Proficient in Reading & Math? Then you get promoted!!!

Are you sitting down? At the school board meeting this past Monday, June 9, the board actually discussed education. You heard it right. The major topic wasn't boundary wars or buildings, but promotion requirements.

The plan that was submitted to the board for approval calls for grade promotions for grades 3 to 8 to be based on proficiency (as determined by WKCE test scores) in Reading and Math. Yep. That's it. You can flunk everything else...as long as you score at least "proficient" in Reading and Math, you move to the next grade level.

As is typically the case, 99 times out of 100, anything submitted by committee for board approval usually gets rubber-stamped at the board level. Things were looking like that in this case. Thankfully, Jim Carrel donned a pair of BBPs and spoke his mind. We've grown so accustomed to board members simply responding "This is so wonderful..." or "I'm so excited by...", that when Carrel essentially said, "I don't think it's enough", everyone in the room was stunned.

SP-EYE has been hard on Mr. Carrel...deservedly so in most cases....but we also give credit where credit is due, and Carrel deserves applause for his comments here.

Too many school board members simply rubber stamp whatever is presented for approval---even if they actually disagree!!! We've now heard several school board members even privately agree that perhaps locating the Creekside elementary in Smith's Crossing was not the right move. There are other instances in which unanimous board decisions are questioned privately by one or more board members after the vote is in. Publicly, however, they won't admit that. Sadly it goes with the territory when we're dealing with politics. SP-EYE recalls one current City Council member privately (off the record) supporting a single new high school, but then saying that they could never publicly state a position because of repercussions within their constituency.

When it comes to educating our children however, politics have no place. Yes, holding back any student from promotion to the next grade level is a serious decision. But passing on a student to more challenging material who hasn't mastered the existing material has consequences as well. We in Sun Prairie talk a good game about the quality of our school system and the education we provide. Sure...it's good. But is it great? As Simon Cowell would say, "If I'm being honest...", then things are as great as we think they are or as great as we'd like them to be.

For a high school population second only to Madison high schools, do we see kids earning National Merit scholarships? State Academic recognition? Are our kids adequately prepared for life beyond high school. Certainly, for some, we can answer "Yes". But do we have the percentage of high-achieving kids one would expect from a high school of this size? Be honest. The answer is, "No". Toss in the question of grade inflation, and we should really start thinking.

Carrel made a very bold move Monday night...frankly a move that was long overdue from someone at the board table. Yes, it's difficult to hold any child back a grade, but is it really a feather in our cap to promote a child who is not ready? Which is the greater disservice to the child? While highly unlikely, a child in 8th grade could receive failing grades in all subjects, but as long as they scored at least proficient in Reading and Math on the WKCE test, this policy would allow them to promote to (gulp) 9th grade...high school.

The argument can be made that as long as you earn a "D" (i.e., not an "F") in all subjects, technically you "pass". Therefore isn't that enough for promotion to the next grade? Let's answer that with a different question, "Would you choose a doctor that has his/her M.D. but was the last in his/her class?" If you have ever done any hiring, have you ever considered absolute grades of candidates when making the selection? Passed over someone with passing (but not stellar) grades for someone with higher grades?

We agree with the board's decision to table this issue and think it through. Hopefully, now that the building issues are solved for a bit, we can take the time to get this one right. Maybe that means approving the policy as presented. But maybe it doesn't.