A new national survey gives teachers the microphone on a hot school reform. The Fordham Institute and RAND asked 967 K–12 public school teachers about so-called “equitable” grading. The results were blunt. Eighty-one percent said that “giving partial credit for assignments never turned in” harms academic engagement. One veteran wrote, “Students are starting to feel entitled to points for nothing.” Another said, “A’s are passed out like Halloween candy. Whether a student learned anything is nearly irrelevant.” Many summed up their frustration with a phrase now common in staff rooms: “Most teachers can’t stand the gifty fifty.”
What equitable grading is
Equitable grading is an approach “popularized” by former teacher Joe Feldman. It aims to make grades more accurate and less biased by prioritizing mastery on tests and major assignments and by separating academic performance from behavior. Typical policies include no zeros for missing work, no penalties for late assignments, unlimited retakes on tests and quizzes, and excluding homework and class participation from final grades. As Education Week explains, advocates believe these rules “make assessing students’ work more accurate by prioritizing summative over formative assessments, separating academic from behavioral performance, and subsequently reducing subjectivity in the overall grading process.”
How the policies work in practice
Districts adopt specific rules that change how grades are calculated. Five policies appear most often in the survey and reports:
- No Zeros. Students receive a minimum score such as 50 percent even if they submit nothing. Teachers called this “ridiculous” and “insulting to the students who work.”
- No Late Penalties. Work can be turned in at any time. One teacher wrote that this “removes the incentive for students to ever turn work in on time.”
- Unlimited Retakes. Students can redo tests without penalty. Some teachers like the chance for improvement but also warn it “promotes avoidance and procrastination.”
- No Homework in Grades. Homework does not affect the final grade.
- No Participation in Grades. Class participation does not affect the final grade.
Some systems also shift from a 0–100 scale to a 0–4 scale or set a grade floor. Teachers reported that under a 50 percent minimum, “students have figured out that, if they work hard for a quarter… they can ‘coast’ the rest of the year and get a D.”
The push blends standards-based grading with efforts to reduce bias in evaluation. Reformers such as Feldman argue that grading homework and participation can “muddy the accuracy of the grade” because those behaviors do not always reflect content mastery. The Fordham report traces part of the movement to broad equity claims about disparities, while warning that some changes amount to “a return to the ‘soft bigotry of low expectations.’” The debate grew during the Covid years, when many schools loosened rules in the name of flexibility.
About half of K–12 teachers say their school or district has adopted at least one equitable grading policy, and about 36 percent say more than one policy is in place. Only 2 percent report all five. The three most common are Unlimited Retakes, No Late Penalties, and No Zeros. These are especially common in middle schools. No Zeros appears more often in schools serving mostly students of color. The report notes that “about 55 percent of teachers in majority-minority middle schools say their school or district has some variant of No Zeros.”
What teachers say helps or harms engagement
Teachers are not uniformly negative about every change. Their views are specific.
- Strong opposition to No Zeros. Eighty-one percent call it harmful, including 80 percent of teachers of color and 80 percent in schools serving mostly students of color. Comments include, “Being given a 50 percent for doing nothing seems to enable laziness,” and “Forcing teachers to give students half-credit… is a disservice to students.”
- Skepticism about No Late Penalties. Fifty-six percent say it is harmful, compared with 23 percent who like it. Teachers say it invites procrastination and complicates cheating prevention when old assignments circulate.
- Mixed views on Unlimited Retakes. Forty-one percent support retakes while 37 percent oppose them. Teachers wrote that retakes can build a growth mindset but also “encourage avoidance and procrastination.”
- Support for including participation and homework. Fifty-nine percent say participation helps engagement, and 44 percent say homework helps, compared with 25 percent who see homework as harmful.
Overall, 71 percent agree that “grading policies should set high expectations for everyone,” while only 29 percent choose “reforming grading to be fairer” for disadvantaged students.
