C O M P O S I N G P R I M A R Y W R I T T E N REPORT C A R D S :

T E A C H E R PROCESSES A N D D I L E M M A S

P A M E L A J E A N GEORGE

B.Ed., The University of British Columbia, 1971

A THESIS S U B M I T T E D I N P A R T I A L F U L F I L L M E N T OF T H E R E Q U I R E M E N T FOR THE DEGREE OF M A S T E R OF A R T S

i n

THE F A C U L T Y OF G R A D U A T E STUDIES

(Centre for the Study of Curriculum and Instruction)

We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard

T H E UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH C O L U M B I A

July, 1995

© Pamela Jean George , 1995

In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced

degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it

freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive

copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my

department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or

publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written

permission.

Department of

The University of British Columbia Cmti /H^jlho tj' 1 OD Vancouver, Canada

Date CAsSsrA^JC

DE-6 (2/88)

ABSTRACT

Composing Primary Written Report Cards: Teacher Processes and Dilemmas

Report cards are of great significance, not only to students and parents, but also to

the teachers who create them. To date, the process of report card writing has been little

researched. The purpose of this study is to explore the issues and dilemmas that primary

teachers encounter as they prepare narrative report cards, and in particular, "structured"

written report cards, newly mandated in the province of British Columbia. As originally

conceived, the intent of the study was to identify information that would prove "useful"

to primary teachers and to those individuals charged with providing in-service to teachers

in the area of primary report card writing. While these "practical" considerations guided

my initial thinking, they were re-shaped early in the investigation to include my concern

for capturing the essence of what has been revealed to be an "extraordinary" event in

teachers' lives. In order to gain this deeper meaning of the significance of report card

writing for teachers and to capture the process as lived by teachers, a decision was made

to use phenomenology to guide the research.

Six teachers in four different schools in an urban lower mainland community took

part in the study. Three conversations took place with the teachers over a period of five

months, and these, together with narrating and journal writing, provided a basis for the

creation of the text. The study contributes insight into the understanding of the lived

meaning of the experience of report card writing for teachers.

i i

T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S

Page

A B S T R A C T i i

T A B L E OF CONTENTS i i i

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S vi

C H A P T E R ONE: On Arriving at the Question 1 The Call to the Question - A Re-shaping of the Research Focus . . 4 Definition of Terms 7

C H A P T E R TWO: A Look at the Literature: " A Cacophony of Voices" 10 Opinions on Methods of Reporting 12 Attitudes Toward Particular Aspects of Anecdotal/Narrative Report Cards . . 13 Media Reactions to Anecdotal/Narrative Report Cards in B .C . ' s Primary

Program 23 Reactions of Early Childhood Experts to B.C. ' s Primary Program 27 Report Card Writing: A Focus on the Writing Process 28

C H A P T E R THREE: The Nature of the Inquiry 29 Conversations with Teachers 32 Narrating: Telling the Stories of Report Card Writing for Teachers 33 Journalizing 35 Situational Texture of the Study 35

C H A P T E R FOUR: In Conversation with Teachers 41 In Conversation with Paula and Andrea 41

On Writing Report Cards 42 On Reactions to the "Structured Written Report Card" 44 On Report Card Writing Processes 47 Composing Allison's Report 48 Composing Bonnie's Report Card 51

In Conversation with Jean 52 On Writing Report Cards 53 On Reactions to the "Structured Written Report Card" 54 On Report Card Writing Processes 55 Composing Keith's Report Card 56 Composing Martha's Report Card 57

In Conversation with Karey 59 On Writing Report Cards 59 On Reactions to the "Structured Written Report Card" 60

i i i

TABLE OF CONTENTS, CONTINUED

Page

On Report Card Writing Processes 61 Composing Shane's Report Card 62 Composing James' Report Card 64

In Conversation with Sandra 65 On Writing Report Cards 66 On Reactions to the Structured Written Report Card 67 On the Report Card Writing Process 68 Composing Lisa's Report Card . 68 Composing Sam's Report Card 69

In Conversation with Janice 70 On Writing Report Cards 70 On Reactions to the "Structured Written Report Card" 73 Composing Dana's Report Card 74 Composing Andrew's Report Card 76

C H A P T E R F I V E Themes on the Processes and Dilemmas as Lived by Teachers as They Write Report Cards 78

The Voices of Teachers 78 Concerns with Personalizing the Report Card 78 The Tensionality of Finding Time 83 On Putting Personal and Professional Lives on Hold 84 On the Ineffability of Capturing the Child Adequately in a Report

Card Comment and the Reductionism of the Written Message . . 85

From Nurturers to Evaluators: Looking in a Different Way at the Child 86

On the Role of Rituals 88 On Reactions to the "Structured Written Report Card" 90 On Concerns About a Changing Primary Program 90 On the Tensionality of Conflicting Ministry Voices 92 On Reactions to the Media Voices 94 On Report Card Writing and Accountability 94 Perceived Report Card Audiences 95

Teachers in Relationship With and Sensitive to the Voices of Others 96 On Being Sensitive to the Effect of the Report Card on the Child . . 96 On Being Sensitive to Differing Views of Education 97 On Softening the Message . 98 Passing the Child On and Looking Differently at the Child 98 A Personal Note 100

iv

T A B L E O F CONTENTS, CONTINUED

Page

C H A P T E R SIX

Reflections on the Process of Researching 102 On Using "I" ... (The "Silenced" I in Scholarly Papers) 102 Struggling with the Approach to Inquiry 103 On Labeling 104 On the Publicness of the Inquiry 107 On Arriving at and Reshaping the Question 108 New Understandings of Implementing Curriculum I l l Ways of Working with Children and Teachers: A Gap 112 Dwelling in the In-between 113 Processes Informing the Inquiry 113

REFERENCES 116

A P P E N D I X A 123

A P P E N D I X B 124

v

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

This thesis is dedicated to all primary teachers, and, in particular, the six teachers

in the study, who "dwell poetically" with their students as they craft report card

statements while being sensitively attuned to each child and to each child's parents.

I wish to thank my partner, Grahame, for his faith in my abilities and his patience

and support throughout my research journey.

To my mother whose assistance with transcribing was greatly appreciated.

M y sincere thanks to Marilyn Chapman for her expert guidance, coaching and

intuitive "sense of knowing" the form of support to give when it was most needed.

Thank you to Carl Leggo for providing me with the courage to approach the study

in a "less travelled" way.

To Bob Carlisle, whose wonderful way of working with young children, wil l

always be remembered. Thank you.

I extend my gratitude to Ted Aoki whose words were a constant source of

inspiration and, who in honoring the "lived experiences" in classrooms is a voice for all

children and all teachers.

v i

1

C H A P T E R O N E

O n Arr iv ing at the Question

All children grow. That growth is documentable. And in their own good time they all bloom. They are neither losers nor potential losers. They are learners. (Goodman, Goodman, & Hood, 1989, p. 43)

Report card day: for many the term evokes a riot of childhood emotions and

recollections; for some, the day signals fear or dread; for others, it creates anticipation of

the number of dimes one would receive for "As" or perhaps even a bike at the end of

term i f improvement was significant! It would seem that some of today's students, too,

wil l have childhood memories of report card day. Jongsma (1991) notes that report cards

are a source of considerable stress for some children, so much so that the National

Association of Elementary School Principals published a report to parents suggesting

practical tips to help reduce their children's report card anxiety (p. 319). Many who

know or are related to teachers will be familiar with the pressures and turmoil of report

card writing time and appreciate the impact of the task on teachers' lives.

