This three-tiered diploma system makes about as little sense as pumping wastewater from deactivated VX into the Delaware River, and for the same reasons: rotten idea, unnecessary and inexplicable no matter how hard you try.

We can blame three-tiered diplomas on those state legislators who got cold feet when school accountability laws were being voted upon. They saw it as an alternative to the horror of exit tests to qualify for graduation. By multiplying the diplomas, they reasoned they could leave a loophole for kids who get through high school without having learned enough to meet the academic standards for graduation.

What they didn't anticipate is how many students who thought they were doing fine might not make the cut, either for standard or distinguished diplomas. Blame inflated grades and zip courses. Worse, they were asleep to the probability that parents would balk at the possibility their kids might wind up with a basic diploma, a credential so potentially poisonous it might set off alarms every time it gets pulled out to prove qualification for anything other than going to jail.

Here's the way it was supposed to work. All 10th-graders would take a standardized test that would tell teachers which diploma they would qualify for at that time. They would have opportunities to improve in weak areas, retake the test and qualify for better diplomas.

A sorting system

Here's the way a lot of parents see it. All 10th-graders are forced to take high-stakes tests for which most were inadequately prepared. Based on those results, they are tracked toward one of the three diplomas. They do not believe testing is likely to do much beyond roughly sorting kids into categories that will be difficult to escape during the rest of their high school careers.

I'm with the parents on this one. I've heard the rationales of both legislators and educators, and though they sound reasonable, I doubt they will work in practice. Too much is at stake too soon. Once marked in 10th grade, the brightest kids will get treated like the cream of the crop, the slowest like pariahs, and the rest will be left to fend for themselves.

That is nobody's intention, of course. But given which kids are likely to fall into the various categories, I would bet on human nature to prevail. Kids in the basic category would be at risk of being left behind. Nobody would have to worry they wouldn't graduate. It's another kind of social promotion.

I am not among those who believe there should be no new standards for earning a public high school diploma. I do not see the point of using 10th grade, when kids are about 15 years old, as a graduation Rubicon.

If it is that 10th-graders ought to know enough to predict academic eligibility for graduation, it's a travesty. If it is to avoid disappointment at the end of 12th grade, it is a cop-out.

I suspect 10th-grade tests would be more appropriate to rate the quality of teachers and school systems than rate students for graduation.

One diploma is enough. You should have to meet reasonable academic standards by passing an appropriate test given at an appropriate time to earn it.