Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Cut Scores topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parents, educators and employers urge Virginia board not to delay raising proficiency cut scores
Summary
Multiple public commenters at the June 25 board meeting urged the Virginia Board of Education to move forward with planned increases in English and math cut scores this fall and objected to a proposed roadmap that would delay consequences for years.
Dozens of parents, educators and employer representatives told the Virginia Board of Education during public comment on June 25 that delaying the scheduled increases in statewide proficiency cut scores would deny families timely information and weaken accountability.
Derek Max of the Jefferson Forum said Virginia has for years permitted an "honesty gap" between state test proficiency and the National Assessment of Educational Progress, arguing that delayed cut‑score increases would prolong that gap and harm students who need earlier interventions. "This is not compassion. This is not equity," he said, adding that parents and employers deserve an accurate picture of student readiness.
Tom Johnson, a Chesterfield parent and employer, and Phillip Papazaki (commenter) described workforce consequences should increases be postponed. Johnson said a proposed roadmap would mean his children and others "will have graduated before expectations ever get raised for them," while Papazaki, who works in the plumbing/pipefitting industry, said modern trades require strong math and technical reading and warned that delayed standards will perpetuate a skills gap.
Several parent groups echoed those concerns. Todd Truitt of Arlington Parents for Education urged the board to reject any last‑minute delay and to ensure families receive honest, timely information about their children's performance. Speakers representing educators and social-studies leaders urged the board to provide clear guidance and to support divisions ready to implement performance assessments required by recent legislation.
None of the public commenters asked the board to adopt immediate procedural actions during the meeting; several asked staff to preserve timelines or to provide additional guidance to divisions implementing statutory changes. Board members heard the comments and later proceeded with a scheduled slate of votes on other agenda items.