Despite their consequences and significance to parents, children and teachers,

there is a scarcity of empirical research on report cards and an even smaller amount on

the processes their authors go through to create them. Goodlad and Anderson (1987)

reported that the general problem of reporting student progress to parents has possibly

received as much attention from educators and the public as any other educational topic

in the form of public opinion. In a new introduction to a reissued text they lament "the

relative dearth since the 1960s of doctoral dissertations, articles, book chapters, or other

publications dealing with reporting pupil progress" (p. xxx).

2

Assessment, evaluation and reporting are always of concern to educators, but

recent events in British Columbia have created even greater interest in these areas at this

time, particularly regarding the communication of student progress to parents in the form

of report cards. In May 1993, two years after the launching of a new Primary Program

(B.C. Ministry of Education, 1990b), the British Columbia Ministry of Education

conducted a Review of Methods of Reporting in the Primary Program (Charbonneau,

1993) to obtain information from all educational partners "to answer questions, address

concerns and provide clarification about reporting student progress to parents" (p. 1).

Following the review, and in spite of the purported 10 year implementation period for the

Primary Program, Art Charbonneau, B .C. ' s Minister of Education, stated in Changes to

BC's Education Policy (B.C. Ministry of Education, 1993), "Over the past year, parents

and the public have told us that anecdotal reports are not working, standards are not clear

and education change has been too rapid" (p. 1). As a result, a new policy was

formulated that went into effect in September, 1994 (B.C. Ministry of Education, 1994a).

Formal reports for each student in Kindergarten to Grade 3 must include the following:

• a structured written report that clearly describes, in relation to the expected learning outcomes set out in the curriculum

a) what the student is able to do

b) areas in which the student requires further attention or development

c) ways of supporting the student in his or her learning

• comments (written on the report card or communicated orally to the parents) about student progress with reference to the expected development for students in a similar age range

• written comments to describe student behavior, including information on attitudes, work habits, and effort, (p. 5)

3

What methods of reporting preceded this review? Teachers have been producing

written report cards for primary students since 1989, when a ministerial order was

introduced stating that in the four years of the primary program, student progress reports

shall be "anecdotal" in nature (Province of British Columbia, 1989). In 1990, with the

introduction of the new Primary Program, anecdotal report card comments were shaped

to provide information about:

• what the child can do; • the child's interests and attitudes; • the child's learning needs; • the teacher's plan to support the child; and • how the parents might assist with their child's learning. (B.C. Ministry of

Education, 1990b, p. 118)

The Program emphasizes the ongoing and systematic collection of "authentic data"

on students and, when introduced, presented new complexities and challenges for teachers

as they determined what, when and how to select from vast amounts of information in

order to write report cards.

The latest mandate again has implications for all primary teachers in British

Columbia as they strive to implement the policy and utilize the prescribed format for

structured report card writing. An added dimension and, for some teachers, a dilemma,

has arisen as they address the directive of the new legislation which calls for

communication to parents about student progress with reference to the "expected

development" for students in a similar age range. Teachers are guided by "Position

Statements" included in the documents as they interpret the Primary Program philosophy.

One of the Position Statements, Continuous Progress, is described as occurring "when a

learner progresses according to his/her academic, social, emotional, physical, and

4

aesthetic development regardless of age or number of years at school" (B.C. Ministry of

Education, 1990b, p. 24). Another Position Statement, Non-Graded Organization,

signaled a departure from the traditional organization of the primary curriculum into 0

grade levels and removed expectations that there should be "a pre-determined body of

content which must be learned or mastered by students in a specified block of time (e.g.,

September to June)" (p. 24). Teachers, now in their third year of implementing the

Primary Program, are experiencing some inconsistencies with a program guided, on the

one hand, by a continuous progress, non-graded philosophy and, on the other hand, with

a new mandate to inform parents whether their child fits into the "expected" age range.

The Call to the Question - A Re-shaping of the Research Focus

As discussed, report cards are a significant event, not only for students and

parents but also for the teachers who write them. As a writer of report cards myself for

many years, I learned that what I personally found to be a challenging and agonizing

experience was indeed shared by most, i f not all, teachers. To date, the area of report

card writing, a source of much concern and stress for teachers, has been little researched.

As originally conceived, because of my work as a consultant charged with responsibility

for providing in-service to teachers in the area of report card writing and because of the

centrality of the reporting issue in this province, the focus of this study was to gain some

perceptions or understandings of:

• how primary teachers compose written report cards and, in particular,

"structured" written report cards;

• any possible dilemmas teachers encounter as they utilize the provided "structure;"

5

• how teachers manage the vast amounts of data they collect; that is, what

procedures do teachers use to enable them to cull the material they need in order

to write the report card?

The main intent of the research was to identify processes and pertinent information that

may prove useful to: (1) those teachers who write narrative report cards for Primary

students, and in particular, other teachers in British Columbia who will write "structured"

written report cards; and (2) those individuals charged with providing in-service to

teachers in the area of primary report card writing.

The following general questions were to guide the initial phases of the research

with room for reformulation as the study progressed:

• Are the changes to reporting called for by the new regulations in British Columbia

supported by the research?

• What processes do teachers engage in, as revealed by "think-aloud" retrospective

reports, as teachers decide upon which information to use to compose the

structured written report card?

• What materials, processes, etc., do teachers utilize to determine where a student

stands in relation to "standards of development" for students in a similar age

range?

• What dilemmas, if any, are encountered as teachers decide how to indicate, orally

or in written form, where a student stands in relation to "standards of

development" for students in a similar age range?

• Are the constraints of a required report card format a help or a hindrance to

teachers as they engage in the process of report card writing?

6

While these more practical questions guided my initial thinking, they soon

expanded to include my concern for capturing the essence of what has been revealed to

be an "extraordinary" event in teachers' lives. Very early in the process of interviewing,

it became evident that teachers' lives, both personal and professional, go on hold three

times a year until the reporting process has been completed. The realization that report

card writing time is characterized by agony, stress, conflict, engagement in individualized

forms of rituals, and huge time commitments, on the one hand, to feelings of

accomplishment and even some enlightenment, on the other, drew me to the readings of

phenomenologists and the lived meanings of experiences. M y thirst for deeper meanings

of the significance of report card writing for teachers grew and reshaped my area of

focus to include the report card writing process as lived by teachers.

