Grading for Equity Coming To San Francisco High Schools This Fall (thevoicesf.org)
- Reference: 0177829527
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/25/05/28/1222221/grading-for-equity-coming-to-san-francisco-high-schools-this-fall
- Source link: https://thevoicesf.org/grading-for-equity-coming-to-san-francisco-high-schools-this-fall/
> Without seeking approval of the San Francisco Board of Education, Superintendent of Schools Maria Su plans to [1]unveil a new Grading for Equity plan on Tuesday that will go into effect this fall at 14 high schools and cover over 10,000 students. The school district is already negotiating with an outside consultant to train teachers in August in a system that awards a passing C grade to as low as a score of 41 on a 100-point exam.
>
> 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.
[1] https://thevoicesf.org/grading-for-equity-coming-to-san-francisco-high-schools-this-fall/
Sounds a bit like college - at first (Score:3)
I'm well used to exams that will give you a C if you score only a 41 out of 100 from college. Called "grading on a curve", though some classes have been around long enough that they're averaging over multiple classes and multiple years. Then you have tests like the ASVAB, SAT, ACT, etc... They're all curved and otherwise adjusted from raw score to the final.
Depending on the teacher, the curving system can be extremely complex. They can chuck outliers like the student who regularly scores 20 points over everybody else, decide that 10% of the class is getting an A, declare that 80% of the class is getting at least a C, etc...
That said, I'd object to using color of the skin for padding purposes.
> Grading for Equity eliminates homework or weekly tests from being counted in a student's final semester grade.
Eliminating homework actually makes some sense - in the age of AI, it is too easy to fake much of the time, and is one of the things that tends to separate out the low income types from achieving as well as high income types, because one of the things high incomes enable is time savings . If you have to get a job as a teen to keep your family housed, well, that's less time for homework. If you can afford to be driven everywhere, that's time saved over the bus. If you have to visit the library for internet access, that's extra time needed. Etc...
Same deal could be argued for weekly tests. Performance capability at the end is what matters.
Mind you, I remember my parents talking about the New York Regency tests, which wasn't 100% of the grade, but could replace your grade if you did better on that test than what the teacher awarded.
Had an uncle who hated one of his teachers, and it was mutual. He got an F in the class, which was upgraded to an A because he aced the regency test. Note: This was so rare that he got investigated for possibly cheating, because the test was deliberately harder than the class.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, de-emphasizing homework is a broader movement with a bit of merit. It's a tricky balance, but absolutely a household that's under water will frequently not permit a child the time needed to complete homework. Also, the child that can basically have the parents practically do their homework for them have a big advantage, even before AI cheating was a thing.
Re: (Score:3)
I think it depends. I'm all for eliminating busy work, but some topics, such as working complex algebra problems, just requires repetition to master. Sure a student might be able to memorize and regurgitate the "rules" quickly, but developing an intuition such that they can actually solve problems efficiently requires a certain amount of volume of worked problems. Unless we want class time to be reduced to the teacher overseeing the students completing worksheets rather than being devoted to instruction,
Color of skin? (Score:2)
> That said, I'd object to using color of the skin for padding purposes.
Where are you getting race is being considered? Despite our current nonsense culture war "equity" doesnt automatically mean race is being brought into this and there's nothing in either the summary or cited article that mentions race. It seems pretty clear to me they're talking about equity in regards to income where kids in poorer families typically perform more poorly in school and trying to level that playing field in regards to that by changing expectations and what they're graded on.
I'm not saying I th
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Yes, it does absolutely mean that and you're a fool if you think otherwise.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm a fool because I noticed that there's zero mention of race in either the summary or cited article? No, you're just an idiot who spends too much time culture warrioring.
Re: (Score:3)
The changes being made here don't make directly padding any grade based on any demographic type easier or harder than it already was and doesn't implement it but you'd know that if you had marginal comprehension skills, a slight inclination to learn, and weren't a prejudiced asshole.
The change is literally: Richer people do much better, relative to poorer students, when assessed on homework or by weekly testing than they do when assessed by examination at the end of the course so they will now score enti
Re: (Score:2)
>> That said, I'd object to using color of the skin for padding purposes.
> Where are you getting race is being considered? Despite our current nonsense culture war "equity" doesnt automatically mean race is being brought into this and there's nothing in either the summary or cited article that mentions race. It seems pretty clear to me they're talking about equity in regards to income where kids in poorer families typically perform more poorly in school and trying to level that playing field in regards to that by changing expectations and what they're graded on.
> I'm not saying I think these changes are a good idea mind you, I just don't see anything about race here.
As much as you're questioning the parent about race, why the hell are you bringing up income?
