Amy’s response below.
From: Williams, Amy
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 10:20 AM
To: Joseph Simonsen <joe.simonsen@gfcmsu.edu>
Cc: McLean, Angela <amclean@montana.edu>; Booth, Janelle <janelle.booth@montana.edu>
Subject: RE: MACRAO follow-up
Hi Joe,
You caught me on one of my busiest weeks. I will respond to what I can below. I am also attaching the powerpoint I shared at the meeting. At the end of my presentation I talked about how challenging the interpretation of this policy can be, it has a great deal of gray area, non-specific language, and holes that are problematic. I suggested that MACARO could put together a workgroup and suggest model policy language.
Feel free to follow up with additional questions.
A
From: Joseph Simonsen
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 5:03 PM
To: MACRAO Listserv <MACRAO@LISTSERV.GFCMSU.EDU>; Williams, Amy <amy.williams12@montana.edu>
Subject: MACRAO follow-up
Hi Amy,
I’m sorry I missed your presentation at MACRAO last week! Great Falls College couldn’t make the trip down, and I think there were some technical issues with our teleconference link. Murphy’s Law always seems to hit conference calls. :/
I did have a few questions, if it’s alright to continue that conversation over email. I apologize if these were already covered in your presentation!
- BOR policy says students must have “graduated from a high school accredited by the state accrediting agency” OR have a high school equivalency. The option given for home school students is to show “satisfactory performance” on ACT, SAT, or an approved ability-to-benefit test. This seems to indicate that no home school graduation is actually necessary, since the policy doesn’t request a home school transcript or diploma – just satisfactory performance on a test, which could potentially be achieved by a precocious 14-year-old. Am I understanding that rightly? Correct based on the interpretation of BOR policy. I don’t know the non-accredited home school world well but I am not sure that a diploma would give us the independent info a college needs to assess the preparedness of the student. Again not an expert but I do believe that homeschool students need to meet the same or similar HS grad requirements as public students but what independence, third party verifies the learning and student ability. Public schools have SBACK, ACT, STAR and other assessments that are nationally normed.
- The Federal Register last published a list of recognized testing instruments in 2006, and it includes tests that no longer exist. It also does not include the tests that are most commonly used across our campuses. Is the intention of the BOR policy to limit “ability-to-benefit tests” only to the Federal Register list (as it literally reads)? The FSA has published a more recent list of approved ability-to-benefit tests in 2015 that includes the Accuplacer test many of us use, but it also withdraws approval from tests that are in the 2006 Federal Register list. Please advise! I can’t comment on the policy’s intent, only what it states. And I agree it is frustrating, particularly with products like Compass on there. In my opinion, the policy needs revising, this being just one of the reasons.
- Additionally, ability-to-benefit in its current incarnation only recognizes a student’s test scores if they were previously enrolled in a college program before July 1, 2012. Does the BOR policy invoke ability-to-benefit in its entirety, so that we can only use test scores to meet this high school requirement if the student was previously enrolled in college prior to 2012? Or is the intent of the BOR policy only to crib this list of tests without the additional requirements for eligibility imposed by financial aid regulations? I believe the way the policy is written it is looking to use ATB tests on the Federal Register to be an additional testing instrument so that ACT/SAT are not the only options. Basically a list of options that is “verified” as having value by a third party, the Federal government.
- Since the two-years schools don’t have minimum ACT/SAT scores set by BOR to show “satisfactory performance” like the four-year schools do, does that mean this option is off the table for us when we admit home school students? Or does it mean that the two-year schools are all free to set whatever scores we like and call it “satisfactory performance” for admission purposes? This is not defined in the policy and one of its most obvious issues. Reference attached powerpoint
- Especially with the advent of online high schools, what counts as being accredited by “the state accrediting agency”? Which state? The one in which the school’s office is located? The one in which the student resided at the time of graduation? Montana? As the policy currently reads it is not clear. The first part of the sentence, when read alone, seems to indicate a state accredited program (any state’s) but, the next part of the sentence indicates that only the MT BOPE equivalency standard is acceptable. So if you have a GED from ND, is that not accepted? I do not know if this means that a student from a private school in Idaho that is not accredited, applies to GFC do they need to HiSET, get a diploma from a MT or ID accredited high school, or hit ACT/SAT scores (and what would those scores be, referenced in Q above). Like I said, when you dig in with “what if’s” the policy shortfalls rapidly and in a variety of ways.
- Not all states give accreditation status to charter schools. This means that, for some states, graduates of charter schools have not literally “graduated from a high school accredited by the state accrediting agency” because no such agency exists with that purview. For the purpose of this policy, are those applicants treated as home school applicants, since they have neither an accredited graduation nor a GED/HiSET? Or is that not the policy’s intention and it just needs updating for the proliferation of charter schools? Similar to the comments above. The policy is unclear and leaves significant holes.
- We’ve found that not collecting proof of high school completion at Admissions for all students can present a hurdle for students who are later flagged for financial aid verification. They get confused and/or they ignore Financial Aid’s contact attempts, and then they panic when their bill comes and there’s no financial aid. (Or when they try to get their refund and instead they get a big fat goose egg.) For the other MACRAO campuses, how do you handle these post-admission verification flags? Do you only accept documents at Admissions that will also suffice for financial aid verification? Or do you get your checklist done and it’s on Financial Aid to problem-solve if you rolled with an ACT score for the “high school completion” requirement? This sounds like a question for your listserv.
Sorry we couldn’t make the MACRAO conference this round. I hope everyone’s having a great week and I look forward to seeing you all next time!
| Joe Simonsen | |
|
|
|
