Besides speaking in edu-babble so that the average parent cannot understand the message, the use of terms like “sometimes”, “occasionally” and “consistently” are tricky.  These terms are code for how well the child is doing; however, most parents haven’t “got” the code. “Occasionally” means that the students gets it right some of the time, perhaps by accident.  “Consistently” means that the student is actually succeeding at the skill; that is, if the parent understands what the description of the skill means!

Please read the follow excerpts from a grade four report card sent home to parents.

English: Johnny explains how the particular characteristics of various text forms help to communicate meaning, with a focus on literary, graphic and informational texts. He extends understanding of texts by connecting the ideas in them to his own knowledge and experience, and insights, to other familiar texts, and to the world around them.”

Math: “Johnny represents fractions using concrete materials, words, and the standard fractional notation, and explains the meaning of the denominator as the number of the fractional parts of a whole set, and the numerator as the number of fractional part being considered.”

Having read the above, please answer these questions:
Are these a clear indication to the parents of a grade four student of her/his progress in school? Has the parent been informed as to what steps should be taken to assist the child in his/her studies? Are parents of Ontario grade four students well informed by comments such as these which constitute most of the comments on Ontario student reports?

If you answer “NO” to these questions, please email me at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  to find out how you can help.

This message will be in two parts: the copy of a letter to Kathleen wynne; the postscript to that letter.Dear Minister Wynne:     

My purpose in writing is to express my concerns about the problems arising from the prescriptive format of the current Ontario Public School report card. I support Tom Sullivan, who has organized a petition on the subject directed to your Ministry, in his request for a review of the present form of the report card.

My interest is, in part, personal.  My six children were all enrolled in the Ontario public school system. Four of them (along with two spouses} are currently teachers in that system. I have eight grandchildren in Ontario?s public schools. There is a good deal of teacher talk in our household, much of it about report cards.  I also have a professional involvement. I have taught at both the middle school and high school levels and have been a principal of both elementary and secondary schools. Most of my teaching career was as a Professor of English at the University of Toronto. I am presently a Professor Emeritus of that university. During the time when the present public school curriculum was developed and methods of evaluating and reporting student achievement were decided upon, I was School Liaison Officer for the Council of Ontario Universities. Because of that position, I was involved with many of the activities related to the establishing of new educational policies and practices.

For the past six years I have been a Community Volunteer at Thorncliffe Park Public School. I am probably more familiar with actual classroom practices than most people outside the teaching profession.

I feel that I do speak on concerns of public education with some authority.

Because of my involvement with your Ministry when the present report card was adopted, I am aware of the objectives and principles involved. The intention was to relate students? learning to specific requirements of the curriculum and to provide a precise statement of the progress gained within each subsection or strand of an area of study. Those principles are sound. The execution has largely failed for two reasons: the terminology draws on the privileged discourse of professional initiates; the ?modifiers? continue to confuse readers untrained in the distinctions they are intended to convey. It appears that most parents look only at the grades because everything else is confusing. What should be an instrument of clear communication to students and parents of achievement within particular units of a broad field of study is treated as an overall report represented by a letter grade. 

If my description of the general dissatisfaction with Ontario?s public school report card is accurate—as the response to Mr. Sullivan?s petition suggests?it seems to me appropriate for your Ministry to conduct a reappraisal of the current report cards. Such a review should rely heavily on the advice and response of parents.

In the postscript I?ve appended two notes. The first translates one of the current standard descriptors from the report card matrix of approved rubrics into simple and clear language. The second illustrates precisely the kind of remark that students and teachers would find informative and helpful.

Yours sincerely,

Guy Hamel

Notes: Existing formula: ?[John] represents fractions using concrete materials, words and the standard fractional notation, and explains the meaning of the denominator as the number of the fractional part of a whole set, and the numerator as the number of the fractional part being considered.?

Alternative version: ? [John] understands simple fractions. He knows, for example, that 3/4 represents 3 parts of a whole object that has been divided into 4 equal parts.? (You could add that he demonstrates his knowledge by manipulating objects as well as by solving problems expressed in words and in abstract notation, if that actually seems useful.)

Sample teacher?s comment: ?[John?s] ability to sound out and understand words new to him is not quite at the level expected in Grade 4. I have arranged for him to get extra practice with his reading to work specifically on developing his decoding skills. [John?s] reading comprehension suffers when he loses concentration. I encourage him to stop often when he is reading in order to think about what he has just read to make sure he understands it before he continues.?

I know there are teachers who write such comments on report cards and principals who both allow and support the practice. Although John?s parents are being informed of weaknesses in their son?s reading skills, they are given specific details about the problems, and they are assured that the teacher has introduced strategies for remediation.. It?s evident from the remarks that the teacher is engaged with the child. The comments represent a useful focus at the post-report teacher-parent interview for constructive discussion on how John?s parents through home activities can support the school?s efforts to help their son?s academic progress.  Unfortunately, the existing format of the report cards inhibits the inclusion of such remarks. I strongly urge you, your Ministry and Ontario?s School Boards to promote the use of such direct, clear and useful comments as I have illustrated on report cards rather than the confusing prescribed entries that now dominate the reports.