Portfolio BCTF FAQ

The BC Teacher's Federation has updated their Graduation Portfolio FAQ added to their regular graduation requirements information page. There is some useful information that clarifies how to deal with portfolio issues in uncertain times.

I have highlighted a few excerpts:

Is it possible that the portfolio requirement will be scrapped altogether?
Yes, but that option may not be canvassed at the regional review forums.At the superintendents’ conference in August, the deputy minister apparently made it clear that the portfolio requirement could be revised or eliminated as a result of the review. However, ministry staff say that “during the review, educators, students and parents will revisit the original goals of the portfolio and consider how best to achieve these goals”. It is clear that ministry staff support a simplified, but still mandatory, grad portfolio.

Do teachers still have to start the portfolio in Planning 10?
Yes, teachers are still obligated to teach all the Planning 10 learning outcomes including those related to portfolio. However, teachers might want to postpone instruction on learning outcomes related to the portfolio to the end of the course in case there is a decision to eliminate the portfolio by December or January.

What about the staffing our school/district put in place to support the grad portfolio?
Staffing that is freed up as a result of the portfolio not being mandatory for this year’s graduates should be applied to the implementation of Bill 33.

The minister’s announcement came after schools and districts had finalized staffing. The announcement does not impact the amount of staffing needed to teaching Planning 10 as that is still a compulsory course. However, it will impact the amount of staffing necessary to support portfolio development by Grade 11s and 12s.

Schools that offer a portfolio class in the timetable should ask students whether they want to continue with this class or choose another elective. Schools will have to reschedule Grade 12 students who opt not to complete the portfolio, and Grade 11 students who do not want to work on their portfolios until the review is complete and the ministry has announced a decision.

Can schools or districts make the grad portfolio a requirement?
No, graduation requirements are a matter of provincial policy, not district or school policy. Students are awarded a British Columbia Certificate of Graduation (“Dogwood Diploma”) for successfully meeting the requirements established by the ministry in either the Graduation Requirements (1995 Grad Program) or Graduation Program (2004 Grad Program) Orders. Schools or districts may require students to take certain courses or programs over-and-above those established by the ministry for graduation, but students who satisfy the ministry’s graduation requirements receive a Dogwood Diploma.

Some schools and districts are trying to keep the portfolio mandatory for their Grade 12s this year. Others are strongly “encouraging” students to complete their grad portfolios. It is difficult for students to distinguish between what is encouraged and what is mandatory. It is important that districts, schools, and teachers communicate to this year’s Grade 12 students, in an honest and straightforward manner, that they have the option of not completing the portfolio, taking Standing Granted, and getting four credits.

The BCTF has also announced the regional portfolio review forum dates that will be occurring in BC. In Nanaimo, this takes place at the Dorchester Hotel on October 13th.

This BCTF FAQ is helpful at a time when some district portfolio school administrators are trying to "encourage" parents to sign up their grade 12 kids through such scare tactics as telling parents that it will be detrimental to their kids’ future to choose to have SG (Standing Granted) on their transcripts as this looks suspect.

The other misinformation being circulated is that the grade 12 students that are opting not to complete the portfolio are getting four credits through Standing Granted "for not doing anything". This is not true at the school where this information is being circulated as students in grade 12 this year were required to attend a compulsory a half semester non-credit grade 11 portfolio course last year; The total hours of which amounted to a two credit course. Furthermore, many students in some schools were also forced..oops! I mean "encouraged"...into taking a PE 11 course.

The Face of Encouragement!

The Delusion of Choice

A recent district news release on September 5th, 2006 indicates that the district has chosen to attach completion of the portfolio by grade 12 students to the Passport to Education. Dr. John Phipps, Assistant Superintendent of Educational Programs has indicated, in the context of announced Ministry changes to the 2006-07 grade 12 student portfolio requirements, that: “These students now have the option of making their portfolio presentations and receiving a mark for their work. Under the Ministry of Education guidelines, the portfolio mark will make up 75 percent of the calculation for eligibility for the Passport to Education. This is a real opportunity for students who might not otherwise be eligible to earn the $500 Grade 12 Passport to Education scholarship credit.”

However, the Ministry of Education portfolio website states otherwise:

• Schools "may" use the Portfolio mark to calculate Grade 12 Passport award stamps.
• Schools should apply the Grade 10 and 11 Passport award stamp criteria to students who have elected to use SG.

(Full text for this policy is the 2006/2007 Handbook of Procedures on page 113)

In other words, it is the schools' choice to tie the Grade 12 Passport to education to the completion of the portfolio. However, the district is attempting to make it appear that it is the Ministry guidelines that are requiring this when the reality is that the Ministry is providing district schools with that choice.

Students and their parents are once again being subjected to conflicting district and provincial educational political messages in, what I can only guess, is an effort to deflect blame in the same way district students were treated with the CTC situation; a most unprofessional conduct by the district and ministry leadership. It remains to be seen what version of the truth will be disseminated by school administrators.

The district and ministry leadership have put these kids and their parents through enough bullshit to award all of them with a 100% mark and $500 in compensation for surviving a seriously flawed implementation of a BC educational policy.