School board agrees on credit/no credit grades

DUBLIN » An exasperated Dublin school board student member proposed eliminating her position because the adult board members weren’t listening to her as she fought for credit/no credit grades during the coronavirus pandemic.

“If you vote against the universal pass-fail policy, you are voting against the best interest of students,” said student Tinni Mukherjee on Wednesday night during the board meeting.

She said that if the board failed to vote for the universal credit/no credit option as opposed to the traditional letter-grading system, she would make a motion to abolish the student board member position “because what is the point of having a student board member position if you don’t listen to students?” Mukherjee said.

The board earlier had rejected credit/no credit grades by a 3-2 vote Tuesday night in a six-hour meeting. Students are at home for the rest of the school year during the shelter-in-place order because of the coronavirus pandemic, and district officials had proposed going to pass/fail system this semester.

But after two days of meeting, the school board reversed its decision shortly after Mukherjee’s plea. The credit/no credit for all students will replace the typical letter-grading system for the rest of the school year.

During the meetings, board members seemed to agree that it would be OK to go to a pass/fail grading system for the elementary and middle school grade levels. But there was concern about adopting that system for high school students; some trustees said they were concerned about GPA requirements for college admissions and scholarships.

The meeting, which began Tuesday night, was continued to Wednesday night.

A survey sent to all Dublin High School students by their principal indicated that about 73% of students surveyed favored a credit/ no credit system. School board members received hundreds of emails on the topic, they said. An online petition with more than 3,000 signatures, and comments from teachers, also indicated some wanted a district-wide credit/no credit policy.

But on Wednesday, another option was brought up by board president Dan Cherrier: to give students a choice if they wanted a grade, or to get a credit/no credit for the class.

Board members Amy Miller and Megan Rouse strongly opposed the idea, saying it became a question of equity — if some students chose to get a letter grade, others would feel pressured to follow suit. Miller, Rouse and Mukherjee pointed out in their comments that not all students’ home life was the same during this online-learning time at home. Some may not have good internet access, or proper computer equipment.

Mukherjee, in an interview on Thursday, said a 4.0 student who worked hard during the school, may have not have the same chance at home during the pandemic, if for example, both parents work as health care workers and may need the student to help care for siblings during the day. Others may have sick relatives they need to care for.

“If we offer a letter grade, we’re not measuring their academics, we’re measuring their home circumstances,” said the 18-yearold senior student.

She said there became a disconnect in the discussion despite evidence from university and college admissions saying students wouldn’t be penalized for credit/no credit, teachers who spoke in favor of the of it, and the comments and letters the district had received.

Board member Gabi Blackman was vocal in pointing out that some students may need the actual grades for competitive scholarship applications and that the board shouldn’t presume what the challenges were for students at home.

Board member Catherine Kuo seemed to be on the fence, saying there were many ways to assign a grade, but that giving students a choice would give them less stress.

Eventually, the proposal to give students a choice was put to a vote, and failed with Cherrier and Blackman voting “yes,” while Rouse, Miller and Kuo voted “no.”

Then Kuo, after some hesitation, agreed to bring back the original credit/ no credit grading for all students motion that had failed Tuesday night. Kuo was allowed to ask for another vote on the motion because she had originally voted no. Both she and Cherrier, who also had rejected the credit/no credit proposal the night before, switched their votes to “yes.” Blackman was the only dissenting vote.

Mukherjee thanked the board for their vote, saying she was “immensely grateful.” On Thursday, despite social media posts applauding her for pushing for the student voice to be heard, she said she’s not taking credit for the change of heart.

“I pushed it over the edge a little,” she said. “But it was all of us together.”