The Graduation Program is the education program students must complete to earn a Graduation (Dogwood) Diploma. We recognize that elements of this program likely need to be changed to ensure success for each learner. Some of the ideas we’ve heard so far are that students:
- would benefit from choice and flexibility in meeting graduation requirements, including multiple options or pathways for success (e.g. academic, vocational)
- should meet graduation requirements through a demonstration of competencies rather than course completion
- could demonstrate their learning through a collection of work
These are just a few of the things we’ve heard. What do you think?
What should a graduation program look like to ensure success for all learners and support an effective transition to post-secondary education and/or work?
Your latest message that academics, district specialists and classroom teachers are discussing curriculum changes indicates that you are missing a piece of the puzzle.
As the parent of a student in University (UBC Engineering) I hear from students how significant numbers of students struggle and fail at post secondary. These students are some of the brightest as the entrance requirements are high. Grads and Post secondary educators should be included in the conversation.
Also Grads that do not go into post secondary need to be considered and representatives that understand their needs should also be included.
Hi Cathy. The Ministry encourages everyone who’s interested in education transformation to get involved – including students and post-secondary educators. With that in mind, the Ministry has established a Standing Committee on Provincial Curriculum. A major role for the members of this committee will be to communicate information to, and solicit information and feedback from, their respective organizations. The Provincial organization representing students has been invited to be a committee member, as have reps from the BC post-secondary sector.
I am a teacher who has taught math and science at all secondary levels for the past 20 years. I believe it is long-overdue to eliminate the math and science 11 requirement for graduation.
This requirement has resulted in the creation of alternative, lower-level courses like A&W math and Science and Tech which are viewed as ‘mickey-mouse’ by students and post-secondary instituations (they not accepted as a ‘real’ math or science credits). These courses almost always ‘dumped’ on the least senior teachers and the classes often border on being unteachable – filled with uninterested, disaffected and often learning-disabled students who know they are merely “hoop-jumping”.
The content of these courses is less rigorous than the corresponding gr. 9 and 10 level courses. Any math needed general numeracy has been taught by grade 8; a strong junior science program (which we used to have before the last curriculum change) will expose students to a breadth of science concepts.
Math and science 11 courses should be electives. Imagine how effective a trades math course could be if only interested students were in the classroom. It is a disservice to these students to place them in a class with others who have no interest in the course and respond by disrupting instruction and the learning environment.
Removing the pointless math and science 11 requirements will improve the classroom environment for students who wish to take ‘alternative’ math/science courses and will allow the remaining students to follow their own passions by selecting a meaningful elective.
Marta,
I couldn’t agree more about your comments. I said in earlier comments that I think the whole graduation program needed to be changed.
I’m dating myself here but I graduated from grade 12 in 1980. At that time you COULD graduate from high school without math or science 11. IF you WANTED to go to university, you would need to have a math 11 and a science 11 and a second language 11, but it was the student’s choice.
To me the current graduation requirements seem like they have been created under the assumption that “everyone” is going to go to university. In my opinion, that’s a mistake.
Me in ’79 Bev. Remember we had to take PE 11 back then? Perhaps with increasing health risks stemming from a sedentary population, bringing back PE 11 would be a better choice for a grad requirement than forcing math & science on an unwilling and/or unable population.
The Ministry is in the midst of transforming BC Curriculum to provide learning opportunities intended to make learning more meaningful to personal interests and strength and relevant to the skills students will need to be successful in their lives. The Mathematics and science education curricula for BC public schools will be part of this transformation process.
Last summer and into the fall of 2012, the Ministry initiated working groups consisting of academics, classroom teachers and district specialists to discuss curriculum transformation. Following the direction of these groups, it has been proposed future curricula focus on including a broader range of 21st Century adaptive skills. In addition to building a deep understanding of content based concepts, the new curriculum will develop skills and attitudes to enable learners to be effective communicators, creative and critical thinkers who have the confidence to apply their knowledge to complex issues and problems.
Currently, the focus is on developing curricula prototypes for the six major disciplines from grades K-10. However, discussions regarding requirements for graduation are well under way. As the graduation requirements become more defined, grade 11 and 12 curricula development will follow suit. With the changes in both the curricula and graduation requirements, there will many opportunities to address the very concerns you’ve expressed here.
