The History, Current Policies, & Trends of the

Carrot-and-Stick Strategy to Regulate Home Education in Georgia

 

The progression toward accreditation-as-regulation begins with the use of taxpayer supported services and the rules for accessing them as a carrot-and-stick to steer students into accredited high schools.  The method of favoritism among the various policies is fairly consistent:  Accept course grade transcripts fr0m only accredited programs while offering inequitable alternatives or, worse, no alternatives to accredited transcript for qualification.    In each case, the solution is simple.  Equitable and suitable alternatives to accredited course grade transcript should be available.

History of Policies for Access to Public Higher Education

HOPE Scholarship: Since 1993, Georgia law has provided, via the Georgia Student Finance Commission (GSFC), the HOPE Scholarship up front to graduates of accredited programs who have enrolled in the University System of Georgia.  For HOPE scholarship-up-front, GA law allows consideration of course grades as the only manner to qualify and Georgia Student Finance Commission (GSFC) policy accepts course grade transcripts fr0m only accredited schools. 

Regular Freshman Admission to the University System of GA (USG): In 1997, students of accredited private and public high schools already had an admission path based on accredited transcript course grades (the “Freshman Index” path).  In that year, the USG first announced a system-wide policy that transcripts would not be accepted fr0m unaccredited programs.  Instead, unless they achieved exceptional SATI scores or received special exception, students fr0m those programs would have to achieve scores meeting or exceeding BoR specified levels on a regimen of (7) SAT-II tests, as well as clear other hurdles.  The SAT-II cut scores were invalidly equated to transcript course grades.  The SAT II testing regimen is an unsuitable admissions path and is a tremendously higher hurdle than the regular admission path and therefore is an inequitable alternative to accredited transcript.  If imposed upon all applicants, the college campuses would be empty.  See http://www.heir.org/oldsite/heirusga.htm.  Between 1997 to 2001, most unexceptional students seeking enrollment in a USG institution had only two realistic paths: 1) graduate fr0m an accredited high school, or 2) prove their merit at the cost of private college before transferring into a USG institution. USG Admissions Policy Timeline, Old HEIR analysis of Admissions Policy, HEIR's Admissions Policy Report. 

Later, this policy was amended as a result of political pressure (keep reading). 

Joint and early enrollment: In 1997, the BoR also instituted a written policy for joint and early enrollment in a USG college.  Presently, this policy says, among other things:  "To participate in either program a student must be enrolled in public or private secondary high school which is accredited…”  It also requires an accredited transcript showing a 3.0 GPA.  This written policy has not changed fundamentally since 1997 and presumes that students in unaccredited programs cannot qualify.

Up until recently, in spite of the written policy, many colleges have been considering portfolio (and perhaps other means besides accredited transcript) as an alternative for joint enrollment. 

HOPE Scholarship:  HOPE Scholarship  In 1997, the HOPE scholarship was first offered to students who prepared in unaccredited secondary programs.  See http://www.heir.org/oldsite/miller02.htm and http://www.heir.org/oldsite/hoperetr.htm.  College students who previously prepared in unaccredited secondary programs can use course grades fr0m their freshman year in college to qualify for the HOPE Scholarship retroactively (to reimburse freshman year college costs.)  SAT II testing also was being considered as an alternate path for award of the scholarship up-front.  See  http://www.heir.org/oldsite/miller01.htm.  That alternative was opposed as unsuitable and inequitable by the home education community and was never implemented. 

(Solution: Accept the scholarship retroactively, and lobby to revise law to make HOPE either retroactive for everyone or up-front for everyone, based on alternatives to transcript.)

Some language in GA code section 20-3-519.2 describes who may qualify for the HOPE scholarship retroactively for the freshman year of college.  The description is, those who have “completed a home study program…” or “graduated fr0m a high school which is not an eligible high school…”  The chosen language is poor and may lead to some unintended and unnecessary problems in the future.  Further, we’ve seen this legal language duplicated in other bills.  Any bill affecting this code chapter should replace the problem language with those who “did not graduation fr0m an eligible high school”.  

The “completed” language isn’t merely extraneous.  It should be avoided because it creates an open-ended authority for the GSFC to establish what proof of “completion” will entail.  Thankfully, policy to date has not been onerous.  (For a complete explanation, see “Keeping Doors Open-Lobby to Reverse the Trend Toward Accreditation-as-Regulation (link))

History of The “Coalition” and the Fight for Equitable Alternatives (Principles of Good Admissions Policy)

“The Georgia Coalition for Equitable USG Admissions was formed in March, 1998 to give a voice to the 60,000 students in home study and unaccredited private schools whose access to the University System of Georgia was severely restricted by new admissions policies adopted in March, 1997." – Fr0m “An open letter to Georgia Parents, February 1, 1999: see HEIR report about Coalition

The Coalition included members of HEIR, Georgia Home Educators Association (GHEA), the Georgia Association of Christian Schools, Harvest Home Educators, and eight large and active homeschool associations across Georgia.

