APS Retake Policy change announced

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This policy is such a classic case of having a theoretical plan that goes wrong in the real world.

Of course the kids taking advantage will be the panicked A hunters. I agree with what a PP said. In this messed up environment, it is fully accurate that one B will blow your chances at a whole class of colleges. And they know it. These are very motivated kids and there are plenty of them.

The kids pulling Cs and Ds and failing and not getting the material who this policy was meant to capture and help. Are they really more motivated by this policy? Probably not much.

In my view this was all predictable, but hey they figured it out in the real world I guess.

Yes- it was all very foreseeable. But it was a policy created by the admin with teacher input (see above comment). I am shocked that aps made a mid year change that is to the detriment of the students. This will negatively impact the students. I think the lesson that kids are learning here is “adults will leave you high and dry if they get to do less work.” I think there could have been some structural changes that aps could have made that would have reduced teacher workload without changing the policy at the expense of students.

A nearby school district implement a very similar policy a few years ago. It was a complete sh!tshow the first year with a ton of extra work. But teachers worked together in their course content areas. All of the intensified chem teachers made one retake and then they took turns one day a week holding re-takes. So each teacher didn’t have to stay after every week. They only stayed after once or twice a month, and they didn’t have to make their own retakes they worked together. There are so many ways that aps could have made modifications. Of course, aps just listens to the loudest voices. The nearby school district did make changes in the summer for the next year. But no changes were allowed for the students. They had to keep whatever they said on the syllabus. The syllabus is a binding document that really cannot be changed, at least that’s how the nearby school district views it. I wish aps had the same honor and integrity to their students.

I think this is overblown really. As long as all students are treated the same and the change in policy is clearly stated ahead of tests in the 3rd quarter it is what it is. The idea that the syllabus is some holy document that must not be changed or APS lacks integrity is just a lot. You might not like it, but I think it's within bounds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This policy is such a classic case of having a theoretical plan that goes wrong in the real world.

Of course the kids taking advantage will be the panicked A hunters. I agree with what a PP said. In this messed up environment, it is fully accurate that one B will blow your chances at a whole class of colleges. And they know it. These are very motivated kids and there are plenty of them.

The kids pulling Cs and Ds and failing and not getting the material who this policy was meant to capture and help. Are they really more motivated by this policy? Probably not much.

In my view this was all predictable, but hey they figured it out in the real world I guess.

Yes- it was all very foreseeable. But it was a policy created by the admin with teacher input (see above comment). I am shocked that aps made a mid year change that is to the detriment of the students. This will negatively impact the students. I think the lesson that kids are learning here is “adults will leave you high and dry if they get to do less work.” I think there could have been some structural changes that aps could have made that would have reduced teacher workload without changing the policy at the expense of students.

A nearby school district implement a very similar policy a few years ago. It was a complete sh!tshow the first year with a ton of extra work. But teachers worked together in their course content areas. All of the intensified chem teachers made one retake and then they took turns one day a week holding re-takes. So each teacher didn’t have to stay after every week. They only stayed after once or twice a month, and they didn’t have to make their own retakes they worked together. There are so many ways that aps could have made modifications. Of course, aps just listens to the loudest voices. The nearby school district did make changes in the summer for the next year. But no changes were allowed for the students. They had to keep whatever they said on the syllabus. The syllabus is a binding document that really cannot be changed, at least that’s how the nearby school district views it. I wish aps had the same honor and integrity to their students.

I think this is overblown really. As long as all students are treated the same and the change in policy is clearly stated ahead of tests in the 3rd quarter it is what it is. The idea that the syllabus is some holy document that must not be changed or APS lacks integrity is just a lot. You might not like it, but I think it's within bounds.

Kids made decision in August/September based on the policies in front of them. They decided to stay in a challenging class because they knew they could work hard and had a re-take option if needed. They are maintaining a B in class working hard and using the re-take policy. Now they could very easily get a C, because the policy has changed mid year. Like it or not, outside forces as mentioned above don’t really allow for you to get a C in a class and still get into a lot of colleges. You need to get As and very few Bs to get into many selective colleges. I think it’s unfortunate and I think a syllabus lays out the policies of the class at the beginning of the year. It has transparency and clear expectations. A very large school district near us does not allow for any changes to the syllabus that could potentially negatively impact the students mid year. I think that shows integrity and models that for students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This policy is such a classic case of having a theoretical plan that goes wrong in the real world.

