Secretary of Education: Initiatives

Online Services | Commonwealth Sites | Help | Governor

Home > Initiatives > P-16 Council > Goals Contact Us

Virginia’s P-16 Education Council: Purpose, Roles and Goals

Virginia’s P-16 Education Council has been created to offer a variety of perspectives on education in the commonwealth and to make recommendations on enhancing a seamless transition for students through the Virginia education system.

The council serves in an advisory capacity to the Governor; the Secretary of Education; the state education agencies: the Department of Education, the State Council of Higher Education for Virginia, and the Virginia Community College System; and other key education policymakers.

Immediate Responsibilities

Executive Order 100, which created the P-16 Education Council, outlines the following responsibilities for the council:

1. Identify opportunities to better coordinate the state's education reform efforts from preschool to graduate school.

2. Serve as a steering committee for oversight of the state's education reform activities as part of the NGA Honor States Grant.

3. Develop approaches to improve transitions among levels of education, promote student success, and encourage students to continue their education.

4. Consider strategies for data systems that provide information about students’ at all educational levels.

5. Make any other recommendations as may seem appropriate.

As noted in the Executive Order, a primary responsibility of the council is to advise on and react to initiatives within Virginia’s grant from the National Governors Association to develop effective models to “redesign” high schools and specifically to improve the transition of ninth graders from middle school.

The specific goals of the grant include:

Decreasing ninth and tenth grade retention in high school:
Increasing mathematics proficiency
Decreasing the number of high school dropouts
Increasing the number of high school graduates
Increasing college readiness of high school graduates by reducing the number of developmental courses taken by recent graduates
Increasing the number of students who immediately attend college
Increasing college graduation rates

Additional immediate responsibilities include the selection of areas on which to focus in order to begin the dialog on ways to facilitate improved coordination and transition within Virginia’s statewide education system. These areas and the associated discussions may shift over time as priorities change.

An important part of the decision making process will include receiving reports and other information from individuals and groups who have had experience in the areas of focus.

Long-Range Responsibilities

Acting in an advisory capacity, it is anticipated that over time, the P-16 Education Council will make recommendations on ways to create a more integrated, seamless education system. This may involve examining and considering complex issues, including transitions between all levels of education, college readiness, testing, teacher education, college admissions policies, governance, and institutional turf issues, to name just a few.

Rather than addressing such issues on a piecemeal basis, the P-16 Education Council permits a more comprehensive approach. The shorthand term for such a process, P-16, reflects the vision of a coherent, flexible continuum of public education that stretches from preschool to grade 16, culminating in a baccalaureate degree.

The goals of a P-16 council may include, but are not limited to:

Expanding access to early learning for children ages 3 to 5, and improving their readiness for kindergarten
Smoothing student transitions from one level of learning to the next
Closing the achievement gap between subgroups of students
Upgrading teacher education and professional development
Creating a wider range of learning experiences and opportunities for students in high school
Improving college and workforce readiness and success.

What is a P-16 System?

The information below has been adapted from, What Is P-16 Education? A Primer for Legislators – A Practical Introduction to the Concept, Language and Policy Issues of an Integrated System of Public Education. [November 30, 2005]

The strengths of a P-16 system are that it:

Is inclusive. Since a P-16 system has as its goal that all learners will master challenging material and achieve at high levels, it creates an environment that expects success from everyone – the gifted and the ordinary, the rich and the poor, the white and the black and the brown, the young and the not-so-young, urban and rural, the native and the immigrant. A system that allows no throwaways is a system in tune with U.S. needs.

Aligns efforts at all levels. As the Center for Policy Research in Education (CPRE) noted in a recent policy brief, “Currently, K-12 and postsecondary institutions move in different orbits, upholding different sets of standards regarding what students should know and be able to do. Aligning these different standards and then providing all students hoping to attend postsecondary institutions with the information and academic skills they need to succeed would represent enormous leaps forward, especially during this time of declining affirmative action admissions.”

Supports standards and assessments. The introduction of standards and standards-based assessments sets the stage for student movement through progressively more complex material at the student’s natural pace rather than according to age or seat time. In other words, the learning standard remains fixed while the time to reach it is allowed to vary. A P-16 system that is aligned at every critical transition point builds on the standards currently in place and provides additional support by allowing for this type of movement.

