By Shirleen Guerra | The Center Square
(The Center Square) – A new report found Virginia’s revised K-12 accountability system is more effective and useful than the model previously used by the commonwealth, but still needs refinement.
The findings come from a report released this week by the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission, which reviewed the design and early implementation of Virginia’s School Performance and Support Framework.
Virginia replaced its previous accreditation system, which had been used since 2017 and rated most schools as accredited, with a new accountability framework designed to provide more detailed information about school performance and student outcomes.
Under the new framework, each public school in Virginia is placed into one of four performance categories: distinguished, on track, off track or needs intensive support.
JLARC found the updated system more clearly measures school performance by combining Virginia’s state and federal accountability requirements into a single framework, reducing complexity and better aligning the state’s accountability system with federal requirements under the Every Student Succeeds Act.
The report also said the framework does a better job distinguishing differences in performance across schools by relying on indicators that measure individual aspects of school performance, rather than blending multiple factors into a single rating.
In addition, JLARC noted the framework includes design elements intended to encourage schools to focus on a broader share of students, particularly those in specific student subgroups.
The report also found that many schools identified as needing support are already showing improvement. Schools designated for comprehensive or targeted support must demonstrate progress over multiple years to exit federal identification, and many are on track to do so under the commonwealth’s system.
At the same time, JLARC identified areas where refinements may be needed.
The Board of Education raised concerns about how student growth and proficiency are weighted within the accountability system in its response to the report.
“Placing too much weight on growth risks masking underperformance in critical areas,” the board wrote.
The review also examined the commonwealth’s 3E Readiness Framework, which measures preparation for enrollment, employment and military service. While the framework expands how schools can demonstrate readiness, the report questioned whether proposed score caps could limit recognition of meaningful student achievement.
The review found that clearer, more user-friendly reporting on school report cards could help parents and stakeholders better understand school performance and improvement needs.
The report found no meaningful relationship between per-pupil spending and school performance ratings under the new framework, based on available data.
The report outlined recommendations for lawmakers and the Board of Education aimed at tightening oversight, clarifying performance labels and scoring thresholds, adjusting indicator weighting, and reviewing how well state school support programs are working.