Erich Martel
Increasing Graduation Requirements Will Not Improve Student Learning and Achievement
November 26, 2006

DCPSWatch Home

Major Areas
DC Public Schools
Mayoral Takeover
Special Education

State Education Agency
State Education Office
Vouchers
WTU
Wilson S.H.S.

Calendars
Board of Education
School Year

Columns
Elizabeth Davis
Ron Drake
Erich Martel
Nathan Saunders

Directories
Schools

Letters

Links

Organizations
DC Education Compact
Parents United
Proposition 100%

Press

Search

DCWatch Home

"D.C. School Superintendent Franklin L. Smith yesterday proposed increasing high school algebra, foreign language and geography requirements …
"The new high school course requirements … would require District students to take a broader range of courses and reach a significantly higher level of math achievement than their counterparts in other schools across the nation."

Brooke Masters, "Plan Would Stiffen D.C. Curriculum" The Washington Post (June 6, 1992), A1, A11.

Four Years Later, Reality:

"In the past five years, the decline in test scores has accelerated. Scores for children in several schools located in [the] city’s poorest wards have declined 15 to 20 percentage points or more. Ward 7 scores fell 12 points between 1991 and 1996."

Editorial, "An Absolutely Devastating Report" The Washington Post (November 13, 1996), A22.

2006: Another Promise:

"Key Actions: To ensure all students have enough time to master the academic core, we will raise the requirements in math, science and world history."

DCPS Master Education Plan (MEP), February 2006, http://www.greatschools.k12.dc.us/Default.aspx?tabid=167 

The proposal that an increase in DCPS graduation requirements (from the present 23.5 Carnegie units, CU, to 26.0 CU), starting with next year’s 9th graders, will lead to greater mastery of an undefined "academic core" cites no supporting evidence. Like earlier increases (see below), public concerns over present performance are answered with vague promises of future benefits. The MEP falsely implies that there is an "academic core" common to different subjects or subject areas. Each subject, however, even sequential ones like Algebra I, Geometry and Algebra II, has its own "academic core" of content and related skills. Students who fail to master the basic knowledge of foundational courses lack the skills to master the more advanced content and concepts of higher level courses. If a student needs "more time to master the academic core" of a course, the solution is to pinpoint the deficiency and provide the support that is identified, not socially promote him or her to a more difficult level!

There are many reasons why this proposal is educationally unsound and should not be approved.

I. First, The Proposal: To Raise Graduation Requirements from 23.5 to 26.0 Carnegie units
(http://www.k12.dc.us/dcps/curriculum/graduationpolicy.html) 

The proposal calls for increasing high school graduation requirements from the present 23.5 Carnegie units or credits (1 CU = a full-year or 2-semester course) to 26.0 CU as follows:

In mathematics, students will be required to pass Algebra I in order to be promoted to grade 10.

II. The Current State of Student Academic Achievement Calls for Better Management and Support for the Current Graduation Requirements

These increased requirements for the high school diploma are being promoted as the next logical step in the process of improving our schools’ academic rigor and the value of the high school diploma. As with earlier promises of distant, rosy, future success (Remember the 2001 Business Plan that promised an average 200-300 average increase in student’s combined SAT scores by 2006!?), this current proposal ignores:

• Continued lackluster student achievement;
• The failure to enforce standards of student behavior and personal responsibility;
• The many years of course content being watered down to substandard levels;
• The pervasive and widespread policies of social promotion and social graduation.

As every good parent, teacher and administrator knows, what matters is the content that that is taught in the courses that are required. In a school system, such as DCPS, with a long history of watered down course content, schools will respond to the increased demands by continuing to do as they have been doing. Nor does it help that DCPS officials have chosen elementary arithmetic and reading programs with poor histories of success in school systems, where most parents are unable to provide the home or tutoring support to make up for these programs’ deficiencies.

III. No State Requires More Than 24.0 Carnegie units!

DCPS already has more graduation requirements than 42 states, but is last in student achievement, e.g. the 2005 NAEP grade 8 math assessments. How will 2.5 more credits enhance improvement?

Beyond obvious minimum subject area requirements, there is no connection between the number of required courses for graduation and improved student performance. The highest performing states

According to the Education Commission of the States (http://mb2.ecs.org), no state presently requires – or has required by 2012 - minimum graduation requirements (i.e. diploma eligibility) of more than 24.0 Carnegie units! Only eight states require 24.0. With its 23.5 CU requirement, DCPS is already in 9th place in minimum requirements for graduation – but last in student achievement!

In 2005, only four of the top18 states with the highest average scale scores on the grade 8 NAEP mathematics assessment required 22.0 Carnegie units (Minnesota, New Jersey, South Dakota & Virginia); the rest fewer. DCPS is already in 9th place in numbers of graduation requirements, but came in last on that grade 8 NAEP mathematics assessments. Does anybody believe that a substantial percentage of the present cohort of 8th graders will be ready, next year, to complete an Algebra I course containing content comparable to national expectations of what such a course should cover?