I was drawn, as I had been many times before, to Aoki's notion (1991) of layered

voices of teaching:

In our busy world of education, we are surrounded by layers of voices - some loud, some shrill - that claim to know what teaching is. Awed, perhaps, by the cacophony of voices, certain voices become silent, and hesitating to reveal themselves, conceal themselves. Let's beckon all these voices to speak, particularly the silent ones so that we may awaken to the truer sense of teaching that stirs within each of us. (p. 1)

In my work with teachers I have become increasingly aware of a quality characteristic of

most teachers I have encountered. Despite cut-backs to supplies, losses in personnel and

rapidly changing ministry mandates, teachers quietly do their best to "make it all work."

On my research journey I have attempted to beckon voices "silenced" - silenced by

swiftly changing, and often conflicting ministry voices, by shrill media voices decrying

the changes in education in this province and by the confused voices of the public. In

7

order to invoke the "silenced voices" of teachers, it became necessary to uncover the

layer, more resilient in some than in others, that is characterized by the determination on

the part of teachers to make things work.

Definition of Terms

The following definition of terms is offered to assist the reader in understanding

British Columbia's policies in assessment, evaluation and reporting to parents in the

primary years. The terms also document the sequence of the changes to reporting

practices in this province.

Assessment and Evaluation - "Assessment is the process of gathering evidence of

what a child can do. Evaluation is the process of interpreting that evidence and making

judgments and decisions based on that evidence. Assessment and evaluation form part of

one process. In the context of the classroom teachers carry out both parts of that

process, often almost simultaneously. Evaluation is the ongoing process of making

judgments and decisions based on the interpretation of evidence gathered through

assessment. The purposes of evaluation are to make informed decisions and to provide a

basis for reporting progress to the child, to the parents, and to school personnel" (B.C.

Ministry of Education, 1990b, p. 360).

Reporting - "Reporting is regular communication, both formal and informal, about

a child's progress. This communication is made to the child, to the child's parents, and

to appropriate school personnel, depending on need and purpose. Communication

between school and home encompasses a range and variety of reporting strategies both

formal and informal. Reporting may be oral or written" (B.C. Ministry of Education,

1990b, p. 362).

8

Position Statements - "The position statements identify important issues, and

define and clarify the intent of the Primary Program." (B.C. Ministry of Education,

1990b, p. 23)

Primary Progress Report/Anecdotal Report Cards - From 1990 until 1994,

teachers wrote Primary Progress reports that were "anecdotal" in nature: "Anecdotal

comments provide specific detailed information on the child's continuing progress and

development" (B.C. Ministry of Education, 1990b, p. 117). "The Primary Progress

Report enables the teacher to report information consistent with the goals of the Primary

Program . . . . Comments should provide information about:

• what the child can do; • the child's interests and attitudes; • the child's learning needs; • the teacher's plan to support the child; and • how the parents might assist with their child's learning. (B.C. Ministry of

Education, 1990b, p. 118)

Structured Written Primary Reports (Kindergarten to Grade 3) - Structured written

report cards were mandated for use in British Columbia for the 1994-95 school year.

"Formal reports for each student in Kindergarten to Grade 3 must:

• include a structured written report that clearly describes, in relation to the expected learning outcomes set out in curriculum

a) what the child is able to do b) areas in which the student requires further attention or development c) ways of supporting the student in his or her learning

• provide comments (written on the report card or communicated orally to the parents) about student progress with reference to the expected development for students in a similar age range

• include written comments to describe student bahavior, including information on attitudes, work habits, and effort.

9

At the end of the school year, the following information must be placed in each student's Permanent Student Record file:

• a copy on the final formal report • documentation of the oral or written statements provided to parents regarding the

student's progress with reference to the expected development for students in a similar age range." (B.C. Ministry of Education, 1994a, p. 5)

10

CHAPTER TWO

A Look at the Literature: "A Cacophony of Voices"

In order to understand the meaning of the report card writing experience for

teachers it is helpful to be familiar with what the research reveals regarding opinions of

and attitudes toward narrative report cards. Furthermore, an examination of the media

reports at the time of the reporting changes in B . C . can provide insight as to the climate

or "landscape" in which teachers were to compose their first "structured written report

cards" and a possible explanation for the relatively "unheard voices" of professional

childhood organizations who lauded B.C. ' s "developmentally appropriate" Primary

Program.

Traditionally, assessment has emphasized scientific measurement through testing, a

view based on the assumption that intelligence is fixed and measurable (Hiebert &

Hutchison, 1991; Wiggins, 1993). The "dizzying" rate of change in educational

assessment practices with the onset of the 1990s is reflected by a proliferation of new

terminology. Terms such as "performance-based," "authentic," "expanded," "portfolio-

based," "informed," "alternate" and "criterion-based" signal the departure from the "fixed

intellect" viewpoint and the predominance of large-scale standardized testing, to the

notion of documentation of what students can do or have learned. While the gathering

of evidence of what students can do is the subject of much current educational research

(Marzano, Pickering, & McTighe, 1993; Perrone, 1991), the documentation and

reporting of this evidence to parents in the form of report cards, and, in particular,

11

narrative report cards, has received little attention from researchers, despite their being a

time-honored ritual.

A n extensive search of the research literature revealed that of the small number of

empirical studies that do exist in the area of reporting to parents, and even fewer in the

area of narrative reporting, several were conducted in the province of British Columbia.

Some of the B . C . studies are in the form of teacher research projects, funded by the

Ministry of Education, and formulate part of the Primary Program Review; others were

commissioned by the Ministry for a review on methods of reporting in the Primary

Program. The B . C . studies are of particular interest as their findings contributed to the

nature of the reporting changes in B . C . starting in September, 1994, resulting in the

replacement of the "anecdotal" report card with the "structured written report card."

The efforts of teachers to determine parental priorities regarding report cards and

to communicate clearly to parents are themes that run throughout all of the studies in

B . C . Parent partnerships are particularly encouraged and valued in B .C . ' s Primary

Program. Parents are viewed as a "child's first and most important teachers" (B.C.

Ministry of Education, 1990b, p. 1). Charting Change (1994b), a technical report

produced following the second stage of a proposed five stage review of the Primary

Program, notes growing success in this area:

Parents are increasingly becoming full education partners. For example:

• Responsibility for children's education is explicitly shared among students, parents, teachers, and the education system.

• In assessing and evaluating students' progress, teachers and parents interact as partners. (B.C. Ministry of Education, 1994b, p. 4)

12

The same report recommends a need to continue this focus:

Teachers need more time assigned to the tasks of assessment and evaluation of students and reporting to parents about their children's progress, as well as to helping parents understand and become partners in the program. (B.C. Ministry of Education, 1994b, p. 6)

Opinions on Methods of Reporting

The recent interest in partnerships in education together with the relatively current

studies conducted in this province in the area of narrative reporting have resulted in a

growing body of knowledge regarding the opinions and attitudes of parents, students,

teachers and administrators towards narrative reporting in comparison to the traditional

graded report card. Two American-based studies suggest the receptiveness of parents to

narrative report cards rather than grades. In a study conducted to determine parents'

priorities for educating their children, Page, Page and Tremble (1987) reported as

"startling" the low rankings given by parents to the importance of standardized test scores

and grades on report cards. Classroom behavior, study skills, cooperation with adults

and problem-solving ability represented the first four items of importance that parents

gave priority to in the education of their children, suggesting to the authors that parents

may prefer the education of the total child and not just "the child for the test." Based on

these findings, Hall (1991) hypothesized that if, indeed, parents are more concerned

about the child's total growth than the grades received on a report card, parents should

prefer narrative report cards over grades because of their potential to offer a more

complete picture of their child. While reactions and opinions from both parents and

teachers revealed positives and negatives from each viewpoint, (i.e., grades versus

13

narratives), Hall concluded that narrative report cards can be a successful alternative to

grades.

