Summary — HB 840: “Reward Schools for Student Growth” (North Carolina, 2025 session)
Status & Sponsors
- Short title: Reward Schools for Student Growth.
- Primary sponsor: Rep. Belk (with other co-sponsors listed in the bill file).
- Introduced in the 2025 NC General Assembly (first reading: Jan 9, 2025). As of the provided documents the bill progressed through committee and floor action in spring 2025 (see timeline below).
Purpose / Intent
- To change K–12 school accountability reporting so that every public school receives two distinct, published ratings: (1) a School Achievement grade and (2) a School Growth grade. The stated policy goal is to ensure schools are recognized separately for absolute achievement and for gains (growth) in student learning.
Key provisions
- Separate scores and letter grades:
- The State Board of Education shall calculate and publish:
- A School Achievement score and letter grade (A–F), and
- A separate School Growth score and letter grade (A–F).
- Achievement grade scale (no plus/minus):
- A: ≥ 85; B: ≥ 70; C: ≥ 55; D: ≥ 40; F: < 40.
- Growth grade scale (no plus/minus):
- A: ≥ 90; B: ≥ 80; C: ≥ 70; D: ≥ 60; F: < 60.
- Overall performance score:
- The existing overall school performance score remains calculated as the sum of the Achievement score (weighted 80%) and Growth score (weighted 20%), converted to a 100-point scale and mapped to an overall A–F grade by the same thresholds used previously.
- Growth calculation methodology:
- The Education Value-Added Assessment System (EVAAS) is used to compute school-level growth. Growth values are translated to a 100-point scale for reporting.
- For high schools (grades 9–12), only specified measures (those identified in statute) are included in growth calculations.
- Additional reporting and transparency:
- The State Board must include separate performance scores/grades for student subgroups and, for K–8 schools, separate achievement and growth in reading and mathematics.
- Local boards must prominently display the achievement and growth scores/grades for each school (current and previous four years) on their websites.
- If a school receives a D or F on either Achievement or Growth, the local board must notify parents/guardians in writing.
Who is affected
- All public K–12 schools in North Carolina (including charter schools and traditional public schools).
- State Board of Education (responsible for calculation and publication).
- Local school administrative units (responsible for public display and parent notifications).
- Students, families, educators, districts, and stakeholders who use school accountability results for evaluation, planning, or choice.
Procedural / Timeline notes
- Bill text makes statutory edits to G.S. 115C-12, 115C-47, and 115C-83.15 to implement separate achievement and growth scores/grades.
- Committee and floor activity occurred in early 2025 (hearings, committee reports, readings). Exact final enactment status should be checked in the NC legislative record for the latest action beyond the provided materials.
Potential impacts / considerations
- Emphasis on separate growth grades highlights and rewards year-to-year student progress, potentially benefiting schools that raise student learning rapidly even if overall achievement remains low.
- Using EVAAS ties accountability to a value‑added model with inherent statistical assumptions; changes in data systems or methodology could affect scores.
- Transparent separate grades may influence district interventions, resource allocation, school improvement plans, and parental decision‑making (school choice).
- Schools may need technical support to interpret and act on two distinct metrics (achievement vs. growth).
Caveats
- The posted bill excerpts were truncated in places. Stakeholders should review the complete enrolled bill language and final legislative actions in the NC General Assembly records for implementation details, effective dates, and any amendments adopted after the draft excerpts.
Would you like a short one-page brief focused on implementation challenges for districts, or a comparison of this approach with the previous single‑grade system?
