60% is the new 0% but are we really changing things?

The LEA where I work has proposed a new policy for all teachers/classes that 0's can no longer be given to students for any assignment or assessment (turned in or not). Instead, a 60% will become the new 0. I have very mixed feelings about this proposed policy. I've read various things the past few years on this new trend, and right now, my PLC is doing a study on Rick Wormeli's book Fair Isn't Always Equal. I've heard the mathematical arguments for giving a 60% instead of a 0% but when I get down to it, I'm still not convinced 100% that this is a good policy. I think what's bothering me the most is what is driving the policy or rather, what's not being said that may be driving the policy. We know that many students spiral out of control, ending up in failure. That being said, it makes sense that in order to get out of that place, students will have to spiral up and that's easier said than done. That requires among other things teachers helping to scaffold and support the student as he/she tries to come up from an F. It requires first and foremost intrinsic motivation on the part of the student. I like to think I can do many things as a teacher, and I'm pretty willing to do most things (whatever it takes) in order to motivate and help a student achieve success. But, that in and of itself is not enough. The student has to want to succeed. This leads me back to the policy. Will giving a 60% create that motivation for that student to succeed? Is the policy really trying to address teachers who do not scaffold and help the student spiral back to success? If that is what this policy is aiming to do, then is making a mandatory "60% instead of 0%" the answer? Aren't we just treating the symptom instead of the root? And that is what bothers me the most. I feel like it's another move of taking the power and control out of an individual teacher's hands. Why do we have these mandated, everyone follows policies instead of dealing with the individual problems? I know from 15 years of personal experience that when a student makes up his/her mind that he/she wants to be successful and is going to work for that success, motivation is strong. From the first year I taught, I pulled students aside after the first grading period who did not pass and offered to raise their grades to a 65% for the first grading period if they made a C or higher the next grading period. I've had a lot of success with that method and have felt good about my decision-making in those matters. Interestingly enough, the two years I decided to go ahead and report the failing grade as a 65% for those who did not make it the first grading period, I had noticeably fewer students who really changed things around and worked hard to raise their grades. Instead, giving the 65% seemed to create a sense of entitlement for many of the students in that category. It's actually easier on me to go ahead and give the 65% so that I don't have to deal with the paperwork at a later date of raising the grade, but after seeing the results for those two years, I went back to my original system. And it's worked. And it's been ME making that decision as a qualified and reflective practitioner; not a 'one size fits all' policy mandated by an lea, state or nation.

Now, if this policy is passed, I will no longer have that individual authority (or the satisfaction of using that authority to help students be successful). And the policy won't address the underlying issue (at least as far as I can tell since there's not a dialogue going on about it) of what do we do to help students turn things around when they are not being successful. Already some teachers are talking about how they can compensate for the 'new 0's' by grading harder or giving fewer assignments or giving more, and so on. And once again, it looks like we're headed for another policy that's being passed in an effort to address all, but it turns out the choir only is once again getting the sermon. As one of those in the choir, I'm tired and discouraged. When will the messages start targeting those not in church?