West Virginia Code of State Rules
Agency 126 - Education
Title 126 - PROCEDURAL RULE BOARD OF EDUCATION
Series 126-013 - A Process for Improving Education: Performance Based Accreditation System (2320)
Section 126-13-6 - School Accreditation
Universal Citation: 126 WV Code of State Rules 126-13-6
Current through Register Vol. XLI, No. 38, September 20, 2024
6.1. Through the direction and oversight of the WVBE, the accreditation system provides:
6.1.a. The criteria and procedures
for verifying a school's A through F grade designation;
6.1.b. A process for assessing and reporting
school adherence to Policy 2322, Policy 4110, W. Va. 126CSR99, WVBE Policy
4373: Expected Behaviors in Safe and Supportive Schools, hereinafter referred
to as Policy 4373, and other appropriate policy and Code; and reporting
schoolbest practices, efficiencies, and resource, facility, and capacity
building needs.
6.1.c. A process
for identifying and reporting school and classroom conditions and
non-compliances that may be impacting (1) student learning and well-being and
(2) overall effective and efficient operation of the school;
6.1.d. A system of school self-study through
which strengths and weaknesses can be determined and from which local school
improvement decisions can be made;
6.1.e. A method of promoting continuous
improvement by aligning local school improvement processes, strategic planning,
and the annual and cyclical accreditation reviews; and
6.1.f. A basis for determining rewards,
supports, technical assistance, and intervention.
6.2. Measures and Levels. School accreditation ratings are determined by the A-F grading system as described in Section 5 of this policy. This is based on the premise that student outcomes are the primary measure of an effective school. A school's performance rating is calculated by the WVDE then transferred to the OEPA for verification through the accreditation process. Once verified, the performance level is approved by the WVBE and communicated to schools, school systems, and communities.
6.3. Principles and Processes.
6.3.a. Operating Principles. The
school's performance grade is verified by the OEPA through annual and cyclical
review processes. These processes assure parents and the general public that
school A-F grades are an accurate representation of the school's overall
quality. The verification processes are derived from W.Va. Code §
18-2E-5
requirements that the accreditation system monitor high quality standards and
promote continuous improvement of all West Virginia public schools. The
verification processes reflect the premise that every West Virginia school has
the obligation to improve and to create school and classroom conditions that
lead to student success. The accreditation processes will operate according to
the following principles:
6.3.a.1. Focus on
Student Performance. The accreditation processes focus all schools on creating
those school and classroom conditions reflected in Policy 2322, used in the
accreditation process to positively impact student performance.
6.3.a.2. Transparency and Clarity. The
accreditation processes are based on clear and transparent expectations
communicated in advance to schools and school systems. These expectations are
outlined in the central tool of the accreditation process, the School
Monitoring Report. This Report summarizes school compliance with Policy 2322,
and other policy and Code requirements. Responses on the School Monitoring
Report will be reviewed and validated through the annual and cyclical review
processes.
6.3.a.3. Vehicle for
Local Decision-Making. The annual and cyclical accreditation processes are
designed and implemented to support local decision-making on how to change
school and classroom conditions in ways that improve student performance and
well-being. By using the School Monitoring Report, school faculties and Local
School Improvement Councils, hereinafter LSIC, have a valuable method for
reflecting on current practice, reaching consensus on improvement priorities,
guiding the contents of the school strategic plan, and addressing
non-compliances with policy and Code.
6.3.b. Review Processes. All West Virginia
schools participate in annual and cyclical reviews managed by the OEPA under
the direction of the WVBE.
6.3.b.1. Purposes
of the Review Process. These annual and cyclical reviews are designed to (1)
verify the school's annual performance grade, (2) provide feedback for local
school improvement efforts, (3) verify compliance with core policy and Code,
(4) document school best practices, and (5) identify efficiencies, resource,
facility, and capacity building needs.