Since the SAT-II testing regimen was a grossly inequitable and unsuitable alternative to the “Freshman Index” path used by graduates of accredited programs (most private and virtually all public schools), then the Coalition pursued an equitable and suitable alternative.

On September 30, 1998, the Coalition submitted the “Proposed University System of Georgia Admissions Policy…” to then Chancellor Stephen R. Portch.  Right out of the gate, the proposal was a compromise fr0m what some felt were more ideal solutions, but the Coalition proposed a solution that it thought could be accepted.

For regular admissions, the Coalition's proposal included the requirements that the unaccredited applicant have an aptitude test score in the 4th stanine or better (in the top 2/3) of the previous year's enrollees to that school, have an achievement test score in the 4th stanine or better of students taking the test nationally (nearly in the top ½ of GA high school students) and submit an Academic Studies Report (ASR) in standardized format but not constrained to only the course selections in the USG's CPC. The ASR as described in the Coalition's proposal would be a list of topics studied, materials used, nature of student activities, and assessment of accomplishments. Summary of Coalition's Proposal

The “Proposed University System of Georgia Admissions Policy…” outlined certain principles for admissions policy.  What follows is an abridged version of these timeless principles:

"1.    The USG should encourage intellectual diversity in the student population to honor the American traditions guarding freedom of educational choice...  Mandating that every applicant should follow exactly the same curriculum leads to an intellectually homogeneous student body, lacking desirable diversity of abilities, ideas, opinions, worldviews, interests, competencies, and ambitions.  The USG vision of “respecting and supporting the different ways students develop their minds, their persons, and their citizenship” should extend to students preparing for matriculation.

"2.    Admissions decisions should strive to identify applicants who have a reasonable expectation of succeeding in their desired program of study.  The question should not be, “How did this applicant prepare for college?”  Rather it should be, “Is this applicant prepared?”…

"3.    Grades are not the only means of assessing academic achievement.  For many home study programs, grades are an irrelevant concept because the student studies a topic until he or she masters it, rather than for an arbitrarily assigned time period, such as a quarter or a semester.

"4.    Achieving CPC proficiency is but one of many possible ways to prepare for college.  While it may be appropriate for students who have chosen to participate in a system where a CPC can be mandated, it is not appropriate for a population whose educational methods and curriculum choices, in accordance with Georgia law, are much more flexible.  Students without CPC have succeeded, often with exceptional performance.  Conversely, many students with excellent high school GPA in a CPC fr0m accredited high schools do not succeed; demonstrating that CPC completion—even with good grades—is not sufficient to guarantee success.”

Joint and early enrollment: Along with its proposal for regular admissions, the Coalition advocated for an alternative to accredited transcript for qualifying for Joint Enrollment.  In 1999, the Chancellor indicated that he would direct colleges to work with home study students on joint enrollment. This verbal directive had generally been followed to varying degrees by the colleges.  He said:

"We are in general agreement with the proposal to allow qualified home-schooled students to participate in JOINT ENROLLMENT AND EARLY ENROLLMENT programs, i.e., entrance criteria will be similar to those used for general admission to USG institutions. We will continue to work with our campuses to iron out the enabling procedures." (Emphasis added.) – Chancellor Portch's letter to Coalition

However, written policy was never revised to reflect this direction.  Up until recently, in spite of the written policy, many colleges have been considering portfolio (and perhaps other means besides accredited transcript) as an alternative for joint enrollment.  We do not know if the Chancellor’s statement fr0m 1999 had anything to do with the continuation of this practice in spite of the written policy.

Regular Admissions:  In 2001, as a result of political pressure, the BoR added a policy regarding regular admissions that is more neutral toward accreditation by allowing colleges to consider relatively fairer and more suitable qualifications as alternatives to transcript.  See http://www.heir.org/oldsite/nw010311.htm.  This policy is still in place today (07/08) and requires portfolio review or other evidence to document completion of the BoR’s specified college preparatory curriculum (CPC) and it requires above average SAT-I reasoning test scores.  Students fr0m non-accredited home study programs can and do achieve admission to GA public colleges.  Note that the BoR policy continues to list SAT-II cut scores that may be used as evidence of CPC completion.

History of GAC’s Accreditation of “Non-Traditional” Programs (ACIS)

Where does the Georgia Accrediting Commission’s (GAC’s) Accreditation Of “Non-Traditional” Programs fit in to this history?