Of course the kids taking advantage will be the panicked A hunters. I agree with what a PP said. In this messed up environment, it is fully accurate that one B will blow your chances at a whole class of colleges. And they know it. These are very motivated kids and there are plenty of them.

The kids pulling Cs and Ds and failing and not getting the material who this policy was meant to capture and help. Are they really more motivated by this policy? Probably not much.

In my view this was all predictable, but hey they figured it out in the real world I guess.

Yes- it was all very foreseeable. But it was a policy created by the admin with teacher input (see above comment). I am shocked that aps made a mid year change that is to the detriment of the students. This will negatively impact the students. I think the lesson that kids are learning here is “adults will leave you high and dry if they get to do less work.” I think there could have been some structural changes that aps could have made that would have reduced teacher workload without changing the policy at the expense of students.

A nearby school district implement a very similar policy a few years ago. It was a complete sh!tshow the first year with a ton of extra work. But teachers worked together in their course content areas. All of the intensified chem teachers made one retake and then they took turns one day a week holding re-takes. So each teacher didn’t have to stay after every week. They only stayed after once or twice a month, and they didn’t have to make their own retakes they worked together. There are so many ways that aps could have made modifications. Of course, aps just listens to the loudest voices. The nearby school district did make changes in the summer for the next year. But no changes were allowed for the students. They had to keep whatever they said on the syllabus. The syllabus is a binding document that really cannot be changed, at least that’s how the nearby school district views it. I wish aps had the same honor and integrity to their students.

I think this is overblown really. As long as all students are treated the same and the change in policy is clearly stated ahead of tests in the 3rd quarter it is what it is. The idea that the syllabus is some holy document that must not be changed or APS lacks integrity is just a lot. You might not like it, but I think it's within bounds.

Kids made decision in August/September based on the policies in front of them. They decided to stay in a challenging class because they knew they could work hard and had a re-take option if needed. They are maintaining a B in class working hard and using the re-take policy. Now they could very easily get a C, because the policy has changed mid year. Like it or not, outside forces as mentioned above don’t really allow for you to get a C in a class and still get into a lot of colleges. You need to get As and very few Bs to get into many selective colleges. I think it’s unfortunate and I think a syllabus lays out the policies of the class at the beginning of the year. It has transparency and clear expectations. A very large school district near us does not allow for any changes to the syllabus that could potentially negatively impact the students mid year. I think that shows integrity and models that for students.

I don't get it though and I have a kid in high school. Figure it out to get the grade you want on the first test. I agree this will take adjustments to how kids might be operating. But as a general plan, doing poorly on the first test and then figuring it out to take the re-take was not a good plan in the first place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do they expect these children to survive college where there are No retake?

They took away the retakes basically. So never fear they will survive college.

No, they didn't. They have basically guaranteed that no child with any interest whatsoever is guaranteed to never get below a B on a test. Of course, there will be kids who ignore the retakes, but sheesh, I'd have loved to be guaranteed at least a B on every major exam.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do they expect these children to survive college where there are No retake?

They took away the retakes basically. So never fear they will survive college.

No, they didn't. They have basically guaranteed that no child with any interest whatsoever is guaranteed to never get below a B on a test. Of course, there will be kids who ignore the retakes, but sheesh, I'd have loved to be guaranteed at least a B on every major exam.

That is pretty limiting right there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The initial policy was made with a cohort of teachers. I was on the elementary committee which only made minor changes but we were part of the drafting process and every teacher in APS was given the opportunity to comment on the draft as well.

I think the need for the midyear change was because of the drastic increase in workload caused by this policy at the high school level and that it was clearly being driven by students who were already performing at or above proficiency “B” level before the retake. My child who is an APS high schooler in AP and intensified classes included, was benefiting. The purpose was to bring up the lower performing students and the bulk of the workload ended up being students on the other end. Mostly those kids chasing A’s.

THIS!!!!! You nailed it precisely!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do they expect these children to survive college where there are No retake?

Not all children attend college, genius.

