School Board Work Session: 11-5-25

001Good afternoon. I call to order the schoolboard workshop. Miss Tanner, please call the role. >> Bassine, >> here. >> Buffalo, >> here. >> Martin, >> present. >> Paulson, >> present. >> Thomas, >> here. >> Kerro, >> here. There's an announcement I'd like to make prior to the start of the me of the agenda. As authorized by Virginia Code section 2.2-3712B of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act, within 15 days from today, the school board will hold a close session meeting for the sole purpose of interviewing candidates for the position of superintendent of Norfol Public Schools. All right. Our first agenda item 3.01. 01 update on BGOE accountability system. >> I have a point of order. >> Our non-negotiable number two requires that we will not operate without an annual self-evaluation to assess the strength and

002areas etc etc. The one that we uh discussed is not an annual. The one of July 9th, 19 correction 2024. Uh I fact checked it. Uh our policy AFA requires that the evaluation include a professional development program. uh and the one that is on file for July 9th, 2024 does not have that. So it is not an annual annual evaluation. And the progress monitoring calendar has it on there as a quarterly. So, we do not have a 2024 U self-evaluation. The non-negotiable says we will not operate without one. So, what do we do? >> I assume that you were referring to 2025 and not 2024. 2024 >> last July that would have been last >> July 9th 2024 talked about this before it was brought up that it was done but not an annual a

003quarterly was did then in 2024. Well, I if I could speak to that, Madam Chair. >> So, I believe when we were doing coaching, the monitoring calendar that we had a couple iterations ago um had a quarterly because that was our aim was to do a quarterly. We're required by law to do one annually, but this the well, not this board, but previous boards had aimed to do one quarterly because we wanted to see how we were doing against the student outcomes focused governance uh framework. And so that required, you know, more frequent check-ins with the board to see how we were doing. So we did at one point in a in a previous version of the monitoring calendar have a quarterly one. Uh but that is not what our most recently adopted monitoring calendar

004reflects. So um I would maybe uh look into the facts that Mr. Pollson is bringing forward so that we can review and forward to for further discussion at at a point when we all have the same information. comment makes reference to our previous I mean the current uh policy which we did adopt we did not adopt but we did discuss not having the quarterly ones on the monitoring counter quarterly self-evaluations but we have not adopted a policy to do that but I'm talking about 2024 and so her policy that she's referencing is current. This is prior to >> I think we all need more information on this topic and to without looking at what Mr. Paulson's looking at. >> You want to look at it? >> Not not right now, but I want to be

005able to dig into it and and >> if you could if you could maybe share it and we can have this discussion at a I mean that's my individual viewpoint. bit up to other colleagues to weigh in. Like to get to the the matter of the uh accountability and accreditation update that our students and see how um we can look into that, get the same information, but right now this is priority. We need to know where our kids are, what our kids know and what they don't know. And this is should be this agenda's been out here for a whole week. Um need to move to the business of the school board today. >> I do believe that >> we're accountability is my issue and we're not taking accountability. >> I I do think that

006we should um be evaluating ourselves much more frequently. Sure. >> Um we just have gotten off track somewhere. Um and I am committed to doing my part to get back on track. So, >> yeah. >> And for what it's worth, the agenda was not posted a week ago. It was posted sometime Monday. The agenda has not been out there for a week. >> Well, it's been out there for the board because it's been in the draft. So, it's it's been there. >> You know, it was it was under draft. It's been under >> on the fifth. >> Correct. The fourth. It was not in there before. I have a screenshot. Well, yesterday >> all of our agendas that we have before they're posted live to the to the public are under draft. >> But >>

007that's how we know what's what's coming forth. >> We don't know. >> So, >> it was posted on the fourth >> because that's Tanner, >> Miss Tanner, since we um when when was uh the materials posted to board docs? >> It's been in draft ever since a month or so ago because we had those agendas up. We have agenda planning. We have up through December in the drafts for the school board to view, >> but we're taking no action on this. >> Well, I think I think we need to get that information shared. Um, those of us who were not in this on the school board in 2024 need some historical background to understand what truly happened and you know can't change the past but we can make sure that in the future we are

008crossing our tees and dotting our eyes correctly and more information. Further discussion from the board. Let's move on to agenda item 3.01. Uh, Madam Chair, as Miss McGarity is coming up, I just want to remind uh the board and the public that the VDOE has sequestered the student data still. Um, they have um my understanding is they've contracted out with a third party to review all the data um and make sure it's in align with the new accountability system. Um, as you're aware, we shared pass rates with you in July and and we've given you updated pass rates. Uh, Miss McGary is going to go through the intricacies now of the new accountability system. Um, as a update to all board members. Um, and once the data is is released, we are prepared to present

009the data on our student performance. I know that our schools and our principles do have their data. They've been reviewing it. They've been using it. Um, but we're not able to share that publicly at this time. So, Miss McGary's here to um, this is a very confusing system. It's taken six months for me to really have a good grasp and understanding of as we go. So, she's going to try to do that in 30 minutes. So, um be prepared with questions. Miss McGary is definitely our resident expert. Um and uh she will she will walk you through this this system um so that you have a deep understanding so that when the data is released, you uh have a thorough understanding of where we stand as a division. Thank you, Miss McGarity. All >> right.

010Thank you. Um, good afternoon, Chair Dalagerro, Vice Chair Thomas, board members, and Dr. Poll. So, this afternoon, we're going to go through an overview of this um the accountability system that is called the school performance and support framework and for short, we call it the SPSF. Some background information, VDU's reported the following principles for moving to this new accountability system. One, wanting high expectations for every student. Two, transparency and access to actionable information. Prioritize. Three, prioritize getting every student to proficiency. Four, to build trust between schools, parents, and students through transparent and concrete reporting and to include stakeholder input. Regarding the data availability from last school years, Dr. P was just talking about to be transparent. As of today, the data for the SPSF are still embargoed. Preview data for the SPSF was received by

011divisions at the end of September. However, myself and team member Greg Williams have worked diligently to review and have sent an estimated 15 to 20 corrections to BDOE regarding our data. This is the same thing that is happening across the state and it's not due to anything that the divisions have done or that we have any control over unfortunately. Um just recently though as Dr. poll also mentioned um due to all the corrections and concerns from the divisions and the idea of data integrity VDE has hired a third party vendor to validate the data as well as the system in itself is the system doing what they wanted it to do. Um just as an FYI for that we do still have data corrections out to VDOE that have not been corrected as of today.

012We know schools still had to move forward and make critical decisions bait for instructional programming for students. Um and in previous years the accountability and accreditation really was a major force in that process. However, due to the unclear timelines of receiving data from VDOE, we ensured data included in the companion documents that we provide to schools in August included data that we were confident to calculate internally or was coming much sooner. So that that is really kind of the foundational items that would impact this with whatever it came out with. Right? So that's something the schools have had in their hands that we've been working with and also for monitoring and those kinds of pieces. As we go through, I will try and give some um examples of things that we've given. And again, the

013annual pass rates really are a big one that we've been kind of sitting on to use. And finally before we begin the presentation this is focused around the rules implemented around last year's data. However there are changes that have already happened for next year for this year's data and others to be proposed that'll take effect and at the end of the presentations I'll go through a few of those changes that have happened or being proposed and what their impact is going to be. All right to here we go. The Virginia Board of Education during the 24-25 school year made the determination to shift from our previous accreditation system to an explicit input output system. And this is what they're using to monitor schools and divisions. The inputs are on the left and these are the

014structures and systems that are required to be in place in all schools and divisions in Virginia. The outputs on the right are the student outcomes on assessments and other required tasks. The reason we talk about this is because I'm going to look at the next piece that we have our accreditation that's inputs. This is a graphic. We will talk about a few of these details but just to kind of show we used to have accreditation. So common language here accreditation used to be based on student outcomes in an implied system. Now that they've gone to this explicit system of inputs outputs we have accreditation as inputs and we have accountability that are outputs. the accreditation are those things again that their examples are do we have a um you know do we have a policy

015in place for promotion retention kind of yes no questions so with the accreditation process and ratings with these inputs as of July 31st 2025 the board of education finalized the new process for accreditation requiring schools and divisions to submit responses to more to a more than 130 question survey within a month regarding all accreditation topics and the topics are all listed to the right. There's multiple bullets under each we had to respond to. Some examples of topics include verification of a promotion retention policy for the division if we're teaching the Virginia standards of learning to our students and do we notify parents in a timely manner about a array of items. Um this was all completed on time by Norvick public schools via the required survey form. Each school will be provided um an accreditation

016rating when we do get data back. We have not seen we this has not even been provided for review because as of today VDOE has not provided what the specific criteria are for the accreditation ratings based on our responses to that survey. We have this um vague definition if we would call it that to know what it is. We don't know. We know what we answered, but we don't know what they're going to take to say you are accredited or accreditation with conditions. So, moving on to the outputs, talking about the school performance and student framework. Where are our kids? What do they know? What do we need to do? Those kinds of things. This is a quick review of the SPSF, which is the output portion. Um, the school performance and support framework is

