Uh the the recommendation again is to wave first review and approve this regulatory action. >> Any questions for Mr. Chapman on this item? >> Is there a motion to wave first review and approve the regulatory changes described in the item and delegate to VDO? VDOE staff the authority to make changes necessary to comply with the administrative process act

076or the Virginia register act. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Any comments here? >> Dr. Arian. >> I. >> Mr. Green. >> Hi. >> Dr. Northern. >> Hi. >> Mr. Hansen. >> Hi. >> Miss McFersonson. >> Hi. >> Miss Kilgore. >> Hi. >> Miss Ashton. >> Hi. >> Mr. Monk. Hi. >> And chair votes. I. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. >> And Miss McDaniel, you're up. [Applause] Good morning, President Cesy, Vice President Hansen, Superintendent Gullixson, and members of the board. I'm Sophia McDaniel, the director of innovative models and policy. Today in front of you, I'm presenting item I, the first and final review of the guidelines for graduation requirements, local alternative paths to the standard units of credit, otherwise known as the alternatives to the 140 clock hour requirement to include requirements of

077seat time flexibility under House Bill 1477. As you know, Virginia law has long allowed local school divisions certain flexibilities in meeting the 140 clock hour requirement for standard units of credit. These pathways include locally developed options such as independent study, work-based learning, or demonstrated achievement. In 2024, the general assembly expanded this flexibility through House Bill 1477, which created the concept of seat time flexibility. This legislation directed the board to provide local school boards maximum flexibility to wave existing instructional clock hour requirements by developing alternative instructional time models to allow for the design and implementation of new instructional time models for all students. In response, the department developed the seat time flexibility and innovation action kit which this board unanimously approved in May of 2025. This action kit provides divisions with practical tools, including resources, a

078notice form for requesting flexibility and a monitoring template to track student outcomes. The guidelines before you today incorporate these new provisions into the guidelines for graduation requirements, local alternative paths to standard units of credit, otherwise known as alternatives to the 140 clock hour requirement as required by the legislation. The superintendent recommends that the board approve this item on first and final review. This action fulfills enactment clause 3 of House Bill 1477 and ensures that staff can provide timely guidance to school divisions as they plan and implement seat time flexibility. Upon approval of this item, department staff will emphasize strong communication and support for the field. Office of Innovation staff have developed resources for implementation to include newsletters, an updated innovation web page, monthly lunch and learns, and office hours. These supports are to ensure transparency

079and provide ongoing support to the field. Lastly, upon approval, it will be hosted on the Virginia Regulatory Town Hall and linked on the VDOE web page for ease of access. There's no fiscal or human resources impact associated with this action and I respectfully recommend the board's approval of this item on first and final review. Okay, any questions for Miss McDaniel here? Dr. Northern. >> Does it just boil down to I know you just read a lot of things to us, but does it just boil down to that the seat time flexibility is not actually recom uh already in the earlier guidance to the alternatives to the clock? Okay, great. >> It's a cleanup. >> Just conforming to legislation being enacted. >> Thank you. >> So, it's simple as just adding that because it was adopted

080by the general assembly and signed by the governor. Yeah. Any other questions? Okay. Is there a motion to approve this item on first and final review to ensure enactment clause three of House Bill 1477 is met and so that staff may provide guidance to the field in planning for and implementing seat time flexibility pursuant to House Bill 1477. and additionally allow staff to place a notation in the guidance document governing certain provisions of the regulations establishing standards for accrediting public schools in Virginia to direct readers to refer to this document on local alternative paths to standard units of credit. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Any discussion? >> Dr. Aur. >> Mr. Green. >> Hi. >> Dr. Northern. >> Hi. >> Mr. Hansen. >> Hi. >> Miss McFersonson. >> Hi. >> Miss Kilgore. Hi, Miss

081Ashton. >> Hi, >> Mr. Monk. >> Hi. >> And chair votes eye. >> Thank you, Miss McDaniel. And Mr. Gilstra is up. >> Superintendent Gellixson. I just want to thank Miss McDaniel for all of her hard work. This has been a year plus in the making. And so, we're very excited to now roll out C10 flex notice opportunities to divisions and especially principles. They've been eagerly awaiting this. So, thank you to the board and we'll keep you all apprised over the coming months on uh adoptions >> and I cannot wait to go visit school divisions to see this in action which we will be doing soon this fall. Thank you, Mr. Gilstraat. >> Good morning, President Cesy, Superintendent Gullixson, and members of the board. What I bring to you today is a new um assessment

082test. Uh the proposed recommendation from the Abtel board uh is to replace the discontinued PRAIS family consumer science 5122 test with the new practis family and consumer science 5123 and set a passing score of 151 to earn a family and consumer science endorsement on a teacher license. The new assessment was designed in partnership with teachers, teacher educators, higher education content specialists to reflect the career and technical knowledge required to teach family and consumer science. The test aligns with state and national standards including standards, family and consumer science teacher standards revised in 2018 and the national association of state administrators family consumer science. This is a new assessment. ABTO is recommending that the data review be conducted after one year to determine if the passing score is provide that's provided the greatest opportunity for teachers earning

083a professional and maintaining rigor. I can tell you that this assessment is already out in the field for other states and right now we're seeing about a 94% pass rate on the new assessment which is higher than what the old assessment was. Uh I will say that that is not just a firsttime assessment. That is a overall whether or not a person attains a passing score ever. Um furthermore um we also uh would ask that this be a final review today. Um the assessment that we currently have in place expires and we would like to get this on our books. Um, superintendent of public instruction recommends that the board of education replace practice family and consumer science 5122 test with the practice family and consumer science 5123 and establish the cut score at 151. I

084will also mention upon adoption uh by the board the written communication will notify school divisions educator preparation programs of the approval of the new passing score at 151. Uh the new passing score will be updated on the professional educator assessment resource document on the video website. That is something that we have started to include in these. This will be a step that we normally do separate, but it's a wasted step for you all. So we will do them all in one step. And uh the board's current guidance document, the assessment requirements, uh that'll be posted for 30 days on the town hall for public comment. This has already gone through review with >> Abtel >> and I kindly ask that you approve this. >> Miss Kilgore, this is your area of expertise. Would you like

085to make a comment? >> It's my area of expertise and I'm glad to continue u believing in this curriculum and I think it's wonderful that we are moving forward. >> Thank It's a very necessary course of study I believe. Thank you. Um is are there any questions for Mr. Gilstrap on this? They are um making the request to move this from first review to first and final for the purpose of getting it in the field and activating on this. Mr. Monk, >> mine is just a logistical. I recognize that 5122 it sounds like is expiring. Um, are there folks in the pipeline that might be currently in taking anticipating taking 5122 before its expiration that would then have to switch mid-study to 5123? Do we see that as an issue at all? >> There there

086could be people, but practis has been uh steering people towards the 5123 for the last couple months under our guidance to make sure that we do that. We also would give extensions on time uh for those that may be caught in the transition period. Good. Okay. Um, so with that, I'm sorry, Dr. Northern, >> how was the passing score? Uh, is this a practice recommendation, an APTA recommendation, or where did 151 come from? >> So, there's a committee that practice puts together of multi-states. This was a 10 state combination. uh we were not part of this but uh Pennsylvania, North Carolina uh two nor neighboring states were involved in that and they have teachers uh IH um higher institution uh faculty member um experts in the field and experts at the national level that all