Attitudes Toward Particular Aspects of Anecdotal/Narrative Report Cards

Analysis of recent research reveals a range of attitudes on the part of parents,

teachers, administrators, and leading educators to narrative reports as well as useful

suggestions for improving their communicative potential and their production by teachers.

Some of the studies included in this section were conducted along traditional lines and

some were conducted by the teachers themselves in the form of teacher action research.

The latter were conducted in the Trail School District in B . C . (Grant, 1993; Hughes &

Thomas, 1993; Kerby & McGregor, 1993; Micklethwaite, 1993).

Action research in education is not new. Though its beginnings can be traced to

the 1940s, there was a decline followed by a resurgence of interest in the 1980s and

1990s (Kemmis, 1982). The major aim of the action research method is:

the establishment of conditions under which self-reflection is genuinely possible: conditions under which aims and claims can be tested, under which practitioners can organize as critical communities committed to the improvement of their work and their understanding of it. (Kemmis, 1982, p. 6)

The teacher research studies included in this review are regarded as significant because

they highlight practising teachers taking action to improve the quality of their

communication with parents through the improvement of their narrative report card

writing. The value of action research is reflected in the literature; it represents "real

people striving to improve their action and their understandings in the real world" (p. 6).

These studies are characterized by their authenticity; that is, they represent an effort on

the part of practicing teachers to form supportive networks to work on problems of

14

mutual concern for the sole purpose of improving practice. Further, they are to be

valued not for their use of predetermined techniques, but rather for their systematic

approach to important issues in the school (Shipman, 1983). The concerns of the

teachers in Trail regarding the time teachers require to write narrative report cards and

the effects of their efforts to communicate effectively with parents provide some useful

groundwork for the focus of this study - to gain insights into teacher processes and

dilemmas as they compose written report cards. The voices of the parents referred to in

the studies regarding the effects of teachers' efforts when report card writing are among

those behind the B . C . Ministry of Education's changes to reporting. The voices behind

the concerns of teachers, particularly with regards to the amount of time required to

compose narrative report cards, have yet to be heard and acted upon. These, and other

teacher issues, are at the heart of this study.

The use of narrative reports is in keeping with practice that is deemed appropriate

for children in the primary grades by the National Association for the Education of

Young Children (NAEYC) (1988). Since its inception in 1926, the N A E Y C has been

committed to acting on behalf of the needs and best interests of young children

(Bredekamp & Shepard, 1989). Position statements were created by the association that

specifically describe what they deem to be developmentally appropriate practices as well

as developmentally inappropriate practices for early childhood programs. Statements

regarding the appropriate evaluation of children are as follows:

• No letter or numerical grades are given during the primary years. Grades are considered inadequate reflections of children's ongoing learning.

• Children's progress is reported to parents in the form of narrative comments following an outline of topics. A child's progress is reported in comparison to his

15

or her own previous performance and parents are given general information about how the child compared to standardized national averages. ( N A E Y C , 1988, P.77)

Inappropriate evaluation practices are elaborated as follows:

• Grades are seen as important in motivating children to do their work.

• Children's progress is reported to parents in letter or numerical grades. Emphasis is on how well the child compares to others in the same grade and to standardized national averages, (p. 77)

One of the most often cited advantages of narrative reports according to parents is

their personal nature. Narratives have the potential of showing that the teacher has a

good understanding of their child (B.C. Ministry of Education & Ministry Responsible

for Multiculturalism and Human Rights, [BCME & M M H R ] , 1992a); further, they allow

teachers to treat each child as an individual (Hall, 1991; Kerby & McGregor, 1993).

Horm-Wingerd (1992) agrees and suggests an overall goal for the content of the report

card, "The teacher should aim for the parent to exclaim, 'This really describes my child!'

or 'That teacher really cares about my child!'" (p. 13). At a Ministry Institute on

Reporting held in British Columbia in January, 1994, a Ministry session leader, also a

parent, commented on her delight at receiving a report card where her son, James,

literally "jumped off the page" at her. She liked the specific examples provided by the

teacher, indicating a good understanding of the whole child and not just his academic

rating.

Kerby and McGregor's findings (1993) support the use of examples, "Providing

examples specific to the child brings the report to life and makes it more personal" (p.

21). Anthony, Johnson, Mickelson, and Preece (1991) report that all too often written

comments fail to be genuinely informative and simply restate the general summative

16

evaluation that letter grades or symbols provide. Rather than statements such as, "John

continues to make good progress in all areas," Anthony et al. (1991) recommend the use

of "illustrative anecdotes" (p. 151). The rich descriptions of a child's development made

possible by actual examples included in the report itself, though enjoyed by parents, was

not always found to correlate with the overall rating the parent gave the report as to the

quality of its communication; rather the use of examples was one of a number of factors

that together influenced parents' perceptions of the quality of communication ( B C M E &

M M H R , 1992a).

Along with the amount of information and an explanation of how a child is doing

in school, narratives are appreciated for their potential to provide a description of student

learning and development over time (B.C. Ministry of Education, 1990b; Fform-Wingerd,

1992; N A E Y C , 1988). Unlike graded report cards that provide a static snapshot of a

child's skills at one moment in time, the narrative report "enables teachers to describe a

child's current level relative to his or her own previous performance" (Horm-Wingerd,

1992, p. 12).

Both parents and teachers cite as advantages of narrative reports the amount of

information about the child they are able to provide as well as an explanation of how and

what the child is doing in school (Hall, 1991). Although parents want to receive the

most information possible about how their child is doing in school, and teachers want to

provide the most information possible, they differ as to how to achieve this goal. Hall

found teachers preferred a mixture of conferencing and narrative reporting while parents

preferred to see a mixture of grades, checklists and narratives on their child's report

card.

17

While some parents value the amount of information they receive from narratives,

recent studies in this province indicate that many parents are less than satisfied with the

informational aspect of narratives (British Columbia Confederation of Parent Advisory

Councils [BCCAP], 1993; Farrell Research Group, 1993). Most of the disatisfied

parents worried that the report cards lack a point of comparison of their child versus

other students (BCME & M M H R , 1992a; Farrell Research Group, 1993; Grant, 1993).

Many parents complained that report cards told them how their children were doing but

not where they should be. Parents were further divided as to how they wanted the

comparative information reported: while some parents wanted comparisons with the

immediate class the child was in, others would be satisfied with the larger "age group"

(Grant, 1993). Grant indicated that the question, Is my child normal for his age range?,

could be resolved with "reference sets" being developed by the B . C . Ministry of

Education to provide teachers with samples of student performance across the age ranges.

