Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Promotion Retention topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board discusses promotion, retention and interventions; staff propose regulation updates to reflect current practice
Summary
Special services and elementary intervention staff reviewed school‑based intervention team processes, Virginia Literacy Act reading plans and suggested regulatory updates to the division’s promotion/retention rule; board members emphasized early grades and asked for policy revisions.
King George County special services staff and elementary interventionists briefed the school board on promotion and retention processes, the district’s tiered intervention system, and how the Virginia Literacy Act (VLA) and new reading plans affect screening and supports for kindergarten through grade 3.
Kathy Bird, coordinator for special services, described the School‑Based Intervention Team (SBIT) process as the division’s highest level of support for students not making adequate progress. She said SBIT referrals come from teachers, counselors, administrators and social workers and can lead to academic and behavioral interventions, trials of accommodations, referrals for evaluation for an Individualized Education Program (IEP) or Section 504 plan, or a recommendation for retention.
An elementary intervention presenter outlined the tiered model used in K–5: tier 1 is core classroom instruction, tier 2 is targeted small‑group support and tier 3 is intensive individualized interventions. Staff reported that adding interventionists at each elementary school last year expanded capacity for daily small‑group reading and math support. The presenter said kindergarten screening with the state‑approved screener identifies students in a high‑risk band who receive individualized reading plans with progress monitoring.
Staff offered sample data and said fall-to‑midyear screening showed decreases in the number of students in the high‑risk band, and they expect further improvement by May’s end‑of‑year screening. Bird noted that SBIT outcomes vary year to year and that the pandemic (COVID) remains a complicating factor in interpreting trends; she cited the 2021–22 school year as a period of unstable mid‑pandemic numbers.
On potential regulatory changes, staff proposed updating the division’s promotion/retention regulation to reflect current practice: renaming the “progress assessment team” to the school‑based intervention team, removing the school psychologist as a mandatory team member (they would still be involved for full evaluations), and updating outdated language such as changing “youngsters” to “students.” Board members asked for more detail on how interventions align with curriculum and how teachers coordinate progress across grades. Several board members stressed prioritizing kindergarten through second grade for early reading supports.
A board member asked specific questions about the SBIT numbers and retention counts; staff clarified the figures discussed at the meeting were elementary SBIT counts and that secondary promotion/credit rules are handled differently. Bird emphasized promotion/retention decisions are made by teams that consider academics, social skills, absenteeism and other factors.
Ending: Board members supported updating the policy and regulation language to reflect current practice and asked staff to provide the draft regulatory language and implementation details for future board review.
