MASSP News Center

By Diane McMillan
MASSP Associate Director
Just about everywhere I go these days, I hear frustrated and sometimes angry educators weighing in on the details of the Michigan Merit Curriculum Personal Curriculum (PC). With MDE, special educators, ISDs, superintendents, Central Office personnel, and others all vigorously expressing their views about the RIGHT WAY, to implement the personal curriculum language in the Michigan Merit Curriculum, it’s much like having too many cooks in the kitchen. Principals, while you have a million things on your plate, this is one process that you may want to step up to take on the role as the head chef and take control of the soup, or in this case, the PC planning process.

No offense to other educators and interested parties involved in the process, but you, the principal, have the most to loose.

• Too many Personal Curriculums granted and you may find the state superintendent knocking on your superintendent’s door. As, the building leader, your superintendent will be paying you a visit.
• Too many Personal Curriculums and you will find yourself in the position as a non-AYP school because too many of your students have not taken enough of the MMC content to be proficient on the MME. We all know that the PRINCIPAL is the only educator mentioned specifically in the NCLB sanctions who can loose their JOB, if their school consistently fails to meet AYP
• And most importantly, too many personal curriculums, and you may graduate students who are not ready for education beyond high school and the world of work. It is unfair to students to allow them to graduate without all the requisite skills and knowledge needed for life in the global world of the 21st Century. There are no “personal curriculums” in the world in which our students will live.

Michigan principals have been at the forefront in advocating for students in Michigan. Michigan principals led the charge for a college readiness examination for all the students in Michigan. It was a hard fought victory for our students. Principals were also at the forefront advocating for graduation requirements that will make our students college and work ready and able to compete in the global economy.

So, I’m going to look at the Personal Curriculum through the lens of the role of the principal as the instructional leader of the building. Also, in my former role as high school redesign consultant at MDE, I was directly privy to what was the intent of the lawmakers who wrote this section of the law about the personal curriculum and I reviewed the final language. I can say with confidence that the intent of the personal curriculum, as envisioned by the crafters of the section, has been way overblown and has made much more complicated than intended.

#1—My first visit would be with the Superintendent of School.

• Ask to design the Personal Curriculum planning process with my building team
• Find out the superintendent’s thoughts on who will be the superintendent’s designee and Central office support.
• Discuss potential Board policy additions and revisions Set time lines for the completion and submission of the proposal

#2—My next step would be to gather together a building team that includes counselors, special education personnel, department chairs, career and technology educators, administrators and union representatives to do a close read of the actual section of the Michigan Merit Standard law that talks about the personal curriculum.

• I would pay attention to words like “may” instead of “shall”, “assessment” instead of “exam or test,” “credit” instead of “course”, “in communication with” and not quarterly meeting. The law says a district “may” devise a personal curriculum, and “may” award a diploma. The diploma belongs to the local school district and is signed by YOU, the building principal. Although most districts will write personal curriculums and will award diplomas for the completion of the personal curriculum, this is not a mandate.

• In your proposal to the Superintendent, suggest a clear Board policy to outline when, how, and if completion of the personal curriculum will result in a diploma.

The idea of “cut scores” and “alternate cut scores” does not appear in the section 5 of the MMS that outlines the personal curriculum. My guess is that the “cut scores” referred to in the MDE guidance document are related to the part of the law that describes what is “credit”. According to the MMS, credit is granted “in part” by earning a qualifying score on an assessment or assessments of the subject content expectations. The qualifying score chosen by the district. Local districts determine the “part” and the “assessment(s)”.

This assessment was never intended to override the teacher’s grade and evaluation, nor be the sole basis for failure. Districts can choose what assessments they will use and how much weight they will carry in determining if the student will receive credit. Districts have chosen to use everything from individual teacher finals, department finals, portfolios (especially in subject areas that don’t lend themselves to paper and pencil examinations), capstone projects, district developed finals, etc as the assessment.

This notion of cut scores and alternate cut scores is confusing and complicated. Since it is not a part of the PC language in the law, I would not include it in the PC discussion, other than to define how “credit” is awarded in your building. In making the PC, the student and parent should have a clear idea of how “credit” will be earned.

The language “the parent must be “in communication with” each teacher every calendar in the personal curriculum was deliberately chosen to allow more options for parents than just face to face meetings. There is no need to reinvent the wheel here. Quarterly communication can take the form of meetings, phone calls, scheduled progress reports, report card notes, letters, school websites, emails, conference calls, etc. The communications can be scheduled at the PC planning session.

#3–Do an environmental scan to determine the human resources, financial costs, and other materials needed to carry out the personal curriculum process. Again, a close read of the law is in order. The law says: “…and the pupil’s high school counselor or another designee qualified under section 1233 or 1233a selected by the high school principal.” The intent here is to provide flexibility to principals if a school counselor is not available. School administrators who have a teaching degree, department chairs, and the student advisers (in schools with an advisory program) can be enlisted to relieve the time pressure on the counselor. Also, it seems that individuals from the ISD, Special Education and/or Central Office could also fill in on teams. Department chairs and curriculum specialists could also be involved, especially if a student wants to modify the content expectations as part of their personal curriculum plan.

#4–Develop guidelines for “practicable for the pupil” provision. Besides the EDP, IEP and Transition Plan, take into account that students may have other aspirations and goals. For example:

• If the student is a talented athlete, then the NCAA Clearinghouse list of eligible classes must be a consideration for the PC development.
• If the student is a gifted art, career and technology student or music student, the PC should not impede scholarship, apprenticeship, or admissions opportunities.

• If your student is scheduled to take the MME in the junior year, the PC should include enough of the MMC to earn a college-reportable score and a shot at the Michigan Promise grant. The MDE mathematics and science departments have already identified pre and post MME content expectations that could be used as a guide when determining what is “practicable.

# 5–Involve others in the planning process before submitting the final proposal.

• District Office
• ISDs/RESAs
• Teachers’ Union
• MDE

Some other things:

• Remember, you don’t have to say YES to every personal curriculum plan. There may be other avenues to help the student accomplish their goals. Testing out after remediation, a systematic approach to interventions, online opportunities, early warning systems, a change of program, dual enrollment, advanced placement, as well as multiple and varied assessment opportunities (or a combination of these strategies) may be an answer before writing a personal curriculum.
• As part of the process, you can establish timeframes or windows for the application process to manage the workflow of your staff.
• As principal, you may want to hold yourself out of the initial PC development process, so that you can be the final line of appeal.
• MASSP has posted information, including sample forms from other districts that are also working on the development from their PC process, as well as the PowerPoints from the PC webinars. Visit the link often, as we will continue to update it when we get new information. You can also post your own forms to share with your colleagues.

So, principals, in this case, I urge you to take charge of your destiny. Take the lead with your faculty to develop a Personal Curriculum planning process that works for your students, families, staff, superintendent, and you. You have the ability to keep the process simple, efficient, and uncomplicated. No one else is better equipped and, perhaps, no one else has more at stake.