Graduation Rule
Education Links
With this panel, we begin our treatment of education law.
Like our other topic areas, this is a work in process. It will grow
week by week. We thought it advisable to begin therefore with Minnesota's
graduation rule, because it focusses on the very purpose of education,
the end product, what students must know. This panel thus begins our treatment
of Minnesota's high school graduation rule. It may be helpful to
understand first a bit of background.
Until recent passage of Minnesota's graduation rule, the
State had rather minimal graduation requirements. Our state curriculum
regulations contained a weak "must offer" requirement which consisted of
minimum course offerings for students. In addition, State regulations
contained a rather minimal seat-time based graduation rule. This
rule focussed on the amount of time a student sat in class. If a
student attended one week in a math class, that constituted one week of
work towards the high school graduation requirement; it didn't really matter
whether the student learned a little or a lot, the week counted the same.
A student could get a week of credit toward graduation at a D- level, which
meant that a student could time-serve his way through high school, learning
little or nothing and still receive a diploma. Moreover, it was possible
for a student to miss the core essentials of learning, the fundamentals
of history, economics, writing, science, and reading, because our prior
state graduation rule contained absolutely no standards regarding what
a student must know or be able to do. Our old graduation rule
focussed on time-spending rather than learning. It is a sad fact,
moreover, that under the old legal regimen, even the minimal state requirements
were never rigorously enforced. We lacked a sound mechanism to determine
how schools were doing; public accountability was virtually impossible.
As it became increasingly apparent that our public schools
were graduating students who lacked reading, writing, math and science
skills necessary to function in modern society, the legislature decided
that graduation requirements should focus on what kids knew and could do,
instead of how long they warmed a chair. This central idea, graduation
for demonstrated proficiency formed the basis of Minnesota's graduation
law and implementing rule. While the ultimate outcome of the legislative
and rule making process has generated controversy, the core idea, that
students should prove what they know, seems difficult to challenge.
Minnesota's Curriculum and assessment laws have now been codified to Chapter 120B. Section 120B.02(a) articulates the purpose of the graduation rule:
- Results-oriented graduation rule; basic skills
requirements; profile of learning. The legislature
is committed to establishing a rigorous, results-oriented graduation
rule for Minnesota's public school students. To that end, the
state board shall use its rule making authority under section 127A.66,
subdivision 2, to adopt a statewide, results-oriented graduation rule to
be implemented starting with students beginning ninth grade in the 1996-1997
school year. The board shall not prescribe in rule or
otherwise the delivery system or form of instruction that local sites
must use to meet the requirements contained in this rule.
-
The graduation requirement must be results-oriented.
It must focus on what kids can do rather than how long they spent learning.
-
The requirement must be rigorous.
-
The graduation requirement must be implemented starting with
students beginning ninth grade in the 1996-1997 school year.
-
The board shall not prescribe the delivery system or form
of instruction. In other words, the state sets minimum learning results,
but it shall not prescribe teaching methods.
Basic Requirements/Profiles The legislation
envisioned two parts to the state graduation rule. The statute required
the new graduation rule to establish minimum competencies reflected in
the basic requirements assessment and rigorous profile of learning standards.
The Department of Children Families and Learning implemented this requirement
with two separate rules. The first rule establishes minimum
competencies in reading, writing, and mathematics. Competency is
assessed primarily with paper and pencil examinations given annually.
The authors of the basic standards examinations were instructed to device
a test which assessed a 8th or 9th grade student's readiness to engage
in learning towards the high standards. In other words, these tests
were not designed to assess readiness to graduate; they were to assess
readiness for high school itself.
Profiles. The statute contains requirements
for the high standards as well. The statute continues:
- The profile of learning must measure student
performance using performance-based assessments compiled
over time that integrate higher academic standards, higher
order thinking skills, and application of knowledge from a variety of content
areas. The profile of learning shall include a broad range of academic
experience and accomplishment necessary to achieve the goal of preparing
students to function effectively as purposeful thinkers, effective communicators,
self-directed learners, productive group participants, and responsible
citizens. The commissioner shall develop and disseminate to
school districts a uniform method for reporting student
performance on the profile of learning.
The state considered, but for better or worse, rejected application
of a similar testing regimen for the high standards. Ultimately the
CFL decided to implement a highly ambitious program involving performance
based assessments. To some extent, this decision, while resting on
currently popular assessment theory, has caused controversy. Some
object to the objectives of the profiles themselves; others focus upon
the fact that by requiring performance based assessments, to some extent
the new rule actually determines the method of delivery and instruction,
in contravention of the statutory mandated.
Mandatory Implementation: The legislation
seems rather clear in requiring all school districts to implement the graduation
rule. Minnesota Statutes Section 120B.03 subdivision 1(a) states,
in no uncertain terms: "A school district shall implement the
profile of learning of the graduation rule....." The statute granted
districts three alternatives. It could implement the entire rule
for the 1998-1999 school year and later. Or, the school could apply
for and receive Commissioner permission to phase in the rule more gradually,
in which case the school would fail to receive certain financial incentives.
Every Minnesota School District elected full implementation and accepted
the funding associated with that election.
Performance Packages: A great deal of controversy
has arisen over the content of so-called "performance packages."
These packages were designed primarily to allow districts to comply with
the rule without requiring each district to develop its own performance
based assessment device. Much of the controversy coming from
the education establishment focusses on the quality of packages or their
impact upon the classroom. But, in fact, by law no district is required
to use these packages. In fact, the law rather ambiguously suggests
that perhaps a school district may not even require teachers to use those
packages. The statute states:
- Teachers are not required to use a state model
performance package. Teachers are encouraged to develop and
use a performance package that equals or exceeds the difficulty of the
state model performance package. Minn. Stat. Section 123B.03 subdivision
2.
Early Graduation: The right to graduate early
has been preserved by law. Section 120B.07 states:
- Notwithstanding any law to the contrary, any
secondary school student who has completed all required
courses may, with the approval of the student, the student's parent
or guardian, and local school officials, graduate before the
completion of the school year. General education revenue attributable
to the student must be paid as though the student was in attendance for
the entire year.
Advanced academic credit.
The statute requires districts to grant credit to students for advanced
courses taken outside the district. Section 120B.14 states:
- A district must grant academic credit to a pupil
attending an accelerated or advanced academic course offered by a higher
education institution or a nonprofit public agency other than the district,
if the pupil successfully completes the course attended and passes an examination
approved by the district. If no comparable course is offered
by the district, the commissioner shall determine the number of credits
which shall be granted to a pupil who successfully completes and passes
the course. If a comparable course is offered by the district,
the board must grant a comparable number of credits to the pupil.
If there is a dispute between the district and the pupil regarding
the number of credits granted for a particular course, the pupil
may appeal the school board's decision to the commissioner. The commissioner's
decision regarding the number of credits shall be final. The credits granted
to a pupil shall be counted toward the graduation requirements and subject
area requirements of the district. Evidence of successful completion
of each class and credits granted shall be included in the pupil's
secondary school record.
Education Links:
|
 |