The precursor to the GAC’s Accreditation Standards for Non-traditional Education Centers was the Accrediting Commission for Independent Study (ACIS) developed by the late Starr Miller, then retired fr0m the GAC.  ACIS was trying to get off the ground during the Coalition's efforts to gain an equitable and suitable alternative to accredited transcript. Opinion Piece "Just who is Accountable for My Child's Education?" or Accreditation Rears It's Ugly Head Again

It was in 1997 that the USG first announced the SATII regimen. In that same year, Starr Miller announced his ACIS initiative, obviously in answer to the fact that, at the time, the USG refused to offer a reasonable alternative to accredited transcript. ACIS showed up with a different tact than the Coalition: Advertising its accreditation as flexible and suitable for anyone, it basically has implied that we don't need fair and appropriate alternatives to accredited transcript, so long as we have a means for accrediting home study programs.  We disagree.

Note that ACIS (GAC) accreditation was not a solution to the punitive accreditation alternative presented by the SATII testing regimen.  ACIS just offered yet another means of accrediting transcripts for validating CPC course grades.  When some portion of instruction is by the parent or where study occurs in the home, the parent (mentor) and the parent’s program are regulated.  As stated in ACIS’ marketing to colleges, “Without this commission, there is absolutely no professional accrediting agency to discriminate between the instructional process as applied to these students.” (“Home schools; tutorials; distance teaming; programmed instruction; etc.”) Starr Miller letter to Oglethorpe University .  In other words, GAC’s (ACIS) aim is to have colleges discriminate among the high school methodologies and programs, rather than simply determine whether or not the applicant is prepared.    

The GAC/ACIS’ approach does not fit, in any way, with the principles promoted by the Coalition. 

  In 1998, ACIS accreditation was being marketed to colleges (see Starr Miller letter to Oglethorpe University) and home educators ACIS flyer to home educators.  The ACIS initiative may have slowed the adoption of alternatives more in line with the coalition's proposal.

Regular Freshman Admission Policy of the University System of GA, 2001-2008

This is a general overview of the USG’s basic format for regular admissions.  There are many more details and there are exceptions to the basic format that are not presented here.  

Presently, the University System of GA (USG) establishes minimums that its colleges must require of applicants.  USG Policy Handbook. The requirements are organized into two categories: a policy for graduates of accredited programs and a policy for those who are not graduates of accredited programs.

For applicants who did not prepare in accredited programs the minimums include:

§         SAT scores equal to or greater than the average score of the other students enrolled into the same college the previous year, and

§         A portfolio or other evidence to document completion of the BoR’s specified college preparatory curriculum (CPC). 

For applicants who graduated fr0m accredited programs, transcript course grades are accepted and a combination of GPA and SAT score (“freshman index”) must meet a minimum standard. 

Note that the USG discriminates on the basis of accreditation.  A GPA fr0m a transcript is acceptable if the transcript is fr0m an accredited high school, while alternatives are required of unaccredited high schools. The USG policy demonstrates how transcript and accreditation issues are linked. When transcripts are used for describing the student’s merit, then the next frequently asked question is "How do we know the transcript itself has merit?"

While the current BoR policy for admission of first-time freshmen does not require colleges to deter preparation in unaccredited programs, it also doesn’t prohibit them fr0m doing so.  Colleges within the USG have the option of setting admissions requirements above the established minimums.  Some have chosen to exceed them greatly, thereby ensuring that few or no applicants fr0m unaccredited programs are admitted as first time freshmen.  Some will not accept any portfolio.

The University of GA, for example, requires applicants fr0m unaccredited programs to meet both the current alternative hurdles AND the extensive SAT-II testing.  Another example: Among (9) 2-year colleges, the “access” institutions, (5) are using a pilot admission policy that requires transcript and Compass test only.  In lieu of transcript, applicants fr0m unaccredited programs must have a GED and must show CPC compliance via portfolio.  As of 2007, (2) of those colleges refuse to even review portfolios and (1) rarely will accept portfolios.  Instead, any non-accredited applicants they admit are declared CPC deficient and are required to pass at least (3) extra courses without credit.  The punishment for this probationary placement is that the student usually must attend and pass identical courses a second time before the college will admit that college credit is achieved.  Further, without CPC compliance, even those with superior SAT-I scores aren’t allowed to exempt the Compass test.  (Insist that the USG track comparative college student performance as a test of the policy.)

This might not be an ongoing problem if another of the Coalition’s recommendations were to be implemented:

“It is essential that the USG establish appropriate data collection and reporting processes to support policy making that affects our constituency… The following data should be collected:

"1.    The distribution of composite SAT I scores and composite achievement test scores for applicants.

"2.    The percent of applicants who are allowed into the admissions pool.

"3.    The percent of applicants in the admission pool who are admitted.

"4.    The GPA distribution and retention rates for students admitted.

“The results of the data should be published annually.”

