Rethinking the Valedictorian

We’re coming into graduation season, replete with caps, gowns, and proud parents — while the prospective valedictorians fight for the last one-thousandth of a point. Let’s stop and rethink this.  

 

First, we are all in favor of recognizing academic excellence. Students who work hard and play by the rules, upholding school values and respecting teacher feedback, deserve to be recognized. That is best achieved with the “Latin honors” system: highest honors, high honors, and honors, or summa cum laude, magna cum laude, and cum laude. Schools can set objective criteria for those designations, including not just grade-point averages, but also integrity, service, and otherwise upholding school values. It’s possible that in some years no students earn highest honors, and in other years more than one student earns that designation. It is far more fair and accurate than the presumption that the 3.99995 student is superior to the 3.9994 student.  

 

The most troubling part of the valedictorian system is not just the mathematical absurdity of it — a classic case of a distinction without a difference — but the inequity of it. Most schools have a “quality point” system in which college credits earn extra points for the grade-point average. This means that the student who, thanks to affluent parents, doesn’t have to have a summer job and can take some extra college classes has an advantage over the student who must work a summer job. But think about it: Which student is better prepared for college and the world of work, the one who never had to work in the summer, or the one whose work ethic was honed as a teenager? The other troubling part of “quality points” is the impact on courses that don’t have those extra points, such as music, art, drama, and physical education. School leaders and policy makers talk a good game about 21st-Century skills and the need for creativity, but they systemically undermine the arts when aspiring valedictorians know that spending any time in the creative arts might deny them the prize as the #1 graduate.  

 

We can do better. We can honor academic excellence without undermining the arts and without giving unfair advantages to students who don’t have to work summer jobs. We need academic honors, but we don’t need valedictorian labels anymore.  

Subscribe to receive our blog updates

Related Posts

  • Research Wednesday | March 4, 2026

    Do Audiobooks Count as Reading?
    Contributing author: Dr. Douglas Reeves

    While surveys indicate that more than 40% of U.S. adults think that listening to a book should not be regarded as genuine reading, Brian Bannon, Chief Librarian of the New York Public Library, disagrees in a November 23, 2025, article.  He notes that while print circulation in the library has remained flat over the past five years, audiobook demand is up 65%.

    Read More
  • Research Wednesday | February 25, 2026

    Hope for Cynics
    Contributing author: Dr. Douglas Reeves

    In this inspiring book (Hope for Cynics: The Surprising Science of Human Goodness, 2025) by Stanford’s Jamil Zaki, there is a treasure trove of research that will help all of us who support educators and school leaders who are dealing with despair in the dark winter months and pervasive threats to our schools, students, and professional careers. Professor Zaki marshals research and keen observation to make these essential arguments.

    Read More
  • Research Wednesday | February 18, 2026

    A Balanced and Skeptical View of AI in Schools
    Contributing author: Dr. Douglas Reeves

    In this thoughtful and evidence-rich article (February 12, 2026), the authors cite several randomized control trials (RCT) that provide mixed evidence on the use of AI in schools. My recent book, Education and the Ethics of AI, offers practical ways to avoid cheating – the principal concern of teachers – and use AI in an ethical and constructive way.  This new article notes that when students become dependent on AI, their performance actually decreases, especially when they practice with AI but are later tested without AI assistance. Moreover, while AI can assist with simple tasks, such as learning multiplication tables, it does not enhance students’ reasoning or creative thinking.

    Read More