The point of school is to master material. This is good policy.

Actually, the point of school is to give everyone a basic education. I think we should stop talking "mastery" and use the term the elementary teacher in another comment used: proficiency.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a little sad about this, because my kid is the kid that the original policy was likely intended for - a HFA/ADHD kid in regular classes who tends to struggle with the faster pace of HS. He does well in some classes, but others like math and science, he really needs the extra help sometimes. It never occurred to me that kids were retaking at a 92. (I honestly thought the original grade had to be below an 80) Because actual tests are infrequent and maybe one or two a quarter, if my kid gets a 62 the entire quarter is a loss. The fact that he does pretty well on the smaller chunk quizzes and schoolwork doesn’t really count for anything.

Of course kids are retaking even if above an 80. These HS kids have been told since middle school that they won't get into a "good" college unless they have straight As. Take a journey over to the College board here and see people being told that anything less than a 4.0 UW knocks you out of contention for UVA. Of course, not all kids are headed to UVA or even want to go there, but imagine the stress of feeling like a single B has completely removed an entire group of colleges, regardless of how well you do in everything else? I don't blame kids for chasing As. They can't rely on homework (proof they are actually TRYING) to boost their grades anymore. Bonus: When they restudy and get those extra points, they've reinforced what they've learned.

I completely agree! Kids are using every ALLOWABLE opportunity open to them to perform their best. Beside for a few gen Ed requirements in college, kids will have an opportunity to choose to pursue interests and skills that they are good at. In order to get into a top school, kids essentially have to be good at everything. All As in English when you are amazing at math and struggle in English. The retake policy let people improve and work harder at the subjects they needed help in so they could then get into the best school and specialize in their interests. This isn’t going to translate into college because they may never have to take a US history class again or calculus, etc. but you do have to get a good grade on it in High school.

People apply their own perspectives and theories. You're all making this so much more complex than it is.
The original policy intention was not that complicated! It wasn't for helping students get straight A's so they can get into "the best" school and then pursue their interests. The original intention was to improve APS stats by giving disadvantaged, disengaged, or struggling students endless opportunities to get their work done, learn the basic material, pass SOLs and graduate. Without making anybody "feel bad" and without regard to unintended consequences on other students or teachers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This policy is such a classic case of having a theoretical plan that goes wrong in the real world.

Of course the kids taking advantage will be the panicked A hunters. I agree with what a PP said. In this messed up environment, it is fully accurate that one B will blow your chances at a whole class of colleges. And they know it. These are very motivated kids and there are plenty of them.

The kids pulling Cs and Ds and failing and not getting the material who this policy was meant to capture and help. Are they really more motivated by this policy? Probably not much.

In my view this was all predictable, but hey they figured it out in the real world I guess.

Yes- it was all very foreseeable. But it was a policy created by the admin with teacher input (see above comment). I am shocked that aps made a mid year change that is to the detriment of the students. This will negatively impact the students. I think the lesson that kids are learning here is “adults will leave you high and dry if they get to do less work.” I think there could have been some structural changes that aps could have made that would have reduced teacher workload without changing the policy at the expense of students.

A nearby school district implement a very similar policy a few years ago. It was a complete sh!tshow the first year with a ton of extra work. But teachers worked together in their course content areas. All of the intensified chem teachers made one retake and then they took turns one day a week holding re-takes. So each teacher didn’t have to stay after every week. They only stayed after once or twice a month, and they didn’t have to make their own retakes they worked together. There are so many ways that aps could have made modifications. Of course, aps just listens to the loudest voices. The nearby school district did make changes in the summer for the next year. But no changes were allowed for the students. They had to keep whatever they said on the syllabus. The syllabus is a binding document that really cannot be changed, at least that’s how the nearby school district views it. I wish aps had the same honor and integrity to their students.

I think this is overblown really. As long as all students are treated the same and the change in policy is clearly stated ahead of tests in the 3rd quarter it is what it is. The idea that the syllabus is some holy document that must not be changed or APS lacks integrity is just a lot. You might not like it, but I think it's within bounds.

