Yes. I remember that detail because where I’m from, it’s unusual for valedictorians to have any B’s. And yet you have two of them that did.
Gathan said in an interview that both Bs came from core classes. And he had some sort of example of “maybe band as a half credit class” or something like that.
So then in this case, each had to take several additional classes. The most likely path is that Wimberly took an extra AP/Honors class while the co-val took an extra 1.5 elective credits.
Wimberly’s grades look like this:
- A’s in 15 of 16 AP/Honors core classes.
- B in English AP/Honors.
- A in an elective AP/Honors class.
- A’s in all 7 of her elective courses.
The Math: 15(5) + 1(4) + 1(5) + 7(4) = 112 / 24 = 4.66 GPA
The co-val’s grades look like this:
- A’s in 15 of 16 AP/Honors classes.
- B in one AP/Honors core class.
- A’s in all 8.5 elective courses.
The Math: 15(5) + 1(4) + 8.5(4) = 113 / 24.5 = 4.61 GPA
Oh, so you are saying black people aren’t as good in English as white people? That’s racist!
But the co-val only had an extra 0.5 in elective credits, according to the press. So something is off here.
I don’t think we’ll be able to figure this out unless we have access to their transcripts. It could be that the difference in GPAs that was reported might be incorrect. It could also be that the superintendent was being disingenuous when he implied that they scored identically in the same courses except for that one elective.
If Wimberly got a B in a AP class (so that mathematically it came out equal to an A), while the co-val got a B in a non-weighted, non-AP class, you can technically say they got the same grade in the same class. But that would be disingenuous. They weigh AP differently for a reason: those classes are supposed to be harder.
So the school could be presenting this as if it’s issue involving the number of credits taken. When in actuality, the crux may be that this school is trying to treat a B in an AP class the same way they’d treat a B in a non-AP class. Considering the fact that the lawsuit mentions the way the school tracks black kids out of AP, I’m starting to think this is what the true issue is.
Road trip!
“Hi, Kymberly, I’m you with the face from the Straight Dope Message Board, and this is Justin_Bailey. Um, have you got your transcript handy?”
And…also your co-val’s?"
The reports say the co-val had a half credit more than Wimberly total. It doesn’t say whether or not either took extra classes.
I’ve also found another complication in the handbook. Only AP or IB classes are given weighted grades. Honors classes are not. So you’re right, unless the transcripts are released, we’ll never know.
I have a hunch that the difference comes down to Kimberly being excused from a semester of gym while pregnant.
Hmm. Earlier you got onto me and Miller for reaching for a non-racist explanation. Sure seems like you’ve been reaching awful hard for an “it’s racism” explanation, with the superintendent thing and now this.
Also, I have no doubt that you would believe the school “tracks black kids out of AP classes” simply by seeing evidence that a lower percentage of black kids take AP classes than white kids.
It sounds like your feelings are hurt now that we’re actually digging into the numbers and noticing that things don’t add up as neatly as they should. Why are you bothered by that? I’ve never seen such a clear case of someone being emotionally invested in having their world view validated. Every few posts, you come into the thread, calling out my name, asking me to do that for you. Aren’t you tired of that yet? I’m certainly tired of seeing you type out my name.
For the last several posts, we’ve actually had an interesting exchange about possible GPA combinations that could produce a .0.03 discrepancy. Now here you come along whining about racism some more, injecting emotion and irrational fingerpointing into the conversation where none needs to be.
Just so you know, this is why I only choose to respond to every fourth or so of your posts to me.
The only way the math adds up, though, is if she took an extra non-elective and the co-val took 1.5 more credit hours in electives. This scenario doesn’t make any sense, since a non-elective by definition is not optional. Everyone–including the co-val–would have had to take it.
What we are missing is the co-val’s story. Did he/she petition to be “co”, or was this decision made preemptively?
Because that’s kind of important information, IMHO. Perhaps the big mess that was being talked about was initiated by the co-val (or his parents) waving the school handbook in the administrator’s faces? And the school personnel were worried about the ramifications of kowtowing to these parents, after the val had already been informed that she held the title. I can see this being a “big mess” for sure. Maybe Kymberly’s mother has a reputation for being a loud advocate for her child and people were afraid of her reaction. So in that case the “big mess” would be her!
Sure seems like the school could have handled it better, though. First off, the guidance counselor should have not have informed Kymberly that she was sitting shot-gun if indeed the final decision had not been made. If I had been told I was the valedictorian and had celebrated about it, only to be told that I have to share it with someone else, then I’d been feeling peeved too.
That said, I’m fine with waiting for more information to roll in, and I am grateful to Justin and you with the face for crunching the numbers. Regardless of the motivation behind this decision, it sure seems that it would just be easier to have one valedictorian, doesn’t it? If I were the principal, I’d be rethinking the whole policy.
According to the CNN report, the principal told Wimberly’s mother and never actually discussed it with the student. Then he went back and named a co-valedictorian. That’s where the stupid began in my opinion.
http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/07/26/valedictorian-sues-school-was-she-snubbed-because-of-race/