Sunday, July 13, 2008
Editorial
State should publish honest high school graduation rates
Three years ago, Gov. Jennifer Granholm promised to adopt a new strategy to ensure Michigan would get a better grasp of one of its most pressing challenges: high school dropout rates. Now, the state appears to be breaking that promise, adopting instead a measuring system that is likely to mask the full extent of the problem.
Granholm signed a compact with the National Governors Association, promising Michigan would adopt its method of calculating graduation rates. It's the most reliable, nationally recognized method for computing such statistics.
But state leaders are backtracking on implementing this measurement.
The Granholm administration promised that it would release state and local graduation rates based on the NGA method next month.
But instead of the governors association's approved method, the state's new numbers will be based on a tweaked measure that is likely to significantly overestimate Michigan graduation rates and undercount its tragic dropout problem.
Under the NGA-approved method, states count the number of students who begin ninth grade together. Those who graduate in four years are considered graduates. Only students who die, are incarcerated or transfer to another school are not counted.
Michigan will stray from that method in important ways, according to interviews and documents obtained by The Detroit News.
First, it will only count first-timeninth-graders in its statistics. Repeat ninth graders will not be counted in the new graduation rate or the dropout rate, said Leslee Fritz, spokesperson for the state Center for Educational Performance and Information.
Second, if Michigan teenagers are in high school for six or seven years or indefinitely, Michigan will never consider them a dropout, as long as they take an occasional class or appear connected somehow to the school district, based on district records. They'll be called "off-track continuing" students.
"We decided to do it this way because the National Governors Association recommended this as the most accurate way to track . . . graduates," Fritz said.
But the National Governors Association says that's not true. Bridget Curran, program director for education at the NGA's Center for Best Practices, said Michigan's new system as described by the state does not follow the NGA method.
"It's just much cleaner if you count the number of students who start together, period," Curran said. "Dropout counts are notoriously bad.
"To better address the problem, you need to know what the problem actually is. That's why (our method) appealed to governors."
The consequences of Michigan's off-track method are many. Repeat ninth-graders are more at risk for dropping out, and by not including them in a four-year graduation count, Michigan will likely falsely raise its reported graduation rate.
And Fritz said state officials do not plan to publicly release the number of "off-track continuing students" -- so taxpayers won't know how many children are truly off track.
The Detroit Public Schools' graduation rate, for example, is expected to be overestimated by as much as 18 to 20 percent under the Michigan formula, said Sharif Shakrani, co-director of Michigan State University's Education Policy Center.
The Granholm administration should reconsider its decision and honor the commitment it made in 2005.
It would be more accurate, more honest and more responsible for the state to report five- and six-year graduation rates to reflect students who need more time to finish high school.
Instead, state officials are essentially pretending such students don't exist -- making the dropout crisis look less severe than it really is and excusing policymakers from the hard work of fixing it.
No comments:
Post a Comment