The San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD) recently backed down from implementing its proposed Grading for Equity plan, which was set to roll out this fall.

The plan, similar to the Grading for Equity plan already in effect in the San Leandro Unified School District, would award A’s starting at 80% and allow scores as low as 21% to be a passing D grade.

It would also eliminate score penalties for late work, and remove homework and weekly tests from the final grade entirely. A student’s grade would be based only on exams, which could be retaken multiple times.

These proposals reflect real trends. So-called equity grading is now in school districts across the country, from Nevada to Maryland and Virginia.

I have seen up close the results of equity grading in public schools. As a college student, I am relieved these policies were implemented in my school district when I was on my way out. Had my entire K-12 education been spent this way, I would have come to college set up to fail.

Destroying academic standards places undue stress on teachers and tanks student motivation. Academic institutions have a responsibility to push their students to learn and hold them accountable effectively.

When progressive terms like “equity” are used to support catastrophic policy, it harms both the students affected by it and those of us who are truly committed to equity in our work.

Laggard K-12 Standards

Equity grading reflects a broader, country-wide trend of inflated grades paired with stagnating abilities.

While average GPAs in every subject have been steadily rising since 2011, the average ACT scores of students have fallen.

High grades are becoming increasingly meaningless. Adding equity grading factors like unlimited retakes and no deadlines further muddy the waters.

The theories behind equitable grading are motivated by a desire to accurately showcase student learning and give students multiple chances to learn material. While these motivations seem reasonable, schools incentivized to boost graduation rates are using equity grading to lower standards.

The misguided attempts to bring equity to education by simply lowering standards do not end there. Public schools have begun eliminating advanced classes, like Palo Alto’s school district, which has done away with honors English and biology. California’s Instructional Quality Commission created a mathematics framework urging the elimination of advanced math classes in grades K-10. The framework rejects the notion of innate mathematical ability in favor of a more “conceptual approach.”

Some students are naturally gifted at math. I’ve never been one of those students, yet I can say wholeheartedly, kids with an aptitude for math are the world’s future scientists and engineers. Their education should not be sabotaged.

An academic system that is truly focused on equity will provide accommodations for students who need extra support. It will also provide accommodations for students who outpace grade-level proficiency — students who will tune out of school if they aren’t challenged. Providing access to rigorous courses is part of accommodating the diversity of students a public school serves. Curtailing the potential of exceptional students does not create equity. It punishes achievement.

The student view on grade reform

I attended a Las Vegas public high school that adopted CCSD’s grading reform policy in 2021. The plan was essentially identical to SFUSD’s proposed policy.

The lowest grade I could receive on an assignment was 50%, whether I’d done it or not. There were no penalties for late work, so deadlines became a suggestion. I could retake tests as many times as I wanted, so studying felt pointless.

Equity grading claims it prioritizes learning. I can report that the grade reforms destroyed learning in my school district.

The framework claims that homework should not be counted in the final grade because it should be used as a tool for practice, without punishing students for errors. The author of “Grading for Equity,” Joe Feldman, compared it to not including a runner’s practice times in their race times.

This makes sense theoretically. Still, the actual effect of having homework that does not count towards a final grade is that no one does it.

For assignments that did count towards our grade, the removal of late penalties was disastrous.

With no reason to follow deadlines, one missing assignment quickly snowballed into five, then ten. Students found themselves re-teaching early-semester concepts halfway through the course. We were not learning the material — we were in a state of perpetual catch-up.

Unsurprisingly, the grade reform policy did not encourage retention. Student grades went up, while test scores went down.

Bad K-12, Bad College 

When K-12 schools fail to adequately prepare students, they pass the burden onto colleges. This dilutes the experience of higher education, as colleges are forced to instill knowledge that students should be entering with.

College students are struggling to read books and are taking far more remedial classes.

Despite students coming to college less prepared, the same misguided ethic of grade inflation is hitting universities.

The median undergraduate GPA has risen by 21.5% over the last 30 years, while students are working and studying less than previous generations.

Grade inflation happens because colleges are attempting to improve student retention or graduation rates, as in the case of Western Oregon University, which removed D and F grades in 2024. It also happens because professors’ ability to receive tenure is tied to student evaluations, causing pressure to grade more leniently.

Studies show students of harsher-grading professors learn more.

To be clear, I am not trying to regurgitate tired, youth-hating sentiments. I do not think our generation is inherently lazy, or that wokeness has made us all soft.

We have been done a genuine disservice by the adults in our lives. The people who were supposed to design our schools to prepare us for our next steps failed. Policies that artificially boost graduation rates were chosen over policies that would prepare us for adult life.

It is not anti-equity to value excellence and rigor in the classroom. It is in all of our best interests to push for high achievement.