6.3.b.2. Annual Reviews. Each West Virginia
school completes an annual on-line review using the School Monitoring Report.
This report is used by the faculty to self-assess overall school quality as
defined in Policy 2322 to document compliance with policy and Code, gather
information on best practices, and identify school resource and capacity
building needs. After review by the Faculty Senate and the LSIC and approval by
the principal and local superintendent of schools, the report is submitted to
the OEPA according to timelines established by the WVBE. The results submitted
on the report regarding school quality and compliance with policy and Code is
utilized by the OEPA to verify the school's performance grade. After the
initial submission, the school annually updates the School Monitoring Report
and uses the report as a source for identifying school strengths and
weaknesses, determining improvement priorities, addressing non-compliances,
revising the school strategic plan, and tracking progress during the four-year
accreditation cycle.
6.3.b.3.
Cyclical Reviews. At least every four years, all schools participate in an
on-site review by an external team of educational professionals managed through
the OEPA. This external review process assures the West Virginia Legislature
and the WVBE that all schools are accountable to a common set of high quality
standards, are complying with core policy and Code, and are fulfilling their
obligation to continuously improve. The on-site review team assesses the
accuracy of the school's electronic submission of the School Monitoring Report.
The external team reviews the school strategic plan and supports local school
improvement efforts by (1) examining school practices associated with Policy
2322 and providing feedback on school strengths and needs, (2) bringing public
notice to school successes by documenting best practices, and (3) identifying
any resource, facility, efficiency, and capacity building needs that may be
impeding the school's capacity to improve.
6.3.c. Conditions Affecting Grade
Verification. The annual and cyclical review processes determine if a school's
A-F performance grade is an accurate representation of the school's overall
quality and should be approved by the WVBE. There are three conditions
affecting approval:
6.3.c.1. Unreliability of
Performance Measures. The auditing processes examine school procedures for (1)
administering the state student assessments; (2) recording dropout data and
other data related to student graduation rate; and (3) measuring and reporting
any other measure in the WVAS. This review is based on information gained from
electronic analysis of student response patterns and investigations conducted
by the WVDE prior to the audit, as well as the on-site review of school
processes and procedures. Scrutiny of these areas ensures performance measures
used to determine a school's accreditation grade are reliable. If it is
determined that assessment results or graduation data have been significantly
compromised, the OEPA recommends reducing the school's performance grade
according to Section 6.3.d of this policy.
6.3.c.2. School Conditions that Significantly
Impair Student Academic Success and Well-Being. During the auditing processes
based on examination of the School Monitoring Report and/or onsite review, it
is the responsibility of the OEPA to identify any conditions that are
significantly impairing, or may, if not addressed, significantly impair student
academic success and/or well-being as outlined in Extraordinary Circumstances,
Section 8.2.f.1. For these conditions to impact a school's performance grade,
the conditions must be pervasive and/or serious in nature.
6.3.c.3. Significant Policy and Code
Violations. During the auditing processes, the OEPA identifies state policy and
Code non-compliances and makes recommendations for corrective action. In cases
where non-compliances are pervasive and/or deemed so serious in nature that
they threaten the overall quality of school conditions and performance, it will
be the responsibility of the OEPA to notify the WVBE and to make
recommendations on school corrective action.
6.3.d. Circumstances for Modifying Grades.
Modification of a school performance grade is considered only when there are
school conditions so serious that the WVBE determines the existing performance
grade would be a misrepresentation of the school's overall quality. The WVBE
intends that such circumstances be rare and occur only when there is evidence
that one of the following three circumstances exist:
(1) The school has failed to follow
procedures outlined in Section 6.3.c.1 that guarantee accuracy of student
performance assessments, graduation rates, and/or other measures in the WVAS.
In this case, the school's performance grade is designated an F rating,
regardless of the grade established through the WVAS.