“the Ministry initiated working groups consisting of academics, classroom teachers and district specialists to discuss curriculum transformation.”
Mike – how are these classroom teachers selected? No one at my large school got an email with a call for applicants. I really hope math and science teachers are consulted before the next round of changes. Math teacher have had it with constant changes followed by ‘unchanges’. Science teachers are still fuming from the last top-down curricula that removed most of the hands-ons units from Science 10 replacing them by lengthy vocabulary list.
Hi Marta,
The consultations last year involved a variety of educators from all levels of the system. The discussions and consultations were exploratory in nature; many took place within school districts and community contexts. As a result educators were identified in variety of ways (e.g., through their direct expression of interest, by district administrators etc.).
The province is now moving forward with curriculum development and recently put the call out for teachers via the BCTF. As curriculum is developed, we are asking those nominated team members to connect with other teachers in their communities and via professional organizations. The Ministry welcomes feedback at any time and we will certainly be posting drafts as they are available. If you want to provide any thoughts about math and science in particular, we would be pleased to forward to the staff involved in that work.
I asked my son and his girlfriend this question after they had finished their first year of University. They see that all students do not take the same path. Their friends who struggled with Secondary Math and Science were left behind. Why can’t there be another path for them so that they don’t feel like they have failed at life before they even get out of high school? I don’t mean to lower standards as an exercise in self esteem. In small towns, such as ours, we don’t have a mechanics option and our wood shop is a joke. How can we offer any kind of trades training? Chemistry and Physics, no problem.
They felt that doing away with Provincial Exams removes the rigor that is required in post secondary study. They both are at UBC and found that despite the fact that everyone there got in with high marks, many did not have the skills to succeed. Self motivation and the ability to problem solve independently were key. My son got in on a Supplemental Application (most Grade 12 students aren’t even aware of these). As an athlete he missed a lot of school and had to do on-line courses and individual study to catch up. He thinks that helped. His girlfriend was a BC Scholar and had to drop out of General Sciences in the first month. She switched to Arts.
The way some secondary teachers use homework is more of a teaching method than a skill/concept exercise. These students thought that BC Ed should be looking at the way homework is assigned in University and steering teachers towards that model. Also university students are able to give the Professor/Instructor feedback at the end of every class. The P/I uses the feedback to improve the delivery of education – no hard feelings. The students respect the opportunity and the P/I’s respect the feedback.
DPA – they think is a joke. If schools can carve out the time to have independent reading, why can’t they carve out the time to have supervised physical activity? Of course after hearing the latest parent comment, there has to be allowances for students who have health issues that exclude them from sport.
I urge the BC Ed Plan to seek feedback from a variety of B.C. students – Post Secondary (both University and Community College), students that have spent a year in the workforce, students that have required a sixth year to graduate and students have not graduated after year 6. It wouldn’t hurt to talk to kids in secondary school right now either.
I have a child with a blood disorder that means if he runs too much all the oxygen his blood can carry goes to his muscles and starves his organs, triggering massive headaches from the brain being deprived of oxygen, chest pain from the heart and liver being deprived of oxygen, etc. The doctor wrote a letter telling the school of the issue and suggesting it would be better if he didn’t do gym at all, as pushing too hard is damaging to him. However the school informs me that if he doesn’t do gym 9 and 10 he can’t graduate. How can you think this type of requirement is ok? My friend’s son has sickle cell and she is just accepting that he won’t graduate, but my son really wants to go to university. How unfair.
Hi Maria
If the student has a medical exemption from taking P.E. (Dr.’s note) then the principal may provide the student with “standing granted” for PE in Grade 9 and should the exemption be provided as well in Grade 10 and ensuing years, then the student may be given “standing granted” for each year including their graduation year. Before the school provides “standing granted”, the principal may wish to encourage the student to take some form of alternative course, such as an online PE course, or they may be able to work out an alternative Phys Ed program that does not require the physical elements of PE.
