The School Board of Alachua County (SBAC) approved two policy updates with amendments at its regular meeting on Tuesday and voted to delay the final vote for a third policy change until August. 

The board approved a change to the policy on challenging library materials and a policy on student progression, with an amendment to remove a grading change. 

The most contentious of the policy changes was an amendment to student progression measurements. While the amendment includes some changes to instruction on people groups and certain topics, the key issue the last two times it has come before the board has been changing the grading scale so the lowest a student can earn is a 50% grade. 

After the first reading and public hearing, board members had time to consider the superintendent’s recommended change and read research on the topic. 

“I have this quote that rolls around in my mind, from a former president, that says… we have the soft bigotry of low expectations,” Board Member Tina Certain said at the meeting. “And I think that’s what we’re setting up some kids for.” 

Board Member Kay Abbitt said teachers gain a lot of information about their students through grading their papers, and that a 50% minimum would teach students the wrong lesson. 

“I don’t think there’s anywhere in society where you can get 50% for doing nothing,” Abbitt said. “If you don’t come to work, they’re not going to pay you 50% of your salary.” 

Citizen commenters also showed up to speak against the grading scale change, including teacher Karen Kearney, who said a 50% minimum grade would only make sense if every test and assessment was summative and high-stakes. Instead, she said it only gives students a reason not to study. 

“This grading scale gives students permission to be apathetic, and that is not what we want,” Kearney said. “Teaching our students that they don’t have to do anything to earn half credit will not help motivate students to be successful.” 

Board Member Sarah Rockwell made a motion to approve the updated policy, but then accepted Certain’s friendly amendment to remove the change to the grading system. 

Rockwell was the only board member to voice support for the grading system change, but she voted with the rest of the board for unanimous approval of the amended policy, without the grading change. 

Deputy Superintendent Cathy Atria said the district did gather input from students, teachers and parents before recommending the grading change. Superintendent Shane Andrew said the district should employ a four-point grade system through all grades so by the time they reach high school, they understand the grade-point average (GPA) system. 

Rockwell mentioned a similar grading system she used during her time teaching, where grades were on a four-point scale attached to letter grades, and how if a student failed to turn in an assignment, they could be given a double F. 

The amended policy also includes many minor updates to policy language, and changes to instruction on African Americans, Asian Americans, Pacific Islanders, health and civic education, and state-required instruction on “Victims of Communism Day.” 

Student Conduct 

The amendment to the student conduct policy was also a hot topic for discussion the last time it came before the board, as it does not contain a clear layout of progressive discipline. 

Rockwell has brought this issue up each time the student conduct policy update has returned, as it contains the policy for students who use restrooms or changing rooms that do not correspond to their sex assigned at birth, and do not leave that room when staff asks them to. 

The proposed policy amendment still requires staff to write a referral for such a student, though Rockwell has asked for more clarity in the policy language so there is less room for school administrators to make decisions based on their personal feelings. 

Expanding beyond the bathroom issue, Rockwell said it is important for students, parents and teachers to know what repercussions are possible for their actions. 

“Nowhere else in society do we have laws with consequences for breaking them, where we don’t know ahead of time what the potential consequences are,” Rockwell said. 

Rockwell said while students’ personal situations should be taken into account, there should be a minimum and maximum punishment. She suggested a matrix of some kind so administrators can match the action to the necessary discipline. 

Kathy Black, Executive Director of ESE and Student Services, said the district has had a matrix before and it did not work out well as it applied too uniformly to impulsive kindergarteners and to older students who could act out in the same way and receive the same consequences. 

Abbitt agreed with Rockwell that student discipline should be “cut and dried,” but Certain suggested it could be better to have different levels of bad behavior, with a list of possible consequences to choose from under each level. 

Anntwanique Edwards, Chief of Equity, Inclusion, and Community Engagement, also warned the board that if it chooses to apply a hard-and-fast matrix without professional latitude for decision-making, children of color are the most likely to receive those referrals and punishments. 

“Sometimes, when you have everything just in a box, you’ve got to deal with it being in the box, too,” Edwards told the board. “We could be putting ourselves in a position where some of our children of color, our males, our students with disability or what-have-you, could end up with more consequences or more harsh consequences.” 

Rockwell said she thought it would be appropriate to have a different matrix for each age group and noted to Edwards’ point that teachers do not write referrals for every misbehavior. 

Black said that if the board was calling for consistency, behaviors should have uniform consequences from all teachers. She said if a teacher can choose to write a referral or not, that is an individual’s subjective judgment again. 

The board voted unanimously to have staff bring back two options—the levels and the matrix—for the policy amendment to the Aug. 6 meeting, which is just within the 90-day timeframe for rulemaking. If the board does not approve the policy amendment at that meeting, it will need to begin the process again. 

Challenges to Instructional, Library or Reading List Materials 

At Tuesday’s meeting, the board also approved an amendment to its policy on parent or citizen challenges to instructional, library or reading list materials. 

The challenge process, previously unaddressed, quickly rose in priority last fall after a new state law made it easier for parents and citizens to challenge library materials. By the end of the year, a dozen books had been challenged, and the board finalized a policy early in the spring semester. 

The overall changes to policy approved on Tuesday remove witness testimony from the hearing process and allow the district to implement new procedures immediately to comply with any new state statute or rule, before modifying the policy at the school board level. 

The book challenge policy update also passed with an amendment, added by Rockwell, to remove non-lawyers from the definition of a “representative.” A recent law limits non-parent objectors to one challenge per month, but Rockwell noted that if anyone could “represent” someone else, then a person without children in the district could have a friend file a challenge and then “represent” that friend. 

The motion, with Rockwell’s amendment, passed unanimously.