087review the scores and then they do a standard test on it. >> So in APTEL recommending that we wait a year is this a recommendation that other states are doing as well? I mean, I guess I'm just trying to figure out there's a community of folks trying to figure out what the >> cut score should be on this new new test. >> We we do that periodically. We just to make sure when we put in a new assessment. If it's the same assessment with a different cut score, sometimes we don't make that recommendation, but if there's a new assessment, we like to look and see how our state is doing with the scores. Um, we do have the data from other states, but we we'd like to know how Virginia teachers are doing. >> Thank

088you, >> Miss McFersonson. I noticed from the materials that actually and and though they didn't consider it or didn't factor it in the new recommended score, but the prior score was 153, they're actually lowering it to 151. So, they just didn't look at what was going on before and just revised the materials and said, "Well, it turns out it's 151." or was there any other rationale given in relationship to the pri test? >> It's not a lowering of the cuts estimate. >> This is the same assessment I would agree that would look like we were lowering the standard but because it's an entirely new assessment that's just the established >> the number that fell out. Got it. >> Okay. >> Other questions or comments here? Okay. Is there a motion to accept this item on

089first and final review? Approve the new practice family consumer sciences test and cut score. >> I so move. >> Second. >> Any comments here? >> Dr. Aki. >> I. >> Mr. Green. >> Hi. >> Dr. Northern. >> Hi. >> Mr. Hansen. >> Hi. >> Miss McFersonson. >> Hi. >> Miss Kilgore. >> Hi. >> Miss Ashton. >> I. >> Mr. Monk. >> Hi. >> And chair votes I. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. >> Um, Mr. Chapman. Item K. Thank you, President Cesy, members of the board, and Superintendent Gullixson. Um, we have here for first review a series of regulatory changes that we would ask for the board to consider that are happening um subsequent to closings of periodic reviews. Um, all of these recommendations again were were things that the board had previously accepted

090as part of the periodic review process. Um and so we're bringing them again to you now um for first review and final review next month in order to get the regulatory changes um enacted and through the process. Um chapter 450 uh which is the regulations governing professional development. The periodic review recommendation and and staff still stands behind is to uh to repeal those regulations because um essentially these were designed in an in an era before the current structure of chapter 23 which is the lensure regulations governing school personnel or for school personnel um and the guidance that the board has approved regarding the um renewal of licenses. Uh we think that this uh this chapter is no longer necessary. Um for chapter 650, which is the regulations governing determination of critical teacher shortage areas for

091the awarding of the Virginia Teacher Teaching Scholarship Loan Program, we have some minor edits which again are really just bringing um this regulatory chapter into alignment with statute. Um chapter 690 is the regulations for the scoliosis screening program. Um we had asked the board to consider as part of the periodic review process for chapter 250 which is the testing of um sight and hearing of pupils and also this chapter on the scoliosis screening program that the board consider combining those two chapters within chapter 720 which is the regulations uh governing local school boards and school divisions. Um there is not any movement in the actual regulatory text. It's really just taking them and and the decision that the these don't warrant to be independent regulatory chapters subject to their own four-year cycles of periodic review.

092It really just streamlines uh for the board and for staff when they are engaging in the periodic reviews of a single chapter all g geared toward the same regulant which is school divisions. Um but there's no movement in the actual policy. Um and then chapter 840 which is the Virginia child care provider scholarship program. Um since this is in fact a scholarship program um in consulted consultation with OAG uh this chapter is is exempt as a grant of funds from um from the administrative process act and so does not actually require a regulatory chapter. Uh the policy that the board has devised in these regulations or really adopted from the department of social services when these regulations transferred over um will just be put into a a document for staff to in order to award

093the uh the scholarship program. Are there any questions for Mr. Chapman on this item? Okay, thank you. We will accept this for first review and see you in September. Thank you. Dr. Hollands, you're up. Good morning, President Cesy, board members and superintendent Gullixson. I bring before you today item L for first review um our revisions to the guidelines on heat related illness prevention which the board is required to finally update. Um however given legislation uh the TW in 2025 the code of Virginia was amended to add uh some additional sections which directed the board to make sure that each local school board shall develop an update in accordance with the guidelines policies on student athlete extreme heat safety and protection which would be required to account for multiple areas of increased safety practice and safeguarding

094student health and wellness. The department worked with an interdisciplinary stakeholder group to review and provide feedback for these guidelines. And the team of content experts consisted of athletic coaches, divisionwide athletic directors, school nurses, representatives from the Virginia High School League, the Virginia Department of Health, and the Virginia Department of Education, as well as local division stakeholders, including teachers, nurses, administrators, and athletic directors. Upon board approval, the revised guidelines will be posted and submitted to the Virginia Regulatory Town Hall in accordance with provisions of the Administrative Process Act to garner additional stakeholder feedback. Um, the superintendent of public instruction recommends that the Virginia Board of Education accept these for first review. And I just want to note, thank you so much, President Cesy. We've identified a technical issue that's impacted our spacing and character replacements and

095our track changes version. So, we will get this cleaned up and posted. So, the clean version will be on APA and will also be provided for your final review protocol. Thank you so much. >> Um, I just want to ask something quickly. Uh, Dr. Hollands, we are in a very critical sports season right now. Um, and I'm just wondering if it would be best if the board go ahead and and move this first and final to get it in the hands of school divisions as fast as we can. Um I mean you have completed the process with stakeholders if I understand that correctly. >> That is correct and and of course I defer to the board's position on this but you are correct. We're getting calls and inquiries for information. As you can see the

096updated guidance has a lot of great additional safety protocol um that given the weather here in the Commonwealth might still be necessary for a few more weeks. And so of course I defer to you all but we are happy to move forward with first and final review today and to support the field accordingly. >> Uh is there is there a motion to support first and final review and allow the department to do any technical edits necessary? >> Second. >> Okay. Any questions or comments here? >> I I as a comment I appreciate you recognizing that we should move this forward quicker. >> Yeah. >> Anything else? Okay. Dr. Arian, hi. >> Mr. Green, >> hi. >> Dr. Northern, >> hi. >> Mr. Hansen, >> hi. >> Miss McFersonson, >> I >> Miss Kilgore, >> I

097>> Miss Ashton, >> hi. >> Mr. Monk, >> hi. >> And chair votes. I thank you so much. >> Thank you all so much for your commitment to student safety. We really appreciate it. >> Okay, right now we are going to take a quick five minute bio break and we will be right back. Thanks, We're back and we are ready to move to item M. and um first review of propo proposed 2526 proficiency cut scores Jason's going to join too. >> Yes. >> Good. >> Welcome team. >> Yes. >> So good afternoon board members. So, we gave a a quite robust presentation yesterday around uh proficiency cut scores and we received some questions uh about the process. And so, we want to dive deep to ensure that everyone has an understanding of how we got

098here and look at the the bigger picture for cut scores and the why. And so, um, just to, uh, talk a little bit about the process, we have our director, um, of assessment, Mr. Ellis. He's going to go over kind of how this happened. Um, he's going to go over the process a little bit, and then I'm going to follow up with, um, some key responses to some of our constituents. So, Mr. Ellis, >> good morning, everyone. Um so this previously years past um we used a method for standard setting referred to as a angolf or modified angolf process and so slightly different than than what we did this year working off of an ID matching process which I know the board has received many uh presentations on over the last I guess eight or

