Board debate intensifies over '50% floor' grading practice as community feedback pours in
Summary
Board members and residents sharply debated a district practice that sets a 50% floor on graded assignments; critics called it unfair and lowering standards while others urged the grading committee to present data-driven recommendations in early 2026.
A heated discussion among board members and attendees focused on the district’s practice of applying a 50% floor to late or missing work — a practice that speakers said currently applies across grades 3–8 and was extended to 9–12 this year.
Superintendent and grading‑committee representatives described a multi‑stage review process: committees will produce draft recommendations in early January, align recommendations in February, present drafts to policy and advisory committees in March, and bring a policy draft to the board in April. As an interim step, the district issued guidance to teachers to re‑establish assignment deadlines to help manage late work and grading burdens.
Several board members and public commenters strongly objected to the 50% floor. One board member said the practice "gives something that is not deserved," and expressed frustration that the practice was adopted without wide public discussion. Another called the practice a "lie" that incorrectly awards credit to students who do not submit work. Supporters of the committee process urged patience and data, asking the committee to present comparative evidence and implementation guidance.
No formal policy change was proposed at the meeting. Board members agreed to collect constituent feedback and asked the grading committee to accelerate data presentation so the board could consider a policy change before the end of the committee timeline.
