Dear Editor,
I am in total support of the graduation policy of the Glenmuir High School, namely that persons who do not pass mathematics and English language at the fifth form should not be allowed to graduate. It is policies such as these that have kept the school at the forefront of academic excellence in this country.
For far too long the education system has been a conveyor belt for graduating dunces and illiterates. The pomp and pageantry of many graduation ceremonies is a waste of taxpayers' and parents' money. I really do not see the point of the recent controversy. Logically the person or persons who implemented such a policy could not have intended that persons who pass these subjects before they reach the fifth-form level could not themselves graduate. Any other interpretation would produce an iniquitous result and could not have been the intention of the framers of the policy.
The policy itself can only be regarded as a minimum standard, as the attainment of the standard before the fifth form year is in excess of this minimum. Students who exceed the standard should not therefore be prejudiced by not being allowed to graduate. Surely the achievement of Miss Leann Lewis should be lauded by the school and she should be given pride of place and special prizes at any future graduation ceremony. Surely her present status is now at a level that she needs not do any other subject in order to graduate.
I am saddened that the school and its administration could not interpret the fact in this way. To act in any other way is to add to the crisis of good governance and transformational leadership that has led us to become international mendicants and has condemned the large pool of graduating dunces and illiterates to lives of persistent poverty and underdevelopment.
Hugh Anthony Porter
bungohead@hotmail.com
Consider Glenmuir policy a minimum standard
-->
I am in total support of the graduation policy of the Glenmuir High School, namely that persons who do not pass mathematics and English language at the fifth form should not be allowed to graduate. It is policies such as these that have kept the school at the forefront of academic excellence in this country.
For far too long the education system has been a conveyor belt for graduating dunces and illiterates. The pomp and pageantry of many graduation ceremonies is a waste of taxpayers' and parents' money. I really do not see the point of the recent controversy. Logically the person or persons who implemented such a policy could not have intended that persons who pass these subjects before they reach the fifth-form level could not themselves graduate. Any other interpretation would produce an iniquitous result and could not have been the intention of the framers of the policy.
The policy itself can only be regarded as a minimum standard, as the attainment of the standard before the fifth form year is in excess of this minimum. Students who exceed the standard should not therefore be prejudiced by not being allowed to graduate. Surely the achievement of Miss Leann Lewis should be lauded by the school and she should be given pride of place and special prizes at any future graduation ceremony. Surely her present status is now at a level that she needs not do any other subject in order to graduate.
I am saddened that the school and its administration could not interpret the fact in this way. To act in any other way is to add to the crisis of good governance and transformational leadership that has led us to become international mendicants and has condemned the large pool of graduating dunces and illiterates to lives of persistent poverty and underdevelopment.
Hugh Anthony Porter
bungohead@hotmail.com
Consider Glenmuir policy a minimum standard
-->