In a stunning reversal, the San Francisco Public Schools system has abandoned a controversial grading plan that would have drastically altered traditional grading methods.
The plan, announced by Superintendent Maria Su, would have allowed students to pass with scores as low as 41 percent and retake final exams until they achieved a passing grade. However, following a wave of criticism from students, parents, educators, and the public, the school system announced on Wednesday that it would discard the plan.
According to RedState, this represents a significant setback for the superintendent, who had unveiled her plan without even securing a vote from the city's school board. The grading scheme, dubbed "Grading for Equity," was part of a larger initiative that critics have labeled as an example of "the soft bigotry of low expectations."
The superintendent's plan to lower academic standards in the name of equity" over merit was met with widespread disapproval. Even in a city known for its progressive leanings like San Francisco, the idea of making passing grades virtually impossible to fail was not universally acclaimed.
The Voice of San Francisco reported on some of the specifics of Su's grading plan. The "Grading for Equity" system would have eliminated homework or weekly tests from a students final semester grade, focusing solely on the final examination, which could be retaken multiple times.
Students could be late for class or not show up at all without it affecting their academic grade. Under the proposed system, a student could achieve an A with a score as low as 80 and pass with a D with a score as low as 21.
Hours after announcing the plan, Su was forced to backtrack in a statement, saying, "We hold every SFUSD student to high standards, and our goal is to support student success by prioritizing learning and mastery. Its clear there are a lot of questions, concerns, and misinformation with this proposal. 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."
However, the public outcry against the plan suggests that any attempt to reintroduce it in the future may face similar opposition. Among the critics was venture capitalist Garry Tan, a Democrat, who lambasted the plan, saying, "San Francisco schools is trying its absolute hardest to make sure all middle-income families who could move out of the city do so right away. This is, on its face, absolutely retarded. It's also a case that it comes from the preeminent tech capital of the world. This will, however, be very good for housing prices surrounding SF."
While San Francisco may be a leading tech hub, it is also governed by far-left Democrats, a fact that critics argue is reflected in the city's education policies. The failed grading plan serves as a stark reminder of the potential pitfalls of prioritizing "equity" over merit, a trend that is increasingly prevalent in progressive educational circles.
As the dust settles on this controversy, it remains to be seen how the city's education system will address the ongoing challenges it faces.
Login