099nine months or so. Um and so the prior to this year, um our participants at standard setting utilized a a test form um and a literal form that was used and they looked at that form and then they made some judgments about where performance would fall on that form for that particular uh subject area or grade level. Well, the ID matching process a little bit different in regards to they look at a set of items that reside in our item bank and those items are ordered from least difficult to most difficult and our participants in this year again a difference. We had both uh educator experts as well as community member experts a change from what we have historically had. And so this year they looked at this ordered item set and said where where

100do we see the change from a performance level perspective fail basic to proficient to advanced? Where do we see a change in those items? And that's where we would expect student performance to fall or to change as we look at that set of items. Again, the set of items is representative of the item bank both in difficulty and content. So again all of those being a little some some changes in our process from the what we did this year to what we have done historically. um the makeup of the panel of the panels and of the each individual committee. Um the number of participants um about what we have normally had except this year as I mentioned we did have the addition of community members which really brought forth a a whole new dimension to

101the standard setting that provided a lot a great deal of value I think to everyone that participated to have the uh that perspective in the room and as part of the conversations. those were the community members were great partners um in in this process. So um I look at that as a a real positive from from this experience this year in relationship to um how these items how these things have been brought to the board and such. Um the board was more involved in our process this year than what I have been familiar with in previous years um in terms of understanding the process and being involved in selecting the process and approving what we were doing. Um but in regards to everything that is happening at this point and with the adoption of cut

102scores or the anticipated adoption of cut scores or board approve of the cut scores, um we're very similar to things that we have done in the past. Um so I look forward to the conversation today. Um I'm more than happy to answer any questions that you may have if if you have any for me at this point. I certainly will be around if you have them later. Um but I look forward to the conversation today and and moving forward. >> Mr. Ellis, I have a question for you. >> Sure. >> Um so the constituency that made up the standard setting committees, I think we um stated in our document, so we had 70ome percent were division um representation, school division representation, >> teachers, administrators, um reading specialists. Okay. So um am I correct in saying

103that division level superintendent or someone at the central office in a division needs to sign off on that person getting being on the committee or no? >> So in the process that we had this year um which a little bit different than what we've had in the past that was not a requirement for application um into the committees this year. >> Okay. Um so um applicants were they uh completed one application process for um just to submit the information uh to the agency for review and then they also completed an expert task. Um the the individuals that came from a school division had to had to do that. >> So at any point were they required to let their school division know that they were participating? Not not technically >> only if they would have

104needed to request time off or if they had an obligation within their school division that they needed, you know, coverage for, >> but the expectation would be that they would likely make at least their div their principal know or their immediate supervisor know, right? >> I I would think that that would happen, but there's no way under the process that we use this year that I could tell you that that that that absolutely happened. So in other words, it shouldn't be a surprise to school divisions that they have participants on the standard setting committee on a it shouldn't >> if again yeah >> I would I would be have been sure to let the folks that I worked for know but I I can't ensure that that happened you know statewide for everyone that participated.

105Um, and I just want to kind of double down on one of the things that you mentioned both the committee selection process from the application itself to the board taking an actual vote on angolf versus or modified angolf versus ID matching versus I think we had one other um item or one other process related. What was the other one? >> Well, >> ID matching ID matching. There was a third one. >> Um, >> bookmark. Yes. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. Um, we we actually took a vote that on that if I'm not mistaken. I think Mr. Tomleski was here the day that we did that. Um, so I in my opinion, there was nothing about this process that has been a surprise. Do >> the the board approved the ID matching process at a

106board meeting. That is accurate. >> Thank you. Can I just add a little bit more because I know that um you know from a lot of our constituents they're asking about the impact and in the data and when the presentation I talked about yesterday about impact we could show statewide impact but it's not going to tell you the story about what's going to happen in this school division A or school division B. And so we're actually running impacts um how this would impact them for um all of the school divisions and then in we're going to go out to every region um and I'm taking my accountability and assessment team because we need to look at how this is going to impact each school division and the level of support that they're going to need

107for their schools because it helps us at the state level ensure that we have the capacity to do it and it also helps the school division begin to plan. And so we could put up a graph of this is how it's going to impact the state, but it's not going to tell you the story about the school and the division in Tidewater or in um central Virginia. Um we have to get better at going deeper with the data. And then there was also the question about um you know that we read from a constituent regarding the the number of items correct and then you know getting deriving a store a a score just based off of the number. Um, and in the presentation yesterday, we talked about the computer adaptive test. And the idea is

108that the questions have a diff a different difficulty levels. And so, it's not about a number. You get you're given 20 questions and if you get 15 of them right, you you get a score. It's about how many of the difficult questions did they um answer correctly. Points are awarded. How many of the medium questions? How many of the low-level questions? And so, it's not testing with just giving a a piece of paper. And you know, it's not those type of traditional tests. Yes, we still do have some of those for the end of course assessments, but when we're talking specifically about our um grades 3 to 8 reading and math, they're computer adaptive and they adapt to each student. So, it's not just 20 question items, you get so many right, then that's your

109score. Um, and so that also needs to be taken into consideration. >> President, Madam President, is it okay to make a comment here? >> Dr. Acriman. >> Yes. Um I I just want to um first thank everybody who participated in coming up with the cut scores. Um I know that was probably a lot of work and there's a probably a lot of angst around it. I appreciate that you point out that the impact is a different conversation really, right? Um like we need to have the scores first and then kind of determine that impact. Um but I do want to express I like to believe part of my role on the on the on the board is is speaking for the voice of of those with special needs. And uh in my own experience, I've

110been in education long enough uh to remember where we didn't hold students with special needs to a standard. Um and uh and I know sometimes these special populations are the ones that get most afraid, right, of of what this might mean to them. But in my experience, people rate like they raise to the bar that we set. Um and so I'm excited that we are doing that and I just wanted to make that comment. Again, I think impact is a kind of another conversation and and I know we'll be having that. But from my understanding and all the conversations I've had and read, most of the impact is support. Um, and how can we help, for example, the population of students with special needs is just one of the many examples to be successful in

111these new cut scores. uh and the new reporting mechanisms that we will get from the cut scores that I'm so excited about to make data informed decisions um for both individual subgroups for individual schools for ultimately that individual student. So anyway, I just wanted to express some of that with some of my background because I know there's a lot of angst in our world of kids with special needs around raising the bar and uh we again I was there when we didn't have one and um we we could have done better. So thank you >> Dr. Northern did you have a question? >> Miss McFersonson. So, in a prior presentation, the board was advised that the department was going to run um stats that would give us a clear indication of where schools were going

112to fall based upon the new cut scores. so that we could be prepared for the fact that the public will want us to respond to how we're going to deal with impact. So I do think it's very important that we run those numbers and so that we are able to tell the school divisions as your department is going out. this is where we think you're going to fall based upon the prior numbers as we run them side by side because that was the transparency that we as a board we were expecting. So we want to make sure that >> we're dealing with impact but impact based upon what those numbers are really predicting where the students are going to fall. And then secondly, I think a lot of the board members are clearly of the

113opinion that current 12th graders should not be impacted by the roll out. And I think at some point we have to say that because there are students right now who are planning to go to college, you know, who there's they're ones who are looking at their job opportunities and whether they pass or not is going to impact whether or not those future plans are going to be put in place within a 12-month period. So, I think it is really important based upon what was done before you were hired that we get the side byside numbers and that we look at them and we begin to talk to school divisions and say this is what it looks like based upon an internal run because that's kind of what we were promised. >> Miss McFersonson, you're absolutely

