ReportWire

Tag: nathaniel cline

  • Technology Transportation Virginia adopted standards for electronic credentials years ago. What happened? – WTOP News

    Technology Transportation Virginia adopted standards for electronic credentials years ago. What happened? – WTOP News

    [ad_1]

    In some states, smartphones can do more than help you pay for services, capture memorable moments, or instantly access your…

    This article was reprinted with permission from Virginia Mercury. 

    In some states, smartphones can do more than help you pay for services, capture memorable moments, or instantly access your choice of media.

    In approximately half of the country, people can also store and share personal credentials on their devices, including state identification cards or driver’s licenses. Virginia has been working with experts to develop technology to make the same thing possible here.

    According to Jillian Cowherd, a spokeswoman with Virginia DMV, the agency has partnered with CBN Secure Technologies on its Virginia Mobile ID (mID) program. While the agency continues to work with businesses and organizations to accept the mID, Cowherd said the agency is working to “make it easier” and “more secure for customers to manage their credentials” while addressing privacy concerns about the potential for personal data to be released without approval. State lawmakers are also closely monitoring the process.

    “We always want to make things easier for folks (and) we can do that with the use of technology … but that’s always tempered with making sure that the privacy of individuals is paramount,” said House Technology Committee Chair Cliff Hayes, D-Chesapeake.

    Currently the app is available for download and is being used by a portion of Virginia’s nearly 126,000 state employees. mID can be used at select TSA checkpoints including Richmond International Airport and Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, and state workers are providing feedback to the agency.

    Cowherd said the team is working to make mID available to the public in Google, Apple, and Samsung wallets and is in discussions with public and private entities to ensure it will be accepted at businesses and by organizations when launched. She said that once its fully rolled out,, Virginians should be able to use their mobile ID to board planes, show proof of identity at DMV offices, engage with law enforcement and emergency services, and eventually show proof of age at retail establishments and restaurants.

    “DMV has continued to work with CBN Secure Technologies, our secure credential vendor partner, to develop an app, conduct extensive testing, gather customer feedback and ensure it has seamless functionality and robust security,” said Cowherd in a statement. “However, building a program that is widely accepted and highly secure takes time.”

    The pilot program, legislation

    In 2017, the General Assembly passed legislation creating the standards for issuing, reviewing, and displaying electronic credentials after the agency conducted a year-long pilot research program to assess “customer value, market demand and the ability to meet stakeholder needs,” Cowherd said.

    According to the program’s list of frequently asked questions, there is no cost associated for Virginians to add the mID to their device or to use it.

    In 2017, lawmakers discussed charging for each individual-issued electronic credential. State law allows the agency to charge users up to $10 per year.

    According to an earlier fiscal statement from the Department of Planning and Budget, at the fixed rate of $10, Virginia would have collected $1.7 million in revenue per year if 3% of the state’s approximately 5.6 million licensed drivers signed up. If 5% of licensed drivers were to buy an electronic credential, Virginia could receive approximately $2.8 million per year.

    Privacy Concerns

    Del. Karrie Delaney, D-Fairfax, chair of the House Transportation committee, said having technology to store your identification card on your smartphone is convenient for a lot of people, but privacy is paramount to many Virginians.

    “Having the security factors is an essential part of making sure that this program is trustworthy for the public,” Delaney said. “We are responsible for making sure that those guardrails are in place. But, at the end of the day, it is also going to be a choice for people.”

    Sen. Dave Marsden, D-Fairfax, said he believes the 2017 bill that created the mobile ID standards didn’t “raise any alarm bells” for the legislature, but believes lawmakers would be open to making any necessary changes if needed to address privacy or security worries.

    State governments and authorities known as “issuing authorities” seeking to use mobile ID technology have partnered with the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, a nonprofit organization dedicated to developing model programs for motor vehicle administration, law enforcement and highway safety, for guidance.

    According to guidelines provided by the AAMVA, the issuing authorities, in this case Virginia, should take care to ensure mobile ID data stored on peoples’ phones is “adequately protected.”

    “As standards in this respect are still under development, each Issuing Authority should take great care to ensure that the design of its solution supports this requirement,” the guidelines read.

    AAMVA’s guidelines also advise authorities to encrypt mobile ID information and protect key material in a security module.

    The organization also provides guidance on access.

    While law enforcement and emergency services have legal access to a person’s physical credentials in Virginia, the association has suggested that mobile driver’s license apps allow similar access in case of justifiable need.