I have children that are both in elementary school and one that is currently trying to do grade 10. It has been a constant battle for him staying focused on the medial courses like English, math, socials and science and PE10. At the present time he is into computer programming and is getting very good at it. This is his passion and his drive and as such is it very discouraging watching him limp through a Socials program or a gym program as he homeschooling to be told that the medial things in life like maintaining a yard ie cutting grass, shoveling a very long driveway etc is not considered physical activity because it isn’t something like bouncing a basketball etc. It is just as physical if not more so and actually takes into account real life. There needs to be more focus on life after the classroom and less on what they figure kids should know about. When a child is given opportunities to grow and learn the courses that they want they achieve great things. i agree that the kids need to do schoolwork but in hindsight why couldn’t it be just that they need so many credits as opposed to specific courses. This way the courses would be designed to the child’s interest and goal as opposed to the ministry goals in which are not useful in the child’s direction.
So, if a child has no interest in ever voting in an election, it would be okay for them to drop social studies and take basket weaving?
If a child doesn’t like to read, they can just take film studies? and if writing assignments is too much bother, they can just do an oral report and post it to YouTube?
Everyone can already do what comes easily to them…
Education is not about getting a job, but about the development of a person.
If a person is strong and well coordinated as per a good PE curriculum, they can shovel a driveway, AND they can play sports. However, if you can shovel a driveway, it doesn’t mean that you are necessarily coordinated enough for sports. I wouldn’t give you a credit in calculus if all you could do is calculate sines, cosines and tangents.
If a person has a good understanding of social studies, they can use discernment and they can effectively participate in influencing the society that they live in…which is important! Even if they don’t like it, it is important! There is so much voter apathy already in the world today, and so often it is because people do not recognize that their participation is a significant piece of the puzzle! Social studies is all about how people influenced the world around them…sort of critical to being a good citizen whether you like it or not.
The reason that it isn’t just about credits is because kids will not choose the courses that they require in order to be well rounded…and most adults don’t even understand the significance of a lot of course material.
Also, how many jobs have you ever had that actually required a significant amount of schooling? I’ve worked many jobs in my life, and rarely has my success in any position depended on my skill set. Skills can be learned at any age. The thing that makes people most employable is the quality of their personhood…
Well-rounded, adaptable, creative, open-minded learning-oriented people are the biggest assets any employer could hope for.
Folks that are accustomed only to doing what they’re interested in and to doing only ‘what they HAVE to do’…they’re already a dime a dozen…they’re the ones that get replaced by ATMs and manufacturing robots.
Accreditation can help just a little bit as far as social mobility goes…
But EDUCATION is what enables us to truly thrive, wherever we’re at on the social ladder.
I don’t think that when I first wrote my comment I explained my feelings enough.
I agree that Math and English are very important in peoples lives. I also agree that the new Planning 10 course is very beneficial to kids as it makes them take a look at themselves. But other than English and Math what courses are mandatory for getting into college? Socials. Definitely not.
Our children have been raised to be the governments puppets in that they are to believe and learn what they feel they should and take away their ability for thinking for themselves.
When looking at a small child they have such natural curiosity and it is amazing to watch. Unfortunately, as time goes on you slowly see that diminish when a child enters the school years to the point that they can’t think for themselves anymore. I have done both sides of the spectrum both public school and home learning and I can honestly say that as of right now my child has a greater self esteem being at home then he did in school. He is always feeling successful in his courses as opposed to be put down by his inadequacies.
All I am saying is that it would be nice to see that this could be for everyone. We need to focus on peoples strengths and not their weaknesses. That’s what we do when we are looking at our careers and whether or not we are going to stay in a job. Why should our children be any different?
Thank you for your comment, Sonja. Is there anything that you can point to that is making things better for your son at home? It sounds like you’re personalizing the curriculum for him, and if that’s true, how is it going?
I think that not everyone is suited for academics. There are many people that are good working with their hands whether in trades or fine arts for example. There is too much emphasis on pushing students into high education with no real reason except to get it. The students should be allowed to choose more and find out their strenghs early so that by the time they end up to graduation they are ready for what they want to do. The testing needs to go, and use of standardized tests after graduation or during last year of school be used instead. I go to university with people in their 4th year not knowing what they should be doing or even if they would enjoy their job. I personally would have benefited transferring into college easier if I somehow knew my personality traits that would make me figure out which career paths I would naturally be good at. So I think personality and applied psychology should be used to help students assess themselves with tests like MBTI, and big 5.
