Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Accountability topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
New Mexico’s revamped VISTAs reduces number of flagged schools; staff warn methodology change may mask continuing needs
Summary
State staff and Public Education Department officials defended new New Mexico VISTAs metrics that produced large numbers of schools exiting support status, while LESC staff and legislators urged caution and asked for follow‑up data to ensure supports are not withdrawn prematurely.
Tim Bedeaux, senior policy analyst for school data at the Legislature’s staff, told the Legislative Education Study Committee on Dec. 6 that changes to New Mexico’s school accountability measures and the public dashboard known as NMVISTAs have produced a substantial drop in the number of schools formally identified for support.
“Since the law was passed in 2019, this iteration of VISTAs is actually the best iteration I’ve seen,” Bedeaux said, calling out the dashboard’s new proficiency index and student growth percentiles as improvements over the prior A–F grading system.
The new methodology replaces a binary proficiency rate with a proficiency index that assigns partial points to students nearing proficiency and extra points for students who are advanced, and it uses student growth percentiles (SGPs) to capture year‑to‑year individual growth. Bedeaux said those changes, together with a move to a three‑year cohort identification and opportunities to exit annually, helped 173 schools exit support status in 2023–24.
David Windham, director of research, evaluation and accountability at the Public Education Department (PED), said the consolidated ESSA plan approved Oct. 18, 2024, and the technical work behind the index and SGPs reflect national practice and input from national experts. “A smaller number of schools identified for support allows the department to prioritize limited personnel and funding to the places of greatest need,” Windham said.
But LESC staff cautioned the committee that methodological changes likely explain a large share of the exits. Bedeaux said their analysis suggests that roughly one‑third of the schools that exited may still need targeted support and recommended PED study whether changes in methodology prematurely removed schools from support lists.
Legislators pressed officials on how the system accounts for family income and poverty. PED staff said the accountability model emphasizes outputs and that prior test results used in SGPs partially capture poverty impacts, while noting that a standalone poverty measure is not required by current law. PED and LESC staff agreed to provide additional analyses, including maps and lists of schools that moved between designations, and to publish a data reference guide for session members.
LESC staff urged PED to: add statutorily required indicators to VISTAs (chronic absenteeism, college and career readiness, school climate, locally stated mission and vision); maintain methodological continuity where possible; publish school dash plan goals on VISTAs; and study supports that exited schools may lose if designations change.
The committee did not take formal action on VISTAs during the meeting; members requested additional data and follow‑up that PED said it would provide as part of a data reference guide for the legislative session.
