Introduction
Accreditation: High Standards for Learning and Achievement
Adequate Yearly Progress: Virginia & No Child Left Behind
Accountability Terminology
Questions Concerning Schools Receiving “Accreditation Denied” Status
PDF Version of this page including terminology and questions

Virginia’s accountability system supports teaching and learning by setting rigorous academic standards, known as the Standards of Learning (SOL), and through annual assessments of student achievement. The accountability system is part of a statewide program of support for the commonwealth’s public schools and school divisions.

Schools receive two annual accountability ratings based on the performance of students on SOL tests and other statewide assessments.

A school’s state accreditation rating reflects overall achievement in English, history/social science, mathematics and science. Schools in which students meet or exceed achievement objectives established by the Virginia Board of Education in these four major content areas are rated as “fully accredited.”

Schools and school divisions are also rated according to the progress they are making toward the goals of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), also known as the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. This federal law requires states to set annual achievement benchmarks in reading and mathematics leading to 100 percent proficiency by 2014. The law also requires testing in science at least once in elementary, middle and high school.

Schools and school divisions that meet or exceed all annual benchmarks in reading and mathematics are rated as having made Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). States also receive AYP ratings.

While accreditation ratings are based on overall student achievement in all major content areas, AYP ratings are based on overall achievement and achievement by student subgroups in reading and mathematics.

Accreditation:
High Standards for Learning & Achievement

Fully Accredited
High schools and middle schools are “fully accredited” if students achieve adjusted pass rates of 70 percent or above in all four content areas. A combined adjusted pass rate of at least 75 percent on English tests in grades 3-5 is required for full accreditation at the elementary school level and for other schools with students in these grades.

Elementary schools must also achieve an adjusted pass rate of at least 70 percent in mathematics and in grade-five science and Virginia Studies (administered in grade 4 or 5), and pass rates of at least 50 percent in grade-three science and grade-three history.

Beginning with accreditation ratings announced in fall 2011, high schools must meet objectives for graduation — as well as achieve the required pass rates in English, history/social science, mathematics and science — for full accreditation. High schools that do not attain the minimum graduation benchmark, but meet all other requirements, can earn provisional accreditation until 2015 by meeting interim graduation benchmarks. High schools that achieve the required pass rates but do not meet the provisional benchmarks for graduation and completion will be rated as “accredited with warning.”

Accreditation Denied
A school is denied accreditation if it fails to meet the requirements for full accreditation for four consecutive years. Schools that are rated “accreditation denied” are subject to corrective actions prescribed by the Board of Education and agreed to by the local school board through a memorandum of understanding.

Within 45 days of receiving notice of a school being denied accreditation, a local school board must submit a proposed corrective action plan to the Board of Education describing the steps to be taken to raise achievement to state standards. The Board of Education will consider the proposed corrective action plan in developing a memorandum of understanding with the local school board, which must be in force by November 1 of the year that school has been denied accreditation.

In any school division where one-third or more of the schools have been denied accreditation, the local school board is required to evaluate the superintendent and submit a copy of the evaluation to the Board of Education by December 1. In addition, the Board of Education may take action — as permitted by the Standards of Quality — against the local school board due to the failure of the local board to maintain accredited schools.

• Written notice of the school’s accreditation rating within 30 calendar days of the announcement of the rating by the Virginia Department of Education (VDOE);
• A copy of the school division’s proposed corrective action plan — including a timeline for implementation – to improve the school’s accreditation rating; and
• An opportunity to comment on the division’s proposed corrective action plan prior to its adoption and the signing of a memorandum of understanding between the local school board and the Board of Education.

The local school board must submit status reports detailing the implementation of actions prescribed in the memorandum of understanding. The principal, division superintendent and local school board chairman may be required to appear before the Board of Education to present status reports.

As an alternative to the memorandum of understanding, a local school board may choose to reconstitute a school denied accreditation and apply to the Board of Education for a rating of “conditionally accredited.”

Conditionally Accredited
New schools – comprising students who previously attended one or more existing schools – are awarded the “conditionally accredited” status for one year pending an evaluation of the performance of students on SOL tests and other statewide assessments. This rating may also be awarded to a school that is being reconstituted. A school rated as “conditionally accredited” following reconstitution will revert to a status of accreditation denied if it fails to meet the requirements for full accreditation by the end of the agreed-upon term, or if it fails to have its annual application for such rating renewed.

2009-2010 School Year Accreditation Benchmarks (Adjusted Pass Rates)

Note: Ratings for the 2009-2010 school year are based on achievement during 2008-2009 or on average achievement during the three most recent school years. Beginning with tests administered in 2010-2011, the pass rate for English will rise to 75 percent for all grades and the pass rates for the other three core areas will remain at 70 percent.