Kids made decision in August/September based on the policies in front of them. They decided to stay in a challenging class because they knew they could work hard and had a re-take option if needed. They are maintaining a B in class working hard and using the re-take policy. Now they could very easily get a C, because the policy has changed mid year. Like it or not, outside forces as mentioned above don’t really allow for you to get a C in a class and still get into a lot of colleges. You need to get As and very few Bs to get into many selective colleges. I think it’s unfortunate and I think a syllabus lays out the policies of the class at the beginning of the year. It has transparency and clear expectations. A very large school district near us does not allow for any changes to the syllabus that could potentially negatively impact the students mid year. I think that shows integrity and models that for students.

I don't get it though and I have a kid in high school. Figure it out to get the grade you want on the first test. I agree this will take adjustments to how kids might be operating. But as a general plan, doing poorly on the first test and then figuring it out to take the re-take was not a good plan in the first place.

I think “figuring it out” is a bit of a naive strategy. Best practices say that teachers should be giving formative (pre test) assignments to give students feedback so they can realize if they are “figuring it out.” But in many classes, due to class size, HW only graded for completion, teachers over confidence that they know inherently that the students are getting the material, many times the unit test is the first chance to get real feedback that you were misunderstanding a concept. Then you get that feedback, study again and do better. That is truly happening for many students. Previous opportunities to “figure it out” weren’t there. Math lunch labs are not truly operated in reality. The teachers talk about them at back to school night, but when kids show up, teachers are shocked and just tell kids to practice quietly in the back. It’s not a true opportunity. I am happy that your high schooler has figured it out, but all kids are different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a little sad about this, because my kid is the kid that the original policy was likely intended for - a HFA/ADHD kid in regular classes who tends to struggle with the faster pace of HS. He does well in some classes, but others like math and science, he really needs the extra help sometimes. It never occurred to me that kids were retaking at a 92. (I honestly thought the original grade had to be below an 80) Because actual tests are infrequent and maybe one or two a quarter, if my kid gets a 62 the entire quarter is a loss. The fact that he does pretty well on the smaller chunk quizzes and schoolwork doesn’t really count for anything.

But your kid can still retake a 62 and turn it into an 80

I think an 80 is low. It means you have to get a perfect score to even have a shot at a B. Most likely in retake you get a C at best. Not motivating to bother taking a retake.

Huh? You just have to get an 80 on the retake to get a B. And if the opportunity to get a C instead of an "F" or low D isn't motivating, then the student has other issues to be addressed. Trust me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This policy is such a classic case of having a theoretical plan that goes wrong in the real world.

Of course the kids taking advantage will be the panicked A hunters. I agree with what a PP said. In this messed up environment, it is fully accurate that one B will blow your chances at a whole class of colleges. And they know it. These are very motivated kids and there are plenty of them.

The kids pulling Cs and Ds and failing and not getting the material who this policy was meant to capture and help. Are they really more motivated by this policy? Probably not much.

In my view this was all predictable, but hey they figured it out in the real world I guess.

Yes- it was all very foreseeable. But it was a policy created by the admin with teacher input (see above comment). I am shocked that aps made a mid year change that is to the detriment of the students. This will negatively impact the students. I think the lesson that kids are learning here is “adults will leave you high and dry if they get to do less work.” I think there could have been some structural changes that aps could have made that would have reduced teacher workload without changing the policy at the expense of students.

A nearby school district implement a very similar policy a few years ago. It was a complete sh!tshow the first year with a ton of extra work. But teachers worked together in their course content areas. All of the intensified chem teachers made one retake and then they took turns one day a week holding re-takes. So each teacher didn’t have to stay after every week. They only stayed after once or twice a month, and they didn’t have to make their own retakes they worked together. There are so many ways that aps could have made modifications. Of course, aps just listens to the loudest voices. The nearby school district did make changes in the summer for the next year. But no changes were allowed for the students. They had to keep whatever they said on the syllabus. The syllabus is a binding document that really cannot be changed, at least that’s how the nearby school district views it. I wish aps had the same honor and integrity to their students.

Since people don't really know why the policy was changed mid-year, everyone is merely speculating and there is nothing proving that it was merely because teachers were burdened. It's not like APS has responded to teachers' complaints about being overworked and having insufficient time for anything before.

