<p>I am curious if this is a new policy and if so, what prompted it? How was this information communicated to the students?</p>
<p>I appreciate the future counselling aspects involved in this data-gathering-IF the HS does use the data to counsel individual students, but it does not. </p>
<p>No to derail my own thread, but in fact I have not found Naviance helpful for the most selective colleges, because our HS’s admissions to these are to kids with specific hooks most of the time, and Naviance doesn’t gather or display this, and counselling is often unaware of hooks (like URMs who look caucasian and legacies).</p>
<p>Good question, sabaray. If the students have always known that they were obligated to provide this information, it’s not quite as upsetting.</p>
<p>It was never stated as a written policy anywhere. Seniors who did not report yet are getting a written notice.</p>
<p>At our HS, seniors need to fulfill certain “obligations” in order to participate in the graduation ceremony. There is no complete list of these “obligations” available, as far as I can tell, but they include returning library and text books, as well as filling out the senior survey on Naviance (which basically provides the info mentioned by OP). Since it never occurred to us not to provide the info, I never thought about the threat. The idea of a fine might have gotten me going, though.</p>
<p>What the school is doing with the information is not that unusual in my opinion. It never occurred to me not to update guidance with this type of information and their involvement with the process was minimal- completing the counselor recommendation and sending out the transcripts- no individual counseling to speak of. We don’t have Naviance. Still, my daughter wrote notes to everyone who helped her with a recommendation or a phone call; and told them all how things turned out for her as they unfolded. I wouldn’t like being told “tell or pay a fine and don’t walk” out of the blue but I honestly don’t see the problem with providing the information.</p>
<p>ProxyGC,</p>
<p>Is this a written policy? If so, I don’t have a big problem with it, even though I don’t like how heavy-handed it is. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Now I’m wondering about your agenda. If there are “most selective colleges” that care about URMs who “look Caucasian” please let us know who they are. That’s an outrageous accusation. </p>
<p>Not all high schools are equal, so if they don’t have a track record of getting kids into the top schools, obviously that will be reflected in the limited sample data within Naviance. That’s not a knock on Naviance, just the reality of the data.</p>
<p>At my son’s high school, there is a manditory exit survey to be done, I think part of it is providing college results.</p>
<p>While our HS did not have Naviance, it would never occur to me to NOT give this information to our GC.</p>
<p>No one like being threatened. The flip side is that we all want GCs to be helpful, and having good outcome data is foundational to that ability. My reaction would be based in part on how they use the data, and whether they release student names paired with outcomes. That might be pushing the bounds of privacy.</p>
<p>This doesn’t sound reasonable to me. OP, did your student receive this notice? Have you actually seen the notice or is this second hand information? Who is the signer on the notice…is this a GC acting out or is this an official school policy?</p>
<p>Wow. I always thought Naviance results came from the colleges reporting back to the GC’s. Now that I’ve learned it is from kids self reporting their admissions results, I’m wary of the accuracy of the data. I wonder if some of the “surprising” results (kids not being accepted at schools they thought were safeties/matches) were due to overreported acceptances. I’m inclined to think that the reporting error would be small, but how to know?</p>
<p>ctyankee, you completely misunderstood the OP’s reference of “URM’s who look Caucasian”. The point being made was that the school’s guidance office would not be aware that certain students may have been accepted due to their URM status, because the students did not appear to be members of a minority group and did not share that status with the counselor.</p>
<p>Someone asked my agenda–I have none other than to help kids navigate our HS and get into a good-fit college. </p>
<p>My point is simply that our counselling dept does not “know” all of our HS’s kids in any detailed way, and does not ask or collect info on ethnicity (which is actually supposed to be reported to our state Dept of Education and in fact could help them advise better about eligibility for certain scholarships or awards like NM Achievement etc). Nor do they ask about legacy, or other potential hooks, or offer advice about individual colleges…they spend no time in individual college counselling, and only maybe 5 min/year on course scheduling. It is a staffing/budget issue. I do understand why the requested info *could *be useful. </p>
<p>But, back to the first question: who owns this information?</p>
<p>If you don’t name the high school, it never happened.</p>
<p>It seems clear to me: the student applies for admission (not the school), the student pays the app fee (not the school), the student is officially notified of the college’s decision to admit (not the school,
That seems to answer the question of who owns the info pretty compellingly.</p>
<p>It seems obvious to me that the student and his/her family owns the information. </p>
<p>On the other hand, it’s equally obvious that the HS owns the graduation ceremony.</p>
<p>Who owns it? It’s quite simple. The student owns it. How is it any more of the school’s business where my kid winds up applying / being accepted / going, than it is the bank teller’s business what I do with the money I withdraw?</p>
<p>Having said that - I see no reason not to share it just from the perspective of paying it forward and helping populate Naviance and similar databases. But the threats seem over the top.</p>
<p>From a GC perspective - sometimes kids (and parents) move on pretty rapidly once they have been accepted at the school they are planning to attend. I have sometimes e-mailed a parent to say - “I know Johnny is attending XYZ University next year, but I really would like to have the rest of his results so that Naviance is more accurate”. And their response is - “Well, I haven’t bothered to check College A’s website to see the result since we know he isn’t going to go there and we lost the password for College B’s website”. In other words, once they have the result they want they sometimes don’t care too much about the safety schools, and since many of the decisions are being given on-line, if they don’t bother to log in and check, they don’t know the result. So, Naviance can be less than accurate as the GC knows how many applied - but acceptances and denials are self-reported - except for the colleges that contact the GC with a letter of final results. But again, as much as we want this info, would never consider threatening someone in order to get it!</p>
<p>It would have been better for the school to send something out to the effect that the quid pro quo for sending transcripts, recommendations, etc., is that the student share the results. Perhaps signing something to that effect would work. I doubt they jumped to the fine unless they were encountering a good number of kids who weren’t cooperating. It’s human nature for some people to simply not do anything without the hammer.</p>