Print 
PDF
A conservative activist in California says backlash against an “equity” education plan shows that even liberals have a limit for dumbing down students.
San Francisco Unified School District was set to implement a pilot program called “Grading for Equity,” but the plan sparked widespread public backlash for its merit-lowering approach. The plan lowers the grading scale, ignores class tardiness and drops homework assignments, and allows students to retake a test multiple times after failing.
When called out publicly, the superintendent claims "misinformation" for the "misunderstanding."
Be informed, not misled.
San Francisco schools oversee about 50,000 students in 122 schools. The largest student demographic is Asian students, who make up about 38% of the student population, followed by Hispanic students at 30%.
A pilot program for 10,000 students was set to begin in the fall, for the 2025-2026 school year, at 14 schools in the San Francisco Unified School District.
The main person behind “Grading for Equity” appears to be Superintendent Maria Su, who requested approval for the pilot phase when she appeared at a May 27 school board meeting.
The Voice of San Francisco, an online news outlet, was the first to report on Su and the “Grading for Equity” plan. Its story says the pilot program was sneakily buried in the school board’s 25-page agenda, which contains only one direct reference to it.
The Voice says this:
Were it not for an intrepid school board member, the drastic change in grading with implications for college admissions and career readiness would have gone unnoticed and unexplained. It is buried in a three-word phrase on the last page of a PowerPoint presentation embedded in the school board meeting’s 25-page agenda. The plan comes during the last week of the spring semester, while parents are assessing the impact of over $100 million in budget reductions and deciding whether to remain in the public schools this fall. While the school district acknowledges that parent aversion to this grading approach is typically high and understands the need for “vigilant communication,” outreach to parents has been minimal and may be nonexistent. The school district’s Office of Equity homepage does not mention it, and a page containing the SFUSD definition of equity has not been updated in almost three years.
Grading for Equity eliminates homework or weekly tests from being counted in a student’s final semester grade. All that matters is how the student scores on a final examination, which can be taken multiple times. Students can be late turning in an assignment or showing up to class or not showing up at all without it affecting their academic grade. Currently, a student needs a 90 for an A and at least 61 for a D. Under the San Leandro Unified School District’s grading for equity system touted by the San Francisco Unified School District and its consultant, a student with a score as low as 80 can attain an A and as low as 21 can pass with a D.
Since that initial story, numerous news outlets, including Fox News and Newsweek, have reported on the public uproar and Superintendent Su's overnight reversal.
American Family News says “Grading for Equity” has since been denounced by everyone from San Francisco’s mayor to a Democrat congressman, Ro Khanna, who represents the 17th District.
“Giving A’s for 80% & no homework is not equity,” Rep. Knana complained in an X post, “it betrays the American Dream and every parent who wants more for their kids.”
Randy Thomasson, of Save California.com, tells AFN the “quick reversal shows that the 'educrats' don’t mind treating kids as guinea pigs."
“This is just an experimental thing. They have no evidence that doing no grades for academics would work,” he says, “And when 70% of California public school children can't read, write, or compute comprehensively, you know there's a big problem."
The plan's title, “Grading for Equity,” Thomasson adds, gives the impression that educators have “totally abandoned standards” for students in the classroom.
He says the goal now is to simply make the kids feel good about themselves.
Rather than admitting the “equity” plan was a mistake, Superintendent Su has stated she postponed it because of "misunderstanding" and “misinformation” about it.
“I have decided not to pursue this strategy for next year to ensure we have time to meaningfully engage the community,” she said in a statement.
Takeaway
Equity in education is nothing more or less than socialism in education.
It decreases the motivation of students to succeed because they know that no matter how hard they work, it will not help them get ahead in an education that values equity over meritocracy.
On April 26, 2022, Dr. Ben Carson's comments about "equity" were published by Fox News.
Just over a year ago, I wrote about the dangers of the left’s seemingly innocuous shift of vernacular from "equality" to "equity." Instead of pursuing the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.’s ideal of judging people by the content of their character rather than the color of their skin, the Biden administration committed to a different path.
Equity’s worldview, as I see it, starts with the proposition that the white majority is guilty of bigotry and oppression, and that all differential outcomes between groups are solely the result of that bigotry and oppression. Equity proponents therefore argue that retributive actions against the majority are necessary to correct those wrongs.
Then Carson says, "So, what has the Biden administration done to achieve its goal of redistribution, driven by race-based victimization narratives that demonize entire groups, AKA 'equity' since I last wrote on the topic?"
First and foremost was the nomination of Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown-Jackson. From the beginning, the administration said it was going to appoint a woman of color. Full stop. Not the best person for the job, not the most qualified person for the job; the only qualification in their mind was based on race and sex.
That is not to say, Justice Jackson was not qualified for the position, but it follows a pattern of treating groups of people differently based solely on race, as long as it serves their agenda. This is what we used to call racism, and those not blinded by identity politics still recognize it as such. Take for example the many members of the liberal media who underscored that Judge Jackson would be the: "First Black Supreme Court Justice", only to undercut and in many cases completely ignore the accomplishments of Thurgood Marshall and Clarence Thomas.
Dr. Carson concludes his lengthy and informative article with this:
No wonder there is a rise in violent black nationalists in this country, the mainstream media preaches oppression only seeking to draw out the division in society. Policies like equity only reinforce that narrative, inspiring people to hate America and its values of hard work and equality, instead of embracing them.
"We as a society need not adopt these divisive ideas," Carson said. "It is up to us, the American people, to choose the path of love and reconciliation rather than retribution."
Be Informed. Be Discerning. Be Vigilant. Be Engaged. Be Connected. Be Prayerful.