As teachers gain experience using them, teachers would be able to demonstrate where a

child was placed in relation to widely-held expectations for his/her age group.

Stiggins (1994) maintains that in order to fulfill their purpose of informing parents

of their children's progress, report cards must focus clearly on achievement; they must

address the issue of what it means to be academically successful and how the student is

doing in relation to those expectations. Satterly (1981) comments on how rarely parents

are informed of the objectives of the teaching or of how closely a child's performance

approaches these objectives. "Parents often receive a general impression of how well the

child performs in relation to some usually ill-defined group but seldom do they

receive an indication of what pupils can actually do, their strengths, and their relatively

18

weak areas" (p. 315). Findings of studies conducted in this province validate this

concern ( B C M E & M M H R , 1992a; Farrell Research Group, 1993; Grant, 1993; Hall ,

1993; Kerby & McGregor, 1993). The Farrell Research Group states that parents "need

to know what the expectations are for their children: what their children need to know,

and by when, and i f they know it" (p. 5). The authors recommend that clear guidelines

for teachers be developed to provide narrative reporting that is more specific.

Attitudes vary among parents as to the manner or tone in which information is

presented in narrative report cards. Some parents like the positive, encouraging way

information about their child is presented and see the potential of narratives to build a

child's self-esteem (BCME & M M H R , 1992a; Hall , 1991). Other parents feel narratives

concentrate on the "positives" or "can do's" exclusively; they have expressed a desire for

the "can't do's" or areas in need of further improvement to be clearly highlighted to

prevent future problems in school (Farrell Research Group, 1993). Goodlad and

Anderson (1987) note that one of the drawbacks of narratives is that teachers are

frequently reluctant to say negative things on paper. Noting, too, that "teachers

sometimes distort the evidence even to the point of providing spurious praise for shoddy

work," Satterly (1981) calls for communication of progress to be as honest as possible (p.

314). Stiggins (1994) urges teachers to consider that, if the intent of educators is to

have students use feedback on their achievement as the basis for improvement, they need

to be able to "hear and accept the truth about their current achievement" (p. 425). He

sees teachers playing a key role in fostering in the student a "sufficiently strong academic

self-concept" so s/he wil l not feel defeated. Stiggins details how teachers may

accomplish this:

19

The giver of the feedback must be able to present it constructively, delivering a clear and focused message using understandable language. The provider must be able to communicate acceptance of the students while critiquing the achievement. Even more importantly, the message sender must help the student understand that student and teacher share a common mission; greater achievement for the student, (p. 425)

Parent responses regarding clarity of narrative report cards is mixed. Clear,

concise use of language and, again, the use of illustrative examples are important factors

influencing how well parents understand the report (BCME & M M H R , 1992a; Grant,

1993; Kerby & McGregor, 1993). Parents criticized terms like "doing well" as being too

general and terms such as "scientific classification" as needing more explanation (Kerby

& McGregor, 1993). Analysis of 50 report cards written by 17 different teachers led

Kerby and McGregor to other findings regarding use of language. A description of "how

the child is doing" rather than "what they are doing" enables the reader to "get a sense of

the child as a student" (p. 20).

Some parents perceived the clarity of narrative reports achieved through concise

and appropriate language usage to be dependent upon the quality and ability of the

teacher (Hall, 1991). Goodlad and Anderson (1987) agree, ". . . some teachers are less

fluent (and even less literate) than others" (p. 121). Stiggins (1994) notes, "Narratives

place a premium on being able to write well. Teachers who have difficulty

communicating in writing wil l find a narrative system frustrating to use, and wil l not use

it well" (p. 411).

Although narratives have been cited as having the potential for being more

informative than other forms of reporting, the decision of what to select when reporting

information and how to express it depends upon the individual teacher (BCME &

20

M M H R , 1992a). Stiggins (1994) feels narrative report card writing must be regarded by

teachers as more than "free writing" time when they can say whatever comes to mind

about a student. A n example from one researcher's files could be criticized by some for

its "free writing" style or admired by others for its poetry, "Matt does not march to the

sound of his own drummer. He has his own brass band, which transmogrifies into

everything from symphonies to pan pipes and everything in between" (Story, 1994,

Appendix, I (b)). Satterly (1981) cautions that when teachers have no prior list of

attributes or criteria and rely on what "floats to the top" of their recollection of a pupil's

salient characteristics, the result could be "some interesting - even bizarre - reports" (p.

322). He further contends that while such reports could come as a pleasant alternative to

the "could do better" type of report, "this recipe for reporting smacks of 'stream of

consciousness' writing .. . usually reveals more about the reporter than the reported, and

seems to have little to recommend it" (p. 322).

Bailey et al. (1988) report that major changes have taken place in the last 20 years

since researchers describe both the reading and writing processes as meaning-centered

processes. The authors feel that this has resulted in very different classroom practices

and that reporting systems should be changed to reflect these changes. They comment:

We have been conditioned to using traditional language generated from scope-and sequence charts. We have continued to use those descriptors, redefining them in our minds to fit a meaning-centered approach, but forgetting that the traditional connotations would be a part of the messages that would be received by other professionals and parents unless we totally revise the way we report in a meaning-based reading and writing program, (p. 366) The authors' work with developing appropriate language reflecting changes in practice

has implications for all teachers as they approach report card writing.

21

For teachers, the time involved in writing narrative report cards is a major

concern and source of stress (Grant, 1993; Hughes & Thomas, 1993; Kerby &

McGregor, 1993; Micklethwaite, 1993). Changes inherent in the new Primary Program

in B . C . necessitate that teachers report on many more aspects of their students'

development and progress than before. Micklethwaite (1993) notes that in the process

teachers exhaust themselves trying to assess, evaluate and report on everything. Parent

responses proved to be less than gratifying; they criticized the extent, the content and the

length of the reports and complained about the "can-do" nature of the comments.

Micklethwaite comments that, "teachers reported that reviewing their assessment

materials and actually writing the report cards had been a time consuming and exhausting

experience. They estimated spending between one and two hours on each child " (p. 11)

Believing in the value of narrative reporting, teachers in Micklethwaite's school

brainstormed ideas that could potentially reduce the workload and rated them in terms of

effectiveness following preparation of their report cards. Analysis of the responses

revealed a few strategies that teachers found helpful. These are summarized in point

form from Micklethwaite's work (1993) as follows:

Format - utilize a report card format with "areas of consistency" on which all teachers agree to report;

- use a point form format rather than paragraphs to save time.

Support/Structuring - gain clerical assistance to fil l in the routine parts of the report card.

- structure report writing time to be as relatively free of stressors as possible;

- plan to start writing report cards early; begin writing the least complicated or more "straightforward" reports first.

