Thinking Out Loud: Leveled Proficiency-Based Diplomas

So this is a "thinking out loud" post.  These are simply questions or thoughts I've had, and want to simply "put them out there."  I don't have a lot of details, research, or examples... just an idea.

And when I have an idea, please note: it's not "outside of the box" thinking.  In my world, there is no box.
_____________

Maine law requires all students to graduate with proficiency-based diplomas starting in 2018.  By all students, I mean: all students.  Whether a student has an exceptionality or not, all students must meet proficiency- expectations in order to receive a diploma.  Pathways and methods may differ, but the line in the sand has been made.  All students.  This notion of "all" really scares and intimidates people.  I think the reason is that when we think "all" in our current educational construct, we think in an industrialized mindset.  We think in a way that our system has to churn-out a singular diploma that is equal across all students.  We think in a way that equates "equal" to "fair."

Well, what if we stopped thinking this way?  What if our diplomas were differentiated?  What if our diplomas were "leveled" for all students?  What if we stopped thinking of "diplomas" as high school exit tickets, and started thinking of them as stepping stones to further learning?

Let me explain further.

In a proficiency-based system of learning, teachers and content-areas develop and design proficiency-based learning expectations.  These expectations are non-negotiable and essential, as a high-level of mastery/competency/proficiency is required in order to be successful at the next level.  Think of it in terms like a video game.  Level One is usually basic understanding and control competency.  Over the next few levels, new controls and abilities are unlocked as the player becomes more fluent and competent.  At the "Boss" or upper-levels, new abilities are less likely to appear, but deeper use and understanding of those abilities are required to advance.  In this way, video games and proficiency-based systems of learning are identical in their basic structure.

So at the high school level, we typically/traditionally have 4-levels (9th grade, 10th grade, 11th grade, 12th grade).  What if we established non-negotiable/essential proficiency standards at each level,  required our students to meet them, and then issued a proficiency-based diploma based on the level.  There would be four distinct levels of diploma (Level 1-4), and a Level 4 diploma would mean that the student was able to show proficiency in the highest levels of learning in our schools (traditionally 12th grade).  A student who had been struggling may not achieve a Level 4 diploma, but maybe a Level 3... or a Level 2... or even a Level 1.  If our system is based on developing learners, and our grading system is founded in communicating what has been learned, these leveled diplomas would not be high school exit tickets; rather steps to "what's next" in the life of the learner.  Some students, depending on home life, prior experiences, exceptionalities, etc., may take four-years and only ever achieve a Level 1 diploma.  Some students may accelerate their learning and earn a Level 4 diploma in three or fewer years.

Isn't the point of a proficiency-based diploma to prove that a student has learned what was intended to be learned?  Isn't this an issue of validity?  If so, can one diploma do that job sufficiently, effectively, and realistically?

I'm not saying this is THE solution.  I know many schools and districts are wrestling with this very issue.  It's an idea.

Is it a good idea?  You tell me.