No Easy Answers; Courts May Write Final Rules

By Joanne M. Haas

A lot of public school districts will be in court over their still-pending policies on student advancement and graduation, a state official predicts.

"Everything will end up in court," Sue Grady said during a workshop Friday (October 27, 2000) at the 2000 WEAC Convention in Madison.

Grady, content and learning team director with the Department of Public Instruction, detailed the two new state laws dealing with how children advance through elementary and high school.

The last several years have brought a change in attitude in the state's education philosophy aimed at guarding against what is popularly known as "social promotion" - the practice of advancing or graduating a student regardless of actual performance.

Two state laws require school boards to adopt - by September 1, 2002 - written policies for advancement or graduation. Each public school board must, by that date, have criteria for advancing a student from 4th grade to 5th grade, and again from 8th grade to 9th grade.

This policy must include the results from the knowledge and concepts examination, which includes six separate scores in the areas of language arts, reading, mathematics, science, social studies and writing. These scores are recorded as advanced, proficient, basic and minimal.

State law also requires the district's advancement policy to include pupil academic performance, teacher recommendations and any other academic criteria established by the local school board.

The first to be affected by the new policies will be the 4th and 8th graders in the 2002-2003 school year.

"As school districts write these policies, they don't have to be the same for grade 4 and grade 8," Grady said, stressing the local policy simply must address the requirements noted in the new law.

Also by that date, each board must have a written policy detailing the requirements for high school graduation, beginning with the graduation class of 2003-2004.

These requirements must include specific credits (at least 13 credits, although most districts require more), the high school graduation test score, as well as academic performance and teacher recommendations.

The high school graduation test includes four scores, covering language arts, mathematics, science and social studies. Each score either "meets the standard" or "does not meet the standard."

Grady said the painstaking process of meeting this deadline might sound straightforward. But in reality, it is a loaded task.

The act of making a decision whether to move a child to the next grade or graduate "is nothing new.we have always made those decisions," she said. But what is new is "what we use and how we go about making the decision. That's the change," Grady said.

And that is where it gets tricky. State law does not contain any definition of academic performance, teacher recommendations or other academic criteria.

Grady said the three tasks facing school boards are:

• Defining the criteria - "What do these mean?"
• Setting the level of expectation - "How good is good enough?"
• Determining how the criteria are brought together - "How is a decision made?"

The authority is with the school board, she said. But what does the school board do? "Give it to the administration. And where does the administration usually give it? Teachers and committees."

Defining test scores is easy because the tests are already established. However, there is no definition for academic performance.

"Academic performance is how a school district defines academic performance," she said. This may include grade point average, report card grades, service learning or a portfolio.

There also is no definition for teacher recommendations. Grady said some options districts are looking at involve checklists, letters of recommendations, passing grades, or even a faculty vote.

The district also must define other academic criteria, she said. This might include summer school attendance, tutoring, portfolio or even daily assignment work.

The next task is to set the level of expectation. For example, consider the test scores. Is receiving a score of basic or above on three of the six categories in the knowledge and concepts test good enough? Or, is it two of six, or five of six?

"This is a political decision. It is going to have to involve a lot of people," Grady said. "There must be a balance. ... You're going to have to make a decision. How good is good enough?"

The same type of debate must occur when defining teacher recommendations, academic performance and other academic criteria.

The last step is pulling it all together. What steps must be followed to determine if the requirements have been met to advance or graduate?

Consider the high school graduation test. It has an "opt out" provision for parents who don't want their children to take it. When that happens, what other requirements will be imposed, and how will those be measured? The board will have to turn to its definitions of academic performance and teacher recommendations.

Once the policies are finished, Grady strongly advises: Run it by the district's legal counsel and "run it against real kids."

Add to the mix the fact each district will have its own policies to meet the two state laws. What happens if a child transfers from one district to another? How does the district weigh the child's performance against the child's new district?

All these topics have a variety of solutions, which is why Grady sees the day when a lot of these policies are challenged in court.

In the meantime, the DPI does have resource material available to assist districts in the development of policies. The booklet is titled: "Suggestions for Local School Boards in Approaching the Development of High School Graduation and Fourth/Eighth Grade Advancement Policies: Implementing the Provisions of 1999 Wisconsin Act 9."

For more information, go to the DPI Web page at:
http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/dpi/oea/hsge.html