Grades are meant to measure mental capacity and capability to learn. They don't exist to measure incomes. The hell exactly are YOUR expectations with this program? Reward poor morons because they're poor, or reward rich morons and pretend they not still morons?
Re: (Score:2)
> Grades are meant to measure mental capacity and capability to learn. They don't exist to measure incomes. The hell exactly are YOUR expectations with this program? Reward poor morons because they're poor, or reward rich morons and pretend they not still morons?
Why are you pretending I was advocating for any of this and not just pointing out there's no mention of race in any of this?
Re: (Score:2)
>> Grades are meant to measure mental capacity and capability to learn. They don't exist to measure incomes. The hell exactly are YOUR expectations with this program? Reward poor morons because they're poor, or reward rich morons and pretend they not still morons?
> Why are you pretending I was advocating for any of this and not just pointing out there's no mention of race in any of this?
> It seems pretty clear to me they're talking about equity in regards to income
Why are you deflecting? It seems pretty clear to me what you said and believe. This isn't about race or income. It's about education. And remembering the entire point of it. To create a valid end product that is actually educated. Not merely pass a moron with a failing grade in order to pat an incompetent "teacher" on the back and secure more funding. Or to pass a moron in high school to ensure a future customer on a campus marketing success while supplying fiscal failure.
Re: (Score:2)
> Why are you deflecting?
Why do you continue to make shit up about what I'm saying? At the end of my post you initially responded to I clearly state "I'm not saying I think these changes are a good idea mind you, I just don't see anything about race here.".
Re: (Score:2)
They are hiding their own failures to teach.
The changes make sense on the surface, but the focus is entirely on the thing that doesn't matter, the grades. They should focus on learning.
The question that really matters is, "Did they learn it?" Ideally, grades should directly reflect that. If students aren't learning it, then the students need to be given support (like tutoring or whatever) so they can learn it.
Re: (Score:2)
> Eliminating homework actually makes some sense - in the age of AI, it is too easy to fake much of the time, and is one of the things that tends to separate out the low income types from achieving as well as high income types, because one of the things high incomes enable is time savings .
I recall classes where homework was 50 percent of the grade. And that was just dumb. Eliminating that as part of the grade makes sense.
But the idea of making weekly tests not counting makes it utterly pointless to even have them. If something is useless, eliminate it.
> If you have to get a job as a teen to keep your family housed, well, that's less time for homework. If you can afford to be driven everywhere, that's time saved over the bus.
Oh, come on. I worked the whole way from Junior High through end of high school. I did my homework when I was off. And why did I work? I came from poverty. This is as insulting to those people are coming from poverty, as it is for people who
They dont leave you behind. (Score:3)
They let you coast through.
How the hell can 41% be... (Score:4, Insightful)
...a passing score? Home school your kids if this is best the teacher's unions & education bureaucrats can offer.
Re: (Score:2)
Ultimately, the percentage can be arbitrary without massive standardization.
If a middle school teacher had a basic algebra test be comprised of half advanced calculus questions for some reason, then 50% would be a pretty respectable score.
Of course the answer shouldn't be shifting from one arbitrary threshold to an easier arbitrary threshold, but what teachers usually do, adjust to a curve to reflect limits in the testing effort.
Re:How the hell can 41% be... (Score:5, Insightful)
Because if you exercise your braincells for a second you'll realise that percentage scores on a test aren't directly correlated with knowledge. For example, if I give you an open-book 60 question exam and four hours in a subject you are reasonably familiar in then scoring 100% might only mean you are good at open-book exams, while the exact same exam closed-book with 60 minutes might be almost impossible to get 50% in.
In general American education systems are obsessed with people getting perfect, or near perfect, scores. Better education systems typically have a mix of much more demanding questions to better differentiate levels of ability. Take a look at what the 2/3rds of OECD countries that have better maths education than the US do when scoring and you'll see that this idea that a high percent score means anything (or is even a good idea) is baseless.
Re: (Score:2)
Grading isn't perfect but it is better than nothing.
Damn! I'm going back to high school! (Score:2)
I'm gonna be able to get kick-ass grades AND get high this time!
School Choice Advocates Rejoice (Score:5, Insightful)
Anyone with money will be sending their kids to schools that have standards, so luckily this only affects poor San Franciscan families. Religious families also bypass this by sending their kids to religious schools.
Re: (Score:2)
> Anyone with money will be sending their kids to schools that have standards, so luckily this only affects poor San Franciscan families. Religious families also bypass this by sending their kids to religious schools.
Not lucky for the poor San Franciscan kids, that's for sure.