(2) The OEPA finds conditions within the
school outlined in Section 6.3.c.2. of this policy. These conditions are
egregious and may require WVBE direct or indirect intervention in the operation
of the school. In this case, the school's performance grade is designated an F
rating, regardless of the grade established from the WVAS.
(3) If during the auditing processes, the
OEPA finds circumstances outlined in Section 6.3.c.3. of this policy and the
school does not take appropriate corrective action as directed by the WVBE
and/or fails to meet the timelines established by the WVBE, then the WVBE
modifies the grade accordingly and in no case will the grade be higher than a
C.
6.4. School Responsibilities for Accreditation. In order for accreditation processes to fulfill purposes outlined in W.Va. Code § 18-2E-5, to impact student performance levels and to improve school quality, each West Virginia school must determine productive and meaningful ways to integrate accreditation processes into continuous improvement efforts. To that end, the school is responsible for the following:
6.4.a. Develop Knowledge of Policy 2322. The
accreditation process is built from standards derived from Policy 2322. All
school faculty and members of the LSIC need sufficient knowledge of these
standards in order to participate effectively in the school self-assessment
process and in the annual and cyclical reviews. Methods for developing
understanding of these standards are determined by the school.
6.4.b. Complete the School Monitoring Report.
Results recorded on the Report are derived from staff and LSIC perceptions. The
results are intended to be derived from meaningful discussions among the
principal, staff and LSIC members. How time is scheduled for such discussions
and the processes used for reaching consensus are determined locally through
the leadership of the principal. The responses recorded on the Report are
submitted to the OEPA as one basis for the annual and cyclical reviews and for
school performance grade verification.
6.4.c. Develop the Strategic Plan.
Development of the electronic strategic plan is a collective and collaborative
process led by the principal. The staff(1) analyzes student performance data
and determines priorities, (2) evaluates school and classroom quality through
the School Monitoring Report and other locally determined tools and processes,
(3) determines appropriate improvement strategies to impact student performance
and well-being, and (4) outlines these strategies in the electronic school
strategic plan.
6.4.d. Implement
the Strategic Plan. The school implements improvement efforts using action
steps and monitoring processes outlined within the school strategic plan. The
school annually modifies and adjusts the Strategic Plan as new data and
information dictate, including information gleaned from the School Monitoring
Report. During the on-site review process, the development and implementation
of the plan is examined.
6.4.e.
Participate in the On-Site Review Process. The on-site review is a culminating
activity designed to verify the school's performance grade and verify the
quality of school conditions as reported on the School Monitoring Report. The
review process also provides feedback for future school improvement efforts and
development of the school strategic plan. School responsibilities during the
on-site review are:
6.4.e.1. Prepare for
Review. Prior to the cyclical on-site review, the principal is responsible for
preparing the staff for productive involvement in the review process with
materials provided by the OEPA. One month prior to the scheduled review, the
school staff updates the School Monitoring Report to document and summarize the
school's overall progress. The principal prepares the staff and stakeholders
for the on-site review, including orientation to the logistics,
responsibilities, and expectations associated with the process.
6.4.e.2. Participate in Review. During the
on-site review process, the principal, school staff, and appropriate
stakeholders participate in processes to authenticate the School Monitoring
Report. This authentication occurs through (1) review and/or observation of
school activities, functions, and materials, (2) interviews of staff, students,
and stakeholders, and (3) scrutiny of existing data bases related to student
performance and high quality learning conditions
6.4.e.3. Participate in Exit Conference. At
the conclusion of the school on-site review, the principal participates in an
exit report as part of the school system exit conference. As feasible, other
school personnel may attend. (See Section 7.3.c.4. of this policy).
6.4.e.4. Address Review Findings. Once the
on-site accreditation review report is finalized, the information and
recommendations contained in the report become a part of the school self-study
for the ensuing improvement cycle. The principal is responsible for sharing and
discussing the report with the school staff and LSIC and for using the report
in the development or revision of the school strategic plan. If findings are
identified in the final report, the principal must work with staff to determine
how the deficiencies are to be corrected according the timelines established by
the WVBE.