Abolish exit interviews and such. Its a pain to students who already have so much to worry about academic wise and to be honest its quite useless. I don’t see how being interviewed on what you want to do in the future is beneficial to anyone. Students have their peers, family and teachers to talk about and worry about their future with. Planning 10 should be kept, though. It’s a good course.
While I can appreciate the reasoning behind the Grad Transitions program, the way that it’s being carried out in districts is ridiculous. In the past, it was a portfolio which encouraged students to really reflect on their learning and future. And now, due to lack of resources, it’s simply a fill in the blanks kind of package. Simply a hoop to jump through. The MOE really needs to consider what they want from this program and encourage continuity and consistency across the districts.
I appreciate the idea of creating choice but how do you do that in rural settings? I have seen the video with the student who studied sailing with a local expert on Salt Spring Is. That is certainly a creative way to introduce alternative learning, but many students will need guidance to find what it is they may want to pursue.
I have a son that is a recent grad. His feedback is that the people that have the latest information on university applications, course selection and how to navigate are the recent grads. There is potential for recent grads to help mentor soon-to-be grads how to navigate their next step. The same goes for students that have found work or entered other training programs.
I think that having some work experience would be extremely beneficial to students once they leave secondary school. I think it could be anywhere from 1 day to 1 week… but this would allow students to see what it’s like in the workplace in a field they would like to get into. This could be paired up with the Grade 10 Planning classes where they have to create a resume and cover letter and then, I think the interview process. I think if the students didn’t have a good interview they would not get the position – instead have to reapply and do another interview.
Currently, students don’t understand how competitive it is out there for jobs and the more opportunities they get to learn (which does happen when they FAIL to do well), the better off they will be after they graduate from high school.
Don’t the students have to complete several hours of work experience or volunteer work in order to graduate? That is a component of the Graduation Transitions course, is it not?
I really like that students have the option of taking several Secondary School Apprenticeship credits by getting a job where they are apprenticed to a master, and that the government gives them a scholarship if they are still working in the trade several months after graduation. I would like to see more programs like that.
The current grad program accomodates a limited population. I see students leave grade 10 defeated because they cannot meet the rigours of the academic requirements. Yes, we need to offer an academic program, as many students can manage and are heading in that direction. But what about the others? Because we uphold academia as the end all to success and ignore other talents and skills, we are dismantling the self esteem of students who have much to offer society. How about we accept the reality that some students just will not learn in our regular academics and offer another stream? It doesn’t necessarily have to be a “trades” stream; it just has to be another option where those struggling students can have some success.
I agree with you Wendy, and I think that the biggest barrier is the new Math curriculum. While I actually think that the new Math streams are amazing, and we needed the workplace and apprenticeship option so that young people wanting a career in the trades have the skills that they need, I think that the easier Math program should not have been eliminated.
If I were to think of one skill in Math that everyone should have, it would be the ability to understand their finances. This was the bulk of the old essentials program, where kids learned about how much financing would cost them, how to figure out their taxes, and many other important financial skills. I really think that this option should be returned.
I agree that the current math curriculum as it stands isn’t working…there needs to be something in the middle. As it stands now, the higher math has many kids not doing very well and not taking anything forward with them into their future because they feel they MUST do this one…the alternative is workplace.
A major problem with grade 10/11 math is that all three streams assume that students learned the prerequisite skills (in other words, they actually achieved the learning outcomes of math 1-9) In so many cases this in not the case. the students were passed along despite their gaps in learning and have arrived in a high school math course without learning their timetables or how to manipulate fractions making it very difficult to grasp many useful concepts.
You make some interesting points…but I’m always nervous when folks go looking to change things for the sake of ‘self-esteem’…because often that means ‘look, we can lower the bar as much as is required for you to succeed’…and it ends up being a slippery slope.
Self-esteem comes largely from doing things that we didn’t think we could do. Nobody develops healthy self-esteem by simply maintaining their personal status quo.
A lot of kids are actually quite capable of succeeding with high academics…even if there is little to no evidence to suggest that.
The new graduation program should have transition programs as a focus. Support for Work Experience and Apprenticeship programs should continue so that students are able to apply what they have learned in the classroom and the work place as well. Learning should not be limited to just the classroom. There should also be a focus on preparing the students for college/university and careers. Students need critical thinking skills if they are enrolling in technical training or are thinking about university arts and science courses. Through Dual Enrollment programs, high schools can help support students while in post secondary schools to make transitions easier and give added support.