114right. We were promised that >> and previous leadership didn't deliver on it. >> Right. >> This is happening now. it will be delivered to us. Okay, we just like Miss Booker Dwire is saying um it is critical in this process. Completely agree and that will be coming to us and that will be um available to the public for their viewing as well. >> Right. I don't have any doubt about Miss Gullixson's um leadership because I know that she's on it. Uh I just wanted to remind the board that that's kind of what we're expecting. So I mean I know that I know that she's going to attend to that. >> Yes. Thank you, Miss Ashton. >> Yeah, I I also um am incredibly excited about the progress. Thinks think that we are moving in the

115right direction and um giving your comment yesterday, I think, you know, just worried about seniors in that they're planning for their next college and career phase, just making sure that they are not, you know, that they have the support and the clarity around the impact. >> Yes, we don't want this to be punitive. This is about seeing if our students met the standards and if not how can we support. Um and that's why we're running those impact numbers by division because the statewide it doesn't give you that clear picture. Um and then we're like I said we will be out on the road uh with the assessment team with the accountability team walking through like how can we how is this going to look for your division? Um so this is a very different level

116and approach to support um than what has been done previously. Other comments, Mr. Monk? >> Yeah, I would agree. I think the my conversations with educators are not in many cases, not all, but not that we don't want to raise the bar. I think we all know as as teachers that raising the bar is going to at the end of the day raise outcomes for students. It's what does that look like and what is the communication around that? Many of many folks, parents are not in these rooms understanding, hey, this is the reality of where students are now. Um, no matter what you say the cut score is, this is the reality of where our our learners are. Um, but there's concern in the field if that's not communicated well and uh with precision that

117there may there may be this perception that all of a sudden students have dropped in one year. And so I I think having that information going into those regions, communicating that, but then also working to make sure that the languaging around uh what other stakeholders are hearing is important. Uh we we don't want the perception that XYZ school district or XYZ superintendent or schoolboard member has failed students right now. It's hey, this is where we're going in the new direction and how we're uh encouraging some um some lift among those assessments. Well, I think I would also follow that with it's not just we we're not stopping at just the communication, right? It's about how we're coming in and supporting. And I do think that from a schoolboard member's perspective, I would want to be

118able to say, "Yes, we are here, but here are the supports that we're getting from the Department of Education because we are here and we are fully embracing those those opportunities that the department is helping to provide for us to improve." Um, so I do think that's very very important to talk. Um, yes, we got to communicate, no doubt, but the bigger picture here is how are we successfully moving schools and students from point A, wherever they're falling, to the most successful that they can possibly be. Um, and so that's I mean that's the point of all of this. So, Mr. Monk >> and if I and then the district's understanding what that scaffolding and support looks like too and how that can integrate to them completely. I think the communication between the district and

119the agency on what those supports are, hey, this is where we are. Here's where we're going to get uh provide you in support-wise to get where we want to be. For sure. >> Yeah. I I there was a comment um that Miss Booker Dwire made yesterday that I think is important that support is not a one-sizefitit all um and that each division is going to need something different. And so communication has to be overcommunication. But I think um just for for the board and I think for um the folks who are watching it's not a one-sizefitit all in terms of support. Everyone's not going to get the exact same thing. I hope that they will get what they need. Um and so we we've have we've got to appreciate the flexibility in that in the

120team's approach to do that. >> Dr. Northern. I'm just going to echo all the onpoint um comments made by my colleagues here um and the transparency function that we've talked about at Nauseium on the board. Excited to hear that we're going to see how these data are going to play out with the most recent data that we have. Um and just want to say again that a higher bar and this is a communications piece that we're going to amp up and continue to amp up. A higher bar doesn't mean that your child is doing worse. It actually means that we raised the bar to help them prepare for college, career, and life, right? It's the honesty gap that we've had for so long. But the honesty gaps become kind of a cliche, but really mean

121it means your child is not prepare prepared for college, career, and life. And so, um, I think just saying what the test score is, right? It's not a number. It actually means something, right? Right. And we look at the research and we see that proficiency is tied on NAPE to all of these very positive outcomes which I've talked about before at this very meeting. Um I would love to see, you know, uh for parents infographics showing the the old and the new scores. I'd love to see videos of our state superintendent explaining to families on our family channel like here's here's what this means. You know, don't be alarmed. Don't be worried like that we're resetting here as a department. We're resetting as a state. I mean, this is what's happened in the past and

122uh we're all in this together, right? This is not it. It doesn't matter if you have an R or a D after your political, you know, orientation. We're doing the right thing by kids, right? We're just doing the right things by kids. And I think that the more that we can communicate that we've said all along this is not to be uh punitive. It's about support. It's about being actually identify the schools instead of saying 90 some percent are accredited and everybody's doing great, wonderful. It really is about um identifying where we have the greatest needs across the Commonwealth. So, I just want to just up the Annie again on the transparency. We're we're in we're at a very critical stage here and we're not going to stop pressing the accelerator on the transparency front

123and we're not going to stop pressing the accelerator on communicating about what we're actually doing with parents, with families as a commonwealth. Who cares where you are politically? this is the right thing for children. So, let's keep um making sure that we're explaining that to families in a way that resonates with them. Um and a way that we can all stand proud of what we're doing and what we've been working so hard doing. Um and so anyway, I I know we're at a a touchy point and it's sensitive, but I just wanted to reiterate I think we're all on the same page here. I I do think it's important to reiterate what the governor said yesterday and that is returning Virginia to the shining light, the number one state for education. Um it I look

124at that as my job sitting right here. I I look at that as all of our jobs sitting right here. Virginia has been a star in education for so long and we all have a duty to get us back there. Any other comments here? All right. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. Um okay with that we will move um to Miss Bura again and I should have said we will accept this item for first review and see you at a subsequent meeting. Thank you. Thank you. >> Good morning again, President Cesy, members of the board, Superintendent Golixson. Before you today is first review of some changes that are recommended related to the guidelines for the school construction assistance program. As a reminder, during the 2025 general assembly session, we were fortunate to be the

125recipients of some additional funding to support school construction program, the assistance program by way of an additional 120 million appropriated in fiscal year 25 along with a transfer of 50 million from the literary fund and then an additional 110 million to fiscal year 26 for school construction assistance programs. So we have quite a bit of funding to allocate to school divisions. And so we are coming to you after uh quite a bit of time of having engagement with school divisions, superintendent, school business officials, our school facility folks um with some requests on allowing some flexibilities to better use that fund that fund resource to them and support their school division. So before you today are some modifications in response to that conversation and feedback. Um you have the document. There is a redlinined version in

126your document along with a clean version. Um, so you can see what it looks like, but I will highlight a few of the changes. Um, just as a reminder, it is the board's charge to develop guidelines associated with this program. So, this is why this is coming before you for first review. Several of the changes, um, as you may recall, the board made a decision during the last revision to allow for regional CTE programs. Um, in response to several communications from school divisions, we are making the recommendation that not only we continue regional CTE programs, but we also allow for school-based CTE programs that align with the VOIE high demand uh, criteria. So, one of the changes you will see is just adding school-based CTE programs that align with the VOIE in addition to the

127regional CTE programs that you all adopted um, in the last revisions. They can apply for up to three school divisions, three school projects during one application period with the award going to the highest scoring project from each division first due to the increased level of funding to enable more schools, CTE programs, and regional CT programs to receive funding. Another modification is currently the program allows for projects $1 million or higher. We are making the recommendation that you um change that to a minimum of $500,000 for an individual school project and a million dollar for similar equipment replacement or upgrade projects at multiple schools. So, for example, if they have three schools that need window replacements and in aggregate they are $1 million or greater, we would allow under this revision to allow that project where

