A STUDENT’S VIEW - California can inflate our GPAs and lower expectations. But none of that makes students smarter or better prepared.

I am a California student, and I have a simple request for the adults running our education system: Stop making things easier and calling it progress. I don't want a grade I didn't earn. If my work deserves an A, give me an A. If it deserves a C, give me a C. And if I fail, tell me then help me learn, work harder, and come back stronger.

That is education. What isn't education is pretending students have mastered material when they haven't.

California has a serious academic problem. Too many students still fail to meet state standards in mathematics and English language arts, even as high GPAs have become increasingly common. That raises an uncomfortable question: If achievement isn't keeping pace with grades, what exactly does an A mean anymore?

A report card should measure learning, not protect feelings, or improve statistics. A 4.0 GPA should represent exceptional achievement; not become another credential students need simply to compete for college admission.

The problem becomes more troubling when students reach universities. UC Berkeley mathematics professor Zvezdelina Stankova has publicly described encountering college students who struggled with fractions and basic algebra. If students can earn impressive transcripts, enter one of America's leading public universities and still struggle with mathematics they should have learned years earlier, something has gone terribly wrong.

You can inflate a GPA. You cannot inflate knowledge.

A transcript can say 4.0. Reality can still say unprepared. Grade inflation isn't compassion. It is deception. When adults give students grades that exaggerate their mastery, they aren't protecting us from failure. They are postponing it until the consequences become greater.

Eventually there is a professor who expects us to know algebra or an employer who expects us to write clearly. Eventually someone will depend on our ability to do the work. At that point, nobody cares whether an honest grade might have hurt our feelings. They care whether we are competent.

California also needs to reconsider how it measures academic achievement. The University of California no longer considers SAT or ACT scores in admissions. Standardized tests are imperfect, and no single examination can measure a student's intelligence, character, creativity, or potential. But eliminating an imperfect measurement does not eliminate inequality.

The answer shouldn't be one test deciding someone's future. Admissions should consider multiple measures grades, course difficulty, personal circumstances, accomplishments, and some form of objective academic assessment. When grades become less reliable, removing other measurements makes it harder to determine what students actually know.

Some argue that demanding high standards disadvantages students from poorer communities or struggling schools. I reject that idea. Students facing disadvantages deserve more tutoring, stronger academic intervention, excellent teachers, challenging courses, better resources, and greater opportunities.

But they do not deserve fake achievement. A struggling student doesn't become proficient because somebody changes a C to an A. A child who cannot read at grade level isn't helped when adults pretend otherwise. A student who doesn't understand algebra isn't empowered by being pushed ahead without mastering it.

Real equity means giving every student the resources necessary to meet high standards not lowering standards until everyone appears to have succeeded.

Young people constantly hear that adults believe in us. Then prove it. Give us difficult books and expect us to read them. Give us difficult equations and expect us to solve them. Return our essays with corrections and make us rewrite them. Make us study, think and show up. And when our work isn't good enough, have enough respect for us to say so.

An undeserved A isn't kindness. It is a lie printed on a transcript.

Failure doesn't feel good. It isn't supposed to. But when you struggle, practice and finally succeed, you know you earned it. Hard work teaches more than academics. It teaches discipline, persistence, responsibility, humility, and confidence. Those qualities cannot be handed out with report cards.

My generation will eventually inherit California. We will become its doctors, engineers, teachers, business owners, scientists, journalists, firefighters, and public officials. Someday, the adults setting education policy today will depend on the students sitting in California classrooms right now. They should want us prepared.

So don't tell us we're succeeding when we're falling behind. Don't hide academic problems behind impressive GPAs. Don't confuse lower expectations with compassion. Give struggling students every resource necessary to succeed, but don't give us achievement we haven't earned.

Give us the chance to earn it.

I don't want California to make school easier for my generation. I want California to make my generation stronger. I don't want a participation trophy disguised as a transcript. I want an education.

California can inflate our grades, lower expectations, and change admissions policies. But there is one thing no government, school district, university, or teacher can manufacture for us: what we actually know.

An A should mean excellence. Excellence should require achievement. And achievement should still have to be earned.

There is no shortcut. There is no substitute. There is only the work.

(Shoshannah Kalaydjian is a young Jewish student who writes about education, identity, and the challenges facing the next generation. Growing up in today’s climate, she has witnessed firsthand how rising antisemitism affects young people in classrooms and on college campuses.  She is committed to sharing the perspectives of Jewish youth, amplifying student voices, and encouraging leaders to create safer, more inclusive environments for all students.) Photo:  Data Science Alumni Mentorship Hub | CDSS at UC Berkeley

ALPERN AT LARGE - As much as I’ve recently come out with a few CityWatch pieces suggesting Mayor Karen Bass might be the lesser of two evils between both her failed mayoral first-term and an unprincipled as-of-yet-unsuccessful challenger (Councilmember Nithya Raman), the concept of “just get Bass out of here!” isn’t lost on me.

Both of the two candidates, as of this Labor Day article, are running neck and neck. The fake Median Strategies poll showing Mayor Bass had a significant lead before the November 3rd runoff election, with 85% of Pratt voters saying they planned to vote for Bass, was just that: fake.

Neither Bass nor Raman have a mandate here, and every Angeleno should know it.

As I’ve stated in other CityWatch articles, Rick Caruso “played” Angelenos in calling against a recall of Mayor Bass, promising to step up for a better campaign in 2026 to replace Mayor Bass, and then at the last second running away like a coward and dropping out of the election.

