<p>D's school didn't rank, but they did acknowledge vals who met certain criteria (published in the student handbook & adhered to very strictly). One of D's friends was considered by all to be the "smartest kid in the class." A few weeks before graduation, the kids who qualified for val were called to the office. D's friend lwas called. He looked at the kids around him & figured out very quickly why they were there. He said, "You do realize that I got a B in AP Comp, don't you?" The head gc turned red and told him to go back to class. He told his class about it & they all had a good laugh. This young man & my D both had higher grades than some vals (actually, the young man had THE highest gpa in the class!). They chose to find the humor in it, rather than to whine about it. Of course, there was no scholarship at stake for them ...</p>
<p>Which brings me to S's school. There is a state school that offers full tuition to vals. Only one per school. S's school doesn't do val, but it does honor "top students" - those who get a 4.0 or higher (they weight AP's). What they do for the scholarship is go to the kids with the top grades & find out who would go to that school if they got the scholarship. They then choose someone to be named val for purposes of that scholarship only. No one has complained (yet).</p>
<p>I don't have a problem with naming a val. I think it's ridiculous when kids don't take certain courses simply because they want to be val - but I don't think that should stop schools from recognizing top scholars (or THE top scholar). In the case of D's friend, I suspect he would not have taken AP Comp if he was hellbent on being val - the class is killer at their school, and he was taking a really tough schedule at the time. While most everyone knew he was the top student, that did not detract from the fact that the kids who were honored as vals deserved to be honored.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The district managed to avoid any future situations like this by changing the graduation requirements so that it would be impossible to graduate in 3 years in the future.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>But Cinci, isn't that like shooting a fly with a canonball? </p>
<p>Some kids want to graduate in 3 years and don't care about whether or not they'd be the val. Our S-2 just managed to do it in 3 years because he came in with some unusual credits as a 9th grader, took summer school, minimized electives. He just wanted the heck OUTAHERE and onward into his college life. </p>
<p>I recall the GC saying, "he could graduate in 3 years, but he couldn't be the Val, since he'd be unrankable." Some of his grades weren't in the same universe as a Val, so that dream wasn't hard to let go.</p>
<p>To me, Cinci's school district just solved one prickly problem (the 3-year val) at the expense of other students who might just be in a hurry to graduate. A 3-year h.s. career also saves taxpayer money (sorta, kinda), so I'm surprised a school district would do that.</p>
<p>But it's an interesting solution to this particular OP issue. Thanks for sharing it, Cinci.</p>
<p>ADA. Average daily attendance. $ per student per day.</p>
<p>Districts have incentives to keep that ADA as high as possible. Save money by graduating early? Pshaw. What self respecting bureaucrat would want to actually cut the budget? LOL</p>
<p>Schools (that I am familiar with) get paid on a per head basis. More kids , bigger budget. Less kids, less money in the budget. With fixed costs being what they are they need a butt for every seat.</p>
<p>A friend of ours experienced this same situation last year. Apparently valadictorian status is determined at the end of junior year and students/families are notified. Our friend decided in July after sophomore year when she received her near perfect ACT scores, that she would graduate in 3 years due to boredom. She had more than enough credits. The school advised her that she could not be valadictorian because the other students in the junior class had already been notified and it would not be fair.</p>
<p>Because of her high GPA, Intel finalist status, near perfect ACT scores, off the chart recommendations she was not held back in college acceptances by forgoing valadictorian. She was more concerned with her own journey than a a title.</p>