128currently they wouldn't qualify. So, that is one recommendation we are making. Also, we're making an adjustment to the point score for poor school buildings to enable some school divisions that are very short of qualifying for previous um awards to potentially qualify for funding in the future. So, school divisions must meet at least 65 minimum points out of a 100 point scale in order to even be considered for a project. And we have about 14 school divisions that have fallen just below. So, some of these changes are in response to that to allow those schools that are just falling short of the 65 point minimum to achieve uh a grant opportunity. Um, additionally, we are looking at changing the total possible score for the identified student percentage ISP uh to enable some school divisions again that

129were short of qualifying a potential to qualify for funding. So, ISP is related to our high needs population in schools and it's a derivative for school nutrition programs. Additionally, we are making some adjustments for points awarded for the local composite index again to allow flexibility and possibly have some of those school divisions rise to the 65 point minimum. Also adding, as I indicated, the school-based CTE program as an eligibility criteria to score points if they meet criteria seven of your current guidelines. also making a recommendation to adjust the points word awarded for fiscal stress designation, poverty percentage, and condition of all school buildings again to enable some other school divisions that are just short of qualifying to qualify. It's important to note that we only have two school divisions right now that are meeting the

130poverty percentage. So, we want to make some adjustments in that criteria to allow for other possible recipients. also lowering the total points awarded for the debt capacity again because there's only two school divisions uh that currently meet that to be eligible. Um adding language requiring schools funded by the SCAP program to remain scheduled to be open for at least 5 years or more. So we don't want to make modifications to buildings that are potentially going to close um in the next 5 years. Also changing the quarterly reimbursement dates to align with our fiscal year. This year we ran into some issues with um reimbursements happening right up against our deadline with the department of accounts. So we want to make sure that we are making it very clear and communicative to school divisions on when

131they will get their funding um but also to make sure that we're compliant with our requirements. And just um having them a reminder added, we've had several um and I think it's due to the transition of of staff that are long serving. There is a requirement in Virginia code 22.1-140 that all projects that are going through a renovation or to be built are to be sent submitted to us as the department for awareness through our school building construction renovation application that's an SSWS. So we're adding it to this language. Also going to communicate that to school divisions as a reminder so that we can make sure that folks know they still have to meet that requirement of state code. Um, one thing that we've added, and Superintendent Golixson and I have been talking about this,

132too, is trying to find ways to encourage school divisions to submit innovative and creative ideas. I think everybody gets stuck in the rut often of the traditional renovation or the traditional school building. And so, thinking differently how we can create learning spaces that are great for students. And so, we want to encourage that through this process, too. Um, this is first review, so I'm certainly happy to answer any questions that you have. I know there will be comments um and opportunity for review by our school divisions as well. >> Um so first I would just want to ask a couple of questions. Um I know that we in the past have talked about how we are able to make sure that we're spreading the wealth instead of you know those school divisions that are qualifying.

133um it's just seemingly going to a particular school division or a set of school divisions, maybe a couple um all the time. Uh and ensuring that we are able to to capture some of those more rural school divisions as well um that are in just as much need. I think it's important at the same time that we're really focused on what those enrollment trends look like. Um, you know, because we know that there are several school divisions across the Commonwealth that have had to close multiple schools this year. Um and you know probably some of those and might not be able to capa capture it in this particular piece here but um you know if those school divisions were ones that were recipients of grants in the past in some of those buildings that are

134now not being used I mean how are we capturing that data as well? Yeah. So, one of the um items that we also added here is more of a technical requirement is we don't really have a reporting mechanism to know where folks are in the process of their of their receipt of the program funding. So, we are asking for reporting. Um that is one thing that I've had conversations directly with the secretary of finance about being able to articulate where people are in the process um is really important. So, there is a reporting component that will go along with the awards. So, school divisions that are the recipients will have to circle back with us and tell us progress on their project. Um, are they still on track? We have several school divisions, too, that

135have received funding and we're trying to circle back with them to make sure that it's still necessary. As you know, we've come back to you with reallocations. So, I think that goes back just like we talked about communication on the instructional side. We just need to do a better job of instructing and communicating out to the field um what the program is all about, what the expectations are, and making that very clear. to your point been previous recipients. Criteria 13 actually um gives folks points >> if they have not been a recipient of the program in the last two fiscal years. So that is part of our mechanism along with these changes we're shifting in points that we hope will continue to spread the wealth >> wonderful across school divisions. >> Okay. >> I thank

136you Dr. Yeah. I and I apologize if I missed this, but I'm wondering if there's anything to incentivize the use of space that's not being utilized. Um I've I have a little bit of experience with this and going in and and using unused space and um and in my experience, the longer it sits unused, the more it costs to get it in use. So, I don't know if there's a way to kind of help, especially with the CTE type programs being allowed in the to be used this to use this and the under $1 million. There's a way to incentivize some of that unused space. Um, I I don't know if I >> Yeah, perhaps maybe not captured here, but I think that's something that we truly need to consider. >> Sure. Miss McFersonson, >>

137I was looking at the point score for the um the programs that have not had the money in the past. And so that point score is a little lower than some of the other categories. And I'm just wondering if in the future you might want to give some consideration to raising the number of points for the school divisions that have not used the funding in the past because I think that would be important be a better incentive. I think one of the things too that I'd be concerned about is where there've been a lot of school closures receiving an application for the building of a new school unless as a part of that as you gathering the information when it comes to the board that we're really clear that that's going to be the best

138use of funding. Uh because I just don't think that school division should just go out and build something new when they've closed it. And I think the location of where the new schools would be in terms of the students that it would serve and the impact to the um the economic impact to underserved communities is going to be really important as we analyze that. So I just want you to keep your eye out about that and whether or not maybe um the point score for people who have not been able to use the funding in the past should be raised. Also, Miss Burda, is this generally just a portion of a project? Because I mean, I just looking at the reporting section of this, you know, like we're not asking school divisions to submit receipts

139to us. So, if they, you know, if they're in a project that's that they get in a million dollar grant for, but it comes in at 900,000, h how do how does that work? >> Yeah. So we're only funding 20, 30 or 40% of their overall project based on their LCI and other factors. So we are not funding the whole thing. But I do think that's where the reporting back to us is the important part so that we can share that information to you. One of the suggestions that I have is put potentially putting that report on whatever cadence on your consent agenda just for you to have awareness of. Perfect. Um and it also provides transparency to the public. So we'll work with the team to do that. >> Thank you, Dr. Northern. >>

140So I think the biggest change that we could add to these bullets is we could make for more flexible loan structures based on enrollment. So you would have some kind of enrollmentbased trigger, right? In which you fall below this enrollment based trigger. Then you have to refinance the project. You have to adjust the scope of your project. You have to restructure your debt. Like something needs to happen that like you fall below here like you're in the danger zone and now you have to make some changes. So, um I think some kind of scale up or scale down depending on those future student enrollment numbers. Um and I think we do this already, but maybe where we um we finance the first phase, right? And then we options to expand, right? That if if their

141enrollment changes or whatnot, there'll be an option to to expand beyond that first phase. But whatever we can do to uh build in these flexible loan structures based on uh these trigger things on um enrollment based triggers I think is the is the piece that is sorely needed here given what we're staring down in the state. >> Yeah, I think that's great. If we could put that as a part of our move to final review on this, that would be really helpful. >> Dr. Acriman, >> I I just a comment I just I I meant to say this earlier. I just want to commend that you're casting a broader net. um and the thought that went into this. So, thank you for that. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Monk. >> May not um be quite

142relevant, but I know this capital project thinking about the application is there first. Love the inclusion of schoolbased CTE. Big fan. So, thank you for that. I think that will broaden the net as uh Dr. Eterman talks about. But Perkins, is there a correlation in the application process knowing that this is for capital funds and there likely would be some type of consumables that are needed? Is there any correlation in that application where we know that their Perkins plan has this ingrained as well or there is not, but we certainly could add some language about coordination because we are looking and we're we're talking to school divisions in our lunch and learn series about blending and braiding funds. So this is a clear example of where that >> can serve particularly on the CTE front.

