Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Grading Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Andrea Johnson: Ohio law requires equivalent weighting for college-credit courses; district to revise grading policy
Summary
At a Sylvania Schools board meeting, curriculum director Andrea Johnson outlined Ohio rules that require equivalent weighting across advanced-standing programs (AP, CCP, CTAG-eligible CTE) and said the district will update its handbook and conversion charts to comply.
Andrea Johnson, the district presenter, told the Sylvania Schools Board that Ohio law defines "advanced standing" as programs enabling high-school students to earn college credit and that the district must align its weighted grading policies to state rules.
Johnson said Ohio Revised Code and Ohio Administrative Code language require that if a district awards weighted credit for advanced-standing courses, equivalent weighting must be applied across advanced-standing programs so one program does not receive higher value than another. She cited the district's existing AP conversion (a 5.0 scale) and the district practice of weighting honors on a 4.5 scale, and noted that College Credit Plus (CCP) and newly recognized CTAG-eligible career-technical courses must be treated equivalently where they are advanced-standing courses.
Johnson traced the policy history: CCP-era guidance from 2014 and a more recent change (House Bill 96 and CTAG guidance adopted this year) that brought career-technical courses onto the same statutory framework. She said CTAG-related changes were adopted in September and went into effect Oct. 1, and that the Ohio Department of Education published additional guidance in November to clarify how districts should implement the rules.
Board members asked whether all career-tech classes now translate to CTAG credit and whether catalogs mark CTAG eligibility; Johnson replied that only courses listed by the state as CTAG-eligible qualify, that catalogs will note eligibility, and that college credit ultimately requires a receiving college to accept the course and, where applicable, a student to pass the end-of-course web exam.
The board requested follow-up information, including (1) how many current classes are weighted versus non-weighted under the district's scale, (2) which specific courses are identified as CTAG-eligible in the program-of-studies, and (3) whether any change to weighting will affect class-rank or eligibility for state scholarship/admission programs. Johnson said staff and the district's legal advisor (Neola) had reviewed the guidance and recommended policy revisions; she offered to return with details and updated handbook language.
The board did not vote on policy changes at the meeting; Johnson said implementation will involve revising handbook conversion charts and notifying families, and that any changes would proceed through the board's policy review process before final adoption.