017a weighted index where each school has three areas in which outcome data is calculated and weighted based on the Virginia Board of Education's priorities. Elementary, middle, and combined schools will all be measured on mastery, growth, and readiness. And altogether, they're going to equal 100 points within their with their framework. High schools will be measured on mastery, graduation, and readiness. All areas have different percentages listed, which I like to look at as more of total points versus percentages. It just makes it make more sense in the sentence as you speak it. Um, for example, in elementary schools, mastery holds 65% of the SPSF weight, but we can also call it that mastery. You can get up to 65 points in mastery. Here, um, the last slide was an image of kind of the overall component. So

018the three components, but each component inside of it has a set of indicators. All of the indicators um have the images up here are of each school level, the individual indicators and their weight within each component. Staying with the elementary example, we know the mastery component is worth 65 points. Within that component, the reading so test outcomes are worth 22.5 points. The math so outcomes are 22.5. So for science is 10 points or and then EL progress is 10 points. Same pattern applies to every component, every indicator and move for all the different levels. The points earned in each indicator are added up for total points for a school on the SPSF and the total points are then interpreted to be performance categories. So this next slide are the performance categories that can be assigned

019to a school for the accountability system. So schools within from their total points, schools with below 65 points are given, if we're looking from the right to the left, given the category of needs intensive support, they would have 65 um 65 to 79 points, they're going to they would be labeled as performing off track. 80 to 89 on track, 90 and above, they would be a distinguished school. So a school that needs intensive supports is a school that need requires more support from VDOE and has more regulations and things that they have to complete to improve student outcomes. And a distinguished school is one that has surpassed the expectations of VDOE. Another layer to this whole process of performance categories is the federal identification of schools. Schools are federally identified based on their performance compared

020to the lowest 5% of title one schools in Virginia. If a school is labeled as TSI or ATSI, which would be targeted support and intervention or assisted targeted support and interventions, then their performance category will actually be dropped. And so that means if a school's performing on track because they have 89 points, but they are TSI, labelled TSI, they would be dropped down to off track. So we really are focusing about where are we performing? if it is an if it's one if they are federally identified. CSI schools though will not be dropped unless they are a distinguished category. So if a CSI school is performing as on track, they will stay as on track. Lots of faces that I feel like I make as well. So >> yeah, I was going to say >>

021yes. So all righty. So with that mastery index. So, we're going to go through talk about real quick kind of what the points are, but we're going to get into detailed information on how the points are earned by the schools. It is somewhat in the weeds, but otherwise it doesn't really make sense if we don't talk about that. So, we're going to kind of get weedy for a second. Um, we'll also look at a review slide. We'll remind ourselves how the total points can be earned. How does an what does it look like for an individual student? And then how does that level up for a school? So, first we're going through mastery. The first piece we'll look at are reading, math, and science mastery index. So mastery for reading, math, and science, like I

022just said, is an index. What that means is that all so test outcomes are given a point value based on their performance level. In the area of reading and math for grades three through eight, those are going to be what's on the left side of the screen. All other assessments are going to be on the right. So if a student takes a test and is earns a pass advanced score, they're given 1.25 points. If they're pass proficient score, they get one point. Fail basic 75, fail below basic 0.25. And if they're a non-participant, they don't get any points, but they're calculated in high school tests. Um, all science tests, history tests, and VAP tests have one less performance level, and it's on the right. That's that list on the right. And basically, there's not the

023fail below basic. It's just you're failed and then non-participants. Okay. Okay, so let's do an example real quick. So if we're a school, I my school has five kids in it. So you know, should be able to work through this, right? This is kind of the wedi part. And again, don't feel like you need to understand the full calculation, but it does just kind of make sense how we get from point A to point B. Um the same process is used across every indicator across the entire framework to kind of add up towards that 100 points. So wanted to kind of go through once. So, if we're looking at this from the so perspective, um, reading or math, science works the same way, but if a student is a fail below basic score, then they're

024awarded 0.25 points. If they're pass proficient, they're awarded one point. Fail basic, my third kiddo 75, pass advanced 1.25, and a non-participant is zero points. So, I'm going to add all those points up, and I'm gonna say, okay, now I have 3.25 25 points but that's not my final points because the weight has to be applied. So this is where that weight comes in. So wherever again you know their f one of their principles was transparency. So we have to take that and transfer it over by each of the indicator weights for whatever that piece is. So depending on where and in mastery for example it is 65% for elementary but it is only 50% of the weight for high school. So the priorities are kind of moved around with the different levels. So I'm

025going to take my points and I'm going to figure out my points from the amount of kids we have, which is my five. What is my rate? So I've got 65%. The other way it used to be, did the kid pass? Did the kid fail? I have five kids, this many, you know, one passed. Here's what my rate is. This rate now is about the points. And there are kids who can earn more than one point. and there are kids who are going to earn points even though they didn't pass. So we got, you know, we keep that in mind when we're kind of talking through the system and using the data. Um, so we take that rate and then we have to multiply it by our weight is where we get our points to

026say for reading if we're going to use a reading elementary example. The total points are 14.625 for this one content area and mastery. So we're going to carry that total weight the point total weighted points here forward into our example. So this example is going to keep showing up. So with this I've said okay for reading my five kids these are the amount of points out of 22.5 points that they could earn. You'll notice we don't really ever look at things this many decimal points out. Um to be very clear, this is one of the things we've really pushed back from from the superintendent level down to our level. Um there is no rounding whatsoever in this system at all. They are using full what they're calling full precision calculations. So they are even going

027out to the seventh decimal point for to even kind of add things in. So the it again even just looks different and it has a little bit of a different twist. And so we'll kind of keep bringing that theme up of no rounding. Seems like it's not a big deal, but in our old system, if it was points, we would say this was 15 points because it would round up, right? No rounding at all for this system. So with here, I've kind of quickly I've pulled in point values if we did the exact same thing for math so test and then for science so test. Right? So in our example so far we've built reading, math and science in the mastery index. So here's this is an example of a place where we we had

028a sneaky suspicion that timelines they were shifting a lot right we're not going to get things not get things and those companion documents we talked about the underlying this is an example of a place we made sure schools had data in hand August at the latest um in their companion documents where we would say what were the annual pass rates not just to say what was the pass fail but what was the different performance levels and gave it back to them historically. So they were able to have multiple years where we backtrack to say has your percentage of past advanced students increase decrease stay the same whatever that might be because we knew we can't we don't have this we can't give them this we can't be confident that our calculation of it is right

029but we made sure schools always had things in place that were really kind of the root of the data and that student performance. Um all right so we're going to move on to the EL piece of it. So with mastery index there's one more indicator which is the EL progress. This is it's the access. So basically what the EL progress is is uh student our it is based on our EL students progress on the access for L's assessment and they take that assessment annually and it is a progress comparison um from the prior year's access for L's assessment to the year that data year's assessment and a student they're measured against this progress chart. So using the progress chart, um students are counted in only if they have an assessment from the year before. They're

030only counted in um so with that if it that was in Virginia also if it because an access fors test can be taken in Idaho. I think New Jersey has it. There's like a large consortium of states that h give this. We can't use those. We have to use just it just if it's in Virginia. Um there are four domain really the purpose of the access for else test measures the ability for an EL student and how well they're moving through they're able to navigate the English instructional and social really the school English social and instructional language. So it's not just am I better at English it is really am I nav able to navigate that language better under kind of the academic guise of school is what that looks like. There's four domains, listening,

031speaking, reading, and writing. And all of that goes in that's assessed for the the EL students. And then they compare it here. So with this, if they show growth, you get a point. If you don't show growth, you don't get a point. So this one's at least we're not leveled all over the place, but we got to figure out on the chart. This is another place we did not have the data from the state about how our students were doing. But what we did have was we had title three data and we were able to take that and configure it to show here's what we know about your students that you had last year, but here's also what we know about your students that are with you now. And we did this again. This was

032something back in August to say here's where they need to go. Um, and that kind of thing. So, it's another place we've been able to pull data from a place that is released and that we were able to configure to at least give them something to work off that's actionable versus waiting till we don't know when at this point. All right. So, mastery index I've put in the five points. So, out of 10 points this school has earned their five points for EL progress. So, basically 50% of the kids eel kids showed progress um from year to year. And so with that, I will me one more thing to mention here. And I keep I think you're kind of getting the idea of the feels like these aren't important, but the nuances about the system

033make a huge difference if you like with what's really going on. Um so with this for EL progress if a school does not have 15 or more students EL progress indicator does not activate the PO 10 points redistribute over to another area to growth. We have schools if they have low EL enrollment, which we do have some, then their growth is going to be worth more than a school that has EL students. High school, we don't have any that are below, but there's a whole other process for high school that we're not going to worry about because we are well over our 15 and we're just going to keep moving forward with that piece of it. All right. So, with that said, basically, we add all of our points up. So, we've got our four