Accreditation Adjustments
Accreditation ratings may reflect credit awarded for successful remediation efforts and the exclusion of failing scores of some Limited English Proficient (LEP) students and transfer students.

Adequate Yearly Progress:
Virginia & the Elementary & Secondary Education Act

ESEA in Brief
The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) requires states to set annual objectives for increasing student achievement with the goal of ensuring that all children have an opportunity to obtain a high-quality education. Schools, school divisions and states that meet these objectives make what the law refers to as “Adequate Yearly Progress.”

• ESEA requires annual testing in grades 3-8 and at least once in high school to measure student progress in reading and mathematics. The law also requires states to test all students in science at least once in elementary school, once in middle school and once in high school.
• ESEA requires schools, school divisions and states to meet annual objectives for Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) for student performance on statewide tests in reading and mathematics.
• ESEA requires the identification of states, schools and school divisions making and not making AYP.
• ESEA requires all students to be proficient in reading and mathematics by 2013-2014.

Key Point: For a school, a school division or the commonwealth to make AYP, it must meet or exceed 29 benchmarks for student achievement and participation in statewide testing. Missing a single benchmark may result in a school, a school division or the state not making AYP.

Annual Measurable Objectives

The yearly achievement benchmarks in reading and mathematics, established by the Board of Education as part of Virginia’s implementation of the ESEA are known as Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs).

The tables show Virginia’s AMOs for reading and mathematics. For a school or school division to have made AYP (based on achievement during 2008-2009) at least 81 percent of students overall and in each subgroup must have demonstrated proficiency in reading and at least 79 percent of students overall and in each subgroup must have demonstrated proficiency in mathematics. To compensate for expected year-to-year fluctuations in achievement, Virginia uses up to three years of achievement data in calculating AYP.

AYP: Annual Measurable Objectives for Mathematics

Note: AYP ratings for the 2009-2010 school year are based on student performance on tests administered during 2008- 2009 or on average achievement during the three most recent school years. Achievement must equal or exceed the Annual Measurable Objective shaded above.

Keep in Mind

• A school that does not achieve AYP is not necessarily a “failing” school. A more balanced and accurate assessment of a school’s overall performance can be determined by comparing the number of AMOs that a school met with the total number of AMOs.
• Virginia is a national leader in implementing high academic standards and measures to hold schools accountable for achievement through objective testing.

AYP Participation

ESEA requires a minimum of 95 percent participation of all students and all subgroups of students in the statewide assessment program at the school, division and state levels. If participation overall or in one or more subgroups is below 95 percent, a school or school division is not considered to have made AYP regardless of the percentage of students demonstrating proficiency.

• Students with disabilities
• LEP students
• Economically disadvantaged students
• White students
• Black students
• Hispanic students

Students with Disabilities
A student with disabilities is assessed in accordance with his or her Individualized Education Program (IEP). Students with disabilities may take SOL tests (with or without special accommodations), or may be assessed through alternative grade-level tests.

Students with significant cognitive disabilities are assessed through an alternate test. ESEA, however, places a one-percent cap on the percentage of test takers in the state who may be counted as proficient based on alternate assessments.

Virginia is also allowed to use a proxy percentage to represent the number of students with disabilities who would have met modified grade-level standards in reading and mathematics during 2008-2009 if assessments for these students had been available.

The proxy percentage (15 percent for reading and 16 percent for mathematics) is added to the pass rates of students with disabilities for schools and divisions that otherwise would not make AYP solely because of the achievement of disabled students. The proxy is also applied at the state level.

LEP Students
School-based LEP committees determine how LEP students participate in the state assessment program. ESEA allows a one-time exemption from testing in reading in grades 3-8 for LEP students who have attended school in the United States for less than 12 months. All LEP students must participate in mathematics assessments regardless of when they arrived in the United States.

If an LEP student in his or her first year of enrollment is tested, the student is counted as participating in the state assessment program for AYP purposes. Failing scores of tested LEP students in the first year of enrollment are not included in AYP calculations.

LEP students at the lowest levels of English proficiency may take an alternative grade-level assessment for reading and a plain-English version of the mathematics SOL test for up to three years.

Other Academic Indicators Required Under ESEA

In addition to the annual benchmarks in reading and mathematics, Virginia schools and school divisions must also meet annual objectives for progress on other indicators of academic achievement. These “other academic indicators” include attendance, science, writing, history/social science and graduation.

Prior to the start of the school year, school divisions, elementary schools and middle schools select one of the following as an academic indicator:

• Attendance – the objective for attendance during 2008-2009 is 94 percent.
• Science – the objective for science achievement during 2008-2009 is 70 percent.
• Writing – the objective for writing achievement during 2008-2009 is 70 percent.
• History/Social Science – the objective for history/social science achievement during 2008-2009 is 70 percent.