    However, the association said that because such an option could be misused, the app must not allow anyone other than the mobile ID holder to access the mobile ID information.Virginia’s mobile ID app follows suit.

    “Your information is not accessible without your consent. You control what information from your mID you’d like to share,” the DMV’s mobile ID FAQ page states. “When you enroll, your information is stored on your personal device. Only those with access to your personal device and the ability to unlock and access the app would have access to view it.”

    Cowherd confirmed that user security is at the forefront of the project. She said the customer will control the information shared on the app, which presents the information needed for the interaction. The customer can also review and authorize the requested information before it is shared.

    “Virginia DMV provides the highest level of security in credential storage, data transmission and verification,” she said.

    Additionally, she said mobile IDs are presented digitally through encrypted communication directly between a user’s device and a verifying business or organization.

    “The device never needs to be handed to anyone or leave the customer’s possession.,” she said.

    Cowherd said the agency hopes to fully release the app early next year, but this depends on final testing and proven use cases.

    [ad_2]

    Ivy Lyons

    Source link

  • Virginia task force recommends dedicated funding for campus threat assessment team training – WTOP News

    Virginia task force recommends dedicated funding for campus threat assessment team training – WTOP News

    [ad_1]

    New recommendations for threat assessment teams, established after the 2007 Virginia Tech mass shooting, are out for colleges and universities.

    This article was reprinted with permission from Virginia Mercury. 

    A task force directed by the Virginia legislature has recommended creating a dedicated funding stream for threat assessment team training on college and university campuses and allowing teams to share confidential information about a person who’s the subject of an investigation with other public institutions.

    An assessment team may investigate a person, whether a student or potential employee of a college or university, if they are determined to pose a “significant” threat of violence to others.

    This month, a task force directed by the state’s Secretary of Education and Secretary of Public Safety and Homeland Security released its report with a handful of recommendations to improve how threat assessment teams, responsible for campus safety, operate.

    Legislative action would need to be taken before any of the recommendations could be implemented.

    Following the 2007 mass shooting at Virginia Tech, lawmakers passed legislation requiring colleges and universities to establish threat assessment teams to help prevent violence on campus.

    Since then, such laws have been expanded, requiring all K-12 public school divisions to have teams and permitting institutions of higher education to obtain records of people considered a “significant” threat on campuses, following the killing of three University of Virginia football players by another student in November 2022.

    One of the task forces’ recommendations was to dedicate a stream of funding for assessment team training.

    The task force said the existing training requirement was never funded and was supported through grants. The group added that the most recent grant funding for assessment team training has expired.

    “Without grant funding, the department will be unable to deliver mandated training without charging substantial tuition for training,” the report stated.

    The task force also recommended removing language from state law requiring the Department of Criminal Justice Services to approve an independent entity for training assessment teams, which they called “problematic.”

    Under the existing requirement, team members have to complete at least eight hours of training with the DCJS or a group it approves within 12 months of being appointed and at least two hours of additional training every year after that.

    “The provision that discusses training conducted by an independent entity approved by the department is problematic, because DCJS does not have specific licensing authority for those independent entities, there is no criteria by which DCJS can judge whether to approve those entities and because it gives DCJS no authority over curriculum for those outside entities,” the report stated.

    The task force also proposed an amendment to the state code that would require each member to complete an introductory foundational course in threat assessment, approved and delivered under the supervision of DCJS within 12 months of joining the threat assessment team and complete a minimum of two hours of threat assessment training each academic year after that.

    Another task force recommendation would amend state law to allow the public college or university’s threat assessment teams, which conducted an initial investigation of a student or employee deemed a “significant” threat, to share confidential information about that person when they are considering transferring schools or gaining employment at other Virginia public colleges and universities.

    At private Virginia institutions, they would be required to share that information with the dean of students, if the person investigated as a potential threat is a student, or with human resources if that person is an employee.

    The notification would occur after the initial assessment team determined through a “full inquiry and assessment,” compared to the current, less-clear language mandating teams take action“ pursuant to an investigation.”

    Existing state law only requires threat assessment teams to notify the receiving institution of the subject of their investigation or determination.

    The report stated that the provision’s current language could have made teams liable for defamation in other states because the requirement failed to explicitly limit the notification requirement to only Virginia schools.

    The task force did not provide a list of best practices and procedures guidance for threat assessment teams because the ones the task force identified and would have recommended were “inconsistent” with the changes made in legislation that passed last year, the report stated.