034different indicators that are now filled out for mastery. And we have our total mastery points when we add all those together to have 48.875 points in mastery. This being an elementary example, this school received 48.875 points out of 65 that they could have possibly had. Okay. So, let's move on to grow. So, again, same thing here. So, with that, the weights are here. different weights based on elementary and combined versus middle school. So again, that's that priority like it's more important. The state's looking at it as growth is more important for an elementary grade level student than a middle school grade level student and they kind of just met in the middle for the combined schools. So with growth um this piece there is a value me a value added for each student depending on

035spring to spring so rates. It is grades four through eight only. Third grade's not included because students have to have two so tests in their test history to be calculated in for growth. It is a value added measure. So it doesn't have to be two reading for reading, two math for math. It is can be reading and math. It could be science and history and they'd be able to determine what an expected growth for a student would be for reading and math. Um this was all done through uh Vivos which was a company with um SAS in prior years and it was the expected growth measure. So they the big piece of that is that we did not have targets for students throughout the year. We didn't know what the growth was that was expected

036of them because it is also a the value added piece is it is a state comparison. So they're looking at in the state how did our students grow who have similar test histories to each other and it's only the test history piece is the part that they look at not any kind of other demographic data or anything but saying okay this is how kids grew across the state but what happens is we don't get the data and we didn't get it till October like a little bit early maybe mid-occtober we got the growth data to even know what the kids expected growth was for last year so that is you know and that's a piece Again, throughout the year, we've provided data of we are taking the state growth assessments. How are kids moving through

037this? But if students met the expected growth, they got a point. If they surpassed it, they got 1.25. If they narrowly missed it, it's 0.5. Other than that, it's no growth. So, if you pull that example forward here, I've provided points for reading and math. It's our same elementary example. And with that piece, I add those up. I get now for reading and math, I have 21.05 points out of my 25 points. Remember, we had to redistribute points. It would be out of 35 points, not 25. If we had to redistribute because there was not enough EL students. So, we have to be careful when we're when we get all of our data looking at this saying, okay, you lost more than this school, but did they have a different endgame kind of thing. So

038all right so then moving into readiness I'm kind of powering through as well. So now for readiness. So right we have readiness across all four levels here. Same thing. Everybody has chronic absenteeism but there are different values and different indicators at each level. Um the general idea and or the purpose of readiness is that students are ready for their next level. So elementary school age kids are ready for middle school. Middle school's ready for high school. High school's ready for post-secary life. With that, everybody has chronic absenteeism here. And really, this is the one place that we can kind of take a breath. It has not changed. Um, the way they get at it, the way you put it together with all the points, yes, but the way we we're not having to refigure out

039how they're considering kids chronically absent or not, it is still 10% um of their days. if they're, you know, if they're chronically absent because they've missed 10% or more, they get zero points. I call them chronically present, which is what we want more of. They get a point for being chronically present kind of thing. So, pulling that forward for elementary, then we have the 9.920 points out of their 10 for that. And we add all three of those together, which is going to give us 79.845 points. So I've added my total mastery, total growth, total readiness. So that's how we get a total points. However, because there is no rounding and 80 points is on track, this school is off track. This hurts a lot. So um so we fight for every point for sure.

040That's why we sent back so many corrections and things. We're not going to let we're not leaving points on the table >> because otherwise I'm like you know we're acting like it's you know >> judge and jury we're like we're not leaving points on the table and we got to figure this out and that kind of thing. So bec and especially that because they're what 2 points >> want to pause for a second. >> I can pause. I can keep going. I can do whatever you want. I don't want to interrupt the >> I just have the last of rest of it is just middle the additional middle school and high school pieces real quick. >> Okay. >> So it you do whatever whatever you feel is >> got like six slides left. >> Yeah,

041that's fine. I'll I'll wait. >> Yeah. >> All right. One of the Yes, I know. One of the thing the readiness one additional readiness piece from chronic absenteeism for middle schools and our combined schools for the middle middle school age kids is advanced um math coursework. Really what this comes down to is that students who VDOE has determined are ready for um advanced math coursework should be on that trail. And then if they are taking the EOC uh algebra one or geometry, if they pass the T, it's this one's truly a pass fail. If they pass the test, they're given a point. If they don't, then there's zero points. Um, one of the readiness pieces is that if a student took the grade seven math test the prior year and earned um, a pass advanced

042score, then they're required to be placed into algebra 1, which we worked with our counselors and all those kinds of things and really digging in to make sure we didn't have anybody. And actually, we were actually doing that already. So, any kid we found that in that situation, they actually in their eighth grade year were in algebra 1. So we were kind of already in that process. So here this is all the numbers are different pretty much because it is now a middle school example. So the weights, all those things have shifted. Here's that middle school example. 73.395 points total. They're also an offtrack school. An additional the readiness component for high school is the six-year FGI. Um, I'm not going to talk too much about this because we will talk about it more when

043we get to the next piece of graduation. But basically here, what's happening is that students are given a point if they are a student who's graduated with a standard or advanced diploma or an applied studies diploma by year six. So, for example, this past year they are looking at cohort 2023 to be able to say, all right, what do we have going on? reooking at everybody that already had graduated. Then do we have any additional kiddos that have graduated or have the applied studies diploma? GEDs and I mean dropouts we get are zero points but even if they earn a GED it is nothing. It is considered the same as a dropout >> which is as it is now right. >> I mean >> hold that thought for a second. I'm and the only reason

044I say that is because I do have that coming up on the next like address that directly. Um, so the next piece, so we've got pull points pulled forward. Then we have the 3E framework. This is a huge piece. It's similar to CCCRI that we used to talk about, but it is not exactly the same. Um, so it is an AN system. So this is really that high school piece of looking at post-secary life for them. It is the sole huge weighted item for a high school. So there are and kids can do because it is an and system a kid can get points in enrollment and employment and enlistment and we did have you know when we were kind of looking through we've got kids who are taking all kinds of things. So you

045know the likelihood is that that might show up for a few kiddos but not every kid right. So with this piece um here are the different activities under each header that will equal a um point value. So again, a kid could be a point in enrollment, a point in employment, and then 0.5 points in enlistment, and they would be a 2.5 and that kind of thing. So with that and all these different activities that can happen, there's lots of components to each one of them. Nothing's really straightforward as I did one thing and I'm good. You've everything is lots of things included with 3E. Pulled it forward. You see I've got this out five decimal points. They are kind of again just reinforcing that they are not rounding and it is just that precise calculation

046um where I've pulled in now readiness for this high school example graduation. So I really want to talk about this piece because this is where it is very different than what we've done in the past. So in the past we've had GCI, we've had OGR, we've had the dropout indicator as part of the old system and those kinds of things. they have gone with FGI solely. It is what the data was for last year. FGI's kind of always been happening in the background, but it really was just that federal look. um with the this is four-year FGI and students receive point the only students in four-year FGI for graduation which is 15 points of a high school's framework is if they earn a standard or advanced diploma applied studies GEDs they are all considered non-

047high school completers in this system just like a dropout is I'm not saying it's equivalent to a dropout we don't like that we fought this tooth thin nail as hard as we could from our sides and the schools and those kinds of things because they did comp they you know and they they're saying you know federal doesn't allow it so they popped in that sixth year so that's where that sixyear for five points is coming up with the applied studies even though GED still doesn't count for that so that's where you used to get points for all those things an applied studies diploma you get with GCI you get the same they're in OGR they are considered graduates um that doesn't you don't have that doesn't do that anymore that kid is the same thing

048as the dropout which is not true um in practice so this piece we just have to kind of remember how that's looking this is very different from prior year looks um and there's benefits to all of them you know GCI just doesn't even get calculated more that doesn't exist but OGR does and is posted publicly so we still have that data um to look at but it's you know as of right and I'm going say as of right now um things could shift as they update so with this we're pulling in now so this school earned 12.5 points out of their 15 possible overall the school high school is 81.42 42 points. So they are an ontrack school. Okay. So questions. So I have before we go into the questions because I do have your

049I do have questions and I'm not sure if I answered the graduation piece for you, but I want to mention a few changes for the upcoming data years. So because it's one of those where this is how it was done for last year's data. So when we see that, we know what we're looking at. But then moving forward, we have to think about what we see differently. Um, so the few changes are next year they are looking at including history in the mastery index. We don't know how point shift. They haven't given us any of that information. They've just said we are proposing history to be in the mastery index for elementary and middle most likely not high school. Um, but we're not positive. Additional performance levels to be added to EOC. So it'll go

050from three to four. So again, another whole even though yes, it's the same stuff, it's still a shift, right? where we're looking um growth will have to change um their methodology because VDOE's no longer has their contract with SAS who ran the value added data. One of the proposed methodologies is progress tables which they are the progress tables that we had before. Um this is what we are advocating for because the target is transparent and students growth is measured against themselves not another set of students and how they do. We know going in what does a student at a minimum need to do? We don't stop teaching there. We keep going. But it's one of those that you know it it's as a former special ed teacher, it's empowering for a student to say, "I

