Aweek ago, after a couple years of debate at state and local levels, state officials finally announced they were about ready to kick into gear a test that students would have to pass to receive a high school diploma.

Or so I thought.

Actually, that's not what happened at all. Instead the Independent Regulatory Review Commission voted 4-1 to water down the original graduation test proposal so that students will not be required to pass a test in order to receive a diploma.

The Keystone Exams will be phased in over several years, and will count as one-third of the final grades in a variety of subjects. So if a student scores a 50 on the state test, he or she could easily receive an overall passing grade by doing nothing more than "C" work in the real class.

Forgive me for thinking that sounds pretty much like what we've already been doing for years -- a student can go to class, do average to mediocre work, but complete enough extra reports and projects to make sure his grade is high enough to pass.

Just high enough to receive a diploma that isn't worth the cost of the paper it's printed on.

I don't get it. Are we trying to educate our kids or not? Or is the idea to let them slide through 12 years of school to walk away with a piece of paper that carries with it little value in the real world?

Theoretically, a graduation test would have made it more difficult for some students to be awarded a high school diploma.

As far as I'm concerned that would have been

Advertisement
a good thing.

The best and brightest students in our public schools would have been unaffected -- or mostly so -- by a graduation exam because they would have had no trouble passing it on their worst day.

Many of the students in the middle of the pack would have faced a challenge trying to pass the graduation exam on the first try, but that would have been good for them in the long run. It might require a little extra effort, but in the end they would feel as though they earned their diploma.

There's value in that, too. A little boost to the self-esteem -- having earned something with a little work instead of being given something they haven't earned and don't deserve.

The kids who would be most affected by a graduation test would probably be the bottom 20 percent of each high school class. The original coasters. The kids who will be expected to enter the world of work right after graduation.

There's nothing wrong with that, but at least they should have the advantage of a decent education after 12 years in school. Because without it, they're at a distinct disadvantage right from the get-go.

The review commission actually made the perfect argument in favor of a graduation exam when it showed in the last school year, 57,000 students in Pennsylvania received a high school diploma without adequate math, writing or reading skills.

Then it dropped its own ball.

This comes at a time when one teacher -- an English teacher in a York County high school -- advised me that students in his or her district don't even take English grammar classes after middle school. No room for it in the curriculum.

The end result? Too many students graduate without the ability to write or speak a coherent or grammatically correct sentence.

Then, just last week, we learned that the Eastern York school board is considering hiring a literacy coach for the high school. "Currently we do not have reading instruction at the high school," Rita Becker, an assistant superintendent, told the school board.

My immediate reaction was why in the world not?

But I'll bet you Eastern is not the only York County school district that can say the same thing.

It raises two questions. How is it possible that students can't read at or near their grade level by the time they're in high school? If they can't, then someone missed the boat several times along the way.

And if it is possible, why isn't there appropriate reading instruction at every grade level from one through 12?

This much I know: When I graduated from high school -- not as an honor graduate, either -- I could read, write and balance my checkbook without a calculator. In fact, I was a great reader, and enjoyed doing it. I wrote college papers (for pay) for other students -- I shouldn't have, I'm sorry. But at least I knew how to do it.

And to this day, I can calculate the square footage of my living room and know without looking it up that there are nine square feet in one square yard and 27 cubic feet in one cubic yard.

It's 44 years later, and that knowledge still comes in handy.

West York, class of  '66.

Back when a high school education and a diploma counted for something.

Columns by Larry A. Hicks, Dispatch columnist, run Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays. E-mail: lhicks@yorkdispatch.com.