The Manassas City Public Schools grading scale was a hot-button issue at the School Board鈥檚 community town hall Sept. 11, with parents asking the board to reverse the division鈥檚 鈥渘o zero鈥� policy.
The School Board implemented a 50-100 grading scale and a no-zero policy in the 2021-22 school year. At the town hall, which covered four key topics, parents resoundingly rejected the grading policy. Other topics included the school system鈥檚 calendar, communications and school day start and end times.
After a brief breakdown of the four topics, attendees of the town hall broke out into small discussion groups. Those who sat in the discussion group on the grading policy, hosted by School Board Chair Suzanne Seaberg and board member Sara Brescia, did not mince words on the policy.
One parent, Ryan Steinbach, recalled the most recent time the board voted on the grading policy, which resulted in a 5-2 vote to maintain the current grading scale. The board at the time decided it needed more evidence the policy was not working.
Steinbach provided his own evidence of what he views as the scale鈥檚 failure.
鈥淵ears of provisional accreditation, years of academic performance that is well below that of our peers who have the same demographics as us, years of just kids being checked out and parent-teacher conferences 鈥here the teachers are blaming the no-zero policy,鈥� he said. 鈥淲e are failing on every level.鈥�
While Brescia has long been critical of the grading policy, Seaberg defended it 鈥� causing friction with many of the parents in attendance. Seaberg said she thinks differently as a parent than as a School Board member.
As chair of the board, she said, her No. 1 priority is student outcomes. When it comes to outcomes, Seaberg said, if a student has a bad first quarter and receives multiple zeroes, 鈥渢hey may never be able to bring that grade up.鈥�
Others in the group argued that鈥檚 not necessarily true and pointed out students are given opportunities for reattempts.
Steinbach added there鈥檚 one key piece missing from the argument for a no-zero policy.
鈥淥ne thing I think that is fundamentally missing from your philosophy is that there鈥檚 value in failure. We learn from failure, and we learn, 鈥極h my god, I can fail,鈥欌�� Steinbach said. 鈥淲e don鈥檛 allow a kid to experience that. If we convince them that they can鈥檛 fail, then we are putting them into a college system where they will fail.鈥�
Steinbach, speaking directly to Seaberg, said he didn鈥檛 believe she would 鈥渄o this鈥� to her own children, and therefore she shouldn鈥檛 鈥渄o that to the children we put in your care.鈥�
Ultimately, Seaberg said, parents can always set their own expectations for their children and decide what is best for them.
鈥淏ecause I expect certain things from my kids, just like you all expect things from your kids, and there鈥檚 nothing holding you back from expecting more than what this grading policy is,鈥� Seaberg said.
Brescia, along with parents in the small group, said there is 鈥� and should be in the policy 鈥� a distinction between a zero that鈥檚 鈥渆arned鈥� through earnest effort and one that鈥檚 received for zero effort and not turning in work.
Brescia added she鈥檚 not aware of any school division that moved to a 50-100 grading scale and maintained a no-zero policy for no effort. Fairfax County was previously a 50-100 scale and no zero at all, but it has reintroduced a zero if no effort is made on the assignment after two weeks.
鈥淚鈥檓 truly not aware of anybody who doesn鈥檛 recognize the distinction between these two,鈥� Brescia said.
鈥楨xhausted鈥� teachers
Karen Huff, a retired teacher of 35 years in the school division, told InsideNoVa teachers are exhausted 鈥� in part, because of policies such as this one.
Huff, who taught elementary school, said the grading policy is failing even the youngest kids in the school system.
鈥淵ou don’t teach children how to live and how to grow by making everything easy for them,鈥� she said. 鈥淚鈥檓 66 years old. The reason I can be what I am now is because of the struggles that I made.鈥�
Huff clarified, though, she never made things easy for her students.
鈥淚 went and told them, 鈥楽ometimes you fall, but you got to get back up.鈥� Because it鈥檚 not the failing that鈥檚 the problem, it鈥檚 the staying down that鈥檚 the problem,鈥� she said.
During the meeting鈥檚 question-and-answer session, the grading policy remained the largest point of discussion.
Steinbach asked the board what evidence the board used to support the change to the no-zero policy and what evidence is the board 鈥渃linging to鈥� that supports keeping this policy.
Board member Lisa Stevens said she wants certain guarantees before agreeing to change the policy.
鈥淚 would want to be able to guarantee that changing the policy wouldn鈥檛 result in higher absenteeism rates, lower on-time graduation rates and lower SOL scores,鈥� Stevens said. 鈥淲e don’t have evidence that says that won鈥檛 happen if you change the policy.鈥�
To the idea the board would seek guarantees before reversing the no-zero policy, Brescia said there鈥檚 almost no way to make decisions with guarantees.
鈥淭hat鈥檚 an extremely high and unreasonable standard 鈥� we don鈥檛 set that standard for anything else,鈥� Brecia said.
