Debate grows over timing of higher academic standards in Virginia
As Virginia prepares to revise its academic benchmarks for students, a select group will consider how quickly the state should implement its proficiency ratings.
The committees could recommend either a single-year transition or a more gradual approach over several years. However, any decision could significantly impact how schools, students, and communities respond.
Implementing the changes over a year could have immediate effects but might also lead to rushed decisions. A phased approach over several years could help reduce anomalies, but may delay schools from receiving timely interventions.
'The (Board of Education) hasn't made a policy decision yet on how they're going to do that,' Virginia Superintendent of Public Instruction Emily Anne Gullickson told The Mercury.
Gullickson did not indicate her preference on the matter but said a subject expert will analyze data from other states that have taken similar approaches. A presentation is expected in June when the standard-setting committees meet.
The committees include teachers, instructional specialists, and community stakeholders, such as parents and business leaders. In June, the members will make recommendations to the board for an initial review, with a final decision expected in July.
Virginia's effort to change the cut scores — the threshold for determining student proficiency — is part of a broader push by Gov. Glenn Youngkin's administration to raise academic benchmarks and 'restore excellence in education.' The plan includes increasing rigor in core subjects, boosting transparency and accountability, and overhauling the state's assessment system.
The administration aims to align the new cut scores more closely with the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), which it says highlights the 'honesty gap' — the disparity between Virginia's current standards and the more stringent NAEP benchmarks. NAEP measures academic performance in grades 4, 8, and 12, using a randomly selected sample designed to reflect student diversity across factors like ethnicity, school size, economic background, and gender.
Between 2017 and 2022, Virginia's fourth-grade reading and math results showed a stunning 40-percentage-point gap between the state's Standards of Learning assessment tests and NAEP assessments. According to the latest NAEP results for Virginia, 8% of Black students and 13% of Hispanic students tested proficient in 8th-grade math. In 4th-grade math, 19% of Black students and 27% of Hispanic students reached proficiency.
The governor has attributed these results to the previous Board of Education lowering cut scores and altering school accreditation standards. However, Democrats have defended the prior approach.
A change would not take effect until the spring of 2026. Board members are still in the early stages of considering their options.
Anne Holton, a former state education secretary and a current member of the Board of Education member appointed by former Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam, said that while she is looking forward to seeing what the superintendent and committees recommend, she's disappointed the governor's administration has not adequately communicated the potential changes to the public — especially because they are likely going to be unpopular.
The Youngkin administration wants Virginia to meet NAEP's 'proficient' standard, which is — defined as a student demonstrating a deeper understanding of complex topics and the ability to apply them in real-world situations.
In response to Holton's question at the board's recent work session, Marianne Perie, founder of Measurement in Practice LLC and a technical advisor on standard setting, said that aligning Virginia's standards with the NAEP benchmark would increase the student failure rate. Holton said the rate could rise to about 68% — resulting in dramatic changes in the commonwealth.
'You need the public to understand that this is not suddenly your child is dumber than he was last year or that your school is worse than last year, but rather that we're changing the grading scale, causing this change,' Holton said.
However, board member Andy Rotherham, a Youngkin appointee, warned of an 'inevitable result' if the state delays action. Speaking at the board's May 21 work session, he said the state has been telling the public that 90% of Virginia's schools are 'doing fine' when fewer than one in five Black and Hispanic eight-grade students are proficient.
'We're either going to have a reckoning for that or not,' Rotherham said, urging the board to continue its push for greater transparency and honesty about how students are performing on assessments.
'The question should not be about that; it should be what we are going to do for those kids, what we are going to do for those communities, what we are going to do for those families,' Rotherham said.
'Those are the kinds of policy conversations that we should be having, not trying to square this circle where we've been telling people that almost every school is great when you have these astounding gaps in achievement, and this astounding gap overall in terms of what we've been saying is proficient and what is not.'
Rotherham said he looks forward to hearing from the committees. He did not endorse a specific implementation method but emphasized the importance of raising standards in a way that educators can manage — without postponing a decision.
'The only thing I'm not open to is kicking the can down the road or not being transparent with parents and communities about where we are,' Rotherham said.
'There are multiple ways to do this, and that's why we need to have a conversation that's not getting everybody riled up that 'all the kids are going to fail next year,' or whatever. (It needs to be) thoughtful, and I have confidence in Emily Anne on that.'
The Mercury learned that several of Virginia's most prominent education associations share the board's commitment to high standards and accountability for students, but have not taken a position on how quickly the state should implement any proficiency ratings.
Carol Bauer, president of the Virginia Education Association (VEA), said in a statement that changes in performance benchmarks have consequences and should only be considered with great care and caution.
'There's no need to rush this process for political purposes,' Bauer said. 'Before any moves are made, we need significant research into how changing cut scores will affect not only student success, but graduation rates, the new Performance and Support Framework, and funding that's tied to SOL outcomes.'
