11/6/2019 EDIT: See the comments for some updated information since the post originally published. –mg
Last spring, the state legislature made a policy move that, in the Tweet-length-version, seemed like a win for kids often marginalized in our system. The oft repeated phrase? “Legislators delink state tests from high school graduation.”
The essential premise as I understand it: The current assessment system (SBA) didn’t deserve greater weight than the rest of a student’s academic performance when it came time to determine if the student had earned their diploma.
Ultimately, this premise prevailed, and the resulting policy established eight separate pathways toward earning a high school diploma. So far, so good. I’m on board.
Unfortunately though, as I’ve tried to sort out what this means for my current students, I can’t help but be concerned. Unless I’m missing something big, there still will be a handful of kids… particularly in the graduating class of 2020… for whom no pathway to graduation exists.
The high school I teach in serves a wide range of students, from the college-track, university-bound students who would have been fine no matter what, to the students who join us credit deficient due to health issues, life circumstances, or past academic struggles. Too often, the SBA test requirement, particularly the math SBA, proved the singular obstacle to graduation. For many kids, repeated failed attempts at the math SBA opened up the option for a “Collection of Evidence” (COE) course. In the COE class, instead of sitting yet again for a few marathon hours of SBA testing-on-all-the-math-you-should-have-learned, students participated in a highly structured, strictly facilitated assessment routine that enabled students to tackle smaller assessments, one at a time, in order to demonstrate their skills.
This COE option enabled students to demonstrate their math skills differently. It required more work from the kids. It required them to take the COE class instead of an art, PE, or CTE elective. (And significantly, many of the math COE students were among the top performers in my English classes, in the music classes, or across the hall in the Art room; math simply was their achilles heel.) The number of kids who needed the COE class was relatively small. Still, it worked as a pathway to graduation for many of my school’s students.
And starting with this year’s seniors, this particular pathway is no longer an option.
The rebuttal I predict: Yes, the COE may no longer be an option, but there are other ways that this student might find their path toward a diploma. They could enroll in a Bridge to College course. They could go to Running Start or take a Dual Credit Course. They could go back in time and take a “complete sequence of CTE courses which includes the potential to earn college credit or earn an industry recognized credential” (source).
The problem? My school does not have AP, IB, Bridge to College or Dual Credit Courses. For the class of 2020, it’s also too late for Running Start. We do currently have various CTE offerings, but none that are a “sequence of multiple courses” resulting in an industry certificate or college credit (required by RCW 28A.700.030).
There are the other test options: the SAT, ACT, and ASVAB. My hunch, though, is that a kid who struggled to sit for the SBA math test would have similar struggles for other traditional math tests. And this doesn’t even consider the fact that the SAT and ACT cost money, $50 each without the extra fees for the essay assessment: One more potential barrier.
How many kids left last June “on track” to graduate, only to now find themselves without options because of a convergence of well-intended policy and under-capable systems?
Considering that this policy passed just this past legislative session and is already in effect for this year’s graduating seniors, how many kids left last June “on track” to graduate, only to now find themselves without options because of a convergence of well-intended policy and under-capable systems?
I have many questions I need answered. The three biggies:
What do we do when one of this year’s seniors, because the ground beneath their feet has now shifted, is left without a viable pathway?
What about the kids whose life means they move from system to system, picking up credits here and there, credits that when cobbled together align to none of the eight options?
What about small or rural schools without system capacity to provide for all eight pathways?
I haven’t been able to find answers to these concerns. I’m hoping this is just a matter of me not being smart enough to navigate to the right .pdf file on the OSPI website or the right link in the State Board of Education’s Q&A.
But I can’t shake the sneaking worry that in our efforts to pave as many paths as possible, we’ve built some unforeseen roadblocks.
Hi Mark…thanks for writing this. I am the principal of an alternative high school and have exactly the same concerns you outlined here. I did write an email to the State Board expressing my concerns as part of their public feedback process, but I have not gotten any response from them. I am wondering if these concerns are being taken into account?
I hope they are. The intention of the policy is good, but I wonder if like many statewide policies it was designed with big systems at the forefront of the drafters’ minds, with an unintentional lack of awareness of the realities of small, rural, or alternative systems.
I do not share your concerns as the expedited waiver is still an option for the Class of 2020.
I am glad to hear that your students still have all options open for them. The inconsistent front-facing documents made it unclear about which grad year was qualified, but doing a ctrl-f of the law cleared that up. Concerns remain about small/rural systems who might not have capacity for offering other pathways even beyond 2020.
The same bill (HB 1599) that created the graduation pathways also extended the expedited assessment appeals waiver through the class of 2020 – specifically for the reasons, Mark, that you note. Students may be eligible to have the assessment/pathways graduation requirements waived if they meet specified criteria.
For more information on the expedited assessment appeals waiver, go to https://www.k12.wa.us/student-success/graduation/graduation-alternatives/expedited-assessment-appeals-waiver.
That is helpful Brian. Part of my confusion is that even though the bold at the top of the link mentions the class of 2020, the text below and all of the links end the waiver with the class of 2019. I did dig up the bill, and I do see the strike and replace extending the waiver to 2020, so I do see this potential pathway for kids… it’s too bad there isn’t a way to make that plainer in the front-facing documentation from OSPI.
That does open an opportunity that otherwise seemed closed off–hopefully the systems across the state were able to sort it out better than me and are nimble enough to respond in time.
Are there alternatives/provisions for smaller schools/systems who might not have capacity to offer diverse pathways? (No AP/IB, limited CTE offerings, etc.)
Hi Mark, there are no special alternatives/provisions for small schools. With that said, the State Board of Education has been tasked (per HB 1599) with surveying the field and others regarding the issue of local district capacity to deliver on all of the pathways. You may want to reach out to the SBE regarding their process. I was at the SBE meeting on 11/6 to hear a presentation on this process but don’t want to speak for them.
Thank you Brian, this is good information for me as well as any other interested readers to take action on.
I am pulling my hair out as I read this. I really appreciate your analysis, Mark.
I wish there were pathways for the NON math-oriented students who could fly in the humanities and social sciences, if people would just let them.
I predict more drop-outs instead of fewer with this latest “fix.”
That is my worry. I do think the intent was good… more options, less weight on a single test. However, no contingency plan for unforeseen collateral damage. I like the idea of the pathways in principle, but the short timeline between the law passing and grad day 2020 doesn’t give systems much time to be responsive and adapt.
This is precisely the situation we are in. I sat in conferences last night with a senior and their parents who needs to complete the math requirement for graduation. All options have been closed off. The COE was a fantastic option for students who struggled passing tests and that has been taken away from us for no discernible reason. It has left a significant number of students in the lurch with no guaranteed pathway to graduation. This has been intensely frustrating for all of us.
Yes, and I’m not getting clear answers. My principal is a master at sorting through bureaucratic messes to understand the impact on kids, and find ways to shield kids from the mistakes of policymakers. This one is a tough one…in no small part because of inconsistent messaging about which graduating class deals with what, which parts apply to whom and when… I almost wonder if we won’t see lawsuits.