Berkeley County Schools board debates rollout, exemptions and staffing changes tied to Third Grade Success Act
November 05, 2025 | BERKELEY COUNTY SCHOOLS, School Districts, West Virginia
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
District administrators spent more than an hour outlining how Berkeley County Schools will implement West Virginias Third Grade Success Act (House Bill 3035, 2023), including diagnostic timelines, tiered interventions, "good cause" exemptions and operational steps for summer school and staffing changes.
The presentation, delivered to the board during the Nov. 4 meeting, said the district will use i-Ready diagnostic assessments within the first 30 days of the school year and a winter diagnostic to identify students who are on grade level, approaching grade level or multiple grade levels behind. The district said it is expanding screening and interventions so that K8 teachers receive state-provided training on the science of reading and that the state has opened additional cohorts for fourth and fifth grades.
"We are still following our tiered systems of support," an administrator leading the update said. "Tier 1 is universal instruction, tier 2 is small-group targeted intervention and tier 3 is individualized, intensive support." The presenter added the district is working with principals to make master schedules more consistent so interventions do not systematically pull students out of higher-priority instruction.
A major focus of the discussion was the statutory "good cause" exemptions that allow students who do not meet the proficiency metric to be promoted anyway. The district said the state currently lists seven exemptions and that state guidance issued the previous week indicated an eighth possible exemption is under review. Administrators said the state has asked districts to avoid definitive public guidance until the state finalizes its review.
Board members repeatedly asked how the exemptions would interact with teacher recommendations and student assistance team (SAT) decisions. "The teacher's recommendation related to whether a student should be promoted shall be a primary consideration," one board member read from the code during the discussion, and asked whether teachers could be effectively outvoted at SAT meetings. Staff replied that the district is designing a committee and appeal process so decisions are consistent and so teachers do not feel disenfranchised.
Administrators described an appeal process, committees to review promotion/retention cases and a plan to "role play" case reviews after the winter diagnostic so the district can estimate how many students would qualify for exemptions if the law were in effect now. They said they will notify families after the winter diagnostic if, under current measures, a student would meet criteria for retention so parents can begin conversations and access available supports.
The board discussed operational impacts if students are retained or promoted late in the summer. Staff said summer-school schedules will be adjusted to include testing windows and that the district can move teachers between third and fourth grade under existing procedures for "unforeseen student enrollment challenges." The presenter said those contingency moves are likely to be limited to third- and fourth-grade teachers.
Concerns raised by board members included: whether after-school or summer tutoring funds would be equitably allocated across title I and non-title I schools; how pull-outs for intervention interact with specials (music, art, P.E.); whether classroom teachers will consistently have their observations reflected in SAT recommendations; and how the district will screen for non-academic barriers (vision, hearing) that affect classroom performance.
District staff said they will provide a midyear progress chart after the upcoming winter diagnostic and that they will continue to work with the state on clarifications to the exemptions. The district also said it will provide additional operational guidance for principals, teachers and parents on how interventions, assessments and appeals will be handled as implementation approaches.
The presentation included no board vote to adopt local policy changes; staff said further operational details and any policy recommendations will be returned to the board once state guidance and local planning are finalized.
The presentation, delivered to the board during the Nov. 4 meeting, said the district will use i-Ready diagnostic assessments within the first 30 days of the school year and a winter diagnostic to identify students who are on grade level, approaching grade level or multiple grade levels behind. The district said it is expanding screening and interventions so that K8 teachers receive state-provided training on the science of reading and that the state has opened additional cohorts for fourth and fifth grades.
"We are still following our tiered systems of support," an administrator leading the update said. "Tier 1 is universal instruction, tier 2 is small-group targeted intervention and tier 3 is individualized, intensive support." The presenter added the district is working with principals to make master schedules more consistent so interventions do not systematically pull students out of higher-priority instruction.
A major focus of the discussion was the statutory "good cause" exemptions that allow students who do not meet the proficiency metric to be promoted anyway. The district said the state currently lists seven exemptions and that state guidance issued the previous week indicated an eighth possible exemption is under review. Administrators said the state has asked districts to avoid definitive public guidance until the state finalizes its review.
Board members repeatedly asked how the exemptions would interact with teacher recommendations and student assistance team (SAT) decisions. "The teacher's recommendation related to whether a student should be promoted shall be a primary consideration," one board member read from the code during the discussion, and asked whether teachers could be effectively outvoted at SAT meetings. Staff replied that the district is designing a committee and appeal process so decisions are consistent and so teachers do not feel disenfranchised.
Administrators described an appeal process, committees to review promotion/retention cases and a plan to "role play" case reviews after the winter diagnostic so the district can estimate how many students would qualify for exemptions if the law were in effect now. They said they will notify families after the winter diagnostic if, under current measures, a student would meet criteria for retention so parents can begin conversations and access available supports.
The board discussed operational impacts if students are retained or promoted late in the summer. Staff said summer-school schedules will be adjusted to include testing windows and that the district can move teachers between third and fourth grade under existing procedures for "unforeseen student enrollment challenges." The presenter said those contingency moves are likely to be limited to third- and fourth-grade teachers.
Concerns raised by board members included: whether after-school or summer tutoring funds would be equitably allocated across title I and non-title I schools; how pull-outs for intervention interact with specials (music, art, P.E.); whether classroom teachers will consistently have their observations reflected in SAT recommendations; and how the district will screen for non-academic barriers (vision, hearing) that affect classroom performance.
District staff said they will provide a midyear progress chart after the upcoming winter diagnostic and that they will continue to work with the state on clarifications to the exemptions. The district also said it will provide additional operational guidance for principals, teachers and parents on how interventions, assessments and appeals will be handled as implementation approaches.
The presentation included no board vote to adopt local policy changes; staff said further operational details and any policy recommendations will be returned to the board once state guidance and local planning are finalized.
View full meeting
This article is based on a recent meeting—watch the full video and explore the complete transcript for deeper insights into the discussion.
View full meeting