If you're using School vouchers (Score:2)
You already have lots and lots of money. 93 to 95% of the school vouchers used got taken by parents already sending their kids to private schools.
If you're poor or just working class then you do not want to send your kid to a private school. Even if you somehow come up with the money or get a scholarship or something.
That's because you're dirt poor kid is going to be surrounded by a bunch of rich kids. And they are going to be treated like shit.
And not just by the students. The teachers will rip
Is this a real article? (Score:5, Interesting)
Is this a real article? Or a real plan?
A quick search didn't turn up a wikipedia article or any references to The Voice of San Francisco . The items linked within the article appear to be a bunch of draft documents with place holder numbers (XX%) and other random paragraphs.
For all we know, this could all be some sort of AI hallucination.
Re: (Score:3)
I came to the same conclusion after a bit of searching. It's clearly not what the article claims it to be, and it reeks of AI slop misunderstanding what it read.
Re: (Score:3)
There are links to a presentation, someone asked questions about it, and the answers to those questions contain the details.
TL;DR:
Taking the linked documents at face value, this is some sort of an experimental program that has gathered 70 participating teachers to test this new method of testing grades.
1. The presentation, which mentions the "Grading for Equity" thing:
[1]https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/sf... [boarddocs.com]
2. The answers to questions about the presentation allegedly by someone who saw it:
[2]https://docs.google.com/d [google.com]
[1] https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/sfusd/Board.nsf/files/DGX5KX10AEAA/$file/%5BBOE%5D%20SFUSD%202025-26%20Interim%20Goals%20and%20Initiatives%202025-05-22.pdf
[2] https://docs.google.com/document/d/16Z956H8rG5ZtflJyyDj642LJi4si8IoIz-DKG-5ynb8/edit?pli=1&tab=t.0
What happens when kids still fail? (Score:2)
Because failing to show up for the entire class and not doing any homework is not going to help you pass the single final test at the end of the year, no matter how many times you take it. I guess it's possible to pass with a 25% on a four-answer multiple choice, assuming you randomly guess every answer.
"Consultants" seem to call the shots (Score:3)
I've noticed this in Canada too. Toronto School board always gets a "consultant" to do the dirty work. They write the policy. They conduct the re-education camps. Primary institutions like government and education seem to have no "in-house" expertise anymore. Everything is contracted out. My read is that this is all about liability. If you take flak, you can always fire a consultant and argue to keep your job.
Great job on deniability, guys.
Uh oh? did I just step in something?
Re: (Score:2)
Well in Ontario you basically have to graduate with a 99% average in high school to get into any decent engineering schools in Ontario. Grade inflation means they're handing out 99% averages to almost everyone in Toronto. Those students out in rural areas with hard-nosed teachers who "don't believe in giving students an A+" don't stand a chance. It's ridiculous that there's no province-wide standards for this.
Re: (Score:2)
We went through this 'consultant' crap back when I was in HS (class of 96). In Texas we have standardized state-wide testing. You get 'practice' tests in 8th grade and they start the real testing in 9th grade in the fall. You take it until you pass, every semester, until one last session after graduation--if you still fail at that point you don't receive your diploma.
This test is based on a 6th grad education standard.
The failure rates are so high that almost every class in high school effectively tos
Re: (Score:2)
I believe you just made a strong argument for memorizing "times tables".
Does this comment make me look ancient?
Also, thanks for the pointer, don't hire anyone from Texas.
Re: (Score:2)
> I believe you just made a strong argument for memorizing "times tables".
Do they not do this anymore?
I hated doing it when I was in 3-4th grade....but glad I did, helped me out SO much in my later life....
NY Regents Testing Similar (Score:5, Informative)
Since 1866, New York State has had a standardized testing regime at the end of high school to qualify for a statewide [1]Regents Diploma [wikipedia.org]. Since at least 2015, they likewise goose the scores in a broadly similar way. You can see a scoring conversion chart from last year [2]here [nysedregents.org]. For example, out of 82 possible points on the Algebra I test, scoring 29 (that is, 35%) gets scaled up to a reported score of 65, qualifying for performance level 3 (out of 5, like a 'C'), and so qualifies for the Regents Diploma ( [3]more [nyssba.org]).
In the time since that's been done, the proficiency of basic math skills for incoming college students has become so poor, the colleges (like CUNY) have had to abandon the requirement to know any algebra even as an expectation to graduate college.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Regents_Examinations
[2] https://www.nysedregents.org/algebraone/624/algone62024-cc.pdf
[3] https://www.nyssba.org/news/2014/06/06/on-board-online-june-9-2014/regents-scores-now-on-a-5-level-scale/
Re:NY Regents Testing Similar (Score:4, Interesting)
They didn't have to, but they wanted more poor performing minorities.
