Eleanor Braddock, Year 12
Every new school year promises to be different. There is always an influx of new classmates and teachers; however, this year brought an even bigger change: one that directly impacts us. Now at the end of our first term, we have our first piece of evidence regarding this shift: the introduction of the so-called “Character Reports”. Designed to give students and parents a better estimation of in-class behavior compared to the standard “Effort Grades” (the A, B, C system), these reports ultimately enable students to pinpoint exactly where they need to improve.
Many students are extremely pleased and impressed with this new system, claiming that they now know exactly what they need to do in order to improve their “self-mastery” and “curiosity”. Azadeh Maresca in Y12 emphasized this heavily when I asked her for her opinion: “I think it’s great because I know exactly what I need to work on for every class. Now I know my teachers believe that I don’t ask enough questions to deepen my understanding of the subject”. The character report tends to align itself quite nicely with the IB learner profile, especially the quality of being reflective.
However, some of the students are more skeptical of the value of this report. In Dr. Hughes’ letter, which came enclosed with the report, he explains: “You may rest assured that feedback will be increasingly detailed and meaningful as the year progresses”. Does this mean these reports aren’t meaningful or detailed? Or are they simply irrelevant to the student as an individual? Some students, myself included, believe that this may be the case. As Hannah Bogaert in Y12 expressed: “I don’t feel as though the character reports give specific enough information on my attitude. I think, if our parents are interested in understanding my academic behavior, frequent parent-teacher conferences and longer, more detailed comments on the standard reports would be a more useful way to indicate this, rather than a vague, confusing new system”.
I personally believe that such a report is more or less redundant, especially as pure number evaluators don’t open up a conversation. In these reports, our “characters” are treated with no subjectivity or justification. A student can only be one of four things, whereas it’s likely they are not purely one or the other. For a system designed to evaluate attitude, it can be viewed as rather impersonal. If someone gets a 4, marked as “almost always”, does that mean there is no room for improvement as there is no “always” criteria? Also, how can a teacher or a student differentiate between “frequently” and “almost always”; you would’ve thought the two were synonymous. There is simply no “why” factor, no analysis, just a statement.
Moreover, with such restrictive criterion, something that could be extremely valuable for one subject may be left out: for example, attitude during labs in the sciences. It also creates the opposite effect as well. Some teachers end up commenting on something which isn’t directly relevant to what they are teaching; for example, in physical education, the criteria “asks and answers questions to deepen understanding”. Ask questions to further knowledge on what? The invention and integration of Dodgeball into a community? This may result in a student receiving a lower score simply because it’s irrelevant to the subject. By consequence, with limited scores and limited criteria, the reports are neither student-specific nor subject-specific. I believe a parent-teacher, student-teacher conference, or a comment would be more personalized and meaningful. However, more detailed feedback is to come, so perhaps this is just a taster and they are easing us into the new system.
On the other hand, some students liked the new system but would rather it was coupled with an achievement grade for further pertinence. Polina Melnikova in Y12 highlighted this when she said: “I believe that character reports are a constructive way for students to identify their strengths and weaknesses, but I wish grades were provided alongside the comments in order to compare the two”. There is a strong emphasis in the letter on the correlation between high scores on the character reports and rapid progress in a subject. This may be true, but, without an assessment of our aptitude for the subject, it is difficult to truly determine this. The combination of a description of our ability in the subject and our “character” would be a better way to prove and evaluate such a statement.
In conclusion, though some people’s views differ on the effectiveness of this report, there is no doubt on the importance of the concept which is an obvious improvement from the previous system. Clear, student-specific feedback on a student’s behavior in class is essential, especially in the open-minded, diverse community we are engaged in.
