San Francisco school officials took a sudden U-turn Wednesday on an initiative that would have effectively let students skip homework, cut class, and re-take their exams.
Parents and politicians alike – including SF Mayor Daniel Lurie – trashed the experimental “Grading for Equity” initiative as soon as the San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD) unveiled it on Tuesday.
Things like class attendance and homework wouldn’t have affected a student’s final grade under the new system — instead, grades would have been left up to a final exam, which students would be allowed to redo, according to the San Francisco Chronicle.
“Grading for Equity” would have also lowered the point threshold for letter grades.
Under a similar system at the nearby San Leandro Unified School District – which SFUSD officials have praised – students need a score of just 80% to get an A, and a score of 41% earns them a C, according to The Voice of San Francisco.The purpose of the alternative grading approach was to minimize the impact of challenges that disproportionately affect low-income students, such as traveling to school and finding time and space to do homework.
But critics on both sides of the political spectrum said “Grading for Equity” was not the answer.
“My immigrant dad asked me where the missing 10% went when I scored a 90. He came to America for the chance to work hard & pursue excellence,” Rep. Ro Khanna, a Democrat, posted on X. “Giving A’s for 80% & no homework is not equity—it betrays the American Dream and every parent who wants more for their kids,” he continued.
“We owe our young people an education that prepares them to succeed. The proposed changes to grading at SFUSD would not accomplish that,” Mayor Lurie echoed on the platform.
Seventy teachers were to test the new system in 14 district schools, but parents cried foul at a Tuesday school board meeting where board members were asked to approve $172,000 for a training program.
Superintendent Maria Su then put the plan on hold, citing widespread “misinformation.”
“It’s clear there are a lot of questions, concerns, and misinformation with this proposal,” Superintendent Maria Su said in a statement to the Chronicle.
“We want to make sure any changes benefit our students. I have decided not to pursue this strategy for next year to ensure we have time to meaningfully engage the community.”
