I support the policy. She'll get over it.

This is sad. Where was her guidance counselor? And why didn't he/she point this out to her parents? If it were my child, she would be taking a very light load of classes her senior year and would take some college level classes at the same time, if it meant she would get a free ride to college-though with her GPA, she probably is getting a scholarship and this is just because it's not fair. They should change the terminology to number of credits/classes taken, versus years for in the future.

And how exactly do you get a 5.898? What's the scale?

She probably took a full load of AP courses and perhaps the school grades on some modified 5 point scale overall? Our HS scores AP coursework on a 5 point scale and non-AP on the regular 4 point scale, so GPAs rise accordingly.

Our district has elementary K-4, intermediate 5-6, middle 7-8 and high school 9-12. They even go so far in the intermediate school to keep the 5th and 6th grades in separate wings of the building, and they only interact during all-school assemblies. A neighboring district has 6th grade only buildings.

As I understand it, some places are getting rid of middle schools all together (I think Chicago is one of them), opting for K-8 for elementary and then high school (9-12).

Not sure if it's a great idea, unless the elementary schools have good facilities, especially for science classes...just a sink in the classroom won't do, IMHO, anyway. However, not all elementary schools are equipped.

I would think with her GPA and possibly her socio-economic background (I don't know what it is) she will end up getting a free ride either way.

Why would you say this?

FWIW, the district that she lives in is considered upper middle class, and portions of that area would qualify as upper class.

So "ethnic name" = "minority-based scholarships?"

i disagree with Sen. I think she should totally fight it. There are thousands of kids who are finishing HS in less than 4 years, by taking an extra class here and there, and some schools let AP classes replace certain requirements. A valedictorian being able to earn that title on the basis of 4 years. It's almost like the school board is implying that if the student HAD taken all of her courses over 4 years, she wouldnt have such a high GPA.

I think this is reflective of the academic culture before all of this. I dont think she should just "get over it." There must be something personal going on. And is this common, valedictorians getting a full ride just because they were #1? Or is this Texas-specific?

My old school district was like this. I personally think it is a bad idea. First off, 7-8 need a whole different set of rules than primary students do. Second, none of the schools in my former district are remotely able to accomodate for 7-8 students (meaning they don't have proper science labs, they don't have gyms for sports, etc...). I hate the "traditional" school approach.

It probably doesn't help my feelings when my former school the 7-8 graders got away with murder, they would cuss out teachers and be sent back to class, they wouldn't listen and follow directions to any teachers on the campus and the primary students saw this. It was very hard as a 1st than a 3rd grade teacher trying to tell my students what are proper ways to behave and then they saw these students that they looked up too, both figuratively and literally, behaving wretchedly. My former AP didn't really believe in discipline. Kids could have 10 referrals in a week and they would get a slap on the wrist. My principal had a much more strict sense of discipline but he actually told me, when I complained about the issues, that he didn't want to step on the AP's toes. :confused:

Those examples are why I don't like the K-8 schools, because most that I've seen are run exactly like this, no discipline, slaps on the wrists.

When I was in school I went to a k-6, 7-8 and then a 9-12. In AZ, depending on the district, there are still middle schools/junior highs around (which I'm glad). When I have kids, unless things change in the K-8 realm, I don't want them going to a K-8 setting.

and furthermore...

This is TOTAL crap. I'd be pulling all SORTS of race cards. I dont give a damn. This girl is getting all sorts of supplementary awards to make her feel better about--gasp--actually doing better than this guy who completed his work in the regular timeframe.

And the article says Again, CRAP. Convienent that no one has solutions for this young woman and everyone--the state, the local district, the principal and the guidance counselor--is just like "oh well. here's a cookie." and even more convienent that this school has "never had a situation like this." Whatever man. i SO call bs.

Absolutely not. Why does it always have to jump to race? I was trying to say I do not know her cultural, religious, economic... background. All I know is her GPA (I didn't even really pay attention to her name - would have guessed she was of middle eastern discent). But we all know that there are scholarships made available to people for things other than grades, or in conjunction with them. It could be a scholarship through her church, cultural heritage, an organization she or her parents belong to, her parents income... This is why I said I didn't know what it was, nor do I really care.

From her grades she seems to be an extremely smart girl. It sucks that she will not get to be valedictorian (I do think they should try to fight it), but I think she will be all right either way as far as funding college.

It's a shame that this girl was advised by her guidance counselor to complete early; that's a big goof on the counselor's part. Surely she (the counselor) would've looked into all the repurcussions before making such a suggestion. In fact, I find her bad advice to be more of a concern than the odd "four-year" policy.

I feel bad for Anjali, but the combination of a three year HS completion with a stellar GPA and a perfect ACT score leads me to believe she won't need the valedictorian title to secure a scholarship.

And while I feel badly for this student, I agree with Senusret. Policies are put in place for a reason, and in today's climate of helicopter parenting, I applaud the school for backing its policy instead of bending to appease disgruntled parents. Perhaps this will be a springboard for changing the policy (since this type of situation is not the reason the policy was put in place) if that's what the school board thinks is best.

OK fair enough. History convinces me that when it comes to debates of education, here's bound to be a race element. In this story no one is even going to think about mentioning it, but in my mind, its there.

I just find it hard to believe that the school never thought about this scenario. And while this student may get a boatload of other scholarships for her accolades, the sheer fact that being named the best is being denied to her--that alone to me has potential to have racial undertone, or even sexist. It could totally not, of course.

It's a stupid techincality in the way the district's policy is written. All they need to do is fix it (fix it, fix it - sorry too much Danity Kane last night LOL) to say the highest GPA is the valedictorian, period, and it'll be OK going forward.

Like B said in her original post, if the guy who was given the honor and didn't deserve it would man up and say she's the one who should get it, there wouldn't be an issue. But I guess that's a rather quaint concept nowadays.

She should have transferred into the school, taken one class, aced it, and then said she was valedictorian. You guys are retarded.

Nah. I imagine that the current salutatorian would then become the valdictorian.

I think it's silly to call this racist or anything else. It's a validly-adopted policy that had a reasonable basis. If that policy doesn't contravene state law, then the state doesn't have any legal authority to get involved. If people there think it's a bad policy, they can urge the school board to amend or repeal it.