051need to make it this far and then what's my next step? What's my next step? What's my next step?" versus, "You're trying to make me get down the road and make this giant hop." So, we're advocating for the um progress tables to be the methodology selected. It sounds like they're going that way. Um, the most impactful change that's already been unanimously voted in are the new cut scores for the so tests. The new cut scores are sign significantly higher than the current cuts which VDOE has stated the purpose of this is to raise expectations for Virginia students and to equal performance ratings of the national assessment of educational process progress which we also call NEAP. So thinking about that let me give you some examples. This data is not embargoed. So I can they the

052cut scores are approved and out there and we are applying it to our old data. So for example, some of the changes are a third grade student in reading who earned a 408 so score last year. They were pass proficient just like we 400 has always been that that line. Now on that same test with the new cut scores implemented, they are considered to be fail below basic which is the lowest performance level of all the performance levels. Huge moves, right? Another example is algebra 1 test in high school. It is the most used math test for verified credit for students for graduation. Um that test so if a student earned a 400 previously they passed. They got their verified credit. Their math is done for verified credits towards graduation. Now the cut score is

053453 for being proficient. Some of the impacts of these change every in every grade level every test has a different change. A few of the impacts of the approved cut scores as we have calculated because again we just applied it to our data old data from last year with annual pass rates is that our reading pass rate overall would go from 62% to 20% pass rate. On the reading math we'd go from 57% pass to 24% pass. 74% of all students who graduated last year with a standard or advanced diploma, their diplomas would have been impacted. 74% that mean who passed with passing tests that now will not have passing tests in that area. Um those are the those are that's a big impact. 60% I want to say I'm off the top of my

054head but so we looked at this even deeper. 60% of our gifted kids were diplomas were impacted. So, this wasn't just a low performing issue. This is kind of a a overarching large issue. Um, it's huge. One student with a disability who earned a standard diploma, it would only be one that would earn it outright. Every other student with a disability who earned last year advanced or standard would be impacted. Those are huge. It's a huge impact. Um however they have been voted in unanimously. Um there are listening sessions. There's one going on right now and there's another one this evening um for families. So hopefully if people are watching they will check their emails or phones and hop on there because hopefully you know they are trying to listen. So they've made some shifts

055in implementation not in the cut scores but in implementation that is not voted on yet. So the scores are in with those cuts. However, what's not done is they're looking at doing an implementation of a phase in over four to five years. So, every year what is considered passing for accountability purposes would be would shift till we get to year four or five and they say, "Okay, here's your now we're at the the final place with the cut scores." Um, with that, they have an approaching index. what they don't know and haven't been able to say and they said it would have to be a board vote is that the approaching which is not proficient but they're kind of putting this little thing in the middle to say you can work through this pathway so

056we can kind of roll kids into this. They're not sure if that is going to work to give students a verified credit. So we still have those high school impacts if that is not the case. Um, so with that piece, we wanted to make sure that that was clear and you know what the impacts are for the changes and one that's already been voted on. So with that, any questions? >> I have a question. Sure. >> We can see it on slide this 29. It's the math was 16.75. So it's conceivable to earn above. >> Yes. >> Yep. And I saw that also on one of the elementary and it just >> yeah because that 1.25 so a school who has more students in the past advanced performance range they could surpass that and espec

057because you have that then you have kids who even if they're failing they're still getting points and so yeah it'll throw them over. Oh, Mine. So since we're we're looking at that slide in particular, so so if I if I heard you correctly, so the student population, the composition could change the point system as well because if you had a school that had a much s a significantly larger e population for instance, >> um so what are the impacts in terms of staffing. I mean like um or even distribution because I right now we have you know newcomer programs we have like what how do you envision those changes? >> So I so we actually um when the new staffing requirements came out from VDOE last year it's based off performance on access. So your

058your ratios, so your your your highest need L students, the ratio might be I and I I'm off the head, it's like 25 to one, but then when you have your your identified who are the the highest performing, it might be, you know, 500 students to one teacher. So, what we did purposefully this year is we looked at all of our scores for our students going into this year and that's how we staffed our additional ESL teachers across the division so that we're meeting the needs where the highest need students are by having more teachers in those buildings to help our our students and you know I I don't Miss McGar I don't know if it it would cloud the issue but another thing to look at is there used to be an 11 semester

059rule rule for our ESL students in the reading so test and that is now a three semester rule. So after three semesters their scores count where it used to be they had 11 semesters of so if we have a student who comes to us a non-native speak speaking student who doesn't know any English within three semesters they'll be required to take the reading so test and that score counts towards us where it used to be 11 semesters. So that's another >> but it was less than 11 semesters and the reason it was that is because what the research shows is that that's the amount of time it takes a student to actually be able to acquire the language to proficiently navigate that the English language academically in school kind of thing. We sent research we

060sent all those pieces and they came back to >> this. Yeah. So that's what I was I was curious about like so that's what the research shows. So, how did what research guided their or informed their decision- making to go to three semesters? >> They said the federal doesn't allow it and they didn't want two systems based on what I have no idea. They never could >> articulate that >> other than here is the we got lots of legislation >> and we >> but with those kinds of questions. >> Okay. >> Norm public schools meaning Miss McGary and I were a part of the statewide accountability committee. We our voices were heard um through this whole process and and we could be pretty loud at times. So >> they and we were on a we're

061on the advisory committee where it's a small group and they had Dr. Pul and they got me. I'm not sure they're happy about getting me but we can you know what I mean? But it's what's nice is that in the superintendent group as well as the this group we have a we Norfick has a pretty big voice at the table for those things with Fairfax. All right. >> You got Sherry on that. Uh I think you got Sherry on that group, too. New >> Well, I've heard this um presentation several times here and in my 9 to5 and I I can't even imagine what a parent >> I know. See what I'm going back to the graduation component. So I see where the goal it looks like the goal is get students graduated in four

062years beyond four years. I mean there's there's no points no no added value to that. So with that said, do we have a plan or working on a plan with our graduation coaches to tackle this big difference in >> I'm going Bruce jump in to you if >> we do and and remember one of the the um requests for future presentations for our graduation coaches. So that's that's we have that on our agenda planning list. So we we'll get more in depth on that, but there absolutely is a plan. But also just recall we're also by law required to allow students with disabilities to stay longer, >> right? >> So, you know, in following that legal requirement, they cannot graduate in four years. So, 15% of the high school score is that's based on it.

063the 5% with the the FGI allows you know up to six years but still we're legally required right to allow those students to stay and to educate them >> and EL students can stay longer as well they have two additional years beyond high school and then >> and yes >> so they're actually added into the numbers but yet you don't get any points if they go beyond >> automatic zero >> and it'll show up as the sixth year if they do but by then um but students with disabilities I think it's they can go even I'm not calculating wrong but so this I think because there was a secure calculation that existed that was the choice >> now for the parents out there this does not impact the class of 2026 yes or no >>

064in the sense of the cut scores >> yes this >> okay so the cut scores. This the system for monitoring schools is applied to cohort 2026. This accountability system, >> the cut scores as it stands right now without an implementation plan does not impact 2026. So, a student is not all of a sudden going to have to earn the 453, okay, who is in cohort 2026. Um what's unknown is if they don't get out >> right >> that year and they kind of slide into that next year like does that shift? We don't have those answers. Those are questions we've put out there. Um we have also again from our two sides advocated for this to not be implemented in high school until the incoming nth graders next year. So then it's you have the

065set that's already in because a bunch of our kids have already taken things, right? >> You know, and it there's a lot of when does the clock start for a kid or not based on the assessments that they haven't been able to really flush out yet. But that's the big advocate piece advocacy piece we've gone with for the high school part of it is incoming nth graders next year like when they changed graduation requirements years ago >> with the 2022 group. Could I piggyback on something you me? Um, so why why start at ninth grade though? Because we know that we have some high school bearing courses in middle school. So it's like, you know, >> their four their four years starts in nth grade. >> Oh, I know. I get I get that piece,

066but the especially knowing what we know with our data. Well, it's it's it's and I know we see it districts see it across the board with nth grade. I mean, we we learned that that transition year. Why not? I guess it's like you could I guess you can make the case for >> I mean, we said we said we would like more than five years. I mean, honestly, for an implementation plan just because, you know, it's parents are going to have to wrap their head around why does this look so different? Hold on. I had one kid who a couple years ago they same score it was this and now this kid and it's this. you're telling me they need all you know um nobody's negating high expectations but at the same time it's they

067you know we put it out there they did not seem responsive >> right and we know that high expectations like I firmly like I high expectations are great but we know that teacher quality instructional quality is what drives success right and so we've got to also plan for having the infrastructure in place staffing all of that building capacity I mean not I'm building capacity among teachers you know to be able to teach also at that high level >> and I think you know as you'll hear in Miss Webb's presentation with Advantis also it's important that they fund everything that they're asking for at the state level with raising expectations means that we need to have the found the basic foundations that are required to be funded um and you'll also see in the presentation you

068know the the part about you know really looking for a reasonable timeline of implementation. >> Can I make a comment Miss Bassine? I'm thinking the reason why they're starting with ninth grade because the component growth in uh for elementary combined schools and middle schools are just different from high school. It is and I think some of it is also that there's a piece in Virginia code which somewhat lends itself to this. So with the 20 the 2022 co graduating cohort. So that's when that was the first cohort that had the new graduating requirements. There's a piece in Virginia code that says if you're changing requirements for graduation that it cannot start while they're in high school already. They have already entered the cohort. policy at VDOE has said we're not changing requirements where we're changing

069how you get to the requirement. Is it mincing words? It feels like it feels like there's a requirement change. So I think that's where if we you know yes I would like it to start 10 years from now but I think that's where we you know trying to have something to stand on to be able to say this is why we're looking at that. That's when they enter the cohort for the first time at high school level. I have another question. So off that. So if I So if we could go back to the performance categories um and I think that is slide. >> Yeah, it's one um or slide seven actually. Um, so if I heard you correctly, so a school could be on track >> but be categorized as ATSI or TSI, right?