All their Asian students and most white ones know Algebra just fine.
Re: (Score:2)
I personally have a lot of white and Asian community-college students who can't do basic algebra.
Re: (Score:2)
And for what? What student benefits from lowered standards? The only rationales I can see are that they think that it's the diploma that matters, not the qualifications it is meant to represent (the "these people are complete idiots" explanation), or that they are trying to cover up their failure to educate ("these people are corrupt idiots").
This, right here, is how we end up with Dr. Lexus (Score:3)
This, right here, is how we end up with Dr. Lexus.
Watch Idiocracy if you don't know who Dr. Lexus is.
Re: (Score:2)
At this point, I think Idiocracy should be taught in schools just like Fahrenheit 451 and 1984 are.
It's an allegory of how Stupidity is just as dangerous as Totalitarianism and Cencorship.
Grading for Customers. (Score:3)
Let's be clear here. The policy of dumbing down a failing grade to call it "average" at the high school level is being done for one reason only; funding.
We stupidly and ignorantly tied school funding to grade performance. Go figure Greed wants to call even a failing grade as "good enough" for funding purposes. A predictable end result after finding high school graduating classes loaded with 80% "honor" graduates. Damn near everyone is an "honor" student now? I wonder if any student or teacher know what a bell curve is.
And now, the incentive to attend college is softening. And those aren't students anymore at colleges. They're customers. Walking around a campus-sized marketing campaign to sell overpriced goods to young idiots too stupid to understand how loans work.
The policy of dumbing down a failing grade to call it "average" at the college level, is to attract qualified customers.
Graduating with 40% is obscene! (Score:3)
Regardless of the merit of grading on a school-wide curve, the lowest ranking schools should STILL require a real passing grade to pass the class. Fuck 40%!
Will make school better (Score:2)
All the dregs can just smoke and play on their phone in the yard, anyone interested in class can go there. I fail to see the problem.
So "Equity" means not educating bad students (Score:4, Insightful)
Surely equity means educating bad students, not pretending you did that by giving them higher grades?
Just like equality for women is when they qualify for jobs on merit, not when they are given jobs because they have a vagina.
Scores are bullshit anyways... (Score:2)
I can make an exam where I can garde the same answers as 30% or as 90%. Not hard to do.
But allowing students to take the final exam multiple times without repeating the year is some advanced bullshit.
The Soft Bigotry of Low Expectations (Score:2)
George W. Bush
Anyone care to refute this?
bah (Score:2)
Oh no, without meaningful homework our education system might become like South Korea's or Finland, oh wait. Homework is stupid. My grades sucked in high school because I just could not bring myself to do a lot of it. I ended up fine educationally speaking.
Good job! (Score:2)
Set up an even greater number of marginal students for slap-in-the-face abject failure, hang a millstone around the necks of the good students by making them suspects-by-association, and hand the enemies of DEI a truckload of ammunition to help Fascists win the war. That's an impressive trifecta!
I am very strongly left of centre, to the point where I consider most elected Democrats to be slightly kinder, slightly gentler versions of their Republican counterparts. Even at that, in this moment I find myself m
Narrative Too Convenient (Score:2)
This story appears to be some combination of AI hallucinations, people with political axes to grind, or an incomplete story. Be wary of "news" that fits a convenient narrative.
If you thought US education ... (Score:2)
... couldn't get any shittier, prepare for incoming.
Stop shitifying education (Score:2)
> A larger question is whether advancing Grading for Equity represents a shift back toward policies such as ending eighth-grade algebra.
I can get behind the concept that a lack of food, lack of shelter, lack of essentials could lead to a lack in ability to handle the stress of school, but, welcome to reality. It sucks that some kids have to deal with hurdles they have no control over. My daughters have friends who comes from houses that lack food security, and some of them lack shelter security (high prices, short term rentals). All of that being true, when you get to college, university, or, start your career, it doesn't matter, and w
This will backfire sort of hilariously (Score:2)
Seriously, it will help boys, probably white boys, the most. They're not like, grading on a curve to include things like a family's background, but making the grade entirely exam based, to eliminate teacher bias.
It's been well known for a long time, sort of an open secret in K12, that girls get better grades, but boys do better on exams.
There was this push a few years ago, to drop ACT/SATs because they were sexist. The argument was that since girls get better grades in K12, and better grades in college, it
Statistical irony (Score:2)
The irony here is -- on a properly designed exam the median student should be getting a 50-60 raw point score out of 100. This is what gives you the greatest statistical power to distinguish student performance. Then, a "C" at 41/100 is not unreasonable and entering it as 0.30 + sqrt(score) * 0.70 in the gradebook makes a lot of sense.