Higher standards for achievement by increasing the number of credits required for graduation. More formal exams for students to obtain practice writing exams reqired in post secondary education and apprenticeship course work.
Present system is too watered down to ensure graduation credits for all and does not realistically challenge students and prepare them for life success.
I think that when we start to talk about Career Counselling and preparing students for their post-Dogwood years, it is important to heed the advice of the experts in Career Counselling, and Adolescent Development, and to not just react to a society that wants to rush children into adulthood and reduce its own anxiety. Career development research suggest that the years of 18-25 are for “exploration” and yet I find that many parents and politicians want children to chose careers much earlier than that. I suspect this is due to their own anxiety and wanting one less thing to worry about…to breath a sigh or relief that their child’s plans are concrete and on the way to being fulfilled. Unfortunately, this backfires for many people. It would be wiser, I think, for us to spend more time talking about and thinking about how to prepare students for a life of wellness, less anxiety, and better decision-making skills. I do like the idea of expanding choice for students, especially in the elective areas, but we need to be careful about how we proceed. Years of cutbacks have meant that it is not efficient to teach small class sizes, and so online learning has tried to fill those gaps, to much failure. In order for children to truly explore and grow, they need to be in relationship with caring adults who demonstrate unconditional positive regard, and a computer cannot do that. I hope that this discussion can include more input from experts in development and learning,and less from a rushed and anxious society.
The BC Jobs Plan folks have a related question on their site that might interest you.
Based on your own experience, what advice would you give fellow British Columbians looking for work?
Any ideas or suggestions, please let them know! http://engage.bcjobsplan.ca/topic8posts/discussion-14/
Graduation is a significant term that implies that students are transitioning from one thing to another. It is important that students have achieved what they want and need from high school for their next pursuit. The student needs to believe that what they are putting effort into has meaning and value for them.
The difficulty that occurs at high school is that students are not career-counselled by a teacher or advisor that deeply knows the student. Who can get to know a student when a student typically has at least 8 different blocks/courses a year, and does this 5 times during high school? How can a teacher get to know a student when they typically see 150 to 200 students per year? They cannot and they tend to only make relationships with a few students. Many students go through high school without any teacher really knowing and caring about them.
If a teacher really knows a student, and cares about what is going to happen to the student after graduation, then quality career counselling can occur. We have excellent career counselling resources available to us, we just need to make it a priority to help students with it, as much as we value other subjects.
The solution to improving the graduation program is to reduce the number of students a teacher has contact with over the year; incorporate career planning for each student with at least one teacher that has continuous realtionship with the student; and connect more of what students are expected to learn with what is needed in the real world; and provide relevance and meaning for the student.
Graduation should not be a collection of credits, rather should be determnined by a teacher, who through deep relationship with the student knows the student well enough to deem the student ready to move on to thier next stage of life. This readiness determnination would be qualified through portfolio work, demonstrating the student’s abilities, interests, community work, and core competencies.
Those ideas mentioned in the preamble to this question sound about right…leading up to the graduation program should be schools that specialize in a variety of approaches to instruction and/or curriculum emphases to enable students. The B.C. principles of learning should be observed:
. learning requires the active participation of the student
• people learn in a variety of ways and at different rates
• learning is both an individual and a group process
The factory conveyor belt called schooling, especially at secondary, follows these principles more in the breach than in the observance because of the system we have inherited and which has proved resistant to change. The wonder and awe of learning we hold naturally seems to diminish as students get older. That doesn’t seem right. Most of us love enhancing our skills and attributes. We want to do well. Our literacy and creative skills need to be applied in areas of passion and interest.
I believe that you have hit the nail on the head here as to the real problem.
By passing students along that haven’t mastered content all the way to high school (due to a variety of factors you listed), I believe that we are doing them a diservice.
They experience failure for the first time in high school, at a time in their life when they are fighting for independence and control and are likely to ‘check out’ of school and drop out when possible. If these students had been helped to actually master content before passing earlier, they would be more likely to be able to handle this process in high school.