070>> And and if I heard you correctly, you said they could be dropped. They'll be dropped to off track. >> They will be dropped to off track. Um I guess I'm wondering how did they get how are they how are they designated on track though? So c can you like >> you're so you're yeah so you're designated on track so that 80 to 89 points. So when we were looking at the total points >> okay >> of the entire framework Matt as we were going through on that example >> right >> that 89 you know the 79.8 8 something that school would is in 79 points because we're not rounding, right? >> They would go to off they would be off track. >> Okay. Right. >> So that's okay. So >> So what matters to

071be on track? >> Well, I thought so I just thought I I thought I heard that they had they were categorized as on track and then something kicked. >> Okay. So yeah, so they are categorized by their points, >> right? I am performing as a school on track. However, because of one situation or another in my student groups, maybe I am identified TSI for this year. Then they will take me say even though you're performing on track, we're moving you down to off track. >> So you're labeled off track, but your performance truly is up on that on track, but the state will have you posted as off track. >> Why? So let me jump in. So >> my understanding and correct me if I'm wrong, Miss Begity, but so you notice now in the

072states >> system there's no longer subgroups. So the way they account for the subgroups is if you have one subgroups who is off federally, that's where you become CSI or ATSI. So then or TSI. So then what they're saying is since that has caused that federal identification to to kick in, you're you're kind of your discipline for it is now instead of being labeled on track. Even though you scored 85 points, you are going to be labeled as off track. Now I will say there's also I think a a kind of a backended benefit to it because they are talking about you know funding schools differently based off of these categories. So when you look at differentiated funding from the state, they have said if you're needs intensive support, you're supposed to get more tutoring

073funding, more support funding. So that would help and that's the reason why they're saying they're doing it. So we know performance-wise then that's where we're saying we got to look like we always do at our subgroup data and say, okay, where was it and how can we improve that so next year we're not in that category. So, this isn't going to mask looking achievement gaps. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> No, we'll still be focusing on achievement gaps. We'll still focus on everything else because >> that's just the data work we do. >> That's we have to that's why I'm just making sure that we're >> Yes. Everything that we've done that are just the base like the base data that I was kind of mentioning that we've given to schools, everything's by subgroups. Any data

074training we do, it's we look at that. Let's talk about who, you know, what's impacting you, who's impacted the most, what do we need to do different, those kinds of things. But >> from a transparency standpoint, like right now, I mean, you used to be able to look at the subgroup data and see all of that very clearly, like as you know, as a board member, as a community member, as a parent, you could see that. Will that still be on the school quality profiles? should still be on the pass rates like it is on school quality profiles, but it is not a part of this. >> We'll get some points. You will not get a mini framework for every student group on the school quality profiles for accountability. >> Okay. >> But we've done

075so much back building on that. >> Yes. >> Within our data warehouse and the in the data that Miss McGary provides to our our all the way to the teacher level, that's not going away. >> Yeah. >> That's still a main focus for us. All I can say is thank you because >> okay good >> I do have one one more quick question so related to the GED so I do want to get back to that so what is what is the rationale >> I know you advocated yeah >> I hate to say this to you they have said because federal doesn't accept it as a high school completing item I and that I >> okay >> then it's the do we love that no it we pushing back like they are still GED applied

076studies they are still high school completers in their way um so OGR will be out there like I said that does they're not counted as a negative but they're not counted as a positive positive. They were for GCI, but that part's totally gone. So, it's kind of >> And will that have any impacts on the programming that we do? >> We've had discussions with our high school principles and that the right path for our student is the right path for our student. It doesn't come down to points. Okay. >> If if we know there's a student who who needs a GED, >> that's the direction that student will be going in. Now, we're going to do everything we can to get them a diploma and keep them on track. But the bottom line and if

077they're going to walk out the door or get a GED, they're going to get a G. You know, we're going to make sure they have something that's respectable when they leave, >> right? Okay. >> You now'll move on to discussion items. Legislative priorities update with Miss Webb. Good evening everybody. I guess it's officially evening. Um I'm delighted to be with you today to uh continue our discussion about preparing for the 2026 General Assembly. Um obviously last night was election night in Virginia. Um and so we do have a little bit more insight about obviously who is going to be leading um uh the executive branch with Governor Lex Spanberger and um Senator Gazala Hashmi as Lieutenant Governor and Jay Jones as attorney general. Um we also saw uh pretty major pickups by the House Democratic

078Caucus um in the House of Delegates. Um, if I'm being honest with you, it was a pretty um unexpected night to be to see some of those sweeping um election results that we saw here in Virginia. Um, but we can tell from what the way the voters mindsets were that they're ready for some change here in Virginia. Um and overall I think it's going to be incredibly positive um for public education to see um some of those leaders come into office and some of the changes um that we anticipate. It is still very early. Actually, Governor Alex Spamberger just announced her trans the leaders of her transition team this afternoon. Um there will be some additional kind of policy area specific transition teams announced over the next um week or two. So be on the

079lookout for that. Um, and this morning I was working on an election night report that you all will be getting hopefully um to give you some more insights into kind of what we think last night's results mean. Um, but yeah, uh, to couple that, we are preparing for the 2026 General Assembly. Um, and so I'm delighted to be before you this evening to talk about your legislative program as well as your priorities. Um, let's see. Hopefully work. Um, so some of these slides we talked about when I was here in September, um, about why we have these two different documents this year, um, and why they're going to help us tell the Norfick public schools story. Um, and so you do have two documents that are in board docs. I do have hard copies of

080both the priorities and the clean version of the legislative program if anybody wants those hard copies as well. Um, but these documents are going to help us provide an overview of the division. Um I have worked with Dr. Paul to update a lot of the um strategic planning goals um and make sure that all of that information is correct. And we want to use uh this document these documents to recognize the unique needs of Norfolk Public Schools um and highlight the good work and progress that is happening here. Um we also want to clearly articulate the resources that you need to meet your strategic goals and to support your students and your community. So that is why we have these two different documents that are going to be helpful to you all as hopefully you

081come to advocate uh in Richmond and also a guide for me as I'm there day in day out um to advocate on your behalf. So just a quick update on the timeline as I mentioned last night was election day um and next week we actually have a legislative event with the Norfk delegation that I'm really excited you all are going to be doing. Um, and so we want to make sure we get these documents ready and good to go so that we're able to share that with the delegation next week. Um, and we are doing that legislative event in advance of pre-file. Well, right now I don't and pre-file uh for folks who may not remember um is uh the the couple of weeks where legislators are able to work with legislative services um to

082put in ideas for different bills. Just because a bill is submitted to free pre-file doesn't mean it's necessarily going to happen. Um, but often it allows a legislator to work with a constituent, a a school division, an organization early to work on some of their ideas and work with legislative services to get that correct before the start of the session. Um, and that deadline for pre-file does end on December 1st at 5:00 PM. So, if we do anticipate any legislation right now, I don't, but if we do, we want to make sure we try to meet that deadline um of December 1st. So, um, in addition, and I don't have this on here, um, that same week that you all are having your legislative or the following week after you have your legislative event and

083when pre-file begins, uh, the House and Senate Money Committee, so the House Appropriations Committee and the Senate Finance and Appropriations Committee are going to have their retreats. The House is theirs is going to be in Prince William County. um the Senate, which is where um Delegate Luke Torian lives, who's the chairman of that committee, and the Senate is going to be having their retreat down at Radford University. Um and that will kind of be our first opportunity for them to preview what their priorities are. Um and certainly staff drives the presentations, but we'll be able to glean from some of their questions and discussions with staff on where they anticipate some of their priorities um to begin at those retreats. and you all will get a full report following those as well. Um, on December

08417th is when Governor Yncan will present his outgoing budget proposal. So, this will be kind of his last chance to push his priorities forward. Um, I do anticipate that there will be significant changes made by the general assembly on whatever Governor's Young Governor Yncan's final budget is. Um it it's always been a little bit odd to me that the outgoing governor does the budget when a new governor comes in a month later. Um but that's Virginia for you sometimes. Um and the general assembly session starts on January 14th. Um budget amendments are due that Friday and again we want to make sure that if we do have any budget amendment requests that we're going to get in um that we do that well in advance and are working with the delegation um to get that

