WeVote

Bill

Bill

HB 773

An Act amending the act of March 10, 1949 (P.L.30, No.14), known as the Public School Code of 1949, in the State System of Higher Education, providing for free tuition for school board members.

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Missy Cerrato and 4 co-sponsors

HB 773 overhauls NC school accountability, creating a 100-point score with A-F grades tied to proficiency and EVAAS growth, prioritizing bottom 25% gains and college credentials.

Referred to Education
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 773

Summary — HB 773: School Performance Grade Changes (North Carolina, 2025)

Status (as of 4/29/2025)
- Committee substitute reported favorable (4/29/2025). Referred to Rules/Calendars for further consideration.
- Introduced April 7, 2025; primary sponsors include Representatives Biggs, Cotham, Willis, and Rhyne.

Purpose
- To replace the existing statutory school accountability framework (parts of Article 8, Chapter 115C) with a revised system of school performance scores and letter grades designed to more precisely reflect achievement and growth at the elementary, middle, and high‑school levels.

Key provisions
- Repeals G.S. 115C‑83.15, 115C‑83.16, and 115C‑83.17 and adds new sections establishing:
- §115C‑83.17A — School performance scores
- §115C‑83.17B — School performance grades
- Defines a separate set of measurable elements (points) for each school level; each point = 1 point per percentage point of students meeting the measure. Major measures include:
- Elementary (K–5): proficiency in math (grades 3–5), reading (grades 3–5, with grade 3 reading singled out), grade 5 science, English‑learner (EL) progress (grades 3–5), and growth measures (math/reading).
- Middle (6–8): proficiency in math (6–8), reading (6–8), grade 8 science, EL progress (6–8), completion/credit or industry credential for high‑school level courses taken in middle school, and growth measures (math/reading).
- High school (9–12): proficiency on NC Math I, English II, Biology EOCs; postsecondary success/credential measures (examples include passing advanced course exams, passing dual‑enrollment courses, industry credentials, or specified ASVAB + JROTC credit combinations); four‑year graduation rate; EL progress; and growth on Math I and English II.
- Growth measurement: directs use of the Education Value‑Added Assessment System (EVAAS) to calculate growth and to determine meeting/exceeding expected growth. Special attention to growth for students in the bottom 25% on prior assessments.
- Scoring and translation:
- Uses a composite approach that weights elements by the number of students measured for each element.
- Requires proportional adjustment when a school lacks a particular element (e.g., a K–5 school without high‑school measures).
- Translates the composite performance score to a 100‑point scale for public reporting.
- Letter grades:
- The State Board of Education will award letter grades based on the performance score and is prohibited from adding other designations (e.g., “+” or “–” modifiers). (The bill text indicates an A–F schema but the committee substitute’s numeric cutoffs are not included in the excerpt.)

Who is affected
- State Board of Education: required to implement the new scoring and grading methodology.
- Local school districts and individual public schools (K–12): scores, grades, public reporting, and consequent accountability/recognition/intervention actions will be governed by the new measures.
- Students, teachers, and administrators: changes in emphasis (e.g., on growth, bottom‑25% gains, dual enrollment, credentials) may affect school priorities, programming, and resource allocation.
- Data vendors and assessment administrators: continued/expanded use of EVAAS and collection/reporting of credential and dual‑enrollment data.

Potential impacts and considerations
- Shifts emphasis toward both proficiency and measured growth, with explicit attention to low‑performing students (bottom 25%) and postsecondary/credential outcomes at the high‑school level.
- Could change school ratings relative to the prior system—schools with strong growth or credential/dual‑enrollment outcomes may see improved performance scores even if proficiency rates differ.
- Administrative and data requirements: schools and districts will need to ensure accurate reporting of test results, growth calculations, credential attainment, dual‑enrollment results, and EL progress.
- Fiscal impacts are not specified in the bill excerpt; implementation likely uses existing assessments and EVAAS but may require data‑reporting adjustments.

Next steps / procedural notes
- Committee substitute was favorably reported 4/29/2025; the bill remains subject to further action (Rules, floor votes, Senate concurrence, and enactment). Effective date is not specified in the provided excerpt.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.