I’ve also stated that our best mayor would have been one Austin Beutner, but that good man had personal tragedy destroy his life and he rightfully—unlike Caruso—dropped out. Had Caruso dropped out six months earlier, we could have entertained other viable candidates beyond Raman and Bass.

Meanwhile, Spencer Pratt ran too amateurish a campaign to provide enough Angelenos assurance he knew how to run a major city, and his future lies in the world of op-eds, Fox News appearances, and the culture wars that still DO need to be fought.

The fact remains is that the creepy, “don’t worry, be happy” smile of Karen Bass can’t pave over her record of insufficient results on homelessness, crime, affordable housing, favoring L.A.’s civil service over the voters and taxpayers of the City of L.A., and her failures in making L.A. more business-friendly prior to the Olympics in 2028.

Bass has the support of anti-Trump voters (who will still need Trump if we want to have federal funds for a successful 2028  Olympics), L.A.’s political unions, and the Democratic mainstream establishment who think that Bass’s failures can be papered over because “who the heck else ya gonna vote for…that socialist Raman?”

I wonder if Andrew Cuomo thought the same thing as he ran against current Mayor Zohran Mamdani to run New York City. Sometimes the voters will put up with ANYTHING just to kick the old and failed leadership OUT.

So Pratt voters MIGHT vote Bass in, might not vote at all, or might just vote in Raman just to get Bass OUT—not so much because they want Raman IN, but they do want Bass OUT. I dare say the Pratt vote is about 50-50 for each candidate, or perhaps 33-33-33 for each candidate combined with a non-vote…

…but neither of the two candidates—Bass OR Raman—are appealing to those who did vote for Pratt because they wanted things to change in L.A.

And in a neck-and-neck election, it’s kind of a horrible idea to ignore the Pratt voters.

But there IS a possible way out for those who are just sick of having to deal with either Bass or Raman:

VOTE IN RAMAN AND KICK BASS OUT, AND THEN GIVE RAMAN SIX MONTHS TO MAKE DEFINITIVE CHANGES OR FACE A RECALL BEFORE (AND BEST ENSURE SUCCESS OF) A 2028 LOS ANGELES OLYMPICS.

Let’s now get to Nithya Raman, who has too often appeared inept in her own district and in City affairs—she doesn’t have the power of the Mayor, but her website does suggest a few potential good ideas (presuming she’s AUTHENTIC about these ideas):

1. Overhauling the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority (LAHSA), because the 17.5% drop in homeless that Karen Bass brags about is pathetic. If Trump can drop illegal border crossings to just about zero, then a tough, results-oriented L.A. Mayor can do the same about ENDING homelessness to just about Zero.
2. Want to be pro-police, public safety, and safe sidewalks—end the ridiculous and failed “Inside Safe” of Karen Bass to have public/private contracted partnerships where reducing homelessness is incentivized (and a failure to do so means contracts ended and City employees FIRED.
3. The police and related law enforcement have plenty of legal precedents to demand homeless seek help and shelters (even if they WANT to remain outdoors but NOT on busy sidewalks and streets)…or face jail-time and/or denial of taxpayer-funded benefits.
4. We’ve got an Olympics coming up—either our next mayor effectively ends homelessness, or Trump will come in and do it for that mayor. Pick one.
5. Speeding up pothole fixing and having a “shot clock” of 60 days for fast-tracking by-right and affordable housing projects is good—this whole “variance” thing has been abused too long to create high-end, NON-affordable housing and make things worse in our City for too doggone long.
6. Enhancing 911 and fire-preparedness times is something Raman calls for (do we believe her, or just give her six months to present major progress, or SHE gets recalled?). Let’s consider giving her a chance, because Mayor Bass thinks she’s been just great with how she’s overseen basic safety/security services in L.A.
7. I do NOT agree with the “end parking requirements”, but the concept of focal and strategically-placed parking structures to create City revenue sources while getting streetside parking shifted OFF the streets is proven and fiscally sound.
8. Do we have an Uber/home-commuting infrastructure in place to obviate the need for cars—and how long will we continue to treat car commuters who need their vehicles to work and do family/children-focused errands? Does Raman have an answer for this, if Bass obviously doesn’t?
9. Every society that allows antisemitism or demonization of a given ethnic or religious group has suffered—Raman needs to distance herself from ANYONE who thinks that Jew-hatred, Muslim-hated, Christian-hatred, or bigotry of any sort is OK. If the GOP can eschew Tucker Carlson, the Left can do the same for Hasan Piker.
10. Most importantly…DOES NITHYA RAMAN (OR EVEN KAREN BASS) HAVE A 2028 OLYMPICS BLUEPRINT OR MAJOR ACTION PLAN?

Many who have supported younger socialist candidates don’t always favor these candidates themselves—they just want the Old Guard in the Democratic Party OUT. Kind of like the GOP electing those they used to despise just to get “RINO’s” out.

Six months is enough for either Raman or Bass to prove themselves.

Voting Bass out, and then making it clear to Raman that we WANT her to succeed but we NEED her to show preliminary results in six months isn’t unreasonable.

Angelenos have had enough—show that CHANGE is a real thing that can occur even in the City of Los Angeles.

(Kenneth S. Alpern, M.D, is a dermatologist who has served in clinics in Los Angeles, Orange, and Riverside Counties, and is a proud husband and father. He was active for 20 years on the Mar Vista Community Council (MVCC) as a Board Member focused on Planning and Transportation, and helped lead the grassroots efforts of the Expo Line as well as connecting LAX to MetroRail. His latest project is his fictional online book entitled The Unforgotten Tales of Middle-Earth, and can be reached at [email protected]. The views expressed in this article are solely those of Dr. Alpern.)