22

Information - student self-assessments provide an additional source of information on a child and can be included as inserts to accompany the report card. (p. 120)

Survey findings in the same school also revealed that parents did not perceive themselves

to be better informed when report card comments were lengthy. This knowledge,

together with parents' beliefs that anecdotal reporting forms only one part of continuous

communication with parents (BCME & M M H R , 1992a; Grant, 1993; Kerby &

McGregor, 1993; Micklethwaite, 1993), has implications for teachers in their attempts to

streamline the process of report card writing.

In a study investigating effective handling of anecdotal reporting in job sharing

situations, Hughes and Thomas (1993) also found the "time factor" to be a primary

concern of teachers. They noted that teachers utilized one of two types of formats: the

point form and paragraph form. Most found the point form format definitely saved time;

some felt that while they preferred the point form it did not look as professional as the

paragraph form. The researchers suggested ways to combine the two. One way would

be to have a personalized opening paragraph, point form for the body of the report, and a

personalized paragraph to complete the report; another way would be to mix point form

with a personalized elaboration of statements when appropriate.

Attitudes of B . C . administrators to narrative reporting were obtained though

examination of Assessing Student Learning Surveys (BCME & M M H R , 1992-1993) now

being conducted annually in this province as a result of the changes to the educational

system. Differences between the 1991 and 1992-93 results, indicate that 62% of the

principals surveyed in 1992-93 were "very satisfied" with the accuracy of written reports,

23

as compared to 45% of principals in 1991. Investigators described the growing

confidence in this form of reporting as "notable." However, they cautioned that

meaningful discussion of trends could not take place until at least a third survey was

conducted.

Media Reactions to Anecdotal/Narrative Report Cards in B.C. ' s Primary Program

Just as the research found narrative report cards in this province to be

controversial, media interest reflected little consensus among viewpoints. Newspaper

headlines in both The Vancouver Sun and The Vancouver Province appearing almost daily

during February of 1993 were clearly for or against the Year 2000 (B.C. Ministry of

Education, 1990a) educational initiative in B . C . Commentaries indicate "anecdotal

report" cards as one of the chief causes of concern. Under the caption, Parents give

Year 2000 a failing grade, Brian Evans (1993) describes his struggle with "figuring out"

his son's Grade Two report card. He challenged the statement, "Alexander can choose a

book at his own reading level and read successfully" indicating that the comment says

little. He added, "What I really want to know is what level is my son reading at?" (p.

A12). Letters to the editor in response to the column reflect varying parental viewpoints

toward anecdotal reporting. One parent, Cohen (1993), wrote that his daughter's

teachers were "deeply committed" to teaching their daughter and were always willing to

discuss her progress in detail (p. A l l ) . However, in the same editorial column,

McCormick (1993) concurs with Evans, " As a parent, I'm frustrated because 'anecdotal

reporting' does not tell me how my children are doing in relation to their peers. While

the ministry of education tells me 'this is not important,' I feel it is" (p. A l l ) .

24

In an article Reading, writing and 'rithmetic taught without a measuring stick,

Kline (1993), a retired child psychiatrist, voices similar concerns, "Unfortunately,

Education 2000 operates on the premise that poor performance, for whatever reason can

be disguised by withholding marks, and that superior potential can flower without visible

measurement" (p. A l l ) . Tony Brummet (1993), B .C. ' s education minister from 1986 to

1990, responded to what he described as a "distorted picture" painted by Kline:

Surely .. . Dr. Kline must be aware of the frustration, disinterest and potential harm, which can develop in children i f they are measured against the same yardstick only because they are at the same age, with no regard for their individual differences . . . . The program is based on the accepted premise recognized by the research giants in early childhood development that children love to learn and to work hard to achieve, (p. A15)

Kilian (1993a) discusses the letter grade or narrative report card debate by likening

grades to currency. He states that parents and students prefer grades over anecdotal

reports because grades can open the doors to scholarships and universities. He

facetiously comments, "You can take an A to the bank, while a paragraph of teacher's

comments is worthless outside school" (p. A21).

Many media articles focussed on student self-esteem, a purported strength of the

child-centred Year 2000 program (B.C. Ministry of Education, 1990a). Kline (1993)

criticized the program for being "child-centred," suggesting that "supposedly in order to

protect their self-esteem, they [students] receive no marks and fail no grades" (p. A l l ) .

Kilian (1993b) defends child-centredness, stating that opponents might as well criticize a

business for being "customer-centred" (p. A21). Balcom (1993a) quotes Bond, a parent

who praises teaching methods that foster self-esteem, "The psychology of children is such

that when a child gets negative feedback at a very young age it's extremely difficult to

25

overcome later on" (p. A12). Nikiforuk, of the Toronto-based Globe and Mail, recounts

how a school superintendent achieved a return to "accountability" in one California

school district, "He has .. . steadfastly kept 'the self-esteem crap' out of his schools,

believing that a healthy sense of self flows from academic achievement and not vice-

versa" (Nikiforuk, 1993, p. A24).

Some teachers were clearly frustrated at the "bad press" B .C . ' s education system

was getting. One school staff tried to address their concerns by inviting education

reporter, Balcom (1993b), from a local newspaper, to visit classes and report "what's

really going on" in Year 2000 classrooms (p. B6). Balcom reported that she got to view

first hand that while the philosophy of the Year 2000 program is clearly aimed at making

students feel good about themselves, it does not ignore academic standards.

Some articles pointed out that evaluations were being made of a program that had

yet to be implemented. Jerry Mussio, the B . C . Ministry's director of school programs

at the time, denounced as unfair the criticism of the program because "people identify

many of those problems with Year 2000 when the reality is it's those problems that Year

2000 is trying to address" (Balcom, 1993a, p. A l ) .

Kilian (1993b) calls the school-bashing engaged in by the media deserved because

of educators' deliberate failure to teach the public: "educators are only asking for more

trouble i f their own silence leads to uninformed attacks on the schools" (p. A21). He

maintains that new methods can work i f the public understands them and supports them.

Conversely, Ramage (1993), describing herself as an average parent, publicly thanked

the teachers in her school for making her feel comfortable with the changes by providing

a document made available to all parents in B . C . , Supporting Learning: Understanding

26

and Assessing the Progress of Children in the Primary Program ( B C M E & M M H R ,

1992c).

While many media reports called for a return to yesteryear in education, some

talked of a changed society and the need for reform. Cohen (1993), in a letter to the

editor, writes:

The education which our daughter is receiving is not like that which my wife and I received decades ago. But there is no reason to believe that what took place in the 1950s and 1960s represented a Utopian vision of education, and our experience at Trafalgar School tells us that the changes have been for the better, (p. A l l )

Discontent and controversy as reflected in media reports was not restricted to B . C .

Mitchell (1993), social trends reporter for The Globe and Mail, reported, "grassroot

groups are springing up across the country dedicated to change and armed with troubling

statistics and damning anecdotal evidence. They are drafting petitions, spending copious

hours in research and banging determinedly on politicians' doors" (p. A l ) . Lewington

(1992) , education reporter for the same newspaper, reports that from Newfoundland to

British Columbia, the results of education are under scrutiny by government and the

public. In a MacLean's Magazine issue entitled What's Wrong at School?, Fennell

(1993) reported, "Thousands of alarmed parents are declaring war on provincial public

education which in their estimation is doing a poor job of educating their children" (p.