143So we can add that too. >> Wonderful. Thank and thanks for all the work on this. >> Yep. >> Other comments here. >> I think this is the most robust conversation we've had about I know >> construction grants. Are you excited? I know VJ's back there super excited. >> He's like, what is she agreeing to? >> I know he's doing back flips. >> Thank you so much. Appreciate it. Okay. So, that brings us to our presentations and written reports. I think what we're going to do, um, should we go ahead? >> You guys want to go ahead and push through? >> Yes. >> Okay. Um, so that means Mr. Chapman, you are up, I think, for item F and G. Is that correct from yesterday? So, >> okay. So, um this this item is from

144yesterday's work session. Um we got we got um very deep into our conversation about uh proficiency cut scores and so we had to punt item F and item G to today's agenda. And so um thank you Miss Velasquez and Mr. Chapman for being so flexible in your schedules to be here with us today. Thank you. >> It's our pleasure. Thank you so much, President Casey. This item is essentially um something that the board is required to do by statute. And so, you know, in reviewing the statutory requirements um as part of the standards of quality um particularly standard six, the board is required to adopt a statewide comprehensive unified long-range plan based on data collection, analysis, and evaluation and uh do so in coordination with state participation. The board did that in 2023 and the

145current comprehensive plan is in effect through I believe 2028. The statute also requires that bianually the board review this plan and adopt any necessary revisions. So where we are today um is providing this plan again for the board. Uh we are in 2025 so we are in that second year. Uh and so the board is required to at very least review um and if there are any suggestions for changes of course uh you know staff will be willing to bring those back to the board for consideration before adoption at the end of the year. In brief the current uh comprehensive plan uh is composed of a couple of different statutory sections. And so, um, you know, in addition to stating the purpose of the comprehensive plan as designed in statute, um, carrying forward the board's

146mission, um, there is a a fairly extended, uh, objectives of public education in Virginia. Um, that I think is a a fairly good distillation of the statutory responsibilities, um, that are scattered across the code and really what public education is designed to do. and then also an analysis as of 2023 of the extent to which the objectives of public a education are being achieved. Um but the real focus I think of the comprehensive plan in this instance is on the board's uh educational priorities um and goals from the 2024 excuse me through 2029 period. And so what we have over the next few slides and I will go through this sort of quickly because again this is high level and just the overview is what those goals are. But I would certainly encourage the board

147to be mindful in reviewing this of how this integrates specifically with the next item on the SOQ prescriptions where you will get a a detailed dive into the board's 2023 prescriptions on the standards of quality and specifically many of the activities that have happened in support of what the board said in 2023 that it would like to um uh what it would like to see occur in Virginia. um and how those things combine uh you know basically that that the board's vision um as as reflected in this 2023 document um is underway and and this is this is representative of the board's work to date. So that first priority and goal is to set and help every learner meet high expectations. This is uh a lot of the items that that the board hears obviously

148from the so to assessments. Um the item you that item just a few ago. Um all of this is part of the board's activities um to make sure that expectations are high for every learner across the state. Um and not just in the K12 environment, but a big component under the bullets in that is that this is really includes our birth to five uh you know learners across the state. And so providing, you know, the board's efforts to provide feedback and oversight for the implementation of the early childhood statewide measurement improvement system, otherwise known as VQB5 in order to ensure that even our youngest learners have high quality learning experiences and certainly to support that system in the best way we can through the the numerous things that the department does under the board's direction

149in order to to make all that work happen. Um the second priority and goal was to support learning loss uh recovery ensuring transparency and communication of formative uh data systems with families. Um I think one of the big efforts even though it's not listed under this but it is listed under the previous is is the board's work to implement a new accreditation system and accountability system. Obviously in 2023 that work was still in the very infant stages. Um but in September of 2024, we had those regulations go live and this this brand new accreditation and accountability system was rolled out and still in the process of getting rolled out um in order to support that recovery, make sure that the data is clear um and that the tie specifically between student performance and the data

150that's that we receive on school performance are are more unified and integrated and together. The third priority and goal to ensure that every K12 student has a high quality licensed teacher includes the numerous apprenticeship models that are being deployed throughout the state. Um the alternative lensure pathways. So I think of the I teach the Arlington monastery program that the board has approved over the last few years. Um ensure the ensuring that the current traditional alternative pathways procedure or sorry produce localized and sustainable highquality uh educator pipelines. Um Mr. Rob Gilstrap has and his shop is involved throughout the state in making sure that the grow your own programs um are are up and running and are active in trying to make sure that those teachers are are not just in high need areas but also

151being grown in those high need areas as well. Um the fourth to create innovative pathways for every learner. Um certainly if you had asked in the middle of 2024 the focus I think would have been largely on the lab school. Um and the board has since moved into numbers of approvals of lab schools, but also all of the work for for uh alternative seat time flexibility that the board has considered, the items today, the items in May. Um all of those are have been done to support this innovative pathways for every learner. Um the advancement of safe and healthy schools uh as number five, the board continues to approve construction projects. um administer the literary the Virginia literary fund um publicizing and prioritizing the school construction assistance program um providing opportunities for school divisions to

152develop divisionwide plans for assessing and addressing threats to security. Um, a lot of those the implementation of statutory requirements are work that the department is undergoing on the direction of the board and the board will continue to see over the next few months and certainly um statewide mental health strategies as well as implementing health school policy guidance and the board has seen a couple of items over the last few months implementing legislation to that effect. um a a certainly I think a big theme of impairing empowering parents as partners uh from everything from the school performance framework um to ensuring that data and materials support the b the board's goals there uh and the research toward a studentbased funding formula I think has been a a major focus of the board's priorities back in 2023

153and has been picked up as legislative concerns in the general assembly that Miss Velasquez will will speak about soon. So in terms of the next steps, this has been the the overview. Um I think the board has at least fulfilled the review component. Um but we were asking that the board will reflect and provide >> Thank you so much, Mr. Chapman. Does anybody have questions for him on this? >> Okay, Miss Velasquez. Well, it's still morning, so I'm going to say good morning. Five more minutes. >> President Cesy, members of the board, >> Superintendent Gullixson. Um, last time I came before you, I stood between you and the end of the day. Until y'all today, I stand between you and lunch. So, I'm convinced that I'm not the superintendent's favorite person. Not today. >> So,