But this doesn't mean taking existing exams where students show mastery at 85-95% and then accepting 41% as a C.
Article could use context. (Score:2)
I have no particular reason to be optimistic about the actual implementation; but TFA, and definitely the summary, seem to be doing their level best to imply that this could not be anything but a perfidious dumbing-down scheme for the benefit of 'those people' who we all know 'equity' is for.
The proposed system is to have a high stakes test graded on a scale that appears to be designed to get better resolution out of the 0-100 scale; rather than the setup where the bottom 60 points are "here be losers" a
I am a teacher (Score:2)
As a lifelong democrat in California and in my 24th year of education, I can say that social justice has run amok in many California school districts. From math lessons that explain how Jews steal Palestinian water to reckless social promotion, schools have, in places, dramatically lost their way. Teachers generally fight the good fight, but some of them are in on the side of stupid.
We need the good old truancy police. We need forced detention and in-school suspensions. Kids need limits, as do parents.
If you're not familiar... (Score:4, Insightful)
The simplest version is if you're poor or some rich, white teacher thinks your race is inferior and just can't do any better, they pad your grade so you pass. If it sounds kinda racist, that's because it is.
Re:If you're not familiar... (Score:4, Funny)
I hated all those rich high school teachers.
Re: If you're not familiar... (Score:2)
In my life experience "rich" and "school teacher" weren't used together very often unless they won the lottery or something.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
"Rich" is a relative term here. School teachers aren't going to retire onto their yacht and sail about the world at the age of 50, but they also have a reasonable income and a guaranteed job so long as they don't actually molest the students. Compared to the Times Rich List, they're poor. Compared to half the kids they teach -- particularly the ones this sort of measure is aimed at -- they're rich.
Re: (Score:2)
> "Rich" is a relative term here. School teachers aren't going to retire onto their yacht and sail about the world at the age of 50, but they also have a reasonable income and a guaranteed job so long as they don't actually molest the students. Compared to the Times Rich List, they're poor. Compared to half the kids they teach -- particularly the ones this sort of measure is aimed at -- they're rich.
You clearly know nobody who is a schoolteacher. They tend to have to spend their own money to purchase supplies for their classrooms because budgets are too tight for the district to be able to provide the supplies needed for the classroom. Many teachers spend money on their students instead of buying themselves food. Frankly, you have to be trolling or a functioning moron passing as compos mentis to believe that schoolteachers in America are "rich" -- especially in the schools where "the ones this sort of
Re: (Score:2)
I had an "or something" as an English teacher. His wealthy father died and he quit at the end of that school year, making him a rich school teacher, if only briefly. It's too bad, as well. He really was a great teacher.
Re: (Score:2)
> In my life experience "rich" and "school teacher" weren't used together very often unless they won the lottery or something.
I know a few rich high school teachers. They got rich doing something else, then took up teaching because they enjoy it and feel like it's a good way to give back.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The median teacher salary in the United States is $63,000 (for nine months of work, equivalent to $84,000 for twelve months).
Annual welfare payments range from $36,400 (Hawaii) to $11,500 (Mississippi).
Compared to poor students, teachers are indeed rich.
Re: (Score:2)
"Compared to poor students, teachers are indeed rich."
Which city is this post about again?
Re: If you're not familiar... (Score:3)
First of all itâ(TM)s closer to 10 months of direct active work, teachers usually have faculty weeks before and after the school year, second of all itâ(TM)s really 12 months because most teachers spend most of the summer doing professional development/continuing ed and class prep work, third of all that number is very skewed by a few places where teacher pay happens to be very good, at least after they hot a decent level of seniority, like NYC, the majority of teachers arent making 84k or more. M
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I hate every one of them I've ever met. I have never met a rich grade school teacher. They spend way too much money providing their students with the basic things they need to learn. Since the government wont and parents don't care about anything but their free day care.
Re: (Score:2)
> I hated all those rich high school teachers.
Claiming there are "rich" high school teachers still teaching in America, is like claiming we have an overcrowding problem on death row due to innocent volunteers.
Some claims, simply do not make fucking sense. No one would torture themselves like that. Not if they're actually rich. Wealth buys sanity. Unlike any school policy, law, or regulation ever could.
Re: (Score:2)
In SAN FRANCISCO. Pretty sure they could be making more money in the private sector there.
Re:If you're not familiar... (Score:4, Interesting)
> The simplest version is if you're poor or some rich, white teacher thinks your race is inferior and just can't do any better, they pad your grade so you pass. If it sounds kinda racist, that's because it is.