I think what the teachers did in your anecdote above is genius and fabulous. But it doesn't mean that's why APS changed its direction mid-course. It could be because the targeted students weren't the ones being reached and the above-average students were unnecessarily sucking more resources away from them. It could also be because parents complained. Or it could be a combination of factors. Whatever the reason, I assume (probably naively) that it was significant enough to warrant an immediate change.

[Anonymous]

I have a kid who is panicking about this change. He has only taken two re-takes, but he’s really down about not having the opportunity to excel on a retake. He is outraged. He’s also got some learning differences and the current policy has made it easier for his 504 to just fall into place rather than me having to obsessively enforce it with his teachers. My other kid has completely abused the policy by only doing the test prep if he gets a bad grade and needs to retake the test. This does not go unnoticed by his teachers! This is to say, I’ve seen both the benefits and pitfalls of the current policy and I have mixed feelings about the change. My question: will teachers have the discretion to offer the entire class the opportunity to completely retake a test that the class collectively bombed and, at their discretion, offer the entire class the opportunity to get an A on that retake? Or does the new policy strip them of that discretion?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This policy is such a classic case of having a theoretical plan that goes wrong in the real world.

Of course the kids taking advantage will be the panicked A hunters. I agree with what a PP said. In this messed up environment, it is fully accurate that one B will blow your chances at a whole class of colleges. And they know it. These are very motivated kids and there are plenty of them.

The kids pulling Cs and Ds and failing and not getting the material who this policy was meant to capture and help. Are they really more motivated by this policy? Probably not much.

In my view this was all predictable, but hey they figured it out in the real world I guess.

Yes- it was all very foreseeable. But it was a policy created by the admin with teacher input (see above comment). I am shocked that aps made a mid year change that is to the detriment of the students. This will negatively impact the students. I think the lesson that kids are learning here is “adults will leave you high and dry if they get to do less work.” I think there could have been some structural changes that aps could have made that would have reduced teacher workload without changing the policy at the expense of students.

A nearby school district implement a very similar policy a few years ago. It was a complete sh!tshow the first year with a ton of extra work. But teachers worked together in their course content areas. All of the intensified chem teachers made one retake and then they took turns one day a week holding re-takes. So each teacher didn’t have to stay after every week. They only stayed after once or twice a month, and they didn’t have to make their own retakes they worked together. There are so many ways that aps could have made modifications. Of course, aps just listens to the loudest voices. The nearby school district did make changes in the summer for the next year. But no changes were allowed for the students. They had to keep whatever they said on the syllabus. The syllabus is a binding document that really cannot be changed, at least that’s how the nearby school district views it. I wish aps had the same honor and integrity to their students.

I think this is overblown really. As long as all students are treated the same and the change in policy is clearly stated ahead of tests in the 3rd quarter it is what it is. The idea that the syllabus is some holy document that must not be changed or APS lacks integrity is just a lot. You might not like it, but I think it's within bounds.

Kids made decision in August/September based on the policies in front of them. They decided to stay in a challenging class because they knew they could work hard and had a re-take option if needed. They are maintaining a B in class working hard and using the re-take policy. Now they could very easily get a C, because the policy has changed mid year. Like it or not, outside forces as mentioned above don’t really allow for you to get a C in a class and still get into a lot of colleges. You need to get As and very few Bs to get into many selective colleges. I think it’s unfortunate and I think a syllabus lays out the policies of the class at the beginning of the year. It has transparency and clear expectations. A very large school district near us does not allow for any changes to the syllabus that could potentially negatively impact the students mid year. I think that shows integrity and models that for students.

Yeah...no.
If they are already maintaining a B, they can still retake tests lower than 80 and get their usual B.
Like it or not, more kids may find themselves going to a "lesser" school or even community college and then transferring to a more "selective" school - which, btw, saves you a ****load of money and they end up with the same degree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This policy is such a classic case of having a theoretical plan that goes wrong in the real world.

Of course the kids taking advantage will be the panicked A hunters. I agree with what a PP said. In this messed up environment, it is fully accurate that one B will blow your chances at a whole class of colleges. And they know it. These are very motivated kids and there are plenty of them.

The kids pulling Cs and Ds and failing and not getting the material who this policy was meant to capture and help. Are they really more motivated by this policy? Probably not much.