6.5. County Board of Education Responsibilities for School Accreditation. It is intended that the accreditation process be a method for local boards of education to improve school quality and student performance. Thus, the county board of education through the county superintendent of schools must exercise leadership and provide appropriate support to accomplish this intent.
6.5.a. Implementation. It is the
responsibility of the county board of education through the superintendent, to
direct, support, and monitor school responsibilities for the accreditation
process. The specific responsibilities are:
6.5.a.1. Develop Understanding of
Accreditation Processes. The school system is responsible for implementing a
professional development process by which principals, teachers, and appropriate
stakeholders become knowledgeable of accountability and accreditation
processes. The professional development must advance staff knowledge of
accountability measures on which school grading is based, procedures for school
accreditation, and effects of school and classroom conditions on student
performance. Resources for the professional development include Policy 2320,
Policy 2322 and the OEPA School Monitoring Report.
6.5.a.2. Establish Local Direction. It is the
responsibility of the school system to develop and communicate (1) procedures
for local implementation of the school accountability and accreditation
processes and (2) expectations regarding the improvement of student performance
and school quality.
6.5.a.3.
Monitor School Responsibilities: It is the responsibility of the school system
to monitor individual school implementation of accreditation processes
including the following:
6.5.a.3.A.
Completion of the annual School Monitoring Report according to requirements,
including holding schools accountable for compiling the report in a
collaborative process and basing responses on the perceptions of the school
faculty and LSIC members.
6.5.a.3.B. Review and verify the accuracy of
the School Monitoring Report.
6.5.a.3.C. Ensure school strategic planning
processes consider the annual and cyclical feedback provided through the
accreditation process.
6.5.a.3.D.
Ensure that all audit review findings are sufficiently addressed according to
the directives and timelines established by the WVBE.
6.5.b. Establish Supports and
Expectations that Impact Student Performance. It is the
responsibility of the county board of education to implement processes, provide
supports, and develop expectations that ensure all schools achieve a C or above
and all schools are improving. Those responsibilities are:
6.5.b.1. Develop instructional leadership
skills of principals. Create expectations that all schools are student-centered
and learning-focused.
6.5.b.2.
Support school continuous improvement and strategic planning processes as
outlined in Section 9 of this policy so each school has structures in place for
collective self-assessment and goal setting that lead to improved
performance.
6.5.b.3. Implement
school-based professional development programs that address the unique needs of
staff and students.
6.5.b.4.
Differentiate support and resources to individual schools according to
performance grades, ensuring that all students in the school system have
equitable opportunities for success.
6.6. OEPA Responsibilities for School Accreditation. It is the responsibility of the OEPA to provide schools with the tools, information, and feedback necessary for effective participation in the annual and cyclical review process.
6.6.a.
Tools. The OEPA will provide each school the tools necessary for participation
in the accreditation process, including the electronic School Monitoring Report
and orientation materials for participation in the on-site review.
6.6.b. Information. The OEPA will provide
documents and offer supports that develop understanding of the accreditation
process including:
(1) informational
brochures on the accreditation system,
(2) local and/or regional professional
development offerings,
(3) regular
electronic updates, and
(4)
guidance on accreditation processes and procedures.
6.6.c. Feedback. The OEPA will provide
feedback to individual schools based on the annual and cyclical review
processes. This will include:
(1) strengths
and weaknesses related to Policy 2322, compliance with policy and Code,
recognition of best practices, and assessment of resource, facility,
efficiency, and capacity building needs;
(2) communication of any recommendations or
findings resulting from annual or cyclical reviews; and
(3) identification of circumstances that may
impact modification of the school's performance grade.
Disclaimer: These regulations may not be the most recent version. West Virginia may have more current or accurate information. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or the information linked to on the state site. Please check official sources.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
