Earlier this year, AISD administrators laid an egg when they made an “administrative” decision that would have allowed no AISD secondary school student to receive a six weeks’ grade in any course of less than 50. The rationale was that although a grade of 50 is most certainly still failing, it provides the student some point of recovery for the rest of the semester. If a student receives a grade any lower than that, then there’s really no way for him to pass the course during the semester, and thus, no reason to bother trying any more. The message to that kid is, then “You’re screwed, and we can’t help you. Sorry.”
It’s a noble sentiment on the part of AISD administration, maybe, but was their mandate attempting to fix something that’s not really broken? Many teachers particularly, led by the Austin Federation of Teachers (AFT), were outraged by this action, and labeled it a numbers game that revoked the authority of teachers to honestly grade students. Sometimes, AFT said, students — due mostly to their inattention to the class, or their failure to even show up for class — really do “earn” six weeks’ grades as low as 20. And that is precisely what they should get. To play around with the averages would denigrate the good work of students who really do earn their good grades.
Reaction against this was violent; the matter was punted to the18-member Superintendent’s Teacher Advisory Council, a standing committee that meets and advises AISD Superintendent Jim Fox on classroom and instructional matters. The committee, which was already in the throes of examining AISD’s grading and reporting system, found sort of a “compromise” between the administration’s policy and AFT’s stance: They proposed that a minimum grade of 50 would be given to students who had fewer than five excused absences and had “attempted all tests and in-class assignments.” (How a kid can come to class, do the homework, take the tests and still manage to earn only a 50 is anyone’s guess.)
The AISD Board of Trustees was first exposed to the committee’s findings at a work session last week; they debated the committee’s proposals at their regular meeting on Monday. Trustee Geoff Rips said he was reluctant to allow students a grade of 50 as a way to recover from a bad six weeks’ reporting period. But trustee Tom Agnor said he thinks the 50 policy is the right thing to do. If students earn a 20 in the first six weeks, then they have to come up with an average of 87 in the other three reporting periods, he pointed out. “And to me that seems tantamount to impossible,” he said. “Even giving them a 50, they still have to come up with an average of 77. And by golly, if a student can do that, particularly a ninth grader, then he’s got my vote,” Agnor said. Trustees won’t vote on the proposal until the next regular board meeting on June 9.
For the second time this month, an item dealing with a contract for the bond program management firm Sverdrup Facilities, Inc., was booted from the board agenda. It’s supposedly the board’s policy to first bring items forward for information and review one week, then bring them back for a vote at a subsequent meeting. This item has not been presented first as an information item, so it’s a puzzle as to why AISD staff has twice tried to push a vote on this, isn’t it?
This article appears in May 30 • 1997 and May 30 • 1997 (Cover).