The Virginia Board of Education’s Technical Advisory Council reported that the department’s recently completed standard‑setting process and technical report were valid and reliable, but recommended several technical and communication changes ahead of implementation of revised cut scores.

TAC chair Mary Anne Perry told the board the panel praised the department’s use of NAEP connections and community member inclusion during standard setting and urged continuation of those practices. “The TAC said this was one of the most collaborative meetings they’ve had in the last three or four years,” Perry said.

Panel recommendations included: shortening the phase‑in period for new performance levels where feasible so policy momentum is not lost; continuing to use ID matching in technical work when possible; and adding a metadata field in the department’s item‑bank process so item writers declare intended cognitive complexity for each item. The TAC also recommended continued work to populate the item bank with more advanced items aligned to higher expectations.

The council discussed the Integrated Reading and Writing (IRW) instrument and recommended using the IRW scores in grades 5 and 8 as a “readiness” indicator rather than as an additional academic achievement metric. The TAC suggested keeping the high‑school end‑of‑course (EOC) writing assessment as the primary high‑school writing measure rather than combining it with an IRW score.

The council flagged retake use as an implementation and communication risk: members advised the department to provide guidance on when retakes are likely to change outcomes and when repeated retesting is unlikely to help an individual student, to prevent unnecessary testing and lost instructional time.

What comes next: The department will add a fifth TAC member, continue its March meeting cadence, and incorporate the TAC’s recommendations into outreach, advice to school divisions and into the department’s item‑bank and standard‑setting schedules. The board was told that fall 2026 is a plausible target for applying revised cut scores to accountability after a year of communication and preparation.

Ending: Board members asked the department to bring implementation guidance to the next board meeting and to continue working with TAC on item‑bank health, retake guidance and communication materials for districts and parents.