For high schools and other schools with a graduating class, graduation is the other academic indicator. School divisions and the commonwealth must also meet the annual objective for graduation.

• In 2007, the Board of Education established an interim objective for high school graduation of 61 percent until the commonwealth developed the capacity to calculate graduation rates based on longitudinal student-level data. Calculations of AYP ratings for the 2009-2010 school year include comparisons with this interim benchmark.
• In keeping with Title I regulations effective November 28, 2008, the Board of Education will establish a new graduation rate objective and set annual targets requiring continuous and substantial improvement.

Retakes of End-of-Course Tests

The achievement of students on all retakes of end-of-course assessments in reading and mathematics will be included in the calculation of AYP ratings. If a student fails a test required for graduation and successfully retests during the same school year, the first test does not count in calculating AYP.

Safe Harbor

Another way for a school, a school division or the state to make AYP is through “safe harbor.” Safe harbor recognizes improvements in teaching and learning that reduce the failure rate of students in a subgroup by at least 10 percent - even if the AMO was not met. However, subgroups making AYP through safe harbor must also meet the objective or show improvement on the school or division’s other academic indicator(s).

Title I Schools

A Title I school is a school that receives federal funds to help children in high-poverty areas who are behind academically or at risk of falling behind. Title I funding is based on the number of low-income children in a school, generally those eligible for free lunch or reduced-fee lunch programs. Some Title I schools provide supplemental federally funded instructional programs for qualifying students. These schools are known as targeted-assistance schools. Title I schools in which 40 percent or more students qualify for free or reduced-fee lunch may provide schoolwide programs. The following accountability ratings and actions apply to Title I schools that do not make AYP for two or more consecutive years in the same subject area(s):

Public School Choice – Year One
A Title I school that does not make AYP for two consecutive years in the same subject area is identified for improvement and must notify parents of its status prior to the beginning of the school year. The school must offer all students the opportunity to transfer to a school within the division that is not identified for improvement. Lowest-achieving students receive priority in the awarding of transfers. A school in year one of improvement must also develop and implement a school improvement plan.

A Title I school in its first year of improvement that makes AYP is held in first-year improvement status. A school identified for improvement exits improvement status by making AYP for two consecutive years.

Supplemental Educational Services & Public School Choice – Year Two
A Title I school identified for improvement that does not make AYP for a third consecutive year in the same subject area enters the second year of improvement. The school must notify parents of its status and continue to offer public school choice. In addition, the school must offer supplemental educational services to low-income students. If funds are insufficient to provide supplemental services to all students whose parents request tutoring, school divisions must give priority to the lowest-achieving eligible students.

A Title I school in its second year of improvement that makes AYP remains in second-year improvement status.

Corrective Action – Year Three
A school division must take corrective action to raise achievement in a Title I schools in the third year of school improvement status. The school must continue to offer public school choice and supplemental services, and the school division must take at least one of the following corrective actions:

• Replace school staff deemed relevant to the failure to make AYP
• Implement a new curriculum shown by research as effective in raising achievement
• Decrease the authority of school-level management
• Appoint an outside expert to advise the school on the implementation plan developed during the first year of school improvement
• Extend the school year or school day
• Restructure the internal organization of the school

A Title I school in its third year of improvement that makes AYP remains in third-year improvement status.

• Continue to provide public school choice
• Continue to offer supplemental educational services
• Continue to take the corrective action selected in year three
• Prepare a plan and make necessary arrangements for restructuring/alternative governance of the school

A Title I school in its fourth year of improvement that makes AYP remains in fourth-year improvement status.

Restructuring (Implementation) – Year Five
A restructuring/alternative governance plan developed during year four is implemented if the school again does not make AYP in the same subject area and moves into year five of improvement status. The implemented plan must include one of the following actions:

• Reopen the school as a charter school
• Replace all or most of the school staff relevant to the school’s failure to make AYP
• Turn the management of the school over to a private educational management company or other entity with a demonstrated record of effectiveness
• Any other major restructuring of school governance

Note: If a Title I school in restructuring fails to make AYP, the school continues to implement its restructuring/ alternative governance plan while receiving technical assistance from the school division and state.

School Divisions in Improvement

• Scientifically based strategies and best practices for raising student achievement
• Professional development for faculty and instructional staff
• Specific achievement goals for subgroups not making AYP
• Identification of impediments to higher achievement by low-performing students
• Strategies to promote parental involvement
• Relevant student learning activities, before school, after school or during the summer
• Fiscal responsibilities of the school division and the technical assistance needed

Accountability Terminology

Questions Concerning Schools Receiving “Accreditation Denied” Status

PDF Version of this page including terminology and questions