Furthermore, it might be helpful if, once the USG begins collecting appropriate data for students admitted fr0m unaccredited secondary programs, the USG would hold a periodic workshop to review results and evaluate the policy with regard to retention rates for those students compared to others.  The workshop should include both college admissions officers and home education representatives in the workshop.  A former Chancellor of the USG promised to collect the data. This promise goes unfulfilled.

Joint & Early Enrollment Policy of the University System of GA-2008

BoR policy still says, among other things:  "To participate in either program a student must be enrolled in public or private secondary high school which is accredited…”  It also requires an accredited transcript showing a 3.0 GPA.  This written policy has not changed since 1997 and presumes that students in unaccredited programs cannot qualify.

There is anecdotal evidence that some colleges, which previously accommodated unaccredited students for joint enrollment, are reverting to the written USG policy.  We don't know how "across the board" this is; however, Georgia Perimeter College reports that they were directed by the USG to stop joint enrolling students fr0m unaccredited high schools.

(Solution: Lobby to revise the public policy and enroll in private colleges for joint enrollment.  For perspective: only about 14 out of every 1000 public high school juniors and seniors are joint-enrolled in public GA colleges. See USG enrollment report. and See Dept of Ed statistics.)

 

Technical College System Of Georgia (TCSG) Policy-2008

(Formerly the Department of Adult and Technical Education)

The TCSG, unlike USG colleges, generally requires neither a course grade transcript nor alternative portfolio for admission to a technical college.  Though a diploma is required, a GED is one of the accepted alternatives.  (Must be at least 18 yr old to take GED w/o special exception.)  Placement test, SAT, or ACT scores must be submitted.  Applicants who prepared in an unaccredited program may be admitted to a technical college without having to prepare a portfolio. http://www.tcsg.edu/admissions.php

For those students whose interest lies ultimately with enrollment in a non-vocational, higher learning program of study at a USG college or university, this path may be considered cautiously.  One can certainly transfer fr0m a TCSG college to a USG institution; however, to bypass the usual freshman requirements (portfolio, etc.) of the USG institution, one must have at least 30 “transferable” hours.  http://www.usg.edu/academics/handbook/section3/301-310/301-310.phtml#n3.06 .  The student must carefully select course work in consultation with both the technical college and the potential USG institution and stick with core courses.  Failing the acquisition of 30 transferable credits, a student ends up faced with the SATI/portfolio requirement anyway, assuming the particular USG institution will even accept the portfolio. 

If the BoR begins to sense a political resignation by parents to accept an indirect path to the USG by transferring fr0m TCSG technical/vocational college programs, it may rationalize an opportunity to withdraw its current alternative admissions path for first-time freshmen to the USG, rather than improve it.  Even with a reliable TCSG path, this loss would be a shameful injustice.

This path should never become a substitute for proper admissions alternatives to USG higher education programs.

 

GED Policy-2008

Georgia offers testing for the “GED diploma” through the Technical College System of GA.  The test is the General Educational Development test published by the American Council on Education.  www.technicalcollegesystemofgeorgia.org/text/ged.php

The minimum age for taking the GED test in Georgia has been increased to 18, except for “special circumstances” or “special needs” approval.  In Georgia, the minimum age for award of the GED “credential without exceptions” is 19.  http://www.acenet.edu//AM/Template.cfm?Section=Home">http://www.acenet.edu//AM/Template.cfm?Section=Home  (p. 34) and  www.technicalcollegesystemofgeorgia.org/text/ged_eligibility.php

 

HOPE GRANT Policy -2008

(Not to be confuses with the HOPE Scholarship for students in USG programs.)

A HOPE Grant was recently made available for students attending a public TCSG technical school or vocational division of a BoR institution and enrolled in a technical or adult education program, regardless of high school graduation date or grade point average.

The grant provides full tuition, approved fees, and book allowance.

http://gacollege411.org/FinAid/ScholarshipsAndGrants/hope_grant.asp

 

Trends

§         Alternatives to Regular Admissions Threatened?

We are aware that new electronic methods of transcript submittal will become available, thereby making it very easy for applicants fr0m accredited programs to enter the admissions pool.  Accreditation advocates tell us that the relatively greater effort necessary on the part of admissions officers to consider portfolios will be a disincentive against continuing to accept them.

§         Dramatic growth in GAC accredited centers/hybrid schools

GAC’s infrastructure of accredited centers is being built to meet demands fueled by state policy or fear of what state policy could be.  As of July 2008, there were 129 GAC accredited non-traditional education centers.  Approximately 35 were awarded fully accredited status in the last 1 ½ years.

 

If we value a unique approach to education, then we must diligently fight the trend to consider the credentials awarded by accredited schools as the only means to demonstrate preparedness.  It is essential that fair and suitable alternative means to accredited credentials for demonstrating preparedness are recognized and accepted.