Board Membership and Leadership

Following the recent election, January’s board meeting was the first one where we could meet and work with the new board members. We welcome Dr. Tricia Braxton, representing District 1, and Ms. Danielle Ford, representing District 3, to our team. They each serve a four-year term on the State Board of Education and bring their backgrounds and experiences to help assist the state board in creating regulations that better serve the students of Nevada. In addition to our new members, two members won reelection and will serve another four-year term on the board. Tim Hughes ran unopposed in District 4, and Angela Orr won her election in District 2. Leaving the SBOE are Felicia Ortiz and Rene Cantu. They both have been invaluable to the Board’s success and will continue to serve Nevada’s students. In our January meeting, we also elected our new President, Vice President, and Clerk. Dr. Katherine Dockweiler, appointed by the Senate, will serve as President; Tim Hughes, representing District 4, will serve as Vice President; and Tamara Hudson, appointed by the Assembly, will continue to serve as clerk. Read more about the SBOE’s members here.

GRAD Score and Educational Funding

A hot-button topic recently on the State Board of Education is the GRAD score and the “at-risk” weight for funding. To fully understand this issue, you must first understand how funding works in Nevada.

In Nevada, we fund based on a per pupil (per person) amount. How much education is funded is decided on the state level, and then each child gets a certain base amount. The more students are enrolled in your district, the more funding you receive. On top of this base amount, there are three weights: English Language Learners, Gifted and Talented Students, or At-risk students. Although the first two listed have clear definitions, the last “at-risk” label is more subjective. In previous years, Nevada has used free and reduced lunch as the qualifier. During the last Biennium (the two year span of time when funding is distributed), Nevada used Infinite Campus’ GRAD score to decide funding for the at-risk measure. 

The original problem with the Free and Reduced Lunch measure was that so many Nevada students qualified for it that it wasn’t making a significant impact. For example, a certain amount of money is distributed to the pool for “at-risk” students, let’s say, for this example, $100. If we take a measure that is so wide, say 100 students qualify for it, each student would receive an additional $1 on top of the base amount. Alternatively, if we take a more exclusive measure, and say 20 kids qualified, each student would receive $5.

In the 2023 legislative session, SB503 changed NRS from “. . .eligible  for  free  or reduced-price lunches  pursuant to  42  U.S.C.  §§  1751  et  seq.,  or an alternative  measure…” to “within the quintile of pupils determined to be most  in  need  of  additional  services  and  assistance  to  graduate based on one or more measures  prescribed by the State Board , which may include, without limitation, consideration of whether a pupil:  (a)  Is economically disadvantaged;  (b)  Is at risk of dropping out of high school; or  (c)  Fails to meet minimum standards of academic proficiency.” This changed the funding mechanism, but most importantly, it added the stipulation that it must be “within the quintile.” A quintile is a percentile and not a percent, a unique distinction. The difference can be hard to understand, but let’s explore it in another example. Say you scored 8 out of 10 on a test, which means you get 80 percent on your test. However, that doesn’t mean you got within the 80th percentile. Say five people got a 70 percent and five people got a 90. That would mean you were in the 50th percentile. A percentile is a statistic that changes based on the others in your group. Understanding this difference and the complexity of the “at-risk” measure led Nevada to the GRAD score. 

The GRAD score is a machine-learning algorithm (not Artificial Intelligence) based on about 75 factors. This gives students a score from 50 to 150 based on the 75 factors to determine if they are on track to graduate with their peers. Based on all the scores in Nevada, the bottom 20th percentile of students received the “at-risk” weight. This was intended to be a more adaptive and effective funding mechanism to target and increase the amount of funding per person to create a more impactful and strategic distribution of funds.

Despite the support from policymakers and lawmakers for this switch, many communities and organizations oppose the further use of the GRAD score for a few reasons. These include the fact that it is not transparent, uses machine learning, and may create unpredictable shifts in funding from year to year. The State Board of Education has held a workshop on this topic. It must make a final decision and complete the temporary regulation process before passing the education funding bill in the legislature.

The 83rd Legislative Session

The 83rd Legislative session started off on February 3rd and will run for a full 120 days and not convene again until 2027. For students, one of the most important roles of the legislature is shaping the education system. Lawmakers decide on school funding, graduation requirements, mental health resources, and policies that impact student life. Students can get involved by attending hearings, submitting public comments, or contacting representatives to advocate for any issues they are passionate about or affect them. To find out who your representatives are, you can visit the website linked here. To learn more about upcoming meetings, bills, and to track legislation, you can visit the Nevada Electronic Legislative Information System, or NELIS, linked here.