Establishes a logical progression. Leaders crafting a single system geared to getting more students to meet higher standards at each level soon realize the necessity of aligning standards and curriculum across key transition points. One of the most challenging transitions is the move from high school to college. Maryland, a leader in P-16 efforts, has sought to align learning outcomes across levels by engaging teams of K-12 teachers and two- and four-year college faculty in reaching a consensus on what students should know and be able to do as they leave high school and begin postsecondary studies. At the same time, community college and four-year college faculty are working to create common expectations for student learning throughout the early college years so that student movement is smooth and efficient among postsecondary institutions.

Reduces the need for remediation. Clear expectations, aligned curricula and strong support services lead to better academic performance and reduced needs for remediation at all levels.

Removes artificial barriers. High school students face a confusing mix of high school exit examinations and requirements, college entrance examinations and requirements, and college-placement assessments. This situation is particularly difficult for disadvantaged students who do not enjoy the school or family support so necessary in sorting out requirements and guiding long-range academic and career planning. A P-16 approach puts a spotlight on these barriers and draws leaders together to address them.

Is efficient and effective. A fully functioning P-16 system can be expected to lead to: (1) greater collaboration between education professionals at all levels; (2) alignment of standards and curriculum across levels; (3) widespread parent, community and student understanding of goals and expectations; (4) significant reductions in the amount of postsecondary remedial work required; and (5) lower dropout rates in both secondary schools and colleges. These improvements, in turn, should lead to higher education levels across all income and ethnic groups, which is associated with greater employment stability and civic engagement, as well as decreases in public assistance and crime rates.

Opens the door to new ways of doing business. Continual adaptation will be needed to respond to a rapidly changing world. A P-16 approach, while a natural next step, is not a one-shot cure and cannot be expected to automatically meet future needs. Yet by demonstrating an ability to craft a flexible P-16 system, the nation also demonstrates its ability to adjust as conditions change.

Challenges of a P-16 System

There are no magic bullets when it comes to improving student achievement. The closest thing, is putting a competent, caring teacher in every classroom. But there are other pieces to the puzzle – challenging content; strong leadership; focused goals; high expectations; clear accountability; community support; and adequate, equitable and stable funding. Adopting a P-16 system is just one piece of a much larger picture.

And it does present challenges, including:

Reliance on individual leaders. Early P-16 efforts have relied heavily on dedicated leaders willing to work toward their visions of a different system. If such leaders leave before new ways of doing business become part of the culture, however, the new approaches are at high risk of being overwhelmed by tradition and inertia.

Time. Awash in a sea of stresses and strains – an increasingly diverse student population, growing enrollments, restrictive regulations, tight budgets, safety issues and teacher shortages, to name a few – it is hard for education administrators and board members to find time to devote “big picture” ideas and cross-level collaboration, especially when there are no rewards for such activity.

Fragmented structures. Current legislative structures mirror the distinct gulfs among early learning, K-12 and postsecondary education that have grown up over many years. One challenge of a P-16 approach is to align legislative structures and processes to accommodate a cross-system perspective.

Turf issues. Serious P-16 efforts offer a direct challenge to established ways of making decisions and distributing funds. At present, decisions about K-12 funding typically are made in isolation from decisions about either early learning or postsecondary education. The success of P-16 efforts hinge on legislative funding decision processes being adapted tallow funding decisions affecting all education levels to be made in a coordinated way. Another problem is the relationship, or the lack thereof, among state boards. State K-12 education boards and state higher education boards have poor track records when it comes to collaboration A P-16 approach is built on close collaboration across levels and requires the development of new working relationships.

Early learning challenges. Adding early learning to the policy dialogue will engage a new set of stakeholders and surface a variety of issues, including: (1) the family’s role in relation to the education institution’s role; (2) the respective roles of public and private early learning providers; (3) the state’s role in establishing licensing requirements for early learning staff; (4) the issue of whether or not early learning programs should be mandatory; and (5) the costs and benefits of such programs and the sources of revenue needed to support them.

Lack of evidence. P-16 advocates point out that barriers in the current system are routinely scaled by students from families where both parents have graduated from college. Unfortunately, many students from families with low-income and low-education levels do not enjoy this built-in support. Proponents argue that if the education system is more fully aligned, we can expect similar success for all students. P-16 efforts currently under way in the states provide laboratories to test this conclusion and examine what works and what doesn’t.

Lack of a common language. New efforts require a new vocabulary. So far, there are few commonly accepted terms in the P-16 arena. Among the choices currently in use, ECS prefers the terms P-16, early learning, K-12 and postsecondary.

Contact Webmaster | Web Policy