By Tamara
We currently have a 65% graduation rate in my district. Raising that rate has rightfully become the district’s top priority. Yet after my experience teaching summer school at the high school with the lowest graduation rate in the district, I question how administrators are pursuing increased on-time graduation.
My summer school students were mostly upper-classmen needing to retrieve freshman English credits. I was given a packet the students were to complete with the stipulation that as soon as students adequately finished said packet, I could pass them (all summer courses were pass/fail) and send them on their way. This was the expectation for every course offered regardless of subject. Check the box, pass go, collect your credit/diploma.
This approach to credit retrieval raised huge questions and flags for me:
1. If they struggled with the content/concepts the first time around, how was independently completing a packet with the same assignments going to produce success let alone learning or acquisition of skills?
2. If students know they can complete a semester’s worth of credit by completing a packet in a week (this was happening in a number of classes) why should they bother coming to class for 40 weeks during the regular school year? Especially in a neighborhood whose zip code is one of the poorest in the state. Their families often need them to work.
3. What does this kind of “box checking” do to the value of a diploma? We already have businesses and colleges screaming about kids not having adequate skills.
Because I wanted my students to gain confidence and experience success in an area they had struggled, I altered the packet and added additional assignments and assessments. I shared my rationale with them that if they struggled the first time, why do the exact same thing again. Let’s try a different approach to success. Their response was resigned at best, pissy at worst. One student said to me, “I was really looking forward to just completing the packet and getting on with my summer.”
And the real kicker? If they didn’t get the work done and pass the summer session, they could complete those packets in a special after-school “detention” class this fall. Um, accountability? When my eyebrows raised at this, the acting principal quickly pointed out that they needed to do whatever it took for kids to retrieve their credits, graduate on time, and get central administration off their back.
But I ask, at what cost? When expectations are no higher than completing a packet will any of these kids actually graduate with college or work ready skills? Have we given them the opportunity to develop the quality of perseverance or to value critical thinking? Has our (teachers and administrators) transparent goal of graduation by the most minimum standard foster a sense of achievement or even learning? Or have we sold them the idea that “success” is earned by checking a box.
well this blog is great i love reading your articles.
“How do we move the conversation with pressured administrators back to the goal of learning so diplomas are actually worth something?”
I believe this relates to accountability and incentive. If graduation rates are the focus then policies, from well intentioned people, will be designed to improve that measure. But since there are no easy answers to the problems schools face the policies that are implemented end up being overly simplistic. But soon support for these programs wane and a new focus is established. Energies are put towards improving some other measure until support for that dries up. It seems like a very hollow cycle.
Since the idea of completion trumping learning chaffes all of us, how do we move the conversation with pressured administrators back to the goal of learning so diplomas are actually worth something?
I agree with your title, DrPezz… and we’ve in the past had click for credit classes like those you describe.
Unfortunately, too much in our system is not about learning but about completion. I think this is part of some peoples’ motivation with the standards movement– if completion can also indicate that a standard has been met, then all’s well.
And, since standards (in English at least) can be awfully vague, any number of performances could be interpreted as demonstrating achievement of a standard– and those click for credit courses are usually sold as being aligned with standards in order to justify their validity.
Personally, I think that there should only be two options if a course is failed in high school: (1) repeat the seat time or (2) transfer to one of the many online public schools available out there now to complete their diploma.
My school only really discussed passage rates and graduation rates these last few years. That’s all that mattered. Learning was virtually an unused term.
We even have classes during the day entirely composed of kids sitting at computers clicking for credits or filling out packets to pass. It’s not just outside of the regular day now; it’s part of students’ schedules.
P.S. “Clicking for Credits” would be a phenomenal title for a documentary on this topic. 🙂