Good grief. What they are also doing is taking whoever it is they are trying to give out free grade upgrades to and creating a group of people who are now going out into the world and looking for work, and once the employer sees where they graduated from, it's a big strike against them.
So I can tell you if this pans out, I won't hire anyone who went to school in San Francisco. I'm looking for capable people, not people pushed through a participation trophy system. Which unfortunately isn't a good deal for students who do well. And yes - it is racist as anything I've ever seen. Having worked with many highly qualified people of various skin tones and ethnicities, I can tell y'all they don't need grade hyperinflation. They just happen to be smart, capable, and good at what they do.
So I'd like to ask the participation trophy teachers - are you helping, or are you just trying to get those students passed and out of your hair?
Maybe some tutoring would be better, that would actually prepare the child for life beyond high school.
Nahhh, the answer is to just bump up the grades, that's what prepares you for life! Or maybe the opposite.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It's possible that this is intended to cover up just how bad of a job SF schools are doing. I wonder if they're doing what LA is and sending essentially illiterate students to college to complete their high school education. Possibly using federal funds to subsidize their failure and pad the budget of the State university system. Definitely harming the students.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
> It's possible that this is intended to cover up just how bad of a job SF schools are doing. I wonder if they're doing what LA is and sending essentially illiterate students to college to complete their high school education. Possibly using federal funds to subsidize their failure and pad the budget of the State university system. Definitely harming the students.
I agree. This is a terrible deal for the students. And certainly they would fail any majors that require actual knowledge. Opinion degrees will be easier, but employment prospects for opinion degree graduates are pretty nil.
I think at base, it is the failure of the "Equal Outcomes over Equal Opportunities" mindset.
And teachers who happen to be utter failures at teaching. Perhaps these teachers are more focused on other things.
Re: (Score:2)
What employer looks at high school?
Re: (Score:3)
People who hire for jobs that don't require a college degree, but do require the ability to read, write, and do some math. And want people who have demonstrated the ability to show up and take direction.
Re: (Score:3)
> People who hire for jobs that don't require a college degree, but do require the ability to read, write, and do some math. And want people who have demonstrated the ability to show up and take direction.
Exactly. Like it or not, a High School Diploma is supposed to connote a level of ability. Does a passing grade of 21 percent equate to a person who will do all those things competently?
I mean, people believing in this think that people who are only right about something 2 times out of ten is sufficient, well you need to create a business and only hire at that level.
The insane part is that rather than say "Something is wrong with our school system, we have to work on better methods of teaching, they are
Re: (Score:3)
> What employer looks at high school?
You look at where they went to high school. And if they went through the San Francisco public school system, you can make an assumption they were "equitably graded" and might not even have basic skills.
This is a bad deal for students who did not need their grades bumped up.
ps. when looking at resumes, I always looked over everything, including High School. Never asked for grade transcripts, but the modern public school system often has other matters they consider more pressing than actual knowledge, s
Deeper issue that "grading" etc is harmful (Score:3)
See Alfie Kohn: [1]https://www.alfiekohn.org/arti... [alfiekohn.org]
====
You can tell a lot about a teacher's values and personality just by asking how he or she feels about giving grades. Some defend the practice, claiming that grades are necessary to "motivate" students. Many of these teachers actually seem to enjoy keeping intricate records of students' marks. Such teachers periodically warn students that they're "going to have to know this for the test" as a way of compelling them to pay attention or do the assigned rea
[1] https://www.alfiekohn.org/article/degrading-de-grading/
Re: (Score:2)
> See Alfie Kohn: [1]https://www.alfiekohn.org/arti... [alfiekohn.org] ==== You can tell a lot about a teacher's values and personality just by asking how he or she feels about giving grades.
Tell me - cutting to the chase - do you believe that getting a grade of 21 percent is passing? Would you hire a person who is only right 2 times out of 10 to do work that requires what used to be a high school level of competence?
Now since it is obvious that we need to continue this in college, as the students are still of dark complexion, and poor, we need passing scores run college to be 21 percent as well. Would you allow your wife or children to be operated on by surgeons who were at the 21 percent
[1] https://www.alfiekohn.org/article/degrading-de-grading/
Re: (Score:2)
"once the employer sees where they graduated from"
You actually believe any employer cares about what HIGH SCHOOL someone graduates from?!?!
Re: (Score:2)
> "once the employer sees where they graduated from"
> You actually believe any employer cares about what HIGH SCHOOL someone graduates from?!?!
I am not an "employer", but yes, being in a technical field, my peers and I looked at entire records. We interviewed candidates. We made decisions on who to hire.
And when knowing that San Francisco public school systems now consider 21 percent a passing grade, we're going to look very closely at anyone who comes from that failed system.
