Should high school diplomas be tiered?

I think so...

1) 40% of kids are ready for college according to CA data. College, or continued ed (two years) is required to not live on food stamps. So shouldn't the diploma reflect the need for continued ed?

2) a diploma signals readiness. An AP student gets the same diploma and a full time SpEd student who reads at a 5th grade level. An easy assumption is both did just as well if on a job app it asks 'high school grad?' I don't even think my HR dept read through my transcripts.

3) Sure we'll see all of the de facto gaps. This will be good. De facto problems inschools should be out loud, not hidden in data.

4) Tier them at 'advanced', 'developed', and 'non-grad track'. These serve as quick, understood signals of progress for everyone.

Advanced would be 3.3 with no summer school. Developed would be 3.0, with credit make-up. Non-grad track would be 2.9.

Special circumstances can be ferreted out with summative finals.

5) increased pressure on teachers? Naw. Same 'ole. And it's worth it to have clear lines of communication and united fronts on curriculum - which are best practices anyhow.

People bitch about teachers failing kids anyhow.

And really, we need to add the teams of data on home life and education to the conversation.

6) with this quick signal it will tell kids if they want to take on $200,000 worth of debt at a 4 yr or sharpen skills at a community college.

Submitted July 06, 2017 at 11:09AM by anonoman925 http://ift.tt/2tQyzPE