28). Much of the discontent was focused on child-centred education, an innovation hailed

as a breakthrough by educators. The B . C . education system was highlighted, "Under a

new, controversial Year 2000 program in British Columbia, standard grades are being

abolished from kindergarten to Grade 3 and report cards for younger students wil l

describe their progress in anecdotal form" (p. 30).

27

Reactions of Early Childhood Experts to B.C. ' s Primary Program

While the media raged with controversy over the pros and cons of the educational

changes in B . C . , leading educators, national and international childhood organizations and

some departments of education both in Canada and in the United States, lavishly praised

this province's Primary Program. Outside reviewers, chosen for their "stature and

credibility in the field of education, to provide impartial opinions" ( B C M E & B C M H ,

1992b, p. 3), supported and applauded the Primary Program's approach to assessment

and evaluation. Bredekamp (in B . C . Ministry of Education, 1992b) comments that "the

principles are completely congruent with the N A E Y C ' s [The National Association for the

Education of Young Children] guidelines for appropriate assessment as well as the

standards of the American Psychological Association" (p. 13). Bredekamp also praises

the Program's elimination of grades. Cambourne, Head of the Centre for Studies in

Literacy at the University of Wollongong, Australia, describes the approach to

assessment and evaluation in the Primary Program as being rigorous and valid, stating,

"The Primary Program Foundation Document more than reflects recent research and

thinking into the nature and purpose of assessment and evaluation. It is in my opinion at

the cutting edge" (p. 13). Requests to the ministry from school boards and/or departments

of education to use portions of the Primary Program documents came from Ontario,

Manitoba and Kentucky. The Nebraska Department of Education adapted B.C. ' s Primary

Program and in a letter of thanks to the B.C. ' s Primary Teachers' Association wrote:

This work is soundly and practically reflective of what is expressed in the vast majority of reports calling for reform of the educational system of this nation and goes farther than anything we have seen to present a concrete plan for implementation. (Appendix A)

28

Report Card Writing: A Focus on the Writing Process

Recent research has revealed the amount of teacher time involved in writing report

cards and a few strategies to reduce the expended time. It has also provided information

regarding the effects of teachers' efforts on the receivers of the report cards. Little,

though, is known about the thinking , and the attitudes of teachers as they create these

documents. Noting this gap in the research, Afflerbach and Johnson (1993) conducted an

exploratory study investigating the writing of language arts report cards utilizing a "think-

aloud" process. Findings indicated that teachers "faced difficult challenges in balancing

information, addressing different audiences for different purposes, and juggling weighty

ethical dilemmas" (p. 84). The authors noted that for each teacher participant the report-

writing process was "heavily marked by conflict" (p. 83). These authors suggest the

importance of further research to clarify how teachers construct the text of report cards —

a suggestion that led me to consider the following study.

An examination of the literature on narrative reporting indicates B.C. Ministry of

Education's changes to primary reporting in the form of a "structured written" report

card hold promise for addressing some major concerns identified in the research, namely

those of parents and the general public. The new mandate for teachers to provide

information to parents concerning a student's progress with reference to others in a

similar age range would seem to address parents' most commonly reported criticism of

narrative reports.

We've heard the voices of others. My interest in the area of report card writing is

to hear teachers' voices and to dwell in that space with them as they tell their stories

about composing report cards for the students they teach.

29

CHAPTER T H R E E

The Nature of the Inquiry

T h e purpose o f educational research is not to put us in command o f our own or others' educational l ives but instead to put us i n " touch" with those l ives. (Brown, 1992. p. 50)

Why wasn't I getting on with what I originally had intended would be a study set in an ethnographic tradition? After all, I had spent a good part of last summer writing the research proposal for a course assignment --I had agonized over the purposeful sampling part: Would my results be generalizable if I failed to choose a teacher from each of the geographical areas of the city etc. etc.? I had it all worked out now. I should just get on with it. Yet I want an opportunity to hear those 'silent' voices of teachers and the real meaning of report card writing time for them. To approach the study phenomenologically would give me 'permission' to reflect deeply on this. (Researcher's Journal)

J welcomed the opportunity to attend the 'grassroots' 'Let's Talk about Report Cards' meeting organized for teachers by teachers - silenced voices rallying the support of fellow colleagues to talk about issues of concern! Teachers, the great shelterers, sheltering students from cutbacks, spending money from their own pockets to buy special art supplies when cupboards contained only the most basic of supplies. I remember it only too well - the ubiquitous purple and black pile of construction paper appearing earlier and earlier in the year leaving as a memory the taller multi-colored stack available only in the first term. Teachers, outwardly masters at making it all work for kids, but inwardly deeply affected as mounting numbers of teachers on stress leave confirm.

It took a while. Teachers arrived - tense at first, the rhythm of their day still reflected in their faces ... As those 'making it all work' layers began to peel away comments were made that will stick with me ... 7 agonized for a week when I had to write on the report card that a kindergarten student didn't fall within the expected range of development for his age!' and, 'I couldn't sleep for a week before those report cards were sent home. It feels like a real betrayal to those few kids who need your encouragement the most ...' (Researcher's Journal)

I return for a second time to A o k i ' s notion o f layered voices (1991):

In our busy wor ld o f education, we are surrounded by layers o f voices - some loud , some shril l - that c la im to know what teaching is. A w e d , perhaps, by the

30

cacophony of voices, certain voices become silent and, hesitating to reveal themselves, conceal themselves. Let's beckon all these voices to speak, particularly the silent ones so that we may awaken to the truer sense of teaching that stirs within each of us. (p. 1)

Teachers' voices, silenced by those all-too-familiar shrill voices. I share Aoki's

"annoyance" with the "negativism of publicity mongering," those "media-bashing" voices

(1993a, p. 67). Seduced at first by my desire to look at the outcomes of my research to

provide new and effective ways to in-service teachers on "effective ways" to produce

report cards, I grew increasingly interested in dwelling in that space with teachers as they

gave voice to their very personal and unique methods and means of writing report cards

and illuminating the issues and dilemmas faced as they did so. This chapter wil l draw on

some of the literature that guided the approach to the inquiry and on the processes of

conversation, narrating and journal writing used to elucidate structures of meaning

embedded in the experience of report card writing for teachers. It wil l also provide the

context in which the study unfolded.

I attempt, then, to set this study in the tradition of phenomenological enquiry.

Brown, (1992) when describing van Manen's approach to research, speaks of a research

that "seeks to give us a sagacious knowing of the mundane that affords enlightened

pedagogical actions" (p. 51). More than a "seeing" and "hearing," it involves a

"touching" or "being in touch" with the experiences we wish to understand. It differs

from traditional research in that its emphasis is upon "contact" rather than manipulation

(p. 50).

In order to become more "in touch with" the meaning of report card writing for

teachers, I borrowed from the experiences of six teachers and their reflections on the

31

experience of report card writing. M y interest was not in "giving" meaning but rather in

"revealing" the meaning of these experiences in order to understand how they are

connected to the "lived experiences" of teachers (Brown, 1992, p. 50). By so doing, I

sought an understanding of the deeper meaning or significance of this experience for all

teachers (van Manen, 1990, p. 62).

