Harris testifies on second draft of high school diploma proposal
Today, Nov. 8., the Indiana State Board of Education (SBOE) met to discuss the second draft of proposed changes to the Indiana high school diploma. At this meeting, SBOE accepted public testimony to close out the public comment period.
State Rep. Earl Harris Jr. (D-East Chicago) issued the following statement following his testimony to SBOE:
“It’s concerning that, despite months of public feedback, the second draft still leaves critical issues unresolved. I’ve heard from parents, educators and students in my district about the lack of clarity and support in this proposal, and many of their concerns remain unaddressed.
“One key issue is the impact this proposal will have on students with individualized education plans (IEPs). These students are being overlooked in a system that is rushing to implement changes without proper planning or consideration for the resources they need. It's troubling that companies may not be equipped to understand or implement IEPs, especially considering the widespread counselor shortage and the fact that many people, may not fully understand what an IEP entails until these plans were brought up in SBOE public meetings. The proposal lacks clear guidance on how work-based learning sites will ensure these students receive the necessary accommodations. We need a more thoughtful approach—one that ensures equity for all students, particularly those who require additional support.
“I’m also troubled by the lack of rigor in this draft. This isn’t about a simple name change for diplomas; it’s about maintaining the high academic standards that help prepare our students for the future. Unfortunately, the current proposal fails to address how we will maintain that rigor while providing real, sustainable work-based learning opportunities. Also, what about the background checks required for these work placements? Students' safety is paramount, yet there's no mention of whether employers will be required to conduct these checks to ensure a safe environment. While the proposal includes provisions for these experiences, there is no requirement to ensure that students are actually hired or placed in meaningful jobs, nor is there clarity on how transportation to these sites will be handled.
“Another significant concern is funding. The proposal suggests that schools would need to prepare students for this program in half of the school year, but there is no clear funding mechanism to support the staffing and resources required to make this happen. Schools are already stretched thin, and this proposal doesn’t provide the necessary financial support to implement these changes effectively.
“We must ask: Why the rush to implement this without ensuring we have the right resources and structures in place? We can’t afford to compromise the quality of education for our students. I encourage everyone to continue to provide feedback and raise their voices to ensure that the final version of this proposal meets the needs of all students, not just a select few. The stakes are too high for us to accept anything less than a comprehensive, well-thought-out plan.”