FARMINGTON – The school board debated a change to the high school graduation requirements Tuesday evening, with the new policy set to take effect at the end of the upcoming school year.
|
|
The class of 2011 will need to maintain a 70 grade point average, taking all four years of high school into consideration, in order to graduate. This represents an increase from the former cutoff of 60, which remains a failing grade for individual tests, projects or classes.
The change was actually made in 2007, but was scheduled to take effect for the class of 2011 in order to allow students at the high school to complete their education there under the old policy. While Superintendent Michael Cormier and many school board directors support the change, the high school teaching staff and administrators unanimously oppose it.
Cormier characterized the debate as a philosophical one; what level of work is good enough to earn a high school diploma from Mt. Blue High School?
“I have a problem going to the community and saying ‘we will give you a high school diploma if your work, over four years, is unsatisfactory,'” he said.
A 60 to a 69 is a “D” grade, which is considered passing in Mt. Blue Regional School District but unsatisfactory. A 70 to 79 is a “C” grade, considered average. Below a 60 is a failing grade.
At the meeting, speaking in opposition to the policy, were MBHS Principal Monique Poulin and Guidance Director Ben Milster. Both Poulin and Milster are heavily involved with a variety of programs designed to assist students who are having difficulty in school. These include the extended day program, which tutor students after school and extended year program, which offers courses during the summer.
The two administrators spoke with teachers at MBHS and noted they were unanimous against setting the graduation cutoff at 70.
While calling the policy “well intended,” Milster said that he believed the change would not benefit students.
“However,” he wrote in a memo to the board, “as an advocate for MBHS students, I strongly believe that this policy will not prove to be the motivational tool as intended and, in fact, creates an ethical dilemma in which our school is saying one thing to our students but doing another.”
The teachers’ objections, as well as Milster and Poulin’s, revolve around two concerns.
Obviously, the increase in the GPA requirement would leave some students without diplomas; generally somewhere between 15 to 20 percent of freshmen end their first year with an average less than 70. That number decreases into the 5 percent range by their senior year, as students adjust to the change in workload, or make use of the number of tutoring and after-hours educational programs offered at the high school. Milster noted that the class of 2009 had 12 students below a 70 GPA, with four of those students being accepted into college and another into the military.
Milster’s concern is that students below a 70 GPA in their second or third year might be on line to get the credits to graduate, but might be below the cutoff and simply give up and leave school. Alternately, a student might be near the cutoff and would take the least-challenging courses possible, in order to ensure graduation.
The other major concern is one of consistency. Many teachers were not in favor of the GPA graduation requirement, but several said they were in favor of making a 70 the lowest passing grade, as it was years earlier.
“The thing I feel most strongly about is whether we’re sending a consistent message,” Poulin told the board. “If a 60 is good enough for credit, then why is it not good enough to graduate?”
Cormier said that changing the grade system to its current 60-70-80-90-100 format had been a large project, involving public meetings and multiple votes by the board, as it impacted students in an immediate and significant fashion. He also noted that the lower failing rate, a 60 versus a 70, allowed a student to pass, for them, a challenging subject but maintain a higher GPA with work in the subjects in which they were more proficient.
“These really are philosophical discussions,” Cormier said. “I feel a Mt. Blue High School diploma should mean you did satisfactory work.”
Directors, for the most part, spoke up in favor of the policy. Director Claire Andrews of Farmington, who sits on the policy subcommittee, noted that students were allowed to petition the board if they were not meeting the GPA requirement.
The debate on the change will likely continue in the coming months. Several teachers have told Poulin and Milster that they wanted to address the board on the issue.
HOORAY! This might be a small step in raising standards and developing (RE-developing) critical thinking. It used to be said that “The future of America lies in the hands of our youth.” Brains would be a better choice of words. Do we really need to let the trend noted below continue??
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
U.S., which once led the world in college degrees for people ages 25-34, now ranks 12th among 36 developed nations. When I was governor of West Virginia in the early 1990s, there was a ranking of developed countries based on the number of young people who had earned college degrees. Among 25 to 34 year-olds, the United States ranked third. I remember thinking that wasn’t good enough. We used to be No. 1; we should lead the world in education attainment again.
Today we’re ranked 12th. Behind Russia. Behind Japan and Korea. And if the pattern continues, soon to be behind a host of other nations smart enough to match their understanding of the importance of college completion with the investments that make it possible.