Why is it necessary for a teacher who has written many report cards herself to

collect the "data" of other people's experiences? Van Manen writes, "We gather other

people's experiences because they allow us to become more experienced ourselves" (1990,

p. 62). The experiences of these teachers have allowed me to become "'informed',

shaped or enriched by this experience so as to be able to render the full significance" of

report card writing (p. 62). During the process of the investigation, while the viewpoints

of these six teachers became apparent, my deeper goal, which is the thrust of

phenomenological research, remained oriented to asking the question, "What is the nature

of this phenomenon as an essentially human experience for teachers?"

In attempting to grasp the essential meaning of report card writing for the teachers

in the study, text was created and interpretations were undertaken utilizing three

processes: conversations with the teachers; writing and reflecting on the narratives; and

journalizing on the process of researching. Throughout the research journey these

processes were ongoing and took place concomitantly; themes emerged and became

objects of thoughtful reflection informing each of the processes while at the same time

continuing to be re-shaped and re-created as new insights were gleaned.

Conversations with Teachers

32

Van Manen (1990) describes a phenomenological orientation as "a kind of

conversational relation that the researcher develops with the notion he or she wishes to

explore or understand" (pp. 98-99). He likens the process to every conversation we

share with another person:

A conversation is not just a personal relation between two or more people who are involved in the conversation. A conversation may start off as a mere chat, and in fact this is usually the way that conversations come into being. But then, when gradually a certain topic of mutual interest emerges, and the speakers become in a sense animated by the notion to which they are now both oriented, a true conversation comes into being. So a conversation is structured as a triad .. . The conversation has a hermeneutic thrust: it is oriented to sense-making and interpreting of the notion that drives or stimulates the conversation, (p. 90)

Early in the study, I began the gathering of data with an "interview transcript" to serve as

a guide to the interview (Appendix B). As time went on I found, rather, that

"conversations" evolved into exchanges characterized by mutual meaning-making.

Increasingly throughout the study, I revisited ideas, some of which later became themes,

that emerged in earlier conversations with individuals in the study by formulating and

lingering in questions with participants. In this way, meaning was often constituted

within the context of the conversation. For instance, the researcher, in turn with several

of the teachers, questioned and reflected on the tension involved in being both a nurturer

and an evaluator of children. This dilemma, felt deeply by teachers as they struggled to

compose written comments, was visited and revisited in several conversations. As we

sought to resolve and attain concensus about the apparent contradiction, we rather, as

stated by Crusious (1991), "enlarged our horizons by incorporating the insights of the

33

other" (p. 39). Crusious further captures the process when he elaborates on Gadamer's

statement that "something different comes to be" in a genuine conversation:

And where does it come to be? Not 'in me' or 'in you,' but rather 'in the between,' via the exchange itself, as we work from some degree of shared preunderstandings (or we could not converse at all) and towards intersubjective understanding and, when possible, agreement. In genuine dialogue carried along by the dynamics of the exchange, we lose ourselves in the matter at hand, subjectivity disappears into participation, (p. 38)

As conversations with the teachers in the study progressed, preliminary themes began

to emerge in a manner similiar to the one van Manen (1990) describes:

Both the researcher and the interviewee weigh the appropriateness of each theme by asking: Ts this what the experience is really like?' And thus the interview turns indeed into an interpretive conversation wherein both partners self-reflectively orient themselves to the interpersonal or collective ground that brings the significance of the phenomenological question into view. (p. 99)

In this study, teachers talked of rituals they engaged in as they "entered into" the process

of report card writing that seemingly provided comfort and sustained them for the

duration of the report card writing period. They spoke of focussing intently on the child

in attempts to personalize the report card and capture the "essence" of each child, and of

tailoring their comments with sensitivity to an array of audiences and circumstantial

considerations. Gradually, these phenomenological themes emerged in the words of van

Manen, "metaphorically speaking, like knots in the webs of [teachers'] experiences,

around which certain lived experiences are spun and thus lived through as meaningful

wholes" (p. 90).

Narrating: Telling the Stories of Report Card Writing for Teachers

As transcripts of the conversations with teachers were read and re-read, themes

which began to be apparent in the conversations, continued to emerge, illuminating how

34

the experience of report card writing was lived by the teachers in the study.

Commonalities in the way and in the sequence in which teachers approached the task

were evident, and sensitivities to others, while differing in nature according to the

individual circumstances, were abundant. As I began to narrate, creating the text as I

told teachers' stories of how they composed report cards, I selected teacher's statements

and insights that supported the emergent themes and proceeded in a manner not unlike the

one described by Kundera (1986), "The themes are worked out steadily within and by

the story" (p. 83).

I was aware that teachers, too, were obviously selective in their recall of the

processes and dilemmas encountered as they composed report cards for specific students.

Bateson (1989) talks of the issue of "selectivity" and "editing" as past events are

recollected:

As memories blur, we supply details from a pool of general knowledge. With every retelling, words that barely fit begin to seem more appropriate as the meaning slips and slides .. . Even for the recent past and in situations where there would seem to be little motivation for distortion, memories are modified and details supplied to fit cultural expectations, (p. 32)

I leaned on Bateson's explanation of the process as I struggled with the adequacy of the

"selectivity of remembering" on the part of both myself and the participants in the study:

The accounts as I heard them are themselves part of the process of composing lives. They are autobiographical, not biographical, shaped by each person's choice and selective memory and by the circumstances of our life together. No doubt they are shaped again by my own selections, resonating variously with my own experiences. These are stories I have used to think with, sometimes quoting at length and sometimes very briefly, sometimes approaching an issue almost entirely through the eyes of one woman and at other times lining them up for comparison, (p. 33)

35

Journalizing

While engaging in the process of researching, I kept a journal in order to reflect

thoughtfully and deeply on the experience. For Aoki (1992), journalizing lived

experiences is "not simply diary writing" (p. 30). I was familiar with, and employed

Aoki's notion of "layered" writing meant to "open ourselves to a deeper understanding of

the lived experiences we experienced, to a deepened sense of what it is to be human" (p.

30). The first "layer" of writing typically describing an event or feeling factually was

followed by locating a theme and "allowing questions to come forth, questions that

beckon me to further reflective writing" (p. 32). Aoki describes theming as a

"thoughtful lingering with and within a theme that stands at the threshhold of a story" (p.

33). Journalizing in this way, for example, led me to question the focus and intent of my

original research approach and shift from an interest in giving information "to" teachers

as an outcome of the research process, to a "living with" teachers as they voiced the lived

meaning of the experience of report card writing.

Situational Texture of the Study

This study took place in the Province of British Columbia and involved six female

teachers in an urban lower mainland community. Two of the teachers were in job-

sharing situations and thus shared the job of report card writing. Participation in the

study was invitational; each teacher was current and knowledgeable about the changing

report card mandates and each, in her own