It's called Due Diligence.
Re: (Score:2)
I hire and if you have a college degree I don't care what high school you went to. Hell, I don't care that much which college you went to as long as you have good experience.
You're not thinking like an administrator (Score:2)
Every year we cut the school budget, and Trump is literally trying to destroy the department of education that typically funds somewhere between 20 and 30% of the schools.
They can't afford to hold back those kids. The money just isn't there. They simply cannot help them they're not being given the resources.
At the very least let them have a goddamn high School degree so that the local McDonald's can't use that as an excuse not to hire them.
People do not realize that our civilization is collapsin
Re: (Score:2)
> "Every year we cut the school budget"
> Yep, no need to read any further.
Amazing the lengths some people will go to in full support of only getting 21 percent correct as a passing grade.
This is terribly harmful to the students. Why even work if guessing the right answer 2 out of ten times qualifies you for a diploma?
To me, that is the whole point. A 21 percent passing grade can be achieved by just guessing at the answer.
I test for Amateur Radio licenses. The lowest license level, called "Technician", is designed to be not particularly difficult, it is an entry level licens
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe the kids are so broken and convinced all they need is a smartphone and a tik tok account and they will be super rich. Lernin aint required. Maybe the institutions are fed up with this refusing to try/learn mentality and plan to dump them on the street and let the soup line teach them the hard lessons of life. Because, seriously, doing this is exactly the career path they have chosen. No life experience but somehow they think theyre going to be an influencer. Influencing a whole generation of homeless
Re: (Score:2)
> Maybe the kids are so broken and convinced all they need is a smartphone and a tik tok account and they will be super rich. Lernin aint required. Maybe the institutions are fed up with this refusing to try/learn mentality and plan to dump them on the street and let the soup line teach them the hard lessons of life. Because, seriously, doing this is exactly the career path they have chosen. No life experience but somehow they think theyre going to be an influencer. Influencing a whole generation of homeless is more like it.
Now Ima troll them: [1]https://www.supersummary.com/t... [supersummary.com]
The coddling of the American Mind. I won't even describe anything else, because I want the "21 percent is passing" people to go there, and have their heads asplode with the heresy it presents. Ohhh noes, Ima be marked as troll for posting that.
[1] https://www.supersummary.com/the-coddling-of-the-american-mind/summary/
Re: (Score:3)
Why wouldn't they? When the metric everyone cares about is graduation rates, the easiest solution is to just rubber stamp as many diplomas as possible.
Re: (Score:2)
> The simplest version is if you're poor or some rich, white teacher thinks your race is inferior and just can't do any better, they pad your grade so you pass. If it sounds kinda racist, that's because it is.
The funniest part of your overtly racist whine is that the stated purpose of the plan (if it even is a real thing) is to adjust the grading process to make it go easier on the richest students, as is made clear from these excerpts from the linked article:
> District materials highlight a decrease in A grades for ‘more privileged’ students.
> ...in Placer County, another jurisdiction with the grading system, “students who did not qualify for free or reduced-price lunch had a sharper decrease in A’s..."
Re: (Score:2)
I would think if the grading system gives less As to the students that don't qualify for free/reduced lunch, then it wouldn't exactly be making anything easier on them.
Though not being eligible for free/reduced lunch is a pretty low bar for wealth. Rich students can certainly pad grades by hiring out their homework, while poorer kids who also don't have time for homework just don't get good grades on it.
Re: (Score:2)
I think what does make sense is that a student can demonstrate that he or she knows the knowledge taught in the class, be that through homework assignments, quizzes during the semester, or the final exam. I did so-so in my German classes. I did reasonably well on quizzes, reasonably well on tests and poorly with homework. 30 years later, I can still speak German. None of my class mates, even the best students in the class, can speak it. All of the effort they put into homework assignments didn't buy what I
It's got nothing to do with racism (Score:3)
The schools are massively underfunded and they can't afford to hold students back anymore.
When my kid was in high school it was literally standing room only. Their math class had 45 students in a room designed for 25. Five or six of the kids in the back really did have to stand.
Are you folks dropping vaguely racist comments that kind of sort of imply that the other races besides yours are inferior while carefully making sure to not state it outright (what you didn't think I was going to hear that do
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Schools are not massively underfunded. Dollars spent per student has risen steadily forever (trillions$) yet the results have gotten steadily worse and worse. The problem is where people like you are spending the money instead of teaching kids the basics. Lighting even more money on fire won't fix that.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
That it is an "equity" program indicates that race is a major factor. And as is so often the case with these progressive agendas, the people who will be directly harmed are the people it is superficially intended to help.