    “The task force does not have the liberty to publish best practices guidance that is inconsistent with mandates in the Code of Virginia.”

    [ad_2]

    Matt Small

    Source link

  • Virginia’s public education accountability system overhaul – WTOP News

    Virginia’s public education accountability system overhaul – WTOP News

    [ad_1]

    A new Virginia system that aims to improve transparency carries possible risks for low-performing schools across the state.

    This article was reprinted with permission from Virginia Mercury. 

    When something is not working, change it.

    The Virginia Board of Education is proposing that kind of transformative change for its new accountability framework, by splitting up the state’s accreditation system into two parts: an accreditation system, to assess whether schools are meeting all requirements laid out in state laws and regulations; and an accountability system, to provide “timely and transparent information on student and school performance.”

    This is another means for Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s administration to completely overhaul the system, which is vague in defining how it constitutes student achievement. Some education advocates support it, saying the changes could raise the state’s standards and improve transparency.

    Others fear the revisions could have long-term negative effects on low-performing schools.

    Mashea Ashton, one of the most recent board members appointed by the governor, said building the framework takes effort but gives the board another tool to determine how to direct state resources and be more transparent.

    “Raising expectations alone is not the one thing that’s going to make this work,” said Ashton last week, “and as I said to the board yesterday, I’ll say again, today, we have to do hard things better.”

    Over the next few weeks, the Virginia Board of Education will hold a listening tour to allow school faculty members and parents to talk about the proposed changes. The board hosted another listening tour last year. Public comment will end on April 19.

    Last June, Virginia Secretary of Education Aimee Guidera and Superintendent of Public Instruction Lisa Coons provided a report to the General Assembly stating that most states have both an accreditation system and an accountability system.

    This, and the governor’s criticisms about students’ declining scores on state and national assessments, prompted the board to begin addressing the current accountability system.

    The two officials recommended that the commonwealth develop “a distinct, stand-alone accountability system” that provides information about how each K-12 school prepares students.

    Virginia’s current system focuses on accreditation and measures schools based on academic achievement, performance gaps, student attendance and graduation and dropout rates, and factors like building safety, student-teacher ratios and licensure. Schools are then labeled accredited, accredited with conditions or not accredited.

    Board member Amber Northern, a Youngkin appointee, said students believe “less is expected of them now” based on her conversations with representatives from the Virginia Student Councils Association.

    She said at the March 28 board meeting that students believe schools are more lenient with grading and disciplinary actions, and students are rewarded high grades for doing nothing.

    “I was so encouraged that these kids were so honest, and it was almost as if they were screaming out, ‘We want to be held to a high standard,’” Northern said to her colleagues.

    At last week’s meeting, the board voted on changes to the state’s Standards of Accreditation regulations, which separated the state’s accountability and accreditation system.

    Under the list of regulatory changes, schools will be evaluated based on how well they are doing on different tests and how they are improving over time.

    The changes also included updating the term “school quality profile” to “school performance report card,” to be consistent with the language of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. The profiles give the public information on how well students are doing in school and also provide useful details on students’ post-high school readiness, schools’ safety standards and other topics.

    The board also voted on an accountability system, revising how the state reviews schools’ performance, to meet its goals of helping every learner meet high expectations and supporting learning loss recovery.

    Under the new system, schools’ performance will be determined by students’ success, measured by their mastery of subjects and academic growth. An overall score for elementary schools consists of three weight factors: 65% mastery, 25% growth, and 10% readiness.

    In middle schools, the performance score is weighted 60% mastery, 20% growth and 20% readiness; high schools’ performance score is weighted 50% mastery, 35% readiness and 15% graduation.

    While critics including the Virginia School Boards Association have urged the board to keep growth and mastery at an equal weight, board members said the mastery indicator is important to make sure students thoroughly understand the concepts before advancing to the next grade level.

    “I think every parent expects that their child will accomplish what is the standard set, or they want that for their child,” said board president Grace Creasey, a Youngkin appointee, after the meeting. “So while growth is important, also showing mastery is important, too.”

    Board member Anne Holton, a former secretary of education and an appointee of former Democratic Gov. Terry McAuliffe, made an alternative motion to accept the proposed regulations under the condition they would receive a final vote after the April listening sessions.

    But the board, made up primarily of Youngkin’s appointees, voted 7-1 against the request. Board member Alan Seibert, another Youngkin appointee, was not present for the vote.

    Plan for raising standards and providing transparency

    Like the governor’s administration, the board has advocated for raising school standards and increasing transparency with the state’s accountability system, issues that the new system will address.