On May 16, a statewide coalition of 12 education associations signed a letter urging the Board of Education to consider the broader implications of raising the cut scores on Virginia's SOL assessments. Areas of potential impact include the state budget, the new accountability system, and graduation rates.
The organizations include the Virginia Association for Teaching, Learning and Leading, Virginia PTA, Virginia School Board Association, Virginia Associations of Secondary School Principals, School Superintendents, and Elementary School Principals and VEA.
'Our coalition supports rigorous expectations; we do not advocate lowering the bar for learning,' the letter states.
'However, we believe any changes to SOL cut scores must be approached with great care, thorough, extensive modeling of student performance impacts as well as transparency around the impact of the new cut scores on state budget funding streams tied to SOL outcomes, graduation rates, and the new Performance and Support Framework.'
The coalition added that significant shifts in performance benchmarks without extensive modeling could carry 'far-reaching consequences.' It urged the board to 'fully analyze and communicate these impacts to all education stakeholders, especially parents, before moving forward.'
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


Newsweek
28 minutes ago
- Newsweek
The House Is on Fire and Democrats Are Debating Paint Colors
In less than seven months, we have watched America slip into fascism with zero meaningful resistance. The Department of Justice (DOJ) has become a weapon aimed at anyone who dares dissent. Elected officials who speak out are targeted. Law firms are shaken down into submission. TV networks have been brought to their knees through threats. In Florida, they built what can only be called a concentration camp. Washington D.C., a city where nearly half the population is Black, has been stripped of its autonomy and placed under federal control. This isn't dystopian fiction. This is happening right now, while Democratic leadership stands paralyzed. Fascism isn't coming to America; it is already here, meeting no resistance from those sworn to uphold the Constitution. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries speak to reporters alongside other House and Senate Appropriation Democratic committee members in the Ohio Clock Corridor of the U.S. Capitol Building on July... Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries speak to reporters alongside other House and Senate Appropriation Democratic committee members in the Ohio Clock Corridor of the U.S. Capitol Building on July 22, 2025, in Washington, D.C. MoreOver the past several weeks, I have had dozens of conversations with sitting members of Congress, donors, organizers, and voters desperate to get involved. The overwhelming sentiment isn't frustration anymore. It's anger. Pure, unbridled anger at Democratic leadership's paralysis. I understand Democrats don't control the House or Senate, but they are not powerless. They can use the bully pulpit to force issues into public consciousness and use every tool to delay harmful legislation. They can coordinate with state attorneys general winning court battles. They can mobilize their base and dominate the narrative. Instead, Hakeem Jeffries admitted at a February press briefing, "I'm trying to figure out what leverage we actually have." The House minority leader is publicly admitting he doesn't know how to fight back. Meanwhile, President Donald Trump has weaponized federal agencies, frozen billions in federal grants, and launched attacks on academic freedom. He's using the federal government to crush dissent, while Democrats issue strongly worded letters. We know from 2024 that some Democrats know how to undermine a sitting president. We watched them coordinate a campaign that forced President Joe Biden to step aside. George Clooney wrote an opinion piece asking Biden to end his campaign. Donors threatened to withhold funds. Where is that energy now? Where is Clooney's passionate op-ed about fascism taking root? Where are the donors threatening to withhold funds unless Democrats fight? All the planning and coordination aimed at undermining President Joe Biden has evaporated when facing an actual authoritarian. While Schumer and Jeffries still believe decorum will win the day, the Trump administration has taken a jackhammer to our Constitution. These men, and Democrats overall, have been unable to meet the moment, and millions of Americans looking for leadership feel abandoned. Back in March, CNN polling found that 73 percent of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents said the party's caucus in Congress was doing too little to oppose Trump. That's not only a poll result; that's a scream for help from a base watching their representatives sleepwalk through a self-coup. This is a base screaming for someone to stand up and fight back. Waiting, hoping judges will keep Trump in check, or that the 2026 midterms will save us, is dangerously naive. Courts are being stacked. Election systems are being dismantled. By 2026, the damage may be irreversible. Since Democrats only have a concept of a plan, let me offer advice. First, if the Democratic leadership in Congress isn't equipped or unwilling to lead, they need to get out of the way. Memes and social media posts aren't enough to fight a convicted criminal wielding presidential power like a weapon. Second, Ken Martin needs to resign as DNC chair. We don't need someone who thinks the answer to authoritarianism is better fundraising emails. We don't need another X post. We don't need another strongly worded statement. We need leaders who understand that when fascism comes knocking, you don't politely ask it to leave. You bar the door. You sound the alarm. You fight with everything you have. We need someone who has faced voter suppression and won. We need Stacey Abrams. Abrams doesn't just understand voting rights; she knows how to mobilize communities Democrats have taken for granted. She knows how to fight back when the rules are rigged against you. We need someone who has been in the trenches, felt the boot of oppression, and fought back anyway. The world is watching America fail. Our allies are making contingency plans for a post-democratic United States. Authoritarian regimes are taking notes on how quickly democracy can crumble when its defenders refuse to fight. Every day Democrats delay, every moment they prioritize civility over survival, Trump's fascist infrastructure becomes more entrenched. If Democratic leadership cannot find the courage to meet this moment, if they cannot transform their fear into fury, then they are failing millions of Americans who still believe democracy is worth saving. They are failing history itself. The house is on fire, and Democratic leadership is debating what color to paint the kitchen. Either grab a hose or get out of the way because if we lose this fight, there won't be a democracy left to save. Christopher Bouzy is an American tech entrepreneur who founded the non-partisan research firm Bot Sentinel and the social media network Spoutible. His ventures leverage innovative technologies to create safer digital spaces and promote authentic online discourse. The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.

