I do not agree with this grading policy. Students grades shouldn't be boosted up to a 60 if they are not meeting the standards.

First, where is the research to back up this grading policy? And if such research is there, I would have the student go back and correct the mistakes. After the second time of re-correct I would stat writing names and re-teach in a small group or a mini lesson based on the number of students that cannot receive a 60 or higher. That is a good indicator that the students have not mastered or even gained knowledge of that skill taught.

I do not necessarily disagree with this policy because if a student is not doing their work then they are failing regardless if they have a 60 or 40, but for those actually trying and still failing, it gives them a lead way because they can make it to a C.

Although the failure is not an option, is a double-edge sword. Students need the opportunity to demonstrate mastery without punishment. Teachers need the authority to improve self-assessment and personal accountability. Real-world scenario shows that if an individual fail to file your taxes one would be breaking the law. Adult-world, we are asking for trouble in this case. However, the proponents of no-zero, looks at the social components verses how grading translate into real world behavior patterns. The question then becomes are teachers in a no zero environment really preparing the next generation, if so, who will enforce the research based laws and morals already established?

I completely disagree with this policy. If students deserve a grade lower than 60, then I think that grade should be given to them along with feedback on how the student can improve.

To be honest, it seems like a giant lie to me. It seems like it would disillusion both students and parents about the true success the student is displaying. If I'm looking at my grades and not seeing anything too poor, I think I'm going at it correctly when in reality I'm not. We shouldn't allow students to think it's okay to do little or no work and still receive a high enough grade to get them by.

I do not agree with this policy. I do not think it is fair that a student should not be given the option of failing at something even when they completely do not understand it.

This is a lot like giving every participant a trophy. It sounds nice, but the reality is that there are winners and losers. Learning how to lose is just as important as learning how to win. We all lose at some point. Hopefully we learn from the experience. When we don't allow our students to fail, we are not being real with them. This "research-based" strategy is mostly aimed at lowering the achievement gap, but most research indicates that the more we intentionally try to lower the achievement gap by lowering standards, the gap increases.