IV. "All Students Must Enroll in Algebra No Later Than 9th Grade" - next September! What pre-Algebra courses will be available for students who are not ready for Algebra?

And what about the many students who will arrive in 9th grade with minimal skills in math? What courses will be available for them? Why is Algebra I being promoted as the 9th grade entry level course? Why not define Algebra I and Geometry as two of the three courses that a student must pass? Wouldn’t our potential graduates be a lot stronger with a solid Algebra I and a solid Geometry course than a watered down sequence of impressive course labels. Exactly who will be fooled by this? Colleges? Employers? The military?

V. More Requirements Means More Courses to Fail and Few Graduates.

More students will be unable to meet the stiffer requirements, which will lead to more students with partial schedules, more students roaming the halls and more drop-outs.

VI. Social Promotion and Social Graduation Undermine the Present Graduation Requirements. They Are Widespread and Await Action. More Requirements Will Put More Pressure on Principals to Allow Ineligible Students to Graduate.

The Superintendent and Board of Education have been repeatedly informed of the widespread practice in our high schools of social promotion and non-enforcement of existing graduation requirements, but have taken no steps to halt these ethical and legal violations.

There is currently an audit of the Wilson H.S. Class of 2006’s completion of graduation requirements. This audit was requested by the Superintendent. There should be no increase in graduation requirements until the full results of the audit are made public.

In June 2002, I reported to the Superintendent and the Board that students at Wilson H.S. were certified for graduation despite failure to complete the following requirements:

Wilson H.S. Class of 2001 (175 – 200 student records reviewed)

• 27 students were missing between 0.5 and 2.0 Carnegie units in math;
• 19 students were missing between 0.5 and 2.0 Carnegie units in science;
• 7 students’ records showed 12 unauthorized grade changes;
• 8 students received credit for 11 Wilson H.S. they never took;
• 7 students received credit for 24 courses at a previous school that they never took;
• 31 students received credit for 49 courses they passed a second time;
• 13 students received 1.0 Carnegie unit for 15 Wilson H.S. courses worth 0.5 CU;
• 6 students received 1.0 Carnegie unit for 26 previous school courses worth 0.5 CU;
• 77 students were allowed to graduate despite failing to legitimately complete all requirements.

Wilson H.S. Class of 2002 (75-100 student records reviewed)

• 7 students were missing between 0.5 and 2.5 Carnegie units in math;
• 9 students were missing between 0.5 and 1.5 Carnegie units in science;
• 5 students had 6 unauthorized grade changes;
• 4 students received credit for 11 courses at Wilson H.S. that they never took;
• 2 students received credit for 4 courses at a previous school that they never took;
• 3 students received credit for 4 courses that they passed a second time;
• 4 students received 1.0 Carnegie unit for 4 Wilson H.S. courses worth 0.5 CU;
• 2 students received 0.5 Carnegie unit for 13 courses at a previous school worth .333 CU;
• 15 students were allowed to graduate despite failing to legitimately complete all requirements.

Wilson H.S. Class of 2006 (420 student records reviewed)

Four years later, despite the public embarrassment to my school and an independent review that confirmed the bulk of my reports (http://www.dcpswatch.com/dcps/030922b.htm), massive non-compliance was found to continue at Wilson H.S.:

The Deficiencies:

• 70 students were missing between 0.5 and 2.5 Carnegie units in math;
• 34 students were missing between 0.5 and 2.0 Carnegie units in science.
• 48 students were missing 1.0 or 2.0 Carnegie units in English;
• 40 students were missing 0.5 or 1.0 Carnegie units in Vocational Education (CTE);
• 67 students were missing between 0.5 and 2.5 Carnegie units in social studies;
• 34 students were missing between 1.0 or 2.0 Carnegie units in World Languages;
• 20 students were missing between 0.5 and 1.5 Carnegie units in Health and Physical Ed;
• 11 students were missing 0.5 Carnegie units in Art;
• 9 students were missing 0.5 Carnegie units in Music;
• 50 students were missing 0.5 to 3.5 Carnegie units in Electives.

Some of the Causes of the Deficiencies:

• 67 students were scheduled into 108 classes they had previously passed.
• 53 students with 107 available periods were NOT scheduled into courses they needed.
• 47 students received inflated Carnegie units in 58 classes;
• 29 students were enrolled in night school courses in violation of enrollment regulations (some were transferred out of classes they were failing at Wilson H.S. – mostly math classes – without notifying the teacher – and into night school classes);
• 21 students were scheduled into classes in the reverse sequence, e.g. Algebra II or Geometry before Algebra I; French II before French II – and received credit for both;

In addition, sixty-one students were listed as seniors despite having fewer than the required 15.0 Carnegie units. According to DCMR ch 22 promotion regulations, 22 were 10th graders. Since they were listed as seniors (grade 12), they were not required to take the DCAS test.