085in. And then on the 17th of January is when the new statewide uh officials are going to be officially sworn into office. So switching gears to your legislative program. That's the kind of the lengthier document. Um which again that's where I kind of will use as my guide as bills come up throughout session um to give me guidance on you know is this something that Norfolk wants to engage on? And certainly there going to be lots of conversations along the way, but it's a good guide for for me and it's also a helpful tool for you all and your community to kind of understand um what's important to to the board. So since the last time we were together, we have made some additional technical updates to the program to improve consistency and clarity and

086flow. Um we have also, as I mentioned, removed or updated outdated language. Um I did work with Dr. poll to update the metrics and progress on your student outcome focused goals. Um, which was he was very helpful in getting that information to me. Um, in your board docs, you do have both a track changes version and a clean copy version. Um, I will say in the clean copy version, anything that is a brand new language, so something you've not seen before, I did highlight that just so it's easy for you to be able to see. Um, on page five of the clean copy version, I did add a draft statement related to shifting from the linear weighted average for the division salary calculations and the SOQ cost assumptions. Um, that is part of JARK's report

087and something that I think would be incredibly beneficial um to Norfick public schools as well as added a draft statement related to assessment cut scores that Dr. Paul and I worked on um as we're continuing to follow what the board is doing around the cut scores and an implementation plan and really not knowing yet what that might look like. We felt like having a legislative position um on that topic was going to be really helpful to um so with that I will pause just for a moment and see if you have any questions related specific to the legislative program before we move Uh then I will go ahead and shift to the legislative priorities document. Um and I know that there's a lot of text on this slide, but this these are all of the

088priorities in one place just so you have them. Um and again, this document is really meant to be the one pages. So the legislative program is, you know, 10 pages. The priorities document is maybe going to be a front and back of a page um that you all are going to be able to utilize when you come to Richmond. Whether that's for VSBA's day on the hill, whether you come up to do your own day on the hill um that we'll work together on, but this is what those priorities are are going to look like. Um and so I do include um at the very beginning kind of a brief overview of Norfick public schools. I think that's important uh for legislators to understand um you know how many students you have, what your staff

089looks like, um the types of different schools that you have, things like that. Um but as far as priorities, again, these are um things that we have talked about before. Um first is to support legislation authorizing um localities to do a 1% local sales tax for school construction. Um that is legislation that has been before the general assembly the last several years. It's been pretty bipartisan legislation. Um but it was vetoed by the governor um this past year. Uh but Governor Lex Spanberger has indicated that if that bill were to make it to her desk that she does intend to sign it. Um and so I do think that there's a pretty good and I know you know certainly it's going to be up Yes. Yes. Um, it's certainly going to be up to each

090locality. So, this does not mandate that localities do it. It gives you all the the um, you know, permission to go take that to the voters to see if that's something they want to do. Um, the second one is to implement JARK's uh, K12 funding recommendations. Um, this is coming out of that 2013 report that has really been um, well talked about, but something that the general assembly has used pretty significantly over the last couple years to figure out where to prioritize any new funding. Um, I will mention that even with last night's election results, we are still in a pretty tough budget year. Um, I'm hearing estimates anywhere that there would be potentially three to four billion dollars um, of surplus. And and I say surplus in the sense that based on revenues there

091may be that much extra money but all the priorities all of the federal um you know Medicaid and SNAP and all that are still things that the state is going to have to fund. So while that may sound like a lot of money we don't anticipate that there is going to be a ton of wiggle room for legislators to be able to play with. But um given that, we do think that these JARK recommendations and continuing to push for them until we get to some kind of new funding formula is really where we need to spend a lot of our time. And the general assembly overall has been very receptive over the last couple years to the needs of public schools. Um and we feel like we need to just keep hammering that point home.

092And so certainly there's a lot of recommendations in there, but I have chosen a couple that I think would be um beneficial and positively impact Norfolk as far as budget allocations. So ending some of those recession era practices while there was an update to the support cap uh this past session. We really wanted to be part of rebenchmarking ongoing. So they have updated it to the current ratio, but we'd love it to be part of that rebenchmarking number as we move forward. as well as the non-personal cost as well. Um and then also looking at um calculating the salary and other SOQ formula cost assumptions using actual division averages versus that linear weighted average. Uh we also have a bullet around um modernizing assessments and accreditation making sure that we are reducing our over reliance

093on standardized testing and develop a more balanced growth focused assessment system. You may know that currently there um is an RFP out for a consultant to come in and look at the state's assessment system. We do anticipate because there have been um kind of a continuation of Pearson's contract through the budget the last couple of years and so we do anticipate that the state um and the the Smeberger administration will um select a new testing vendor and put a new assessment system in place. What that looks like yet is still to be determined. Um but continuing to have a focus on that about what we want around assessments and accreditation um I think is going to be really important and a topic that I think the legislature is very interested um in hearing about as

094well. >> Um also looking at um advancing a new balanced accountability system. Certainly you all just had a presentation on that. Um, and so continuing to prioritize school improvement, local flexibility, um, and really use those evidence-based models around English learners and student growth and locally adopted locally adopted assessments is going to be important. Um, and I will mention that there was an assessment bill this past session uh, by Senator Van Vulenberg and Delegate Helmer that um, it has some delayed enactment clauses as well as reenactment clauses. You may have heard pieces of this bill talked about before around um requiring the so test account for 10% of the student's grade, making sure that so assessments are done the last two weeks of school. Um and there are certainly a lot of practical implementation concerns around

095that. Dr. Paul and I have talked about it. And so we are continuing to work with Senator Van Vulcanberg and Delegate Helmer on that bill to make sure we get some of those, you know, not necessarily policy differences, but how our school divisions actually able to implement this um when it comes to reality. So we are we are working on that and so far he's been very receptive and we're committed to continuing to work with him to make that a better bill. Um but certainly all that takes into account that we may have a new assessment system in a couple years. So so even with the new accountability system framework that we just reviewed and then what may be discussed in these retreats and may be introduced in the legislation. I mean unfortunately our students

096are always part of this political pingpong every time there's a change in administration and the change in the accountability systems impact not only them it impacts it's also it is one of many reasons why our workforce teaching workforce is the way it does is because they can never teach to have a break. >> They can never have a break. They're always evolving along with whatever the new assessment, whatever the new rubric is, whatever it is. It's it's it's constantly shifting and it's like how do we protect um that space so that it is protect it from the ever evolving Yeah. You know, the the Yeah. the political winds of you know and and just focusing on doing what is right academically. for the student. >> I I couldn't agree with you more. Um I do

097think in in talking with um the governor elect team over the last couple of months to share some of the concerns that we've heard um they are aware of that. Um, you know, I think that they're going to put a team in place that is going to evaluate each piece of policy that's been put in or has been boards voted on it or it's been a department-led policy. Um, to really evaluate is it is it based in data? Is it what's best for students? >> Um, and if it is, I think that they're going to be there's going to be some commitment that because they do know that the field needs to have a little bit of a break. Um, you know, but certainly there are things that probably do need to change. Um, and

098I think that their team will just have to evaluate each each piece of that. Um, and you know, hopefully we can get back to a little bit of normaly. Um, and again using data, making decisions based on the best interest of all students, >> right? Um, you know, and I think that it'll be important for us to, you know, be in the know about who they're looking at for whether that's be a state superintendent, governor's administration, but I do think the board of education is going to be and those appointments are going to be really important over the next couple of years. Um, you know, I'm a little biased. I worked for the board of education a number of years ago. Um but I think that that board had a um very data driven student

099driven mindset. Um and certainly there there are people on this board that do but there have been some other you know influences at play as well. Um and so you know I do anticipate that they will try to get back to some of that. Um you know and again hopefully provide a little bit of of normaly um you know and quiet things down a little bit for the field. I think people recognize that. >> But I am I correct that we currently have three board members at the state level who were appointed but never officially confirmed. Then we have three more board members that their terms up two more that are up in July. Right. >> Yes. >> So there could be huge shifts at the state level as well. >> Yes. So um just

100the way the appointment process works and the timeline um the governor Yncan did make three appointments to the board and this is traditional. It's not like there's anything out of the norm. Um that then come to the next general assembly for confirmation. So you do have those three that will need to be confirmed in this 26 session and then July 1 of 26 uh Governor Spanberger will have two additional appointments and this is a nine-member board. Um and so you know a swing of a couple members here and there can drastically change things. That is what happened um under Governor Yncan and why during his administration they were able to kind of get back the board so quickly with some of their appointments because the general assembly did not confirm three appointments that were made

101by Governor Northam. Um and then they too had those uh two initial appointments. Um and so that there will probably be some politics at play. Um you know something for us to kind of keep watch at. I have no idea what may happen. that is certainly up to the to the legislature um to decide because it's not just board of education appointments. It's appointments to a whole host of boards. Um and so they will have to decide how they want to handle that, how they evaluate each um appointment, each individual, what their qualifications are. Um but certainly something for us to watch. All right. Uh let's see. Um, next up on the list is supporting students through cut scores changes. Um, again something that Dr. Paul and I worked on um around gradual implementation of

