Winona staff recommend raising high‑school graduation requirement from 21.5 to 25 credits; board to consider in fall

A committee of Winona Senior High School teachers and administrators recommended the school board raise the district’s graduation requirement from 21.5 credits to 25 credits, committee members told the Winona Area Public Schools Board during an information item.

The recommendation, framed as the start of a conversation, would not fix those extra credits to particular subject categories; students could earn the additional credits in math, science, art or other electives. A committee presenter said, “we should shift the number from 21 and a half to 25,” and described the change as a way to make elective choices “matter” to students rather than let electives be treated as courses that can be failed without consequence.

Board members and staff said the proposal matters because it could reshape elective offerings, affect students who take Post‑Secondary Enrollment Options (PSEO), and highlight differences between Winona Senior High and the district’s Alternative Learning Center (ALC). High‑school presenters said their review included staff input gathered by straw poll and that staff were “overwhelmingly in favor” of the 25‑credit recommendation.

Why it matters: the change would alter diploma requirements for future graduating classes and touch scheduling, counseling and course availability. Presenters said 25 credits would reduce the possibility of students graduating in January (after fall semester) and help ensure seniors remain in school for the final semester. One member of the presenting team said the increase recognizes that, unlike many peer schools, Winona does not offer study halls; without study halls, students have fewer planned openings in their schedules to accumulate elective credits over four years.

Concerns and unanswered questions - ALC parity and access: several board members pressed for clarity on how the ALC’s 21.5‑credit structure fits with the proposed 25‑credit senior‑high standard. Presenters said the ALC provided representation on the committee and that, for now, ALC leadership prefers to keep their requirement at 21.5 because many ALC students lack access to the same elective offerings. - Transportation/logistics: staff noted the ALC is a short drive from the high school but currently there is no regular shuttle; any plan that expects ALC students to take electives at Winona Senior High would require logistics planning. - PSEO and budgeting: board members asked whether a lower required credit total encourages more students to pursue PSEO and whether that could raise district tuition costs and reduce in‑building enrollment. Presenters and counselors said PSEO credits can count toward the district diploma and that counselors would work with students to assure coursework aligns with diploma requirements, but the board asked the district to outline financial and scheduling impacts. - Equity and external perception: one director cautioned that differing graduation requirements across district programs could create the perception of a two‑tier system and that colleges or employers might question equivalency of an ALC diploma.

Next steps: presenters described the item as informational only and recommended further analysis and stakeholder conversation over the summer. Staff said any board action would require a policy change to Policy 613 (graduation requirements) and suggested aiming for board action by October–November so the requirement is set before forecasting and master‑scheduling for the next cohort.

The board did not vote on the recommendation during the meeting. Staff asked directors to submit questions to principals and the high‑school team and indicated they would return with details, including counsel on ALC access, PSEO translation of credits and scheduling impacts.