Albemarle staff outline new Virginia school performance framework; model data moves several schools into lower support tiers

Assistant Superintendent Pat McLaughlin told the Albemarle County School Board on Feb. 13 that Virginia has replaced its old accreditation system with a new school performance and support framework that combines mastery, growth and readiness measures into a single 100‑point scale.

The new framework, McLaughlin said, uses different weights by school level (for example, 65% mastery/25% growth/10% readiness at elementary schools and 50% mastery/15% graduation/35% readiness at high schools). He presented state model data showing how Albemarle schools would have scored if the system had been applied this year, and warned that several schools would move into lower categories once the framework is fully implemented.

The presentation mattered because the framework determines state accountability categories — "distinguished" (90+), "on track" (80–89), "off track" (65–79) and "needs intensive support" (below 65) — and because a separate federal designation for targeted support and improvement can push a school down one category, McLaughlin said. "If you are designated for targeted support and improvement, you get a one‑category penalty," he said.

McLaughlin explained how mastery, growth and readiness are calculated: - Mastery aggregates SOL (Standards of Learning) test performance and WIDA English‑language learner progress into point values (advanced = 1.25; proficient = 1.0; basic/fail values lower). - Growth uses a state analytic system (VVAS) that benchmarks students against statewide percentiles and assigns points for exceeding, meeting or not meeting individualized growth targets; those results arrive later in the year. - Readiness combines chronic absenteeism and other measures (middle schools’ advanced coursework; high schools’ the "3 E's" — enrollment, employment or enlistment indicators, plus cohort graduation rate).

To make the framework concrete, McLaughlin used Burley Middle School as a model. Under the state's modeled data, Burley produced a mastery value of roughly 49 and a readiness score near 82.8; with the state's rules and the federally required targeted‑support checks applied, several Albemarle schools (including Burley, Agnor, Scottsville and Mountain View in the model) would shift into the "off track" category or lower.

Board members pressed on timing and implications. McLaughlin said most mastery and readiness components will be available to the division at the end of the school year, but the growth results produced through the VVAS system typically arrive later — often not until early fall — meaning a complete, official picture may not be available until months after testing. "We won't be able to say, 'Here's where we are' at the start of the year," he said.

Several trustees said they were concerned the single composite score could mask disparities among student groups. "None of this takes into account at all whether a student is a student of color, whether a student is economically disadvantaged, whether a student received special education services," McLaughlin said, adding that the federal performance indicators still require the state to look at subgroup performance for targeted‑support decisions.

McLaughlin said the division will continue to produce disaggregated data for the board and staff and urged trustees to use demographic breakdowns alongside the new state scores when planning supports. The division will present a more detailed academic performance update at the board’s next regular meeting.

For now, McLaughlin and staff recommended that trustees treat the state scores as an additional data point rather than the only measure of school success.