Some ‘failure’ earlier in the system would help prevent ‘failure’ in graduation. But as the original post pointing out, ‘failing’ is the only option to deal with struggling students – but combined with increased support funding and intervention – I think is necessary.
Academic and vocational paths should lead to different accreditations perhaps vocational and academic dogwoods. The 20% with the top grades in grade 9 should be the only ones allowed to continue in academics. All others should be enrolled in trades programs with graduation granted to those that pass these studies and land and hold a job for 6 months. Sports/music/art/drama/personal planning should be considered outside the realm of the schools. Lets specialize our schools to support industry and academics only.
Further to my other comments, the emphasis needs to be on independent demonstration of and responsibility for learning: Having just attended one of the regional sessions on curriculum, assessment and graduation, I am encouraged by the focus on 5 key competencies. Independent student plans, coupled with a portfolio which demonstrates evidence that those competencies have been achieved, is coherent with a more personalized, less of a cookie cutter approach.
In defining graduation “requirements”, I would urge that we ask WHY? all students would need core subjects such as Science, Math, Socials, Planning, English, etc., beyond grade 10. I would suggest that we emphasize the disciplines less and ask for evidence of how those disciplines play out in planning for successful transition beyond school. For example, if students truly need a course in pre-Calculus for entry to a specific program, then perhaps it should be offered but I would suggest that this is a relatively small group of students. However, I continue to have many examples that show that math requirements continue to stress students…and to what end? Real life problem solving, focus on local and global issues, critical thinking, evidence of creativity will do more for our world than a set of “requirements” that we all know are not needed by all students.
I would suggest that we rename these years “The Transition Years”: The key purpose of education in these years to be to facilitate the students transition to life beyond school, whether it be post-secondary education in its many forms, work, travel, volunteerism, etc. The many paths and opportunities that students have for learning beyond school should be expanded and celebrated. There should be minimal “required” subjects/credits and much more emphasis on student designed programs. Building on the current policies around Independent Directed Studies, PSI credits, and expanding far beyond these options is desirable.
Pat:
We already have enough non-productive people in BC. Preparing our children for lives of leisure (travelling, long term goal-less academia, volunteerism, etc) is to prepare them to tap into wealth they did not generate. Lets not make the transition of any young citizens from the being the hope of BC’s future to being deadbeat parasites any easier.
This one is close to violating the Moderation Policy. Let’s avoid name calling please.
Our current graduation program needs to be completely reworked. It and the core courses contained within it to obtain a Dogwood are designed for at best 25% of the high school students in BC. Huge numbers of our high school students see little to no relevancy in what is being offered to them through our traditional schools. There is little to no consideration given to career education throughout all education (even though it is supposedly part of curriculum from K-12). Students are not prepared for what they will actually be doing “post” high school. Huge numbers of youth are travelling, drifting in and out of post-secondary institutions and in general are “floundering” as they are ill prepared for entering a work world that requires skills, training and often creditionals they know little to nothing about.
If we want our students to transition successfully to the real world of work and life we need to look at alternate delivery models involving work experinces, community based schooling, work place mentorships, creating individualed learning plans that move away from the traditional classrooms from the past. Big Picture Schools, High Tech Highs, Dual Credit programming, and Independant Directed Studies (as examples) all can lead to real “transitioning” as opposed to the artificial Graduation Transitions “course”. A course is not enough, it’s not real.
There is no better preparation for careers and the world than simply knowing how to think.
Most of the suggestions that you have made undermine the philosophical foundation of traditional education and replace it with a sort of social indoctrination that doesn’t actually foster intelligence as much as it promotes ‘employability’…placing the value of ‘certification’ over ‘smarts’…placing ‘experience’ over ‘understanding’…
Technology and work experience are two things that sound really nice, though in fact they are typically shallow and generally void of real substance. They are also extremely expensive and impractical. Employers typically have their own training for use of proprietary software anyway…and apart from that, little more than basic familiarity with word processors, power point, and web browsers is totally sufficient for virtually every non-specialized career pursuit.
The concerns that you have raised are more social than educational…and while it is worthwhile to make efforts that will help youth to have more direction and ambition, we must be careful not to compromise the aspects of traditional education that give it its integrity. (That said, I agree that the transitions programs are a waste of time and effort).
anyone who has down-voted my response, I am interested to read your feedback.
