South Carolina Passes "GRADE FLOOR" Ban For K-12 Public Schools
- Fellow Editors
- 8 minutes ago
- 8 min read
Meanwhile Talbot Passes Compromise Grading Policy
In a move to protect educational excellence, consistency and standards, the State of Carolina has become the first state in the U.S. to ban "grade floor" policies in K-12 public schools.
For those who are not familiar with the "grade floor" policy, it is a practice that prevents teachers from giving a student a grade below the actual percentage the student earned.
The most common "floor" school systems adopt is the 50% minimum. Basically, a student need not do any work to earn at least a 50%. It's part of what is called "equity grading" which should be correctly called "enabling grading" because it enables students to appoint themselves as "victims" in order to skate by without achieving educational proficiency in school. It teaches students that they can't and don't have to achieve, especially when they face difficult content or situations. We have published several articles on this crippling policy:
Currently, we can confirm only six districts in Maryland that have used or do use the 50% floor in grading, Anne Arundel, Calvert, Charles, Montgomery, Prince Georges and Talbot. Talbot recently removed it from their policies.
Currently, it is estimated that 18 out of South Carolina's 22 School Districts use the 50% floor in student grading even though research concludes that the practice does not improve student achievement.
Here is a copy of the law:
Under this law, public school districts cannot require teachers to assign a minimum grade higher than a student's actual performance on assignments of assessments. For example, if a student took a test and got a 40%, the teacher could not be forced by anyone, administration, etc. to give the student a 50% or higher without the student actually earning that score.
The bill does more than prevent the 50% floor, it also requires students to complete all necessary assignments to be eligible for course credit or content recovery programs.
For example, in many school districts, including Talbot*, a student who is nearing graduation but lacks credit for a necessary course will often be scheduled to attend a two-week "recovery session" on the content of that semester long course. The student will then be given the credit for the course if they complete all the given work in that two-week session.
Under the new law, credit recovery in South Carolina would only apply if a student had actually completed all the work/assessments for a course prior to the recovery session. This is often provided for students who have medical, special education accommodations or emergency exemptions.
Many teachers point out that credit recovery gives some students an "easy out" if they simply don't want to complete a semester course. It also creates the question of how all the content of the semester course can be adequately covered and learned in two weeks. If that's the case, then why are courses scheduled to last a semester or longer? In the teaching profession, they describe this practice as putting the student in the "magic room" so he/she can graduate on time.
The bill also prohibits districts from mandating that formative assessments (classwork, homework, etc.) or district or state benchmark assessments (which are used to monitor progress) grades are included in final course grade calculations. Grades must also be based on actual achievement rather than behavior or class participation.
It's clear that grade floors are a problem.
From the article:
The South Carolina Department of Education ensures that South Carolina schools have a consistent grading scale so they can compare students and schools across the state. But grading floors have the effect of skewing data to make certain districts look better than they are.
Grading floors also negatively impact students, as they neglect to teach students the importance of turning in work and doing so on time. If a student can do no work and still earn half-credit, it sends a message that effort and mastery of the material are optional. This not only devalues the work of students who engage meaningfully but also fails to provide struggling students with an honest picture of their academic standing—a participation trophy of sorts.
Teachers are frustrated by giving students grades they don’t earn and seeing students disincentivized from doing their work. This is a rare issue where the lefty SCEA and conservative Palmetto Promise are in agreement. It’s policies like these, passing students through the school year without ever making them do the work and learn, that lead to lawsuits like this one recently filed in Tennessee, where a special needs student graduated from high school without being taught to read. In the long run, grading floors can lead to a cycle of passed-along (“socially-promoted”) students who are ill-prepared for future coursework, college, work, or life.
The Tennessee lawsuit, which is mentioned in the paragraph above, is detailed here:
There are supporters of the grade floor who claim that it prevents students from having their grades destroyed by one bad grade. They also suggest that the psychological effect of very low grades can be discouraging to students who will then stop working entirely.
However, critics argue that grade floors disincentivize students from giving their full effort, create a false picture of academic performance, and allow students to advance without mastery of course material.
Some critics also question the intrusion of the state on local control of schools and school policies.
The bill was initially introduced by State Senator Jeff Zell (R- Sumter) a former Sumter County School Board members who removed a 50% grade floor in his district in 2024.
The bill now goes to the Governor's desk for his signature. If he signs it, the bill will take effect immediately. Any school district which violates the law would lose 10% of their "State Aid to Classroom" funding.
South Carolina currently ranks 43rd in the nation in K-12 education performance. Critics of education in the state claim that graduation rates are artificially high, thus creating an illusion that students are achieving.
This bill could influence how other states approach similar policies.
