Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Student Achievement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
SOL results largely stable but sharp middle‑grade declines prompt targeted supports, officials say
Summary
Division leaders reported a 77% overall SOL pass rate (up 1 point) and improved CIP percentile ranking, while flagging substantial declines in some eighth‑grade scores; staff said they will implement targeted instructional reviews and support plans this summer and monitor schools with persistent drops.
Bedford County Schools’ preliminary 2025‑26 Standards of Learning results showed overall stability and improvement in relative standing within a multi‑division consortium, but district officials said declines in some middle‑grade cohorts — especially eighth‑grade math — will require focused interventions.
Dr. Trotter, joined by Ms. Kelly Jennings, told the school board the division’s overall pass rate across core subjects is 77% (up 1 point from last year) and the average CIP percentile rank rose to 63. History pass rates improved to 72%, and the division saw growth in several elementary and high‑school measures. Dr. Trotter noted the division compared results using a three‑year window and that the CIP comparison set grew this year, affecting percentile context.
Students with disabilities: Presenters highlighted a notable improvement for students with disabilities: overall pass rates rose by 4 percentage points and the group’s average CIP percentile increased by 10 points, with writing and history showing strong gains. Dr. Trotter said the results reflect ongoing work on tier‑1 instruction, inclusive practices and specially designed instruction.
Middle‑grade concerns: Board members pressed staff on an across‑the‑board decline for many eighth‑grade subjects and large math drops in some schools (cited as as much as 14–18 points for particular cohorts). Staff said they do not yet have full strand‑level answers but flagged teacher turnover, some new teachers in affected schools, and participation/assessment population differences as likely contributors. They committed to summer data reviews, strand‑level analysis, and targeted instructional support plans for identified grades and schools.
Zone‑level variability: The presentation broke results out by zone and school. Some small schools showed large year‑to‑year swings (for example, a 19‑point math swing at a small Liberty Zone school), which staff attributed to small cohort sizes where a handful of students can move a pass rate substantially. Staff said they would continue school‑level reviews and use Title I lead teachers and cross‑zone collaboration to spread successful practices.
Follow up: Instruction and special education supervisors will produce action plans that include pacing and resource adjustments, focused professional development, and targeted supports for grade bands and strands that underperformed. The presenters told the board they expect to finalize more detailed reports and recommended actions over the summer and brief the board ahead of the fall semester.
Board members thanked staff for the data and urged clear presentation of cohort‑level trends (following students year‑to‑year) to prevent misreading class‑to‑class comparisons.
The board took no formal vote on the presentation; presenters said additional state performance reports are expected later in the summer and that they will continue monitoring results.