102any cut scores. Again, this massive swing um and change with the cut scores is going to be, you know, pretty detrimental I think to our divisions. Um, you know, the board did have this as an item at their meeting last week. um but they did not take action on it. I do anticipate that it will be on the November agenda as well and so we will continue to kind of monitor what happens at the board level around this gradual implementation. But in the absence of knowing what that is going to look like and the real possibility that the legislature may decide to step in on this topic, it's important for us to make sure that we understand where our priorities are and that this is something that the board um supports. Um the next couple

103of items all kind of go towards that teacher recruitment and retention that you all have been very focused on around funding competitive teacher salaries around establishing a statewide teacher mentorship program removing some of those VRS restrictions on return to work um and then looking at also strengthening the school bus driver pipeline which I know is is another concern. Um so those are the priorities uh that we have um you know laid out as items we have discussed also some that I think that are going to be very relevant as we go into this legislative session. Certainly this is your document we you are free to make additional changes. I will mention you are free to move things around as well. Please don't feel like it's it's not necessarily in a specific order, but I did

104kind of prioritize things that I think that are a little bit, you know, more likely or higher on your list to have first. But again, this is your document. And so would love to have your feedback on any additional changes that need to be made, any shifts, anything that you don't want on there or do want on there. Um, so is it um is JARK providing an update to the recommendations that they've made are there in their presentation to the board of education? >> Yeah. >> And and so JARK is the joint legislative audit and review commission that's of the general assembly, right? >> Um so that that uh report came out in July of 2023. Um, I will say that, you know, DOE staff as well as the Department of Planning and Budget work

105with money committee staff to kind of update what those numbers look like as they're going through the budget process, but there's no indication that JARK is going to issue another report or anything like that. I mean, the um the general assembly has been kind of ticking away at some of those recommendations. Um, there are still, you know, especially on the longer term side, some additional recommendations. for instance, a completely new student-based funding formula that I think are going to be around for a while. And that may be something that the general assembly and a Spanberger administration do want to take up. Now, that's not something that I personally think could be done in four years. I think you probably need an eight runway um from conception to full implementation and funding. I think it's going

106to take a while. that's what we've seen in other states who have shifted to that kind of funding formula. Um, and so I don't know if that will be something that they want to move forward with and and al honestly the revenues and and where that budget picture is going to be taking us, especially considering some of the federal impacts, you know, I think will will also be something they need to consider. >> Great. And then I will just mention one more last thing. So following um your approval and any additional edits, which I think it sounds like we're in pretty good shape, um I will work with Dr. Paul and the team here to make sure that we get this document ready for the legislative event um next week so that we have kind

107of a pretty document that we can pass out to the legislators and something that you all can utilize um throughout the general assembly session. We're also working on some one pagers for that like we have in the past too. >> Yeah. And I do um I do have some from other divisions that I'm happy to share as well. It's just a a template so we can um a lot of those like fast fact sheets have been really helpful. >> Um and so that's something that we can work on together as well. >> All right. >> I ask a question about the event. What time does >> 9:30? >> School visits start at 9:30. >> Oh, we're still doing school visits. school visits first, then we meet at Sherwood Forest for a Miss Webb's presentation, and

108then a chat and shoot. >> Okay. I thought we weren't going to do school on your calendar. >> All right. Moving on. On to agenda item 3.02, discussion resolution for school board salaries. Um, I'd like to uh the resolution and also a a uh a document that I'd like us to take a look at um with schoolboard salaries of of of um other districts so that we can look at um what other districts uh that meet similarly do. We had discussed uh shifting the salaries to 25 and 27 which is still the resolution. But if there was concern that that was too much too quick too quickly, I wanted to share what other divisions were doing in the area. Um, so, so Hampton looking at bringing their schoolboard salary up. Um, they are the lowest

109paid in the region at 3,000 and 5,000. So any discussion on modifying the resolution, keeping the resolution as stated? Uh we will have a public hearing on this at the November 12th business meeting. So I just we needed to have a discussion um before the um I am uh in support of a more phased in approach like for the um salaries um over five year period to FA period to phase. >> Can you do that, Jack? >> I'm sorry. Could you repeat the question? >> Yeah. >> A little louder. >> Just Oh, I'm sorry, Mr. Cloud. Um, more of a phased in approach. Say if we vote for example um 15 and 17,000 15,000 for the board member 17,000 for the chair and the board decides two years later to increase and I'm just I'm

110just more >> Yeah. So you can phase it in uh but you have to follow the statute. So uh and you can only make the decision in a year before a general election and then you do not get the increase until the start of the calendar year after >> and and basically there's actually two votes that have to occur. You will uh you vote now to tell the public you're going to increase your salaries if that's what you're going to do. Then the then you will have to fund your salaries which requires another vote uh when you vote on your recommended budget which you will send to the council. Um in in your case it's a little bit different for council members uh city councils but uh in your case for example right now you

111would vote on it. you have to vote if you're going to increase your salaries before the end of this year. If you want to increase them in 2027, then uh in the spring of next year, calendar year 2026, you would vote again to fund the higher salaries. Then there would be an election in November of 2026, a general election. And then those members who who are either newly elected or reelected would receive the uh increased salary starting in the middle of the fiscal year 2027. Uh because it starts on July 1st, 2026. So the middle you would get it uh when you either newly elected people start their terms to begin with or you start your new terms after uh being reelected uh in J on January 1st. So uh if whatever you do now

112uh you can certainly in future years you or some other board increase up to the maximums which are currently now under the the changes to the statute. The maximums for our board, which is based on population of the city, uh are the same as the maximums for the council, which is 51,000 for the mayor and 47,000 for our ordinary council members. And so you all could in future years continue to increase your salaries up to that maximum unless the general assembly changes the max. >> So you can Yes. phase it in. however you want with the idea that though you you vote one year and you don't get it until after the next general election and in the middle of the next fiscal year. >> So what I'm hearing again like I I said phase

113and approach I'm thinking next four years we'll be approving recommending approving recommending approving based on the cycle that we have to follow. So um I'm not ready to vote for the >> We're not voting. >> I mean, just just just saying um for the resolution at $25,000. Um I think we need to phase it in. >> So, what number do you suggest? 15 and 17. Uh I'm looking at Newport News which uh again um of all the school divisions here, same size term. Um so I'm looking at Newport News at 15 and 17. 15 for the uh board members and 17 for the board chair. >> Did they vote to increase their their salary in 2025? That's been their salary for many years now. >> But they were set to vote on a statement increase

114in September. >> Oh, that's Hampton. >> I was going to say they're not even No, >> I was looking at Hampton. >> Oh, that was No, that's Hampton. >> Apologize. >> Other thoughts? But >> I was just going to say I'm not in favor of the the um phase and approach. I think we just need to do this. This $3,000 was the appointed salary and we put practically full-time hours in for this job to get a 3,000 a year stipen. Um, and I just think that if we phase it in, then it's just going to it's just dragging it out. And I think it just opens the door for we'll be spending a lot of time focusing on this salary piece, which will take center stage where I think that academics and other things that

115are going on this district need to take center stage. So that's why I'm in favor of setting a number that we can all agree on and moving on. I I think we've spent a lot of time on this talking about it previously. Phasing it in, changing our approach is not the best way to handle this. I think because it we're just sort of kicking it down the road, kicking the can again. >> So, so do you have a numbers that you're happy with or the original? >> I'm I'm I think this is most adequate for everybody. >> What's the number? the the one that's in the resolution. >> Okay. >> This is what we came up with, right? >> He was trying to match city council because they going hire next year. So, that was

116the whole thing to match what they're getting right now. And like Adele say, this is a full-time job. If you here for the reason why you here, you are putting in the work and the gas money, the stipen, because that's exactly what it is, you know. Um, we need an increase. >> Looks like three are leaning towards ripping the band-aid off and just going for it. Tanya, do you have any thoughts? >> Um, as I shared in March when we last talked about it, I am not in support of um what is in the resolution at this time. I believe a phased in approach is um is better because you know like Mr. Cloud said we do have to fund it as well. So um but I am not in support of of the amount

117that's in the resolution at this time. Want to add with closing our schools and consolidating them. we are going to save some money. I mean, I don't I really don't think that, you know, we should be able to reallocate funds that would help support a one-time increase in salary for everyone. Um, >> I would also remind the public that uh this is a volunteer job you but I spent more on my election for the position than I'll make personally and I'm sure that is true of other people sitting around this table. Um, and we need to attract more people to this job. And part of that is compensating as fairly as possible. So, I'm okay with ripping the band-aid off. Um, yes, we our general consensus is to not change the resolution. Wait, I'm in

118favor of the resolution. >> I'll go with the will of the board. I just wanted to express. >> Right. So, there will be a public hearing on this during our business meeting next week and it will come for a board vote at the business meeting in December. >> Madam Chair, so a couple of comments. Um I don't necessarily think the increase and this is what other districts have seen as well that increasing the salary results in um better qualified >> board members. I mean the research does not show that some people you also get people who do it for the money and do nothing on the school board um just as you do now. So um so there's that. So I I would just want to be clear that what the research shows in the

