Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Alternative Education topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Renaissance Academy year‑2 evaluation finds mixed outcomes; administration concurs and plans modifications
Summary
A year‑2 implementation evaluation of the Renaissance Academy alternative education program showed some gains in behavior and academics for subsets of students but highlighted attendance and post‑return challenges. Administrators accepted the recommendations and outlined next steps.
The Virginia Beach School Board on Tuesday received a year‑two implementation evaluation of Renaissance Academy, the division’s alternative education program, which serves middle and high school students who have struggled in comprehensive settings.
No formal vote was taken; the evaluation and the administration’s response were presented for information and will be returned to the board for action on Jan. 28.
Why it matters: Renaissance Academy is a sizable and resource‑intensive program. The evaluation examined enrollment patterns, student outcomes, staffing and programmatic supports. Board members pressed for clearer measures of long‑term outcomes and asked for further data on transitions back to home schools.
Major findings and administration response - Enrollment and demographics: In 2023–24, 774 students were enrolled at Renaissance Academy at some point (295 middle school; 479 high school). The student population was 60% male, 60% Black, 70% economically disadvantaged and 24% special education — all proportions higher than division averages. - Duration and referral reasons: About 58% of enrollments lasted less than half a school year; the majority of placements were for behavior code offenses. Half the students were first‑time enrollees. - Outcomes while enrolled: Staff‑reported and student survey items showed improvements for many students: 77% of students had fewer discipline referrals, 75% had fewer suspensions and 68% improved core course averages while at Renaissance. Passing rates on state tests varied; English/writing passing rates were high but other SOL pass rates ranged widely. - Post‑return outcomes: After returning to home schools, students on average had higher discipline referrals than comprehensive school averages. Only 42% of returning students maintained attendance rates they had at Renaissance, and 14% sustained the grade averages earned while at Renaissance. - Costs: The evaluation reported program costs at approximately $14.9 million for 2023–24, with staffing and transportation the largest expense categories.
Recommendations and planned actions The evaluation recommended continuing the program with targeted modifications: enhanced social‑emotional and self‑regulation interventions (anger‑management, self‑management, relationship skills), strengthened transition procedures for students returning to home schools, and expanded instructional supports and academic opportunities. The administration concurred and listed actions already underway, including adding an instructional specialist, AVID implementation at Renaissance, trauma‑informed skills training for staff, increased concurrent enrollment with home schools to allow ongoing monitoring, and simplified residency verification to reduce placement delays.
Board questions and public comment Board members sought clarifications on the definition of “good grades” (administration confirmed a C average as the benchmark for return), the distinction between short‑ and long‑term enrollments (short = <50% of school year; long = >50%), staffing levels (four counselors, four student support specialists with one on FMLA at the time of presentation) and the 92% parent orientation satisfaction figure. Some members expressed concern about long‑term costs and the relatively low percentage of students who sustain gains after returning to comprehensive schools; presenters said many of the recommended interventions were new or only recently implemented and that future evaluations should show the impact.
Next steps The administration’s response and further supporting materials will be on the Jan. 28 agenda for action. Staff committed to provide follow‑up data requested by board members, including more granular demographic and short‑ vs. long‑term enrollment breakdowns and further evidence on post‑return outcomes.
Ending note Presenters and several board members emphasized the program’s role in meeting student needs and noted planned improvements aim to increase the share of students who sustain academic and behavioral gains after returning to comprehensive schools.
