A deeply divided Morgan Hill School District Board of Trustees
narrowly approved requiring four years of social studies for high
school graduation, far exceeding the requirement for admission to
University of California and California State University schools,
and disregarding the proposal of the committee the board itself had
established to study the graduation requirements and issue
recommendations.
A deeply divided Morgan Hill School District Board of Trustees narrowly approved requiring four years of social studies for high school graduation, far exceeding the requirement for admission to University of California and California State University schools, and disregarding the proposal of the committee the board itself had established to study the graduation requirements and issue recommendations.
While we agree that it was well past time to review graduation requirements for MHSD students – it had been nearly a decade since the requirements were reviewed, far too long – we don’t understand or trust the action the board took last month.
Proponents of the new graduation requirements are trying to sell them as a plus – more rigor for students – when they are really a minus – loss of flexibility, electives and personalization of education.
Here are the requirements for admission to UC and CSU schools:
• History and social studies – two years
• English – four years
• Math – three years required, four years recommended
• Science – two years required, three years recommended by UC, which also requires that the classes be laboratory science
• Foreign language – two years required, three years recommended by UC
• Visual and performing arts – one year
• College prep elective – one year
Here are the graduation requirements just adopted by the school district:
• History and social studies – four years
• English – four years
• Math – three years
• Science – two years (one year physical, one year life)
• Foreign language – one year
• Visual and performing arts – one year
• Remainder of 220 credits to be filled out in electives of students’ choice
We think the two lists should match. We can find no justification for exceeding the UC/CSU requirement for social studies, especially when the district doesn’t meet these schools’ standards in other areas. Requiring four years of social studies doesn’t mean additional rigor, as those who voted for the new standard dubiously claimed, it means less choice, less opportunity, less learning, less flexibility and less exploration for our students.
While we’re all for setting high expectations, the four years of social studies requirement makes no sense and has negative impacts for our students – severely limited electives choice for one and increasing distrust and disbelief among parents and students for another. Students who are in music or sports, or who wisely want to explore a wide variety of college prep electives will find their ability to do so severely limited.
In a district that’s already rife with speculation that this administration is trying to sneak block scheduling and limited electives into its high schools by any means it can, this maneuver is highly suspect.
With “core classes” of English and social studies at the middle school level, it seems as if a pattern is being developed: four years of English, four years of social studies so students can be put into “small learning communities,” or clusters, at the high school level.
We urge the three district trustees who opposed this measure to craft a proposal that matches UC/CSU minimums and bring it back to the board at its first opportunity.
And we urge all parents in the district to lobby board members to adopt UC/CSU admission requirements as the district’s graduation requirements. This is important even if your kids are in nursery or elementary school and you think high school is a far-off dream, because if graduation requirements aren’t reviewed for another ten years, this mistake will impact your children, too.
Remember, voters, school board elections are next year – three seats will be on the ballot. Trustees would be wise to keep that in mind as well.
The parents and students of this district – its customers, who pay its bills, – need trustees and administrators who make decisions in students’ best interests and that have sound reasoning behind them. This decision smacks of either backdoor, sneaky policy changes or a total lack of common sense. We don’t like either option. Let’s fix this mistake now before any incoming high school students’ educational options are limited.