Where is Maryland on This Issue?
In Maryland, a bill was proposed in 2026 to eliminate the 50% floor but it was withdrawn by the sponsor, Delegate Tom Hutchinson. Here is a link to that bill:
Here is an Chatgpt generated summary of how school districts in Maryland handle grading:
What are Talbot's Grading Standards?
The 50% floor seems to be part of a movement among some in the United States public school systems to create an illusion of academic success in failing districts. Recently, the Talbot County Public Schools has attempted this illusion through revamping the current 4.0 grading scale. Here's what we reported:
A grading committee made up mostly of TCPS employees deliberated on the issue for months. They finally reached a decision on the policy. At that meeting a senior member of the school administration told members of the committee that they are NOT to use the word "compromise" when speaking about the recent decision to recommend this new grading administrative regulation. The compromise system was presented at a Talbot School Board meeting on Wednesday, May 20th.
It is a compromise because people on the committee don't all agree with what was created.
The new grading policy (or Administrative Regulation), which was approved at the TCPS meeting, is another attempt on the part of the Talbot County School Administration to recalculate grade values.
Now, a 3.75 average is considered an "A". This is not unreasonable since mathematically that is about a 93.75 out of 100. Colleges would consider this grade within their "A" range. A 3.25 (87-89%) is an A 2.75(80-82%) is a B.
While the May 20th plan eliminates the controversial minimum grade floor of 50%, it still has holes when it comes to handing in late assignments and the retake policy. Now, a student has until the summative (final) assessment for a particular objective to hand in assignments due. This means teachers will get an onslaught of overdo assignments right before the summative. This will certainly slow down grading. It's also unclear if there can be a penalty for late work.
This policy is obviously a compromise because school officials had originally asked that a "3.25" and above be designated as an "A." They really wanted to make standards lower.
And while they may have adjusted to what some would call a more reasonable compromise for grades 6-12, elementary parents will now have to translate just what the elementary grading scale means:
Student progress on clusters of skills within each subject area will be assessed based on the following criteria:
SP Student’s skills and understandings are surpassing proficiency in this area.
DP Student’s skills and understanding are demonstrating proficiency in this area.
AP Student’s skills and understanding are approaching proficiency.
EM Student’s skills and understandings are emerging in this area.
NM No Mark
At no point in the conversation does the school system address the real problem, the problem that they are either unable or unwilling to help students achieve. Instead of bringing students up to standards, they want to lower the standards to the students. Students know it. Let's face it, solving the REAL problem of student achievement is HARD.
The system can't use state test scores, which are abysmal, to allege that the system is doing great, so they dazzle the public with a "97%" graduation rate. But when people question how TCPS has a graduation rate that doesn't square with the 45% proficient score in reading and 18% proficient score in math on state testing they have no accurate explanation. Now, they hope can point to more students earning "A's" as an indicator that everything is awesome in TCPS.
However, ignoring or putting lipstick on the problem isn't helping anyone.
A recent graduate of TCPS shared their experience as they went to Chesapeake College to continue their education. This graduate opined that, after graduating from TCPS with great grades, they had to take remedial classes at Chesapeake in order to be able to do the regular classwork. They also talked about how ill-prepared he/she and his/her classmates were for the world of work as well. This is no surprise. We hear it from employers every day.
The focus has been moved from teaching students the knowledge and skills they need to focusing on making kids feel "good about themselves" with grade inflation. It's the "self-esteem" movement and it has been around since the 80's.
If you want to blame the teachers, don't. Most of them want to hold students to higher standards in many areas, academics, behavior, etc. It's the 12 Magnolia Street crowd who spend their days in theoretical scenarios who search for ways to make things look better than they are.
We applaud TCPS for getting rid of the 50% floor. But that move needs to be part of a more coordinated, sensible approach to teaching, learning, grading and achievement. It's time to focus on REAL standards, REAL excellence, REAL achievement, not ridiculous recalculations of letter grade requirements or mumbo jumbo achievement descriptions that are both amorphous and meaningless in real world terms.
*We have been told by TCPS staff that this credit recovery practice occurs in the school system and it is not always used for students needed special exemptions.
Jan Greenhawk
May 26, 2026
Jan Greenhawk is a former teacher and school system administrator for over thirty years. She has two grown children and lives with her husband in Maryland. She also spent over twenty-five years coaching/judging gymnastics and coaching women’s softball. She was a former county Teacher of the Year and one of five finalists for Maryland Teacher of the Year.
This article was originally featured on the Easton Gazette.
Please consider supporting or signing up to the Delmarva Parent Teacher Coalition and follow us on facebook to stay informed of what's really happening with education in our schools.
Comments