Poor, minority students will now receive even less education and be graduated with a diploma that does not represent an ability to read or do basic math.
Re: (Score:2)
> Don't try to pretend there isn't a strong correlation between poverty and race, in both directions.
So that means anything addressing income inequality is automatically race based? What a bunch of fucking nonsense you're spewing.
> ...and you're doing the left a disservice by pretending otherwise.
And you're doing thinking people a disservice by spouting this nonsense.
Re: (Score:2)
Man, you really are grasping at straws to be offended. And Democrats wonder why we keep losing. If you're gonna project a ton of assumptions on me, you might as well join the republicans.
> So that means anything addressing income inequality is automatically race based?
That's not what I said and you should know that. You're bending over backwards to jump to insulting conclusions.
> And you're doing thinking people a disservice by spouting this nonsense.
What is your goal? To prop up your ego or change people's minds? Jesus, simmer down dude.
Re: If you're not familiar... (Score:2)
I am confused. Democrats barely lose because of astroturfers on slashdot?
Re: (Score:2)
> That's not what I said and you should know that. You're bending over backwards to jump to insulting conclusions.
Then what are you saying because that's sure what it looked like what you were saying?
> What is your goal? To prop up your ego or change people's minds? Jesus, simmer down dude.
To express my low tolerance of idiots who make claims like I'm being obtuse when all I'm doing is pointing out that there's nothing race based about this program. No kid will see their grade adjusted based on their race because of this program.
Re: (Score:2)
"Don't try to pretend there isn't a strong correlation between poverty and race"
I'll "pretend" that's it's far less about race than you seem to suspect. Measure "choices", not skin color of the end result.
Example: Measure those who:
o finished high school
o didn't have a kid while in school
o go to college or a vocational school
o don't have a kid while in school (part II)
o don't have a kid before getting married.
Now, measure the results of those who made those choices. Far, far less poverty along all raci
Re: (Score:2)
" I said it's a component and silly to pretend otherwise"
Did you really say that?
"Don't try to pretend there isn't a strong correlation between poverty and race"
Nope. You said something entirely different with "strong" implications. The correlation is meaningless, which is what I claimed, strong or otherwise. It's silly to pretend otherwise, to quote some guy on /.
Now, regarding your citation: Where did I indicate that having a diploma was a key to staying out of poverty?
The nutshell of my list are DO N
Re: (Score:2)
> Wow, some one really wants this to be about race so they can cry and pretend they're offended by "racism". Why don't you show me what you're basing that on? I ask because I don't see anything in either the summary or cited article that mentions race being considered here.
Some people can't wrap their head around the idea that there are poor white people too, so they assume that "poor" is an equivalence for "person of color." It's a racists view of how racism is now affecting the white man negatively. It's a patently absurd view of the world we live in, and one that needs to die. I say that as a middle income, white, middle aged nobody. I hear this nonsense spouted by a lot of my peers and wish I could at least educate them well enough to get them to understand that we have c
Re: (Score:2)
I think there's also something to be said for some conservatives having been conditioned to be triggered by the term "equity" by right wing news to the point that their brain shuts down when they see the word and they just start running with dumb-shit biases. To many of these people "equity" has to equal race based considerations because that's what the TV said.
Re: (Score:2)
> Wow, some one really wants this to be about race so they can cry and pretend they're offended by "racism". Why don't you show me what you're basing that on? I ask because I don't see anything in either the summary or cited article that mentions race being considered here.
When you consider the problem they are trying to avoid solving you would know it's about race. Have a look at [1]https://t.co/U5NOWK1GGB [t.co] page 8. The black and Hispanic kids are graduating with very low proficiency and have chronic absenteeism. They aren't ready for kindergarten, high school, college, or a career. Just giving them higher grades for "equity" does not solve anything.
[1] https://t.co/U5NOWK1GGB
Re: (Score:2)
But it is the cheapest solution. It doesn't cost anything to raise grades, they don't even have to provide remedial education. /s
Re: (Score:2)
> The black and Hispanic kids are graduating with very low proficiency and have chronic absenteeism
Yes because they are disproportionally low income and these are problems kids from low income families have with school. Or are you saying that kids miss school because they are Black and Hispanic?
> Just giving them higher grades for "equity" does not solve anything.
I'm not advocating for any part of this program. I'm merely pointing out it has nothing to do with race. Sure, if this program were to actually help low income kids it would disproportionally help Black and Hispanic kids (but not Asian) but that's not because the program is race based.
Re: (Score:2)
"That started with ... [LBJ]" Sure, THAT'S when black Americans' culture started to be systematically dismantled. Everything was great for African Americans before that!