<p>P3T, does your state have district of choice? In Michigan, districts can decide to allow students from other districts to come to their district. I should mention that every town has a district, more or less ... our county has 28 school districts, ranging from a couple hundred kids to maybe 13,000. Anyway, there is a foundation allowance from the state, a per kid payment. Some districts get more due to a really weird formula that can no longer be changed at the local level through millages. If a district takes a student from another district, the home district loses money because that kid is no longer there ... and the district he goes to gets the foundation allowance, which may be less than the district would get for one of their own kids. Districts with extra space in their buildings will accept out of district students even at this lower per student amount ... the butt in the seats pays the fixed costs and helps the school keep some of its extras (like maybe an athletic director, an extra assistant principal, etc.). It also helps keep certain programs alive that may otherwise be scrapped due to low participation. In my area, there is quite a bit of interest in other districts. My own son goes to school in a neighboring district. We are on the edge of that district, and it is one that offers (in my opinion) a superior education.</p>
<p>I know this is off topic. I just think the creative butt-in-seat marketing is interesting.</p>
<p>I think she should have received valedictorian status- he earned the highest GPA in the school district, even though some of it was in middle school. </p>
<p>While she may be attending a UT Honors Program, that does not mean she has received any scholarship from UT. She may well have needed the valedictorian scholarship offered by the state of Texas. In any case, she certainly, in my estimation, deserves one.</p>
<p>After looking at the picture in the newspaper article, I can say that I have actually met this girl- she and my daughter spent a UT scholarship competition weekend together. She is, without a doubt, one of the sweetest and least pretentious students I have ever met. My guess is that she, like my daughter,did not receive that scholarship, which would have been close to full tuition. It is VERY hard to get a large scholarship from UT Austin. </p>
<p>While her accomplishments certainly auger well for her future, despite adversity, she is being penalized unfairly for having stellar accomplishments.</p>
<p>This kid is good at getting A's and taking standardized exams, but I highly doubt her extracurricular activities would get her into schools like HYPSM.</p>
<p>• Candidate for Presidential Scholars Program
- Based solely on SAT/ACT scores.</p>
<p>• Founder and President of Mu Alpha Theta, GHS chapter
• Captain of GHS World Quest team
- Not distinguishing for top schools.</p>
<p>• Accomplished Chess player and represented the U.S. in World Youth Chess Championships in Crete and Greece
- I suspect some resume padding here, since her US Chess Federation rating is a 1910, which is excellent for a high school student, but wouldn't make her state champion, let alone a contender for world champion. A 2000 rating qualifies for the title of "Expert", which is lower than a "Master." She's merely an "A level player" in the world of chess.</p>
<p>• Volunteer Chess coach at Southlake and Colleyville Library Chess Clubs
- meaningless</p>
<p>
[quote]
While her accomplishments certainly auger well for her future, despite adversity, she is being penalized unfairly for having stellar accomplishments.
[/quote]
How do you think the parents of the kid with the highest grades among those who were there 4 years would feel if his standing as valedictorian was usurped by her? It's not "unfair" -- there are 2 possible ways of looking at it, both with rational arguments in support, and only 1 scholarship to be given. So the school administration decided to go with a literal interpretation of their rules to make a choice, which really is the most logical -- I mean, maybe this girl has a jerk of a father who makes a big stink on radio programs, but if they went the other way the other kid might have a court case. If you have written standards, when in doubt it makes sense to stick by them. </p>
<p>I graduated from high school in 3 years, a very long time ago (and in Texas) -- and truthfully I did not feel like I was part of the class of 1970, after having gone through 3 years of high school, and in some cases 11 years of schooling with the kids in the class of 1971. In fact, I was a little embarrassed when I was called out of class to pose for a picture of the top 10% of 1970 graduates because I didn't know most of the other kids I was posing with. Fortunately there was no money involved (at the time, the last thing in the world I would have wanted was a scholarship to UT). To me the choice of graduating early was a well-thought out option that meant that I received some benefits but gave up on others. (Chief benefit: I could get away from Texas that much sooner.... other than visits, I left the state permanently at age 16 1/2 -- I didn't even come back during summer breaks). </p>
<p>Anyway: valedictorian is an honor, not an entitlement, and if one kid doesn't win a competitive scholarship and another does, that's just the way things work. </p>