Politico
28 minutes ago
- Politico
Vance leans into DC crime fight in Georgia
The vice president acknowledged that the administration has focused on Washington because of Trump's unique power over it as a federal city, but said, 'We certainly hope, whether it's Atlanta or anywhere else, people are gonna look around and say, 'We don't have to live like this.'' Critics say Trump and Vance's rhetoric about urban crime has racial undertones, and the six cities he named explicitly in his news conference last week are led by Black mayors. But the White House is attempting to defend its position by slamming detractors for being white. When Vance, alongside Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and top White House aide Stephen Miller, were heckled by protesters Wednesday in Union Station, the vice president said they were 'old, primarily white people' who have 'never felt danger in their entire lives.' Vance continued that tactic Thursday. Bashing the racial justice protests in 2020, which led to major anti-police sentiment in the Democratic Party, Vance said it was 'disproportionately Black Atlantans who suffer the most from high violent crime.' Asked about the historical pain associated with homeless people who were swept off Atlanta's streets in preparation for the 1996 Summer Olympics, Vance first reminded the local reporter that he had been 12 years old at the time. 'I was worried about football and fishing,' he said. But, the vice president added, 'the question betrays the question of what we're trying to do, and what is the nature of true compassion.' 'Why have we convinced ourselves that it's compassionate to allow a person who's obviously a schizophrenic or suffering from some other mental illness, why is it compassionate to let that person fester in the streets?' he said. The 'compassionate thing to do,' Vance continued, was to 'get them in treatment, not to let them sit on the streets and yell at our people while they're walking by.'
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Higher education board chair favors keeping interim leader of North Dakota colleges
Tim Mihalick, right, chairs a North Dakota State Board of Higher Education meeting in Bismarck on May 29, 2025. Next to Mihalick is interim chancellor Brent Sanford. (Photo by Jeff Beach/North Dakota Monitor) The chair of the North Dakota State Board of Higher Education said Thursday that he will propose giving interim Chancellor Brent Sanford the job on a long-term basis. Sanford, a former lieutenant governor, was named the interim leader of the North Dakota University System in April. Sanford replaced Mark Hagerott, who left the position at the end of April. Black, who was named board chair in May, spoke to the Legislature's Higher Education Institutions Committee that was meeting in Dickinson. Black said he favored skipping a nationwide search in favor of giving Sanford the job. Black said a search would likely cost more than $100,000 and still lead the board back to Sanford. He praised Sanford's work as interim chancellor and said a search 'is going to lead us right back to the person we think we know would be the best for the job.' The eight-member board would have to approve the proposal. Sanford is former mayor of Watford City and holds a bachelor's degree in accounting from the University of North Dakota. He had been interim president of Bismarck State College before being named interim chancellor. Before that, he had been working for the BSC Office of Workforce and Economic Development. Sanford, a Republican, served as lieutenant governor under Gov. Doug Burgum for six years before resigning in January 2023. Black noted that the board is evaluating what the leadership position should be called. It has been called chancellor, but some states use commissioner and the state constitution refers to a commissioner and chief executive officer. 'The commissioner, chancellor, whatever title you want to use, is not an academic post,' Black said. 'It is very much an executive leadership post.' Hagerott, who had led the university system since 2015, had a doctorate degree. Other recent chancellors have had a master's degree or other advanced degree. Former lieutenant governor named interim chancellor for North Dakota University System Sen. Jonathan Sickler, R-Grand Forks, chair of the committee, said that one of the advantages of a search process is that it forces the board to undergo a kind of strategic planning process as it evaluates what they are looking for in a candidate. Black said the board would still plan to do an evaluation of the roles of responsibilities of University System leadership, including the board. 'Brent understands that and he is fully on board with that process,' Black said. The State Board of Higher Education will meet Sept. 23 at Minot State University. Sanford did not immediately respond to a message seeking comment Thursday. North Dakota Monitor Deputy Editor Jeff Beach can be reached at jbeach@ SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX Play Farm Merge Valley