Yeah, although I’m leaning towards this as the explanation, I admit I can’t quite conceptualize the math behind it.
Can someone help?
You seem utterly shocked that the superintendent, who most likely has day-to-day operational control on what goes on in his district, is being looked at as the person with day-to-day operational control on what goes on in his district.
It’s been my experience that school boards rarely get their hands dirty with the day-to-day operation of their district. So saying that buck stops with the superintendent is not some weird “some of my best friends are black” non sequiter.
From the sounds of it, Wimberly has a slightly higher GPA (.05 is the number being thrown around) while the co-val has more credits (.5 is the number I see).
So let’s say Wimberly has 20 credits and a GPA of 95.05 while the co-val has 20.5 credits and a GPA of 95. So the co-val took one more half-credit course (surely an elective) than Wimberly and got a 95 in it. So what the co-val likely claims is that they were being penalized for taking one more (unnecessary) half-credit course and only getting an A+ (a 95 puts her under Wimberly) instead of an A++ (a 97 would have pushed her ahead).
I was playing with some hypothetical numbers.
Let’s say both students took 100 credits in regular (non-weighted) classes and scored A’s. (Equalivalent to 4 GPA points each)
They also took 20 credits of AP classes (weighted) and scored A’s. (Equivalent to 5 GPA points).
They both got a B in a half credit class.
The other co-val got an A in a half credit class that Wimberly did not take.
Wimberly’s GPA = 100(4)+20(5)+.5(3)/121.5 = 4.13
Other co-val’s GPA = 100(4) + 20(5) +.5(3) +.5(4)/123.5=4.08
In my hypothetical, the difference in GPAs is 0.05. The actual difference stated in the press was 0.03 to 0.05 (why they didn’t state the exact point spread is a mystery).
An issue like this falls under the principal’s purview. These are the types of fires principals are responsible for putting out. I only know this because my dad was one.
You think that when the superintendent goes under review each year, his boss cares about who got named the valedictorian at a random high school in his jurisdiction? They’re more in interested in looking at global shit like test score performance, budgets, and facility operations. Not symbolic commencement rituals.
Valedictorian is a big shit deal to some people and in the case of two nearly identical student scores I can see the principal going to the superintendent and asking “Can you sign off on this too?”.
Also, what random high school? The district is tiny and there is only one high school. The superintendent is likely very likely at the day-to-day level when the district is so small.
I absolutely think the superintendent cares about a FEDERAL LAWSUIT in the national press. In my school district, the superintendent was the public face of the school board. He was the one interviewed for most items in the local paper, he was the one people knew.
Also, in terms of the superintendent being the only black guy in the mix… He’s not. The McGehee page lists William Campbell as the President of the school board, and he is listed with picture here:
I don’t know if everyone has read the complaint, but here it is.
In it, the mother asked the Superintendent about her daughter’s status, and he told her that she was in fact the Valedictorian. So I am guessing he was, if not directly involved at that point, informed. He has said he signed off on the change.
OK, I went to the source and I think I’ve shaked it out. The school’s handbook can be found here: http://www.edline.net/files/_IKIuU_/398988b9b7b02eef3745a49013852ec4/MHS_2010_Handbook.pdf
An AP/Honors diploma requires 23 credits (including 16 AP/Honors courses) and we know the co-val took a half credit more. We also know the difference between the two is 0.03.
So Wimberly’s grades look like this:
- All A’s in AP/Honors classes.
- A’s in 6.5 of her elective courses.
- And a B in a half credit elective.
The Math: 16(5) + 6.5(4) + 0.5(3) = 107.5 / 23 = 4.67 GPA
The co-val’s grades look like this:
- A’s in 15 of 16 AP/Honors classes.
- A’s in all 7.5 elective courses.
- And a B in one AP/Honors class.
The Math: 15(5) + 7.5(4) + 1(4) = 109.5 / 23.5 = 4.64 GPA
What would you do in this situation? Personally, seeing that the co-val’s B had to come in an Honors class, I’d probably stick with Wimberly as the sole valedictorian. But if co-val’s parents were causing problems (and maybe threatening a lawsuit of their own, who knows) I can see why the principal caved.
raventhief, my point is that looking at the race of the administrators when assessing this case is stupid. It’s not inappropriate that the superintendent is in the limelight of this case, but it’s naive to think that his high visibility in the press has nothing to do with his race. At any rate, it doesn’t matter to me because his skin color is a red herring. Take him completely of the equation and the facts that I’m aware remain the same.
For what it’s worth, the principal’s name (Darrell Thomas) screams black to me too. For all I know he is black. And what of it? Should I get on google and find out what he looks like, or would that be a complete waste of my time?
Interesting. But I actually don’t think there was any pressure from the co-val here, though. IIRC, Wimberly said that the co-val was sympathetic with her position. I’ll have to dig up where I read that, though.
I think the race of the superintendent or any of the board *is *irrelevant. I was pointing those items out because of the implication that he was the only black guy around and thus was shoved into the limelight solely because of race. I suspect the school board is not at all unhappy that the public face of McGehee district is black, but I don’t think it’s odd that he is in the forefront. Perhaps I *am * lucky & naive, but I don’t think he was tapped to be PR spokesman by virtue of being the only minority around.
That would be a more credible theory if he were appointed superintendent, say, yesterday. Presumably his position and race were well-established prior to this dust-up.
Ah, I don’t know what the other co-val got, but Wimberly’s B was in English. Does it matter in the calculation?
On another note, just googling for “racism” and “McGehee” I found an article from the Albany Herald (12 Oct. 1983) noting that a federal judge ordered a re-vote over homecoming queen—the original winning queen, black, lost in a secret-ballot runoff and sued. The original vote seems to have been badly handled, and the guy at the center was the football coach, Sam Gill, who “didn’t want to hurt anyone’s feelings.” The principal and superintendent were named in the suit.
Now, that was nearly 30 years ago and I assume all of the people in power have changed and that it is not directly related to this case. There are plenty of horror stories about McGehee in the 1930s through 1950s, but those aren’t as surprising. There’s a Washington Post journalist called Courtland Milloy who has written a bit on racism in McGehee… it’d be nice if he weighed in on this case.
Yes, that means the math of the GPAs changes.
I’d be interested in hearing what people think about Justin’s math. If it turns out the other co-val’s B was in a class that carried more credits than Wimberly’s B, does her claim become more believable? Would yall still support the co-val decision? I wouldn’t.
If Wimberly’s B came in English, it must have come from her AP/Honors pool of classes. I’m still working on the numbers to somehow come up with a 0.03-0.05 grade difference.
What does your math show if they get the same grades in everything except the one .5 credit class that the co-val had (and presumably got an A in) but Wimberly didn’t take.
Just eye-balling it, it seems the point spread would be smaller than 0.03 if this was the situation. But I don’t know.
That’s right. If Wimberly’s B came in English, the only way to get the spread reported is if both students completed more than the minimum number of credits. Do we know they both only got one B?