119salaries that's not um the other thing is is that if I'm hearing what's that >> watch surrounding board meet >> oh yeah absolutely go to conferences and we'll yeah just see right there. Um, the other thing is, um, if I heard correctly, so the public hearing would be next week on November 12th with the vote expected to take place when? >> During the business meeting in December? >> In December. Okay. And will there be a public comment period just as we do with like policies and stuff where where even if they can't attend the public hearing where they can provide public comment to um what the resolution states currently >> um I'm sure we can set that up. I have a question miss uh research what research wasantiating this >> well it's your position >>

120research that I've looked at over the years I mean this has come up many times you know at different points over the last what 10 11 years that I've been sitting here so it's it's just that's looked at you can look at you can look it up and look for yourself um But I haven't >> you mentioned that you should be able to then at least uh tell give us a general direction. >> There there is no nothing conclusive that states that raising uh board salaries results in uh just as there's no conclusive evidence that elected school boards results in higher qualified candidates than appointed. But it's it's I'm personally not going to be supporting the resolution and put it out there right now. So, >> I just don't want this to be a money

121issue because I asked a question a month or two ago when something happened in June. Where is the money coming from? So, this can't be a money issue cuz we seem to have money for that. And we all know what I'm talking about. That's a waste of money. Oh, you know what I'm talking about. The superintendent that money that we're putting out. >> Oh, for the in then for the new superintendent. >> Yes. So, don't let this be an issue. >> Good point. >> Yeah. >> All right. I think we're done discussing this for today and hopefully. So, I need a motion to enter into closed executive session. I move that we enter into closed executive session. >> We have future items on >> Oh, you're so right. I apologize for missing this. Future agenda

122items. Potential future agenda items >> any you have one >> self evaluations. Um, there going to be a response to the NA Navy station commander uh concerns. We brought this up. Okay. >> I've formulated a response to send to the email that was given on the letter. I'll send it out tomorrow. Um I think we need to consider in going forward that when we have appointed members to the board that there are some limitations what that person can participate in as far as voting. It will be a difficult uh conversation I'm sure but I believe that uh we should approach that here in the future at at as soon as possible because we may run into that situations uh if nobody wants to be elected and we have to appoint somebody or somebody quits. But

123you know we we I think there is a a need for thinking about that >> talking about limited privileges for an appointed member >> right such as uh they can't participate in in the uh superintendent's search they can't bud uh things like budgets long-term issues that they >> uh could vote on they should >> I could argue that since you only have a year left on your term maybe you shouldn't voting, >> but you have a term. You're not appointed >> appointed. Uh, >> there are legal issues there. >> A a member appointed to the school board temporarily by the board under the statutes uh for an elected position. They have all the authority and the only conditions on their exercising authority are what is in the Virginia code. They are essentially for that limited

124period of time no different than an other school board member and the school board itself cannot put special limits on their authority for that time. They're equal to having been elected. Uh and in many cases you just don't appoint anybody because it you can hold the election the special election fairly quickly. Uh in this case it was postponed some because of the cost involved. If you don't hold the special election as part of a broader election, the school board would have to pay for it. But I I don't believe that there are any legal conditions. If you find yourselves in a situation where you are allowed under the law, it's not always the case that you are to temporarily appoint someone until a special election can be held. I don't believe you can limit their

125authority once they're appointed. during that limited period of time they are full board members and have a right to participate and do everything as if they were elected to the position. >> Maybe we should change this to uh discussion items instead of agenda items because I think uh Mr. Cloud has answered the question. we don't may have to bring it up again of if this is the law that we can't do this then that answers the question but we need to bring these kinds of things up so so we know that we're thinking about these things and some good some are good ideas and some are not >> have any other agenda items >> uh yes there was one other here um no that's all thank I would like to discuss um training. >> I

126think we definitely need more training. I know that you know what we had at VSBA was is was a nice starter, but I I think we need some more technical training. Um, and really, you know, if we want to be a high performing board, which I think is our goal, um, I think that we need to be able to all feel comfortable deciphering data, um, projection, you know, moving forward. Um, so I just I would like to get um, a highly qualified professional organization to come in and help us with that type of training. And and that was going to that was my my agenda topic as well is to do the governance coaching um to really do that where we're focused on students student outcomes and as part of that also includes board evaluations

127and um all of the things that we've talked about and that we all agree are necessary um necessary parts of our work. So, I think we need to prioritize that that and I I think I've been saying that saying that for a long time. Are we are we going to add that to the budget? Because again, I think M brought up a good point. We're we're spending money that we haven't allocated money for. And we're if we're going to do that, >> I think we have training. We already have training and and and may you >> we're terminating the s superintendent. We have money in the budget. >> It's a typical line training. >> Everybody's talking. It's very hard to hear. >> We have a line item in our schoolboard budget for training. And I'll

128say this, we expect um our students to achieve at a high high level. We expect our building administrators to have professional development and and um serve at a high level. We expect our central office administrators >> to have PD and perform at a high level. And why do in the world will we want our school board, our go and superintendent governing body to not perform at a high level, to not have professional development to serve in the best way they can. I I'm I'm just >> you have to hold them accountable accountable >> when they're not performing at that high level. >> So I'm going to hold the superintendent accountable. I'm going to hold central office administrators, building administrators, teachers, and students. >> But ourselves ourselves. >> So I'm in agreement with uh Dr. Martin,

129Miss Bassine. We need to get in training ASAP. >> High performing school boards have professional development. >> I don't know anybody that didn't recommend doing it. you seem to be uh focused that that's what I was saying. I did not >> I didn't say I didn't say I said this is what how those are my comments. This is Tiffany more Buffalo's comments. >> My experience high performing school boards are in training. That's that's my experience as someone who serves a school high performing school board. >> Oh, one more thing. Joint meeting date. Start with the city council. Yes. Um, so I don't know. Um, I guess I'm bringing this up as a discussion point or if um, Dr. your team has thought of how um now that we have the list of schools what the

130um report out process is going to be what as far as next steps go like when we're going to get some sort of update I don't think we need I mean to be focused on what our students know and can do that's what I want our board meetings to be focused on but if there's some sort of an update that you can provide us um >> some like a with a timeline of when transition plans will be expected what will be in included in those transition plans and so that we're and not only that um I don't want to forget this piece too but you know you gave us some news the day that we took the vote about um you know Walpert's contract changing and so I know there's there's some efforts being uh

131put out you know what the status of that is in terms of identifying another consultant and um all of that, you know, some sort of an update on on where we are. >> Bring an update at one of the December meetings just, you know, as you see in the weekly update, I'm I'm I'm putting that we're meeting constantly on it. Um >> Yeah. >> So, we can we can update, you know, more on on that with the with the Woolert um and the timeline at the school level and everything else. >> Yeah. Yeah. Just as Yeah. Dr. Martin just shared a timeline would be great. >> I'd like a point of privilege. I think at this point, well, yesterday we had an election and the person who was elected for W three is in the

132room, but nobody has recognized her. So, Miss Slaughter, would you please stand? For everybody that doesn't know, this is Miss Slaughter. She was elected last evening. >> We're three. motion to enter into close. >> I move that we go into executive close session. >> I second that motion. >> Buffalo has brought forth the motion and is there any discussion prior to the vote? Move that the members of the school board of the city of Norfolk go into a closed meeting for the purposes which are set out under subsection A of section 2.2-3711 of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act as amended for discussion, consideration or interviews of prospective candidates for employment, assignment, appointment, promotion, performance, demotion, salaries, disciplining or resignation of specific public officers, appointees or employees of the school board pursuant to subsection 2.2.

13392-3711A1 of the act. The subject covered by this exemption is the discussion of unique questions for specific candidates for the position of superintendent who will be initially interviewed in closed meetings. Which questions will be tied to individual candidates unique qualifications and experiences such that the questions cannot be discussed in an open meeting without revealing the identity of the individual candidates. Consultation with legal counsel regarding specific legal matters requiring a provision of legal advice by council pursuant to subsection 2.2-3711A a8 of the act. The subjects covered by the exemption are consultation with legal counsel concerning legal issues related to closed meetings under the act and the matters set above in subsection A of this motion. Bassine >> I. >> Buffalo >> I. >> Martin >> I. >> Pollson. >> I have a question before I vote.

134I have not seen the list of questions. So I can't How can I certify that the questions meet the standards you just read? >> That's what we're discussing questions. >> We're discussing questions that you're going to give to us. But how do we know ahead of time that they meet the standards for closed session? If in the course of the closed meeting you conclude that the meeting is being conducted illegally, you can leave and you when it comes time to certify, you would vote not to certify the session and you would explain to the public for the record that you feel that the meeting was conducted illegally and state why such as certain questions that were discussed you felt was outside the scope of the motion. >> Thank you. Olson. >> Hi. >> Thomas Caligerro.

135>> Hi. >> I'm calling