154but I will try to be brief because I know uh uh you've heard a lot of information. So, I have for you today um Oh, let me introduce myself because there's some folks that are new that haven't been here before when I presented. I'm Melissa Velasquez. I'm the assistant superintendent for government relations. Um and um I'm here today to present to you on the standards of quality and the progress that's been made towards your 2023 prescriptions. Um on slide one you can see we've outlined for you um that this is a constitutional requirement of this board on one of the only boards in the constitution of Virginia is that you have an obligation to prescribe the standards of quality or SOQ for the school divisions and those prescriptions are subject only to revision by the

155general assembly. We provided for you links to the statutes um that cover the SOQ um for your reading pleasure. Um some of the um standards are quite lengthy, but uh it is the foundation for public education in the Commonwealth. So, it's very critical to the work you do here. as required by the constitution and the code of Virginia, every two years you have to review the standards and you make decisions on whether prescriptions are needed or whether things um can uh remain as they are. In in conducting the review, you um generally seek public comment uh including those suggestions from concern and concerns from stakeholders such as educators, parents, the school division employees, students, and the community at large. On slide three, um the language regarding your constitutional authority is laid out there. Um in

156prescribing the standards uh as you do so and and subject to revision by the general assembly. Um, you also have to provide uh the cost of changing those standards because anything changed in the SOQ is assoc uh associated with funding and that's a a constitutional requirement just not a statutory requirement. And again on page on uh slide four the code language is laid out for you as well. On slide five each of the standards is uh uh are listed for you. um which each one provides for um from any everything from staffing and ratios to the accredititation and graduation requirements and uh compliance requirements by the school division as well as their policy requirements. So, in 2023, uh, we came before the board at that time. Um, and the board through bipartisan efforts arrived at

157the seven prescriptions that are listed there for you. And we're going to go over each of those prescriptions individually and the progress that's been made on those. So the first prescription was uh for a student centered funding formula and as Jim mentioned um that's been a focus of the board and uh so the board recommended in 2023 the general assembly investigate and consider a model um for a student weighted funding formula and then for purposes of determining the required state share to fund the standards of quality based on that student weighted formula. And then in response to that, the general assembly has formed a joint subcommittee to study elementary and secondary education funding. They continue to work um and uh JARK supports that uh and the committee continues to evaluate the provisions of JARK's recommendations

158from 2023 for K12 funding. And uh the governor and the general assembly also through FY24 and 25 budgets uh began some incremental targeted student weighted funding for ELLL students and special education students in the amount of $1.2 billion. As slide nine indicates um BDOE is in the process we'll issue we'll issue a RFP to seek a consultant for data analytics to support modeling because that's an extensive task um that uh to uh provide uh supports to the general assembly for the weighted funding formulas and that consultant um will be uh used for the funding model to provide options to the joint subcommittee. In addition, the general assembly uh and the governor allocated two positions to the department in an amount of $300,000 to support that work um and that modeling. Uh prescription two that the

159uh board proposed and and prescribed back in 2023 involved the literacy act, math acceleration, and addressing learning loss. The board recommended for the assembly to provide flexible funding for innovations in learning um and that to provide greater support to literacy, mathematics, counseling, learning acceleration and recovery from learning loss. In response to that prescription, there all in Virginia program, $418 million in general front funds across three fiscal years were used to accomplish um uh those goals, including dedicated highintensity academic tutoring, um accelerated expansion of the VA, uh the literacy act, and combating chronic absenteeism. And as uh the superintendent noted yesterday, we're being recognized nationally for the progress made in chronic absenteeism. Uh 7.1 million was allocated in general funds for targeted extended school year services and year-round programs. Um $300,000 per school uh was available

160up to $400,000 for certain schools with accredited with condition status. uh over $600,000 for planning grants up to $15,000 for each school division uh who wanted to pursue a creation of a new extended enriched school year or year round programs. And they can use any of those remaining funds um out of that aotment to for instructional delivery for um those governance models. $11 million was provided in fiscal year 25. In fiscal year 26,1 million was provided in general funds to improve student performance in mathematics. Um those include grant distribution and $10 million to school divisions for the mathematics curriculum and high quality instructional materials, competency based mastery learning models, and a regional network of support. the $1 million in funding to support expanded access to online and advanced mathematic programming and innovative math credentiing options.

161But again, 1 million in funding to support the additional five positions specifically to support math instruction. And the department will also oversee and establish a mathematics advisory task force. $500,000 in general funds were provided for innovation grants um proposing innovative concepts for up to $50,000. 29 proposals have been received and 10 proposals were selected covering six out of eight superintendent regions currently. And lastly on that slide 12, 750,000 in FY25 and 900,000 in FY26 have been allotted to support economically disadvantaged students taking advanced placement and dual enrollment and by IB and Cambridge courses. Um, on slide 13, you can see additional efforts have been made in support of this prescription with $800,000 in in respective fiscal years for middle school teacher core to help the school divisions with their shortage area, middle and high school

162mathematics. uh technical assistance for school divisions um with a specific focus on implementing House Bill 2686 from the 2025 general assembly session for the math acceleration grants. Uh they were awarded seven to school divisions in June of 2025. 1.9 million in additional funding will be available in the second round of the grant applications this year. And again, there's there is collaboration between DOE, the Virginia Community College System, and the State Council for Higher Education to implement the College and Career Ready Virginia program that's beginning this fall, and that will further expand opportunities for students in the areas of dual enrollment at no cost to their families. Slide 14. Um, revisions to the board's textbook adoption process have been made to include high quality instructional materials. Um, that was made pursuant to House Bill 2777 from

163the uh, previous general assembly session. And then that full implementation of BLA K through 8 has occurred, including teacher training and new literacy screeners. 34.3 million in state and 30 point uh 30 million, excuse me, in federal funds to accelerate the launch of ELA and implement evidence-based literacy instruction has also been utilized. Moving on to prescription three from 2023, seat time flexibility and work-based learning. In 2023, the board at the time recommended the general assembly to require high school students to have the opportunity to pursue individual academic and career-based experiences as well as have the opportunity to earn an industry recognized credential or um participate in meaningful work-based experiences, college readiness and military readiness. Um high schools have to use their flexible scheduling and competency based seat time flexibility to achieve this. So it as

164a result, House Bill 1477 from 2024 required the board to provide that maximum flexibility and um I believe that was discussed earlier today. Um in May of 25, you approved the seat time flex kit and department staff mentioned today that uh there's a a huge technical support effort that will be rolled out. Um, further in regard to seat time flexibility, there have been 40% of the innovation grants um that have been awarded have noted their plan to utilize the seat time flex in their innovations and uh any of that funding mentioned earlier for targeted extended school year can be used support these innovative to support these innovative approaches. In regards to work-based learning, in December 23, the Virginia Office of Education Economics collaborated with the Board of Workforce Development and stakeholders to publish the high

165demand occupi occupations dashboard. And then 2024, the board uh you as a board reviewed stakeholder feedback and changes to the definition and experiences for high quality work-based learning. And Anthony has mentioned in 20 uh 25 you adopted a new definition and in May of 2025 House Bill 2454 has required the board to include work-based learning within the 3E readiness framework. So on in May of 2025 you adopted to incorporate highquality work-based learning into the employment section of three the 3 readiness framework for the 2425 year. that you as a board added additional IB courses to expand access for the IB diploma students as they work towards uh graduation. There's a process for that where student credentials are evaluated ongoing basis and um prescribed criteria for those graduation requirements as the credentials that meet the criteria

