Graduation rates are up. Supposedly. If they are, it doesn't really mean anything.

"Graduation rates" are a measure of the overall success of public schools.  They are a widely used measure, by politicians and public servants.

Graduation rates are not the only measure of the success of public schooling.  They are not the best measure.  They are not even a good measure.

What point is there in counting the number of diplomas you hand out, if the diplomas are so easy to get that they are essentially meaningless to employers or secondary educators?

Simply allowing students to graduate in five years instead of four, raises graduation rates; independent of increased performance.  The Journal reported this morning, that graduation rates are based on four years; that is not my understanding.

Gov Martinez and PED Sec Skandera

In any case, there are more
valid measures of increased
performance and they are
not registering increased
performance.

Nationally normed tests SAT,
ACT, others, don't show the
20% increase in performance
for which governors and
school boards, secretaries and
superintendents, would like to claim credit in this upcoming election.


So why then, such a hullabaloo over graduation rates?

• They are easily manipulated and 

• they cover the asses of the folks who were supposed to improve public education and have not.

Why are the people ignorant of their manipulation?

How did the people become fixed on the red herring?
Why are they focused on graduation rates exclusively and
instead of every other objective measure of the performance of public schools?

Blame the establishment press.

It has let the people down.

The Journal, has let them down.

Kent Walz, has let them down.




photos Mark Bralley