San Francisco ABANDONS “Equity Grading” – WHY?

San Francisco schools abandon controversial ‘equity grading’ plan that would have awarded C grades for 41% scores after intense backlash from parents, politicians, and community members.

At a Glance

• San Francisco Unified School District halted implementation of “Grading for Equity” after public criticism
• The proposed system would have allowed students to pass with scores as low as 41% and earn A grades with 80%
• The plan eliminated homework, attendance, and participation from grade calculations
• Mayor Daniel Lurie and Rep. Ro Khanna were among high-profile critics of the proposal
• Critics argued the system would lower academic standards and harm students’ college readiness

Controversial Grading System Faces Public Rejection

The San Francisco Unified School District recently backed away from implementing a controversial “Grading for Equity” initiative after facing significant public backlash. The proposal, which would have dramatically altered how students in the district’s 14 high schools are evaluated, came under fire for lowering academic standards. Under the planned system, students could have received passing grades with scores as low as 41 percent, while earning an A would require only 80 percent. Additionally, the plan would have eliminated homework, classroom participation, attendance, and punctuality from grade calculations.

“We owe our young people an education that prepares them to succeed. The proposed changes to grading at SFUSD would not accomplish that.”, said Mayor Daniel Lurie.

The initiative, which would have affected more than 10,000 students, sparked immediate concerns from parents, educators, and political leaders. Critics argued the system would inadequately prepare students for college and career environments where punctuality, consistent attendance, and timely completion of assignments are essential skills. The plan’s implementation without a formal vote by the school board further intensified criticism about transparency and lack of parental involvement in the decision-making process.

Political Opposition and Administrative Response

High-profile opposition to the plan emerged quickly, with San Francisco Mayor Daniel Lurie and Congressman Ro Khanna publicly criticizing the proposal. Rep. Khanna specifically challenged the notion that lowering standards constitutes genuine equity, pointing to his own immigrant experience. Superintendent Maria Su ultimately announced that the plan would be put on hold, acknowledging the need for greater community engagement and addressing what she described as misinformation about the initiative.

“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. Giving A’s for 80% & no homework is not equity-it betrays the American Dream and every parent who wants more for their kids.”, said Rep. Ro Khanna. 

District leadership indicated they would refocus priorities on balancing the budget, stabilizing the district, and rebuilding trust with the community. The controversy comes at a challenging time for the district, which has been facing financial strain and declining enrollment. While the plan has been paused, there remains the possibility that the Board of Education could review or override the superintendent’s decision if public pressure continues to mount.

The Equity Argument and Its Critics

Proponents of the “Grading for Equity” system, including educational consultant Joe Feldman who was hired to train teachers on the new practices, argued that traditional grading methods disproportionately benefit students with more resources. The initiative aimed to address achievement and opportunity gaps by focusing on student learning rather than behavioral factors like attendance and homework completion, which can be influenced by socioeconomic circumstances beyond students’ control.

“Nowhere in college do you get 50 percent for doing nothing. Nowhere in the working world do you get 50 percent for doing nothing. If I don’t show up to work, they don’t pay me 50 percent of my salary—even if I made a reasonable attempt to get there.”, said Laurie Sargent.

Critics countered that the system would not actually improve academic outcomes and might widen performance gaps on statewide assessments. They raised concerns that lowering standards could obscure real academic challenges facing students and ultimately harm college-bound students who would be unprepared for higher education environments. Similar policies implemented in other Bay Area districts have yielded mixed results and faced community resistance, suggesting the approach remains controversial throughout the region.

Implications for Educational Standards

The controversy surrounding San Francisco’s “Grading for Equity” initiative highlights broader tensions in American education between maintaining rigorous academic standards and addressing systemic inequities. While the district has temporarily halted implementation, the debate continues about how best to serve students from diverse backgrounds without compromising educational quality. The significant pushback against the proposal suggests that many families and community leaders remain skeptical of approaches that appear to lower expectations rather than provide additional support to help all students meet higher standards.

“Grading for Equity de-emphasizes the importance of timely performance, assignment completion, and consistent attendance.”, said John Trasviña.

For now, San Francisco schools will continue with traditional grading practices while district leadership works to address community concerns. The experience demonstrates the importance of transparent decision-making processes and meaningful stakeholder engagement when implementing significant changes to educational policy. As schools nationwide grapple with similar questions about equity and standards, San Francisco’s experience may serve as a cautionary tale about the challenges of reforming deeply entrenched educational practices without broad community support.