At the precise time that the importance of a college degree is increasing, the ability of the United States to compete in a global economy is decreasing. – Gaston Caperton
WASHINGTON — The United States is facing an alarming education deficit that threatens our global competitiveness and economic future. The country is not keeping pace with other industrialized nations: Once a world leader in the proportion of adults ages 25 to 34 with postsecondary credentials, the United States now ranks 12th. Source: advocacy.collegeboard.org
Affordability and access to higher education are huge challenges that will have to be tackled if we’re going to move up those rankings. But, a nice step taken here by the Mt. Blue Regional School District.
What’s the matter with the teaching staff and administrative staff? Read the above. Also, do not dilute the curriculum or ease of achieving a passing grade! The class day should also be at least a couple hours longer.
We (the communities in the US) MUST raise the standards for graduation. The US has one of the weaker secondary school education systems in the developed world.
It’s a rather simplistic solution to a problem the administration and school board would rather redirect the cause/effect to students rather then addressing the actual issues. (granted there isn’t enough funds) Unsatisfactory products are a result of unsatisfactory production methods, not the results of quality control. The manipulation of the of the graduation requirements seems to me like a cheap and quick fix(not that it actual will) which avoids the real problems. Given the opportunity and tools/resources I am assuming that most pupils would rather receive a “satisfactory” rank then a “unsatisfactory” one but this would require the receiving of an education in a system deemed “satisfactory” and not one that just chooses to apply judgments based on what hoops a disciple can and can’t jump through.
We need to raise the standards for parenting too…
Linwood is absolutely correct. The first time Cormier was involved in changing this it made little difference, and this time it will make little difference. But he needs to justify his time and this is something he can do while sitting at his desk, staring at the wall: “Hmmm, how can I make a change that will get me in the papers taking the high road against a move I had actually created myself that will require absolutely no effort on my part…. Ah I got it, an arbitrary change in the minimum grade for graduation.” Grades are created by teachers to assess their students, the failing grade no matter what number is associated equals ‘unsatisfactory’.
Thank you, Geoff…your comment is right on….
If parents are not invested in the outcome of their child’s
education, the child will not be invested, either.
Thanks Concerned, I just get really worried about the fact that we tend to discuss education issues in a vacuum, without considering what we outside of schools (as parents, adults, the “village”) can do to improve the education of students. It is important for everyone to remember that only about a third of a child’s day is spent in schools, and so I think that we would be surprised to find that we can do a lot to improve the education of our children outside of schools (which would include parents actually parenting and being there for their children, of course).
Linwood, good point. I think that, in an ideal world, the school board made a good decision. However, this must necessarily raise questions of what grades actually mean and what they’re reflective of. Too often, grades are reflective of work passed in and not of content learned (they are FAR from one and the same).
“We need to raise the standards for parenting too…” (How do we address that??)
I would agree and forgive me for using old data but do you remember the Coleman report 1966 “Equality of Educational Opportunity” one of the findings were that students background and socioeconomic status had a significantly greater effect on the educational outcomes when compared to the provided resources of a public school. So I really don’t understand how raising the bar (alone) for graduation requirements is going to help in the matter? I think it will however cause some changes to individual teachers methods of grading but that’s about it. You still need keep the assembly line of children moving foward and it will regardless of the end results.
This is my personal opinion:
First, during the school work week, students interact with parents a lot less than they interact with teachers, if you take into account sleeping, getting ready for school, getting to school, being at school, returning from school. That leaves eating supper, play time, home work for the parents to make a difference in the childs education.
The school systems are taking the responsibility for child rearing at a younger and younger age.
The teachers and the school systems need to be held accountable for the results of the students education, in some fashion by some means and not just put all responsiblity on the parents and children. There needs to be a rational balance of accepted responsiblity.
The following thought is one I have heard so many people vent to me, in not so polite terms, that it needs to be commented on, also.
More degrees do not always make better or productive teachers, they make more educated teachers and more expensive teachers. More degrees doesn’t make the teachers good with kids or able to encourage, challenge, and or create a positive atmoshere for children to learn, in a emotionally healthy atmosphere. It should not take an act of congress to observe and remove the less productive teachers from the roster of employees.
Parents do matter in instilling positive can do encouragment and helping children deal with the emotional challanges of growing up and some parents the children need to be protected from.
Raising the reguired average score is an attempt to do something in a positive direction.
Modifying tenor, bumping, payment of teachers continued education, benefit packages, removal rules, and other issues in teacher contracts, along with retirement arrangements and funding are issues to deal with.
The parts of these that guarantee over the long term the school system to be more costly and less effective have to be dealt with, somehow, some way, by someone or some group in a way that will be best for the students, the tax payers, and the teachers.
Just something to ponder.
PS: sorry about the couple of type o’s