In my view this was all predictable, but hey they figured it out in the real world I guess.

Yes- it was all very foreseeable. But it was a policy created by the admin with teacher input (see above comment). I am shocked that aps made a mid year change that is to the detriment of the students. This will negatively impact the students. I think the lesson that kids are learning here is “adults will leave you high and dry if they get to do less work.” I think there could have been some structural changes that aps could have made that would have reduced teacher workload without changing the policy at the expense of students.

A nearby school district implement a very similar policy a few years ago. It was a complete sh!tshow the first year with a ton of extra work. But teachers worked together in their course content areas. All of the intensified chem teachers made one retake and then they took turns one day a week holding re-takes. So each teacher didn’t have to stay after every week. They only stayed after once or twice a month, and they didn’t have to make their own retakes they worked together. There are so many ways that aps could have made modifications. Of course, aps just listens to the loudest voices. The nearby school district did make changes in the summer for the next year. But no changes were allowed for the students. They had to keep whatever they said on the syllabus. The syllabus is a binding document that really cannot be changed, at least that’s how the nearby school district views it. I wish aps had the same honor and integrity to their students.

I think this is overblown really. As long as all students are treated the same and the change in policy is clearly stated ahead of tests in the 3rd quarter it is what it is. The idea that the syllabus is some holy document that must not be changed or APS lacks integrity is just a lot. You might not like it, but I think it's within bounds.

Kids made decision in August/September based on the policies in front of them. They decided to stay in a challenging class because they knew they could work hard and had a re-take option if needed. They are maintaining a B in class working hard and using the re-take policy. Now they could very easily get a C, because the policy has changed mid year. Like it or not, outside forces as mentioned above don’t really allow for you to get a C in a class and still get into a lot of colleges. You need to get As and very few Bs to get into many selective colleges. I think it’s unfortunate and I think a syllabus lays out the policies of the class at the beginning of the year. It has transparency and clear expectations. A very large school district near us does not allow for any changes to the syllabus that could potentially negatively impact the students mid year. I think that shows integrity and models that for students.

I don't get it though and I have a kid in high school. Figure it out to get the grade you want on the first test. I agree this will take adjustments to how kids might be operating. But as a general plan, doing poorly on the first test and then figuring it out to take the re-take was not a good plan in the first place.

I think “figuring it out” is a bit of a naive strategy. Best practices say that teachers should be giving formative (pre test) assignments to give students feedback so they can realize if they are “figuring it out.” But in many classes, due to class size, HW only graded for completion, teachers over confidence that they know inherently that the students are getting the material, many times the unit test is the first chance to get real feedback that you were misunderstanding a concept. Then you get that feedback, study again and do better. That is truly happening for many students. Previous opportunities to “figure it out” weren’t there. Math lunch labs are not truly operated in reality. The teachers talk about them at back to school night, but when kids show up, teachers are shocked and just tell kids to practice quietly in the back. It’s not a true opportunity. I am happy that your high schooler has figured it out, but all kids are different.

It's the approach to teaching that needs to change - not making policies that require kids to do double the work and take up extra time to re-do and re-take. Fix the TEACHING. Make teachers TEACH.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have a kid who is panicking about this change. He has only taken two re-takes, but he’s really down about not having the opportunity to excel on a retake. He is outraged. He’s also got some learning differences and the current policy has made it easier for his 504 to just fall into place rather than me having to obsessively enforce it with his teachers. My other kid has completely abused the policy by only doing the test prep if he gets a bad grade and needs to retake the test. This does not go unnoticed by his teachers! This is to say, I’ve seen both the benefits and pitfalls of the current policy and I have mixed feelings about the change. My question: will teachers have the discretion to offer the entire class the opportunity to completely retake a test that the class collectively bombed and, at their discretion, offer the entire class the opportunity to get an A on that retake? Or does the new policy strip them of that discretion?

There's no reason to interpret the policy as stripping away teacher discretion. These policies merely ensure certain opportunities.
If your kid has a 504, then perhaps you can retain the assurance of retakes through that. However, by this policy, he is still ensured that ability just like everyone else if they get below a B.

I just don't understand why everyone here seems to think every student is entitled to an A.