|
David
Blount, Editor
The third prong of the state’s education reform efforts
is accountability, reflected primarily in the Standards of
Accreditation (SOA) which, as approved in October 1997, increase
graduation requirements for students and base school accreditation
on student performance on the SOL tests. The SOA usher in
new diploma requirements, first for students in the class
of 2002, who must earn 22 credits (up from 21) to receive
a Standard Diploma or 24 credits (up from 23) to receive an
Advanced Studies Diploma. Students in the class of 2004 are
the first that will be required to earn verified units of
credit, which indicates passage of a high school course test
assessing SOL achievement. Six verified credits (including
two in English) are required to receive a Standard Diploma,
while nine verified credits (including two in each of the
four core content areas) are required to receive an Advanced
Studies Diploma. The SOA also established the standard that
70% of students pass the SOL tests in English, math, science
and history for schools to be accredited. The Board of Education
(BOE) modified this requirement in 2000 to 75% for third and
fifth grade English, while saying that third grade science
and history scores would not be counted unless they benefit
the school. The BOE also made other changes to provide schools
and students with more flexibility to meet the SOA requirements,
which will be fully phased-in by the 2006-2007 school year.
By the 2000 General Assembly, after two official test administrations
that yielded few schools meeting the 2007 school accreditation
standards, legislators sought to prohibit SOL test scores
from being the primary basis for student promotion or retention,
diploma awarding or school accreditation. None of these bills
was successful, given the Board of Education’s ongoing
process to revise the accreditation regulations in the spring
and summer of 2000. The legislature did approve a pair of
bills that allow civil action against, and BOE suspension
or revocation of teaching licenses of, anyone who knowingly
and willfully committed certain acts (e.g., divulging secure
test contents, making answer keys available, etc.) deemed
to threaten test security.
As stated in the High Stakes Testing legislative history,
the Commission on Educational Accountability has numerous
responsibilities related to SOL testing and the SOA. In addition,
a special task force of the Commission is studying the impact
of the SOA on local school division budgets. The Board of
Education also was directed by the General Assembly to consider
issues involving English as a Second Langauge/Limited English
Proficient Students in revising the SOA (the Board did approve
a provision that scores of such students will be used in calculating
school accreditation if the scores benefit the school). Any
future legislative activities in the consequences arena likely
would be based on recommendations or findings of these groups.
1998 – HB 653, SB 558, SB 668
1999 – HB 1512, HB 2570
2000 – HB 409, HB 632, HB 867, HB 1241, HB 1402, HB
1483, SB 547, SB 548, SB 623
Many other states also are addressing student and school
performance accountability. For example, Georgia has created
an independent office of accountability. A Deleware law delays
until 2002 the retention requirement of the student testing
program. An Oklahoma bill replaces the diploma options (standard
diploma or diploma with honors) with one standard diploma.
Florida is providing funds for low-performing schools, as
well as for high-performing and improving schools. Alabama
also included reward money in its budget this year for schools
that improve student performance. South Carolina increased
funding for its 1998 Education Accountability Act in areas
such as summer school for low-performing students and professional
development for teachers, and targeted $1 million to assist
low performing schools.
http://141.104.22.210/VDOE/PolicyPub/EduReform/
http://www.sreb.org/main/LegAction/legrept/legreptindex.asp
Click here for a policy issue briefing on “Testing
Consequences.”
Click cepi@vcu.edu to provide
comments or additional information. Please indicate in an
e-mail the copyright source and contact information for new
inclusions. Back to Top
Copyright © CEPI 2000
CEPI grants permission to reproduce this paper for noncommercial purposes if
CEPI is credited.
|
