Valedictorian, continued from Page 1

Next: A Parent's Turn: Back to Math Basics

Home  Library Email

1001 Connecticut Avenue, NW • Suite 204 Washington, DC 20036 NONPROFIT ORG. U.S.  Postage PAID MIAMI, FL 331 PERMIT NO. 2438 an “A” in an Advanced Placement physics course, for example, could be credited with a 5.0 toward his overall grade point average, whereas an “A” student in a regular physics course would receive a 4.0. While weighting provides an incen- tive for students to take difficult courses, it carries its own baggage. Class ranking can turn contentious. There are cases in which only a hair has separated the grade point averages of top students in a gradu- ating class.  That has led to debates over the difficulty of the courses taken by the individuals involved. In a few cases, the battle for the number one class rank boiled over into the courts when parents who believed their child was treated unfairly by the class ranking process filed lawsuits against the school district.  There also are cases where a student who faltered slightly and got a “B” in an Advanced Placement calculus course, for example, found himself losing the number one class ranking to a student who breezed through four years of high school taking no challenging courses.  And there are cases where the designated valedic- torian had less than a 4.0 grade point average, but was given the number one class rank over 4.0 averages because of the more diffi- cult course load he had taken. To try to avoid such headaches in the future, school districts have devised a variety of alternatives to the valedictory tradition and class ranking.  In some districts, the “vanishing valedictorian” actually is multiplying.  One school district named 25 graduating seniors with 4.0 grade point averages as “vale- dictorians.”  But the effect is the same — to dilute the standard of excellence and diminish the stature of those designated as valedicto- rians. When the school board in Red Wing, Minnesota, terminated the honor of valedictorian and salutato- rian for the Class of 2000 and sought a fairer way of honoring top students, they decided to designate all students who performed well as “graduates of honor, distinction and highest distinction.” Other districts have adopted higher education’s system of honoring top performing students and are graduating them summa cum laude, magna cum laude and cum laude. If class rank and the valedicto- rian are to be abandoned, this could be a promising route for high schools to pursue.  But there are other considerations.  Ultimately, class rank matters.  If a school district doesn’t recognize class rank, it makes it harder for colleges and universities to arrive at decisions about applicants.  Also, no matter how hard educators try to shelter students from the fact that we all have different strengths and weak- nesses, students intuitively know simply from sitting in the classroom which kids are the smartest and work the hardest. Outside of academics, there is little reluctance on the part of educa- tors or the public to recognize skill, prowess or superiority.  The head majorette — the one who is most skilled with a baton — marches at the head of the school band. Orchestras have their concertmaster — the leader of the first violins and their principal trumpet player, both positions of honor signifying that they are the best in the assembled group.  Why is it acceptable to crown the prettiest or most popular girl the Homecoming Queen, give a Most Valuable Player award and a trophy to the best athlete, and recognize the most talented musi- cian — but unacceptable to acknowledge that one student has superior academic abilities? As one pundit put it, only in the mythical Lake Wobegon can everyone be above average. Everywhere else, only one person can finish first.  Depriving students of academic competition and distinction sends the wrong signal to our children. CONTINUED FROM PAGE 1 Valedictorians and Class Rank, continued