PROVIDENCE — As expected, the Board of Regents for Elementary and Secondary Education yesterday approved new, tougher high school regulations that, starting in 2012, make state standardized tests count for a third of a student’s graduation requirements in English and math.

Currently, the tests, which are administered to juniors in October, count toward 10 percent of a student’s graduation requirements.

Education officials defended the changes before a packed room of concerned parents and teachers at the state Department of Education. The parents said they worried the new regulations would prevent deserving students from receiving a diploma. The officials said their intention was to pressure school districts to adequately support students and ensure that students are able to read, write and compute by the time they leave high school — not to punish students.

“We can no longer literally have someone walk across a stage to graduate who cannot read their diploma,” said Education Commissioner Peter McWalters. “We can’t have someone graduate who cannot fill out a job application.”

The Regents decided students must score at least “partially proficient” on the tests in order to comply with the graduation requirement. Students who score substantially below proficient are therefore at risk for not graduating unless they re-take the test and score partially proficient; submit another kind of test score, like SATs; or pass a test developed by the district. There will also be an appeal process for students, giving them an opportunity to prove they are prepared to graduate.

The other two-thirds of graduation requirements will consist of the student’s four years of coursework and demonstrating proficiency through senior projects and portfolios.

Districts have a few years to prepare for the more rigorous requirements, which go into effect in 2012.

The new regulations, which have been hashed out over the past 18 months, have been vigorously opposed by some educators and parents, as well as groups that represent minority and low-income students and students with disabilities. Opponents of the changes say that by emphasizing test scores, Rhode Island is adopting a back-door approach to high-stakes testing. They also say struggling students will pay the price by failing or dropping out of high school.

“I am concerned that the educational path of my son will be cut short. He does not test well,” said Renee Snow, of South Kingstown, whose 10-year-old son has autism. “I am worried my son will not receive a high school diploma.”

Opponents also point out that just half of the state’s high schools have aligned classes to the state standards the tests are based on. It is unfair, they say, to thousands of students who have not had the opportunity to take rigorous courses, and who would be at risk of not graduating because their school system has failed them.

Just 22 percent of juniors scored proficient or better on the math test last fall, a reflection, state education officials concede, that many high schools are not teaching algebra, geometry, statistics and probability in the first two years of high school.

“We think this is putting the cart before the horse,” said Tim Duffy, executive director of the Rhode Island Association of School Committees. “You are actually penalizing the student for the failure of the system.”

McWalters and the Regents sought to reassure parents yesterday evening, saying they do not envision the test being used as a gate to prevent students from graduating, but rather as a hurdle students must clear before receiving a diploma.

“It is not the intention of the Regents that the test will be an absolute gate,” McWalters said. But if a student scores significantly below proficient — as 51 percent of juniors did in math last fall — that student is at risk for not graduating, and schools need to move swiftly to help the student, McWalters said. In addition, if a district gives out high grades, yet a significant portion of juniors in that district fail the test, it could be an indication that the district is lenient in its grading and has not worked hard enough to align classes, McWalters said.

“We have districts in this state that give out grades and when students from those districts apply to colleges, those colleges can tell me which ‘A’ means an ‘A’ and which ‘A’ means a ‘B’ and which ‘A’ means a ‘C’,” McWalters said. “So someone out there has been benchmarking grades in Rhode Island. We have not been doing that.” The new high school requirements will allow the state to compare grades across districts for the first time, he said.

However, the distinction between a gate and a hurdle was lost on some in the audience.

“If there is a minimum on this test that the student has to achieve, then it’s a high-stakes test no matter what percentage you attach to it — 10 percent or 33 1/3 percent,” said Donna Tobin, a guidance counselor at Pilgrim High School in Warwick. “Even if there is another way to make it up, you are saying it’s a test the students have to pass to graduate.”

Mary Sommer, an Exeter-West Greenwich parent and a founder of the Statewide School Improvement Team Collaborative, which gathered 1,300 signatures opposing the new regulations, said her group will continue to monitor the situation closely. She said she left the meeting a bit confused about how the test will actually be used, but also pleased by how the Regents’ conversation evolved over the past several months, placing more responsibility on school districts, not just on students.

“If we’ve learned anything, it’s that parents really need to be at the table, following the issues and speaking out about education,” Sommer said. “They would have passed a really bad policy if we hadn’t spoken up.”

jjordan@projo.com