    Under the board’s direction, the Virginia Department of Education split the system into two: the framework, which will provide the public information on how well students are doing in school and help determine which schools need additional support; and the accreditation system, which will let the public know how well the school is being run.

    The new system will allow for the state to separate mastery from growth, and includes a focus on readiness for middle and high school, and life after high school.

    “Every kid deserves the best educational opportunity in the commonwealth,” said board member Dale Sturdifen, a Youngkin appointee. “We need to have high standards.”

    He added “This is an age of participation trophies, where we just want to hand stuff out. I believe kids should work hard every day. They need to know what it’s like to fail, to not make a team.”

    In September, one of the board’s early steps to overhaul the accreditation system was directing the department to develop two different measures to track academic performance: an achievement index and an overall school rating.

    The index measure would provide a picture of a school’s achievement level based on students’ performance on assessments, with different levels of performance — like basic, proficient or advanced — receiving different weights.

    A school’s overall rating, or a summative measure, would be similar to those used in states like North Carolina and Maryland and could take the form of A-F grades, stars, or another ranking.

    In 2013, former Republican Gov. Bob McDonnell signed legislation to assign letter grades to public schools to rate them.

    However, before the legislation could be implemented in 2016, lawmakers became concerned that schools would be unfairly stigmatized.

    In 2016, the General Assembly voted to repeal the decision and the bill was signed by McDonnell’s predecessor, former Democratic Gov. McAuliffe.

    Possible harm to low-performing schools

    Critics said the revisions to the accountability system could negatively affect low-performing schools with enrollment, teacher recruitment, addressing achievement gaps and graduation rates.

    Advocates fear using the summative measure could lead to a ripple effect of changes in low-performing schools, perhaps making it harder to recruit teachers and influencing parents to seek other school choices for their children.

    “A summative score such as star ratings or letter grades would not provide the level of nuance parents need to make informed decisions,” said James Fedderman, president of the Virginia Education Association, at the March 28 meeting urging the board not to include a summative rating in its process.

    “Parents could easily be misguided by a summative score based mostly on mastery to enroll their students in a school with high pass rates, but low growth,” he said, adding that in some states the metric tool has contributed to “worsening racial segregation in our schools.”

    At the same meeting, the Virginia School Boards Association reiterated its concern that a summative rating system could have “unintended consequences” on a school division’s ability to recruit teachers or obtain needed resources.

    Holton said if the board uses an A-F rating system, it must be heavily weighted on growth measures and include significant resources to help failing schools improve.

    “When you label some schools as C, D, or F schools, families — and teachers — who can afford to will be incentivized to move away from those schools, leaving behind the neediest students — mostly Black and brown students — and the least experienced teachers,” Holton said. “Those schools will then spiral further behind.”

    Several board members fired back.

    Andy Rotherham said not telling people about the problems is backward thinking.

    “The way forward is to assume the dignity of Virginians, not their density,” Rotherham said. “Give them the information, allow them to make choices in terms of the governance of their local schools — who they want on their boards, who they want in various roles around the state, where they want to send their kids to school. We can only do that by giving them accurate information.”

    Board Vice President Bill Hansen added that the decline in scores among Virginia’s Black and Hispanic students over the past few years under the current system is an emergency.

    “It is a shame on our system, shame on our commonwealth, and what we’re trying to do here is to bring our attention, to bring our focus on accountability, on helping us understand achievement mastery for all of our students, and that is going to lift up our most disadvantaged and our Black and brown students the most,” Hansen said.

    Advocates are also concerned achievement gaps will worsen if the state does not support all underperforming students.

    While the board proposed that the Office of School Quality provide additional support to 5% of underperforming schools, not all of them would receive it, since 11% of schools are not fully accredited.

    Holton said she hopes the governor will support the General Assembly’s budget measures to restore funding to the Office of School Quality and other efforts to help at-risk schools, those with many economically disadvantaged students, and English learner programs.

    “Our challenged schools, especially, are severely underfunded and they can’t hire quality teachers for every classroom without more state support,” Holton said.

    She added that changes could lead to lower graduation rates, with the proposed weight system watering down college and career readiness initiatives such as dual enrollment and work-based learning experiences.

    “This slavish devotion to our SOL tests is simply not well grounded in experience and will, I fear, lead to lower graduation rates and students less well prepared for college and career,” she said.

    [ad_2]

    Matt Small

    Source link