<p>Another note: my d. was #2 in her class at the end of junior year. She never had a chance at #1 in part because she took a semester abroad, thereby reducing the number of AP credits she could have. Her school also gave weighted credit for college courses, and the kid ahead of her had a higher GPA because of it. He's a great kid who probably would have had a slightly higher GPA than her in any case... but he didn't get to be val, either. Why? Because in the last month or so before graduation, 2 other kids who taken college courses over the years turned in their transcripts with more weighted grades -- thereby putting themselves in the #1 & #2 spot. Is that fair? Sure -- those were the rules. But basically, any set of rules can be manipulated by some in ways that will hurt others.</p>
<p>Through church, I know some of the kids that are in her classes. We were discussing this on Wed. night and they all agreed with you pipmom. They said she was really nice and they said most of the kids all agreed SHE should be named Val. These are kids in her classes at high school.</p>
<p>And now, since some of you have had to go and critique this girl and her ECs and community involvement to deem her "unworthy", have you checked out the boy who will be Val? Maybe he will be deemed "unworthy" by you as well, and they should move onto #3.....everyone is so quick to smear a 16 year old. How sad.</p>
<p>By the way- she did get into MIT. I don't think she applied to any of the Ivies. She and my daughter discussed this rather thoroughly while in Austin. </p>
<p>I understand that rules are rules. And the school district may well have interpreted them the best way for this situation at this time. However, she should have been advised of all the ramifications of her choice to graduate early before she committed and we don't really know if that took place. Somehow, I doubt it. </p>
<p>While there is nothing to be done about it for this year and this girl, I think the school district should reevaluate their policy so that it does not penalize this type of student. In that regard, the more publicity about this situation that the father can muster, the better for the upcoming graduates.</p>
<p>P3T - Remember, my experience was 30 years ago or so and things have very likely changed since then. I think the school district figured that if someone really wanted to get done with high school in 3 years they always had the option of going the GED route. I don't know, I could have graduated in 3 years but opted not to, I was having fun in high school but I didn't like study halls so the credits were there. At the time graduation requirements were not that difficult to fulfill in 3 years if you never took a study hall.</p>
<p>
[quote]
In that regard, the more publicity about this situation that the father can muster, the better for the upcoming graduates.
[/quote]
Nope. Complaining about this makes him look like a jerk & erases any sympathy she may have earned. You know her to be a sweet, unassuming girl. She did not come across that way at all in the video. Perhaps she is parroting dad's lines? Upcoming graduates will not be "better" for the attention he is bringing to this school. The current policy keeps the four year attendees from being penalized. That's as it should be.</p>
<p>pipmom, I agree that she should have been better advised. But because there were the rules, under which she did not qualify (they didn't change the rules to exclude her or to prevent her from becoming valedictorian), I don't think it would be fair to the senior who was valedictorian to take the scholarship away from him. If they had, then he would have had the right to say, "I followed all the rules; I'm the senior with the highest GPA. She didn't; she's not even a senior. They're taking money away from me, and I didn't even know I was competing with her!" How fair would that have been?</p>
<p>I'm not saying that the young man should have his scholarship revoked. Do we even know if he will go to a Texas school? Apparently the school district rules did not allow for naming of two valedictorians-which was the case last year at my daughter's school in HISD. Both of them would have received the TX Val scholarship, but neither decided to attend Texas schools. </p>
<p>My daughter, by the way, is the highest ranking senior who attended her school all four years, but is #3. Why- because 1 and 2 did freshman and sophomore years elsewhere at schools, both within district and out of state, that offered more pre-AP weighted courses in their curriculum. My D took every pre and AP course she could. Is this fair?- I'd say not and have raised the issue with the school. Am I calling the newspapers- no. Mainly because we knew from the get go that she would most likely not be attending a Texas school. The Val this year will not be attending a Texas school either. </p>
<p>My point? Apparently there are many different ways to determine Valedictorian throughout Texas. Perhaps it would be helpful if the scholarship committee tried to assist in more equitably standardizing the rules of the game. </p>
<p>Regarding the father- he has every right to scream- it's his only hope for getting change. If there had been no publicity I doubt whether the school district would undertake a review of their policies on their own.</p>