Why teachers say it feels unfair
Teachers argue that grade floors and blanket leniency distort what a grade means and punish diligence. One wrote, “Everybody gets at least a 50 percent is insulting to the students who work.” The Wall Street Journal editorial adds that if GPAs become unreliable, “college admissions officers can’t rely on high-school GPAs” and will turn to more subjective measures such as extracurriculars, which can be less “equitable” for students without the money or time for travel sports. The Fordham brief “Think Again” states that these policies “tend to reduce expectations and accountability for students, hamstring teachers’ ability to manage their classrooms and motivate students, and confuse parents and other stakeholders who do not understand what grades have come to signify.”
The behaviors these policies can encourage
Teachers describe predictable patterns after adoption:
- Entitlement. “Sometimes it feels like the only acceptable grades are A-, A, and A+.”
- Procrastination. “Students are allowed to turn in work at any point in the school year with zero penalty,” which encourages delay.
- Skipping work. Minimum grades make it “almost impossible to fail,” so some students do less and still pass.
- Minimal effort late in the term. Credit recovery lets some “refuse to work all quarter and then do minimal work… to pass.”
- Cheating risks. Very late submissions complicate integrity because graded assignments are already circulating.
Supporters say the aim is accuracy and fairness. Feldman argues that including homework and participation “can muddy the accuracy of the grade” because those items reflect effort and behavior. He also frames motivation as personal responsibility rather than compliance. Education Week notes that advocates want grading that is more “bias-resistant,” with clear rubrics and a focus on whether standards are mastered.
Skeptics question whether the theory matches classroom reality. One teacher wrote, “Equity grading is not leveling the playing field… it is simply lowering standards so that school districts look like they are meeting kids where they are, when in fact they are hiding their failures behind ‘equitable’ policies.” Another said, “If a teacher’s autonomy to grade how they see fit goes away, I will leave the profession.” Many also point to rising GPAs beside falling scores on the ACT and other tests as a sign that expectations are dropping while learning lags.
District examples and course corrections
The debate has broken into public view in multiple places. Teachers in Fairfax County, Virginia, circulated a document criticizing reforms and warning of unintended consequences. Portland, San Leandro, and Schenectady saw heated debates over policy changes. In Atlanta and Las Vegas, reports indicate administrators reversed parts of the agenda after pushback. In San Francisco, Superintendent Maria Su moved to negotiate trainings with Feldman, which drew attention to how quickly a central office can change grading practice.
Even without formal mandates, many teachers feel a nudge to keep grades high. The survey reports that 84 percent say supervisors would be concerned if they gave too many low grades, compared with 16 percent who say leaders would worry about too many high grades. Teachers wrote that “we are encouraged not to fail students,” that “counselors can override teachers’ grades,” and that “teachers are pressured to pass all students.”
What teachers say they want instead
Most teachers prefer clear policies that still leave room for judgment. Fifty-eight percent favor schoolwide rules for consistency, while 42 percent want full professional autonomy. Many support common-sense steps that target bias without lowering expectations, such as anonymous grading and strong rubrics. As one teacher put it, “I believe in consistent, high standards and then making exceptions for students who need it. I do not believe in lowering the bar for all students.”
The Fordham report urges districts to end No Zeros and other rules that lower expectations, avoid blanket mandates for retakes or late work, and allow teachers to include participation and homework when it helps engagement. It also recommends refocusing fairness on practices that reduce bias, such as anonymous scoring and clear rubrics, and discouraging extra credit for non-academic tasks. Finally, it calls for leaders to stop faulting teachers who uphold standards and to use external measures of learning so that graduation and pass rates do not drive grade inflation.
Teachers’ voices in this survey are consistent and clear. Policies like No Zeros, No Late Penalties, and Unlimited Retakes may aim to be fair, but many educators say they weaken motivation, inflate grades, and make it harder to know who needs help. “Grading standards have fallen to the detriment of students,” one teacher wrote. Another added, “I don’t think we should reward kids that don’t want to do any work. Real life doesn’t work that way.” The message from classrooms is to keep expectations high for everyone, use smart safeguards against bias, and let grades tell the truth about learning.