166presented to the board annually for approval and that document posted um with the guidance on the department's website and the Virginia regulatory town hall and as is for as the slide indicates there's always going to be further collaboration between the office of of uh BOE Chev and the community college system to define those credentials of value, develop the criteria for the review and evaluation of the credentials to align to the high demand occupations in the Commonwealth. Further general assembly action resulted in House Bill 1087 from 2024 with a college and career ready program that requires each school board to offer qualified high school students uh the local school divisions access to completion of the passport program which involves 15 dual enrollment credits or the uniform certificate of general studies program that um involves 30 credits

167um at a public institution of higher ed at no cost to the student. And that's very critical. These courses are not electives. They're college level general ed credits that transfer to every public school um univer college college or university in Virginia. 2023 prescription 4 resulted in um the board recommending that the general assembly provide funding for a statewide IEP system uh to ensure that school divisions can meet the diverse needs of our students with disabilities. As a result of that, general assembly action for Senate Bill 20 uh 220 requires the department to develop um and review update as necessary every five years and make available to each school board the an IEP writing facilitation tracking and transfer system known as the Virginia IEP. Um it's currently a voluntary um statewide IEP system. school divisions are

168not mandated but uh they voluntarily participate and we have 117 of the 131 school divisions participating and DOE staff and Dr. Holland's office continue to support the remaining school divisions regarding that adoption process. And lastly on that slide, an additional $5 million in general funding is supporting a new version of Virginia IEP. The fifth prescription made in 2022 regards the teacher pipeline development. the board recommended to address teacher vacancy rates for school division divisions experiencing a teacher vacancy rate of more than 3%. Um, and so as a result of that prescription changes coming out of both the 24 and 25 general assembly session supported governor's uh governor Ynan's executive directive three addressing teacher shortages in Virginia. 51 school divisions identified um where they have a vacancy rate over 3%. 43 of those 51 divisions participated

169in an apprenticeship program or the I teach alternative route to um address vacancies. And since 2024, there have been 500 teachers licensed by a total of 61 school divisions through the local eligibility license, which is a new alternative pathway resulting from 2024 legislation. In addition for prescript the the teacher vacancy and pipeline development, we provided for you a list of bills from the 24 session. Um everything from you making things uh easier in the sense the eliminating the VCLA and um different changes for the provisional career switcher program for special ed. uh bills listed also from the 2025 session that I went over with you in May, I believe it was of additional items for the teacher pathways to provide outstanding teachers in a more compressed timeline so we can address those vacancies. Um and

170that list of bills goes on onto slide 27. They're there for you. They're linked. Um I know lunchtime. Uh, so I'm not going to read through them, but I did I did go through them individually back in May. Um, so you have that as well. Uh, in slide um 29, we'll jump to prescription six related to the board's recommendation for appropriate funding for VDOE to purchase a statewide student information system. Unfortunately, um that proposal for statewide uh student information system was cut during the budget process, but the department did leverage ESER money um state funds to build a statewide students student attendance data dashboard and phase one of that should be completed by December of this year. Lastly, uh I think prescription seven, the board recommended to consolidate the ask risk add-on program and prevention

171and the prevention intervention remediation program to create a new at risk program under the SOQ and that um at risk and prevention intervention uh funding was successfully combined into the atrisisk SOQ funding. So that was a big success there. So those were your prescriptions from 2023. While SOQ SOQ may not have been um revised in each um of those instances, a significant amount of work you can see has been done through the governor's office, through the department, and through the general assembly to accomplish the goals of the board. Um so your next uh meeting, you will then move into your phase of um deciding what prescriptions, if any, you want to make for the 2025 uh year under your constitutional obligation. Those prescriptions would then get transmitted to uh the governor's office in the general

172assembly for the upcoming 2026 general assembly session and bianial budget process. I'll be glad to answer any questions. Um I don't know what's on the menu. Um Melissa, um so at this point, what do you what would you like from the board as far as um how we prepare for September? >> I mean, I'll certainly defer to the superintendent if she has outlined that process. But um the most significant thing is if you're not familiar with what's in the SOQ, um that may be the the good place to start. We provided you for links for that. um and what the critical needs that this board has been focusing on for this year. We want to see how we can accomplish incorporating that into the SOQ if it's not there. Um we love to receive some

173concrete ideas um of of things that um you know kids need for success and that we want to put that before the general assembly as this board's priority. >> So what that means is we have homework. So, um, in order to prepare for September, uh, we would ask that you do some studying up there, um, and and come with with some things that you can help us to, uh, discuss, um, and come to consensus on. Superintendent, >> I've given you homework and between lunch, I'm a I'm a winner. >> It's good. Um, and our team is certainly available if you want to gut check um, so that you don't come with ideas that are already baked. These have been pretty bold uh legislative sessions with a lot of bipartisan wins on um eliminating unnecessary hoops,

174empowering principles with more autonomy to make some decisions and really design models that work better for students. So consider us your thought partners as well. If you're leaning towards a concept, want to gut check, does this already exist? Has it previously existed? Uh Melissa has a wealth of knowledge as well of of um past actions and maybe why they uh are no longer on the books. Um obviously Jim has been uh before the board on the monthly basis of old rags and chapters that are now outdated to not bring them right back and so consider our team here to be a good uh useful resource as well. >> Absolutely. Any comments here? Thank you. >> Thank you, Miss Velasquez. We appreciate it. >> Um, and so with that, we are coming to the end of

175our meeting. Um, and I would just ask before I wrap us up if anybody has uh any necessity to speak on current issues that you have on your top of your mind. No. Okay. Um so I as we know from our executive sessions uh our lensure cases um it usually lends us to thinking about some things deeper. Um and and I know all of us would appreciate it if the superintendent would be um so kind as to remind division superintendent of the requirement uh in the law and the importance of background checks. Um in compliance with such code um not just background checks but also child abuse and neglect registry searches. Um we're seeing a rise of inappropriate conduct. Uh I'm sure you've all seen through the news. um a lot of I shouldn't say

176a lot a rise in inappropriate conduct is the best way to put it um by educators with students um whether that be through social media channels or otherwise um we just need to ensure the utmost safety for students um in every way that we can possibly control. Um, additionally, I appreciate board members helping us navigate through um the public hearings on the 2025 draft expanded high school science standards. Um the department will get those comments um com compiled and we'll be able to see all of those get the comments about those standards put up on our website for further input and we will be seeing those likely sometime in the Octoberish time frame. Um final thought here. We are hearing um something some chatter around um folks, school divisions, school boards opposing the cell phone

177free education law. We expect divisions to comply with all all laws and executive orders and that includes those governing boards. Um, so, um, I know our directors of policy implementation across the the Commonwealth and school divisions work hard to ensure their boards, uh, are in compliance with all all of our laws and all executive orders. And I would just, um, encourage school boards uh, to comply with the law as well. Uh, and I think with that, Superintendent Gullixson, you don't have anything that you'd like to add, right? Or do you? >> Well, in case you missed the press conference yesterday, tune in again because we are just so proud of our students rising to the higher expectations that you have heard here today and yesterday. And just a huge nod um to the collaborative effort

178from our coaches to our instructional coaches to our faith partners to our nonprofit community after school partners, teachers, principles, uh superintendent, governing board members, parents, families, and everybody else is coming around our students to help us move the needle uh and really ensure that they're ready for life. So, thank you to the board for your leadership. And if you missed yesterday, check out our website, check out uh the board documents because we covered a lot on the upcoming supports and how we can continue to move the needle for every student in the Commonwealth. >> And with that, I would entertain a motion to adjurnn. >> So moved. >> Second. All those in favor? I. We are adjourned.