Woodrow Wilson H.S. June 5, 2006 Graduation Day Data and Statistics

On August 15, 2006, I received copies of the official lists of all DCPS H.S. graduates from the Board of Education. The Wilson H.S. list shows 311 names, 109 fewer than appeared on the 6/5/06 graduation day program. 90 of the 311 are students I cited as ineligible, i.e. failing to legitimately meet all mandatory requirements. Ten more students I had not cited as ineligible are also absent from the list. Thus:

Ethnic/Racial Breakdown of Wilson H.S. Students on June 5, 2006:
Eligible versus Ineligible for Graduation on June 5, 2006

VII. DCPS High Schools are Certifying Large Numbers of Students for Graduation Despite Their Failure to Complete All Mandatory Graduation Requirements.

DCPS HIGH SCHOOLS ARE NOT HOLDING REQUIRING COMPLETION OF THE EXISTING 23.5 CARNEGIE UNITS. THEY WILL HOLD EVEN FEWER STUDENTS ACCOUNTABLE FOR MEETING 26.0 CARGEGIE UNITS!

Woodrow Wilson H.S.’s five year senior graduation rate (more accurately, senior completion rate: percentage of seniors present in October who graduated on time 8 months later) averages 80.6%. As the next chart shows, almost every other high school claims official senior completion rates greater than Wilson H.S.

In 2003 and 2004, Eastern H.S. reported to Board of Education official graduation statistics of over 100% of its enrolled seniors (see chart, below)!

Ballou H.S. graduate 98.6% of its seniors in 2005, but only 73% in 2006.

Bell Multicultural H.S. claimed 89.5% in 2005, then dropped to 66% in 2006!

When the records of the Wilson H.S. Class of 2006 were closely examined, the senior completion rate fell from 74.0% to 52.6%! If this standard (valid completion of the Board’s mandated graduation requirements) were applied to all DCPS high schools, the REAL SENIOR COMPLETION RATE would probably fall to half or less of the number most of the schools are reporting!

IN THE FACE OF THESE NUMBERS, WHY MAKE GRADUATION REQUIREMENTS EVEN MORE DIFFICULT TO VALIDLY COMPLETE?!

An increase in the graduation requirements will lead to an increase in socially graduated students. This is dishonest and hurts everyone: students, teachers, administrators, parents and community.

IT ENABLES OUR SCHOOLS TO GRADUATE STUDENTS UNPREPARED FOR COLLEGE, CAREER or GAINFUL EMPLOYMENT. THIS MUST STOP!

When the time comes that DCPS students are being held to existing graduation requirements and the supporting course requirements and those course requirements meet generally accepted national standards - and the superintendent no longer allows principals to use student confidentiality rights to certify ineligible students for a high school diploma – there should be no talk of increasing graduation requirements.

VIII. DCPS High School Senior Graduation/Completion Rates, 2002 – 2006

(Senior Graduation or Completion Rate: Number of June Graduates on the Official List of Graduates Sent by Each High School to the Board of Education, Divided by the Number of Seniors in the October Audit Count.) Do not confuse this graduation rate with other high school graduation rate formulas, which typically compare 9th grade enrollment with graduation numbers four years later. Nonetheless, the senior graduation rate, which uses the October enrollment audit (conducted by an independent contractor) is a useful and more accurate base ratio against which comparisons over a longer time period (e.g. grade 9 to 12) can be judged.

The enrollment audits for October 2001 through 2005 are posted on the DC State Education Office website (www.seo.dc.gov). Schools that showed a greater than 10% change in the senior completion rate from June 2005 to June 2006 are highlighted in red.

- compiled by Erich Martel, Wilson H.S., DCPS, 8/19/06

IX. Historical Overview of DCPS Graduation Requirements

The Four Track System, 1956-1967
The requirements were in "units" for grades 10-12; one unit equaled a current Carnegie unit (a full year or 2-semester course)

* These are the totals for grades 10 – 12; it isn’t entirely clear from the report how many credits were required in grade 9. It appears that the above "total units" include grade 9 English in all four tracks. Similarly, the "total units" for the Honors Track included foreign languages in grades 8 and 9, elementary algebra in grade 8 and intermediate algebra in grade 9.
The Honors math requirement concluded with plane and solid geometry and trigonometry.

(source: Racine, Marie M.B., "Influences On Curriculum Development in the Public Schools of Washington, D.C., 1804 – 1982," Paper #4 in "Studies in D.C. History and Public Policy," University of the District of Columbia, May 1982; located in the Washingtoniana Room, D.C. Public Library, REF272.1909R121)

X. CHANGING DCPS GRADUATION REQUIREMENTS, 1956 – Present

The following columns show the changes in graduation requirements over the past five decades. It isn’t clear from the report what graduation requirements were in place from 1967 (when the track system was dismantled) to the early or mid-1970s.

(*Including 1 year of "Topics of Math")
(** Including Algebra I)

Sources:

• 2006 proposals: (http://www.k12.dc.us/dcps/curriculum/graduationpolicy.html) 
• Franklin Smith, Superintendent of Schools, "New Graduation Requirements … for the Class of 1996," DCPS brochure, January 1993.