What is it that you disagree with? What is the underlying problem with my statement?
The beauty of this format is that it allows for dialogue…and I encourage those who disagree with me, or with others, to justify their positions and offer more input than just a thumbs up/down.
There are many examples in government where there has been disapproval among witnesses(eg. voters) who failed to be responsible for doing anything about what they disapproved of (eg. not turning out to vote during elections, for example).
A good explanation can go a long way…even if it doesn’t happen immediately, ideas can percolate over time, and people do sometimes change their minds on various issues.
Say your piece!
Graduation requirements that are equivalent to credits for ‘course completion’ are a fine measure of readiness to go beyond high school.
Within those courses, passing can be effectively accomplished by meeting requirements via demonstration of competencies, and by producing a collection of work.
Basically, the system can remain exactly as it is!
I would really like to see some sort of mandatory philosophy credit required in order to graduate as well…something to ensure at least a minimal quality of thinking and discernment as grads go out into the world. Such a requirement could help to identify students who are good at jumping through hoops despite their low capacity for original and/or critical thought.
Definitely, several years prior to grade 12, some sort of academic vs. vocational streaming would be a great benefit…and obviously the courses for each stream would have competency-demonstration and a collection of work as evidence of learning, so each stream could still maintain a format of passing according to credits earned.
A few down-votes so far. Anyone care to offer a critique of what I’ve said?
I think that we need to maintain high standards for graduation. Students should have to meet the academic requirements to graduate. Throughout elementary school many students fall through the cracks because they are no longer held back and do not meet grade level expectations for reading, writing and math. They are pushed through each grade and fall farther and farther behind. A big part of that is severe underfunding of education and they do not get the amount of support they need. When they get to high school they are significantly below grade level expectations. The dogwood diploma used to mean something. What they could do to change it is to have different achievement levels for the dogwood.
The primary thing that I think a new grad program should have embedded within it is ‘self evaluation’.
Here is a rubric I used with students when I was helping to implement the Grad Transitions program at a high school a few years back: http://pairadimes.davidtruss.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/rubric-with-birds.jpg …(at a school where the phoenix is their logo). More on that here: http://pairadimes.davidtruss.com/evaluating-a-journey/
We see all kinds of students, from those who simply jump through all the hoops with the smallest of effort, to those that go above and beyond all expectations… and everything in between. And all of these students graduate. The experience, however, can be strikingly different for each student. So, what is important is:
a) Their ability to reflect on what they have accomplished; and
b) Their ability to look forward to what comes after graduation.
This isn’t about students giving themselves a grade, it is about students recognizing what they journey has given them and/or what they still have to work on. And it is also about seeing high school graduation as a step in a longer learning journey (whether academic or not).
Self evaluation through self reflection… this is something all students should go through on their way to graduation.
To allow a student to graduate based on meeting certain pre-defined competencies, by producing a ‘collection of work’, etc. – hmmm … I think this idea holds some merit IF, and ONLY IF, proper research is done (and continues to be done) to determine which competencies/collections are most likely to result in favourable outcomes for Canadian society in terms of producing crops of young people who will become productive (i.e., employed), tax-paying citizens. [Note: If our young people achieve this, the 'soft' benefits of pride, self-worth, personal fullfillment, etc. are likely to follow].
PS:
Since I graduated from university back in 1990, I have always worked and paid taxes (i.e., have done my fair share to contribute to the Canadian tax base); and, I expect no less from the young people coming-up behind me. Those of us in the workforce today (particularly those of us in our late 30′s – late 50′s cannot be expected to keep this country going all on our own, especially with a tsunami of retired seniors heading our way).
Heather, if you haven’t already done so, I encourage you to read some of the comments for Question 1. People have identified what they believe are the most important competencies students need to have today. Here’s the link if you’re interested:
http://engage.bcedplan.ca/2011/10/question-1/
Many of the competencies that people have identified align very closely with ones that the business community and research have said are important for success in the 21st century workplace.
Will do; thanks Mike
As my daughter is only in grade 3 I haven’t yet experienced first hand the grad requirements, but I have seen my nieces and nephews go through the process and based on that I would say that the grad requirements should be scrapped entirely and a new system put in place.
In my opinion you have too many “required” courses needed for graduation. Way back when I was in high school we didn’t count grade 10 courses for graduation. Grade 10 was the last year when a lot of courses were required so that students would have most of the necessary pre-requisites for the grade 11 & 12 courses. In grade 11 we had to take English, Socials, and PE and the balance were electives. In grade 12 we had to take English and everything else was an elective. You had to pass these four courses plus at least 8 other courses in order to graduate. Of the 8 other courses, 3 of them had to be grade 12 level. With this system, students were able to select courses that they felt would benefit the direction they had decided to take (if they even knew). If you wanted to go to university, you took academic courses. If you wanted to go into office work, you took typing, shorthand, and accounting classes. If you wanted to go into an industrial education program, you could take woodwork, metal work, or automotive type courses. When I look at the grad requirements now, it seems to me like it is set up as if all students should be going to university. 48 credits from required courses which include science and math at a grade 11 level, 4 credits from grad transitions, and 28 credits from elective courses. 52 out of 80 credits are “required courses”. How does this give a student any flexibility and choice? Even the word credit conjures up university courses in my mind. Students should be able to graduate with a “Dogwood” even if they aren’t bound for university.
Also, I think we really need to look at just what we expect our school system to do. I’ve always thought that our school system was set up to educate the children so that they could become productive members of society who are able to find work to support themselves and eventually their families. Now it seems like we’ve assigned some very idealistic goals to our education system. Now students are expected to be socially responsible citizens, participate in democracy as a Canadian & global citizen, and to be community contributors along with having the knowledge and habits to be healthy individuals, both mentally and physically. All of these are noble goals, but should they be in the domain of our school system to the degree that they are now? I don’t think so. I think that this is the realm of the family first and foremost. I think schools should provide some information and instruction, but I feel that some of the required learning outcomes infringe on family’s personal choice and privacy. For example, in the grad transitions requirements, students are expected to document 150 minutes per week of moderate or vigorous exercise for grade 10, 11 & 12. If this is such an important aspect of a student’s education, then PE should continue to be a required course up to grade 12. However, if it’s not a required course, then if a student makes a personal choice that they don’t wish to do this amount of exercise, then that should be their choice and should not be a requirement to graduate from high school. I have seen students basically lie in order to meet the requirement, so all this is doing is teaching them to lie and work the system. The same applies to the hours of work and/or volunteer time. It should be up to the family if they decide that they want their child to work or volunteer prior to graduation. Not every parent wants their child to work while they are going to school. Again, I have seen students running around trying to find someone to sign off that they volunteered or worked somewhere when they really didn’t, just to meet these requirements. Lastly, while it is important for students to learn how to prepare resumes, fill in applications for post secondary schooling or work, I think that they go too far in asking for personal and private information. Students may or may not know what they are going to do after they graduate, which is perfectly fine and I don’t feel that they should be expected to put together a plan to present to their school or community. That is their own personal business. Also asking students to turn in financial plans either invades their privacy (in my opinion) or teaches them to fill in what they think the teacher wants to see in order to pass the course.
I think students and parents have a right to their privacy and should not be expected to provide this type of information so that they can graduate from high school.
Thank you for your very thoughtful comment, Bev. Our grad program is currently undergoing an extensive review so we appreciate your feedback in how we might improve it.
Tragic, really tragic.
t seems to me the plan is to rush them through school as soon as possible(when they “demonstrate the competencies” or when they gather their “colelction of work”).
This will further water down BC education, in 10 years we’ll be facing two alternatives: expensive private school for a proper education, fre public school if we only want our child to pass with a “collection of work”.
Maybe I misunderstand the whole thing, but the initiative doesn’t sound like it will lead to more and deeper learning.
“We recognize that elements of this program likely need to be changed to ensure success for each learner”
By success, you mean graduation rates? Will it work to make is easier so more can pass? Maybe the program is not the problem?
There is already tons of flexibility and choice at the high school level, including trades and apprenticeship programs.
I don’t understand the practicality of these suggestions:
-should meet graduation requirements through a demonstration of competencies rather than course completion
-could demonstrate their learning through a collection of work
Isn’t course completion already a “demonstration of competencies through a collection of work”? What exactly is being proposed? More online learning for courses like PE10, where students can log how they walked to school and get graduation credits?