When IHS Principal Jason Trumble announced at the September 25 Board of Education (BoE) meeting that PE classes would be counted in the calculation of GPA for the 2018-19 school year, many students were shocked to hear the news. The announcement came after a long few weeks of widespread confusion among the student body. At the beginning of the year, PE teachers announced in their classes that PE grades would count in GPA calculations. However, several concerned and skeptical students contacted members of the guidance office in an attempt to find a definitive answer, and guidance department replies generally indicated that PE would not be included in GPA. In terms of the subject of GPA, the IHS student body generally holds the guidance department in high regard, and this misinformation was rampant until the tables were turned again with Mr. Trumble’s announcement.
Communication between the administration and the student body has long been a major concern in the IHS community, and the fiasco of the addition of PE classes to GPA has become another chapter in that discussion. But in this case, the most glaring issue is perhaps that confusion was not limited to the student body; parts of the school administration did not seem to understand the situation either. According to a survey of 347 IHS students conducted online by The Tattler, nearly 70 percent of respondents heard conflicting information about the addition of PE in GPA, and the most common explanation for this confusion was a widely-circulated email from the guidance department. As stated before, the guidance office, a part of the school administration that students trust to have correct information, appeared to not be aware of the situation at hand. The failure of the upper levels of the administration to communicate with those who students interact with the most suggests that said upper levels did not communicate effectively about the progression of this policy.
But perhaps more significant than the lack of communication between levels of school administration was the lack of transparency in the way in which PE was added to GPA. The addition of fine and performing arts classes into GPA in the 2017-18 school year was one that was spearheaded by the IHS Student Council the year prior. After several meetings on the issue which tackled student and administrative concerns, including a public discussion in which students expressed their feelings about the issue, fine arts classes were added to GPA the next year. Students were not only aware of the discussions that were taking place about the topic, but they had the chance to participate in them directly to express their affirmations and reservations about adding fine arts to GPA. In contrast, 75 percent of respondents to the Tattler survey noted that they did not know that PE would be added to GPA prior to hearing the news this year at school.
This lack of information about a major academic change is unacceptable, and it stemmed from the hushed manner in which the IHS administration went about implementing this change. As the administration prepared to make the pedagogical and logistical changes necessary to add fine arts classes to GPA, it seemingly tacked on PE classes to this plan, giving the PE department an additional year to revise its curricula. While students were allowed to engage with administrators the year prior about adding fine arts classes to GPA, at no point last year were students even contacted about this change. This lack of transparency has carried over to this year, when there has continued to be no clear indication of when the necessary registrar changes will be made to add PE to GPA calculation.
Amidst the confusion surrounding this change, it’s no surprise that the IHS student body has responded negatively to the addition of PE to GPA. In the Tattler survey, over 50 percent of respondents stated that they were “generally opposed” to the addition of PE to GPA, compared to only about 20 percent of respondents who were “generally in favor of ” the change. In addition to more nuanced and comprehensive assessments of student activities in class, students are now expected to watch videos outside of class and complete assignments outside of school. For those students who may not have expected PE to be included in GPA, a lack of completion of that work, under assumption that they would still pass the class, may now have significant ramifications for their GPAs.
Of course, the administration had reasons for adding PE to GPA. As the only remaining class at IHS to not count towards GPA after the addition of fine and performing arts last year, there was a sense of urgency to add it, especially considering the lack of attentiveness and participation in PE classes.
However, nothing can justify the administration’s lack of communication about the issue. In making such a significant educational decision, the opinions of the student body should have been considered, and it was particularly disappointing considering the precedent that was set during the process of adding fine arts to GPA. But perhaps more importantly, executing such a change requires communication with parents and students, and especially with different levels of school administration. In order to smoothly execute transitions of this magnitude in the future, communication will be key, and IHS administrators should reflect on this situation to better deal with upcoming changes.