Tougher academic standards ahead for Virginia students
The Virginia Board of Education hears from experts on setting performance levels for K-12 students at Reynolds Community College on Feb. 26, 2025 (Photo by Nathaniel Cline/Virginia Mercury)
Virginia students may soon face tougher academic benchmarks as the state aligns its performance levels with the higher standards of a national assessment.
Starting next month, the Virginia Board of Education will begin adjusting its cut scores — used to determine whether K-12 students are meeting proficiency levels — to better match the rigor of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP).
Student performance is typically categorized as 'below basic,' 'basic,' 'proficient' or'advanced,' reflecting their knowledge and skills in core subjects.
Since 1998, Virginia has relied on its Standards of Learning (SOL) assessments to gauge proficiency in areas like reading and math. However, NAEP, a widely recognized national organization, has often been used to assess smaller student groups, such as fourth and eighth graders.
'The NAEP assessment provides a common benchmark that states can then use to look at the relative rigor of their own assessment cut scores,' said Lesley Muldoon, executive director of the National Assessment Governing Board, during a work session Wednesday.
Gov. Glenn Youngkin's administration has frequently pointed to NAEP data to highlight what it calls the 'honesty gap' — the disparity between state-level proficiency standards and the more stringent NAEP benchmarks.
Virginia's learning recovery falls short as NAEP scores show mixed results
Between 2017-2022, Virginia's fourth-grade reading and math results showed a staggering 40-percentage-point gap between the state's SOL and NAEP assessments. That disparity does not provide an 'accurate picture of student performance,' said Em Cooper, deputy superintendent of teaching and learning, during Wednesday's work session.
In response, the board has begun discussing plans to revise the cut scores — the threshold for determining student proficiency — in key subjects. The effort is a cornerstone of Youngkin's broader push to 'restore excellence in education,' which includes raising standards in core subjects, increasing transparency and accountability, and overhauling the state's assessment system.
Youngkin has argued that Virginia's current proficiency standards are the result of the previous Board of Education lowering cut scores and altering school accreditation standards.
However, Anne Holton, a former state education secretary and an appointee of former Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam, defended the previous board's approach. She noted that Virginia's pass rates aligned with the NAEP's 'basic' achievement level, which reflects 'partial mastery of the knowledge and skills that are fundamental for proficient work at a given grade,' according to NAEP.
The Youngkin administration, however, is pushing for Virginia to meet NAEP's 'proficient' standard — defined as a student demonstrating a deeper understanding of complex topics and the ability to apply them in real-world situations.
Virginia Explained: The debate over student expectations
Board member Amber Northern, a Youngkin appointee, argued that achieving NAEP proficiency is linked to better long-term outcomes, including higher graduation rates and increased job earnings compared to students who score at the NAEP 'basic' level.
'NAEP proficiency matters in terms of long-term outcomes for kids [and] I know this because I study it,' Northern said.
She dismissed political finger-pointing over the state's current standards, urging the board to focus on the benefits of higher expectations.
'I don't care about the politics, I don't care about 'well we did this, and we did this,' … nobody knows why we are in the situation we're in, we just know that we're in it and we're not about pointing fingers. What we're about saying is, okay, this is what NAEP proficiency does for our kids, and we should actually have that as our goal to do right by them.'
But Holton pushed back, questioning whether realigning Virginia's SOL to match NAEP would lead to actual student improvement. While she acknowledged that strong SOL and NAEP scores correlate with better outcomes, she argued that no research supports the idea that adjusting cut scores alone drives success.
'The research shows there's no impact of realigning our cut scores,' Holton said. 'We need our students to do well on the test, but where the line is is irrelevant.'
Previously, cut score adjustments went through a multi-step review involving a standard-setting committee, an articulation committee, and the state superintendent before final recommendations were presented to the Board of Education.
On Wednesday, the Virginia Department of Education staff outlined the board's new approach, which includes selecting and training committee members, assessment date, and ultimately making recommendations on cut scores.
Under the process proposal, committees will primarily consist of education experts, including teachers and instructional specialists, while the remainder will include community stakeholders such as parents and business leaders.
Educators applying to serve must complete an application demonstrating their understanding of grade level content and assessments. Community members will undergo a selection process led by the board and the governor's office.
The committees are set to convene in late May once enough assessment data from the 2025 assessment cycle is available. Their proposed cut scores will go before the board for an initial review in June, with a final decision expected in July.
On Thursday, the board will vote on the proposed review process. If approved, the updated performance standards will not take effect until spring 2026.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Hegseth returns to Capitol Hill to defend Trump's defense budget plan
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth will appear before Congress this week for the first time since his tumultuous confirmation to discuss the fiscal 2026 military budget, even though the full White House request for his department has yet to be released. Hegseth is scheduled to appear before both the House and Senate Appropriations Committees on Tuesday and before the House Armed Services Committee on Thursday. All three hearings are intended to be focused on funding issues for the next fiscal year. But questions from lawmakers are unlikely to stay only on that topic. Democratic lawmakers have already discussed plans to grill Hegseth on his use of non-secure messaging platforms ahead of overseas airstrikes, policy decisions ending outreach programs to women and minority recruits and the high-profile dismissals of multiple defense officials in recent months. The defense secretary will be accompanied by Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine in his first post-confirmation testimony, as well. Caine replaced Gen. CQ Brown after the latter was fired by President Donald Trump in February for unspecified reasons. Last week, Senate leaders said they didn't expect specifics on the president's defense budget plan for several more weeks. But lawmakers said they need to press forward on the issue now to have any hope of reaching a funding deal by October, the start of the new fiscal year. Senate Armed Services — 9:30 a.m. — G-50 Dirksen Navy/Marine Corps Budget Navy Secretary John Phelan, Acting Chief of Naval Operations Adm. James Kilby and Marine Corps Commandant Gen. Eric Smith will testify on the fiscal 2026 budget request. House Armed Services — 10 a.m. — 2118 Rayburn Middle East/Africa Posture Gen. Michael Kurilla, head of U.S. Central Command, and Gen. Michael Langley, head of U.S. Africa Command, will testify on current challenges and the fiscal 2026 budget request. House Appropriations — 10 a.m. — H-140 Capitol FY2026 Defense Budget Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine will testify on the fiscal 2026 budget request. Senate Foreign Relations — 10 a.m. — 419 Dirksen Pending Nominations The committee will consider several pending nominations. Senate Appropriations — 2 p.m. — 192 Dirksen FY2026 Defense Budget Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine will testify on the fiscal 2026 budget request. House Appropriations — 3 p.m. — 2359 Rayburn FY2026 VA/Military Construction Budget The full committee will mark up its draft of the VA appropriations bill for fiscal 2026. House Armed Services — 10 a.m. — 2118 Rayburn Navy/Marine Corps Budget Navy Secretary John Phelan, Acting Chief of Naval Operations Adm. James Kilby and Marine Corps Commandant Gen. Eric Smith will testify on the fiscal 2026 budget request. House Veterans' Affairs — 11 a.m. — 360 Cannon Pending Legislation The subcommittee on economic opportunity will consider several pending bills. House Armed Services — 3:30 p.m. — 2118 Rayburn Army Munition Industrial Base Department officials will testify on challenges and strategy with the Army munitions industrial base. Senate Armed Services — 9:30 a.m. — G-50 Dirksen Central Command Gen. Michael Kurilla, head of U.S. Central Command, will testify on current challenges and the fiscal 2026 budget request. House Armed Services — 10 a.m. — 2118 Rayburn FY2026 Defense Budget Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine will testify on the fiscal 2026 budget request. Senate Foreign Relations — 10 a.m. — 419 Dirksen Pending Nominations The committee will consider several pending nominations. Senate Appropriations — 10:30 a.m. — 192 Dirksen Army Budget Army Secretary Daniel Driscoll and Army Chief of Staff Gen. Randy George will testify on the fiscal 2026 budget request.
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Gavin Newsom asks Trump to withdraw troops from Los Angeles as protests intensify
National Guard soldiers stand in front of the federal building in downtown Los Angeles, on June 8, 2025. President Donald Trump deployed 2,000 troops to handle escalating protests against immigration enforcement raids in the Los Angeles area, a move the state's governor termed "purposefully inflammatory." (Photo by Frederic J. Brown, AFP via Getty Images) This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters. Hundreds of California National Guard soldiers are deployed in downtown Los Angeles in an escalation of the Trump administration's rolling immigration enforcement action throughout Southern California. Their deployment comes over the objections of California leaders, including Gov. Gavin Newsom, who say that local law enforcement agencies are more than capable of keeping the peace in the city. He wrote a letter on Sunday afternoon to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth requesting that the administration withdraw the troops and questioning the legality of their deployment. The National Guard is usually called in at the request of a state's governor; a president has not deployed troops without a governor's requests since 1965. 'There is currently no need for the National Guard to be deployed in Los Angeles, and to do so in this unlawful manner and for such a lengthy period is a serious breach of state sovereignty that seems intentionally designed to inflame the situation,' he wrote. The governor had previously spoken to Trump on the phone for about 40 minutes on Friday night, a spokesperson said. This morning, rifle-toting National Guard soldiers patrolled a federal building downtown. They also brought heavy military vehicles. Tensions intensified by midafternoon, when a protesters neared the complex. Los Angeles Police Department officers pushed them away from the building and fired dozens of less-than-lethal rounds into the crowd. The deployment followed two days of unrest after immigration sweeps downtown and in the city of Paramount. In one incident, officers arrested David Huerta, the leader of a California janitors' union, who was protesting a raid. He remains in custody. Trump's order deploying the troops cited 'incidents of violence and disorder' following immigration enforcement actions and the Border Patrol on social media has called attention to an incident in which someone threw rocks at their vehicles in Paramount, breaking a window. After the raids, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement published a list of what they called 'the worst of the worst' offenders caught in the immigration raids. The release also accused 'California politicians and rioters' of 'defending heinous illegal alien criminals.' The escalation could be a turning point for a state where Democratic politicians had started the year fairly quiet on Trump's immigration crackdowns, at least compared to his first time in office. With the state facing a multibillion-dollar budget deficit, lawmakers and Newsom were antsy about losing federal funding, and Newsom especially was depending on a relatively harmonious relationship with the federal government to secure aid for Los Angeles wildfire recovery. But California Democrats have since struck a more defiant tone. Last week they advanced numerous bills to discourage warrantless ICE visits to hospitals, schools and shelters. Over the weekend, they condemned the raids and sided with protesters, especially after federal agents arrested prominent union president Huerta on Friday during a clash with protesters outside an immigration raid of a garment company's warehouse. Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, a Salinas Democrat, called the raids 'an authoritarian assault on our immigrant communities.' 'We will not allow (Los Angeles) to become a staging ground for political terror,' he wrote in a statement. His counterpart in the state Senate, Healdsburg Democrat Mike McGuire, said the National Guard deployment 'reeks of fascism.' Bill Essayli, U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California — which includes Los Angeles — told KNBC-TV that immigration enforcement agents were under duress while conducting raids in Paramount and Compton. 'You have thousands of people forming and gathering in crowds, rioting, attacking our agents, throwing rocks, throwing eggs, throwing Molotov cocktails,' Essayli told the news station. Marissa Nuncio, director of the Los Angeles-based Garment Worker Center, said garment workers were reeling after immigration enforcement agents detained 20 of them in a raid at Ambiance Apparel in the city's Fashion District on Friday. The amassing of troops downtown made her members worry about a second raid. The Garment Worker Center held a know-your-rights seminar on Saturday, one day after the raid. Attendees 'wanted to know, how can we stop this,' Nuncio said. 'How can we resist these attacks on our community? They wanted to know if it's safe to go to work, to go to church, to go to the clinic.' Garment workers are particularly vulnerable because they are often employed in illegal production facilities that pop up and then disappear overnight. They're paid by the piece, usually 5 cents to 12 cents per piece of clothing, a controversial practice that has drawn scrutiny from the Legislature. Their weekly take-home pay is about $300, or $5.50 per hour, paid in cash. 'We feel the best we can do is inform workers of what's going on,' Nuncio said, 'and remind them that they have power in their rights.' CalMatters reporter Joe Garcia contributed to this story. This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Newsom calls National Guard deployment 'unlawful' as immigration clashes rock LA
SACRAMENTO, California — Gov. Gavin Newsom's administration called the Trump administration's deployment of National Guard troops to the Los Angeles area 'unlawful," urging Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Sunday to back down as demonstrators clashed with law enforcement. The Trump administration's extraordinary deployment of the Guard to quell immigration protests in Southern California came without necessary coordination with California officials, Newsom's legal affairs secretary wrote in a letter to Hegseth. Newsom's team argued that state and local police agencies had the situation under control and that federal intervention would only intensify the conflict. 'There is currently no need for the National Guard to be deployed in Los Angeles, and to do so in this unlawful manner and for such a lengthy period is a serious breach of state sovereignty that seems intentionally designed to inflame the situation,' Newsom Legal Affairs Secretary David Sapp wrote. President Donald Trump's move to federalize a state's National Guard without the governor's approval was the first of its kind since Lyndon B. Johnson sent troops to Alabama in 1965. Around 300 National Guard troops arrived in Los Angeles on Sunday as protests of immigration raids stretched into their third day. At one demonstration, law enforcement used tear gas on protesters who approached National Guard troops, though it was unclear which law enforcement agency threw the smoke-filled canisters, the Associated Press reported. Protests sprang up in downtown Los Angeles Friday and continued in the region throughout the weekend, with demonstrators facing off with federal agents Saturday in response to an immigration raid at a suburban Home Depot. In an AP video, protesters blocked off a major roadway, many of them waving Mexican flags and holding signs as traffic came to a standstill. Newsom traveled to Los Angeles on Sunday to meet with local officials and be briefed by law enforcement, according to a spokesperson for the governor. Democrats in California and across the country rallied around Newsom as he sought to push back on the Trump administration's intercession. Former Vice President Kamala Harris, who lives in Los Angeles, called Trump's action a 'dangerous escalation meant to provoke chaos.' 'This Administration's actions are not about public safety — they're about stoking fear. Fear of a community demanding dignity and due process,' Harris, who is considering running for California governor next year or president in 2028, wrote in a statement. The nation's Democratic governors derided Trump's Guard takeover as an 'ineffective and dangerous' override of Newsom's authority. 'President Trump's move to deploy California's National Guard is an alarming abuse of power,' the Democratic chief executives wrote in a joint statement. 'Governors are the Commanders in Chief of their National Guard and the federal government activating them in their own borders without consulting or working with a state's governor is ineffective and dangerous.' The governors' stand came as the Trump administration considers deploying Marines to Los Angeles County. A Defense official told POLITICO that 500 members of the military branch were given 'prepare to deploy' orders and could be sent to the region. 'We're going to have troops everywhere,' Trump told reporters on Sunday, without offering specifics. 'We're not going to let this happen to our country. We're not going to let our country be torn apart like it was under Biden.' Trump's border czar Tom Homan told NBC News that raids will continue daily in the region and hinted that Newsom or Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass could be arrested if they 'cross that line' and impede immigration enforcement. The National Guard deployment, paired with Newsom's legal shot across the bow, reflects rising tensions in the Trump-Newsom relationship after the two leaders seemingly entered a fragile détente when Trump visited Los Angeles in wake of the fires there earlier this year. Newsom and other California Democrats have blasted the administration's response to the demonstrations, while also calling for protesters to avoid violence. The California governor's counterparts across the country cast Trump's unwanted intervention as a vote of no-confidence in local police agencies. 'Threatening to send the U.S. Marines into American neighborhoods undermines the mission of our service members, erodes public trust, and shows the Trump administration does not trust local law enforcement,' the Democratic governors wrote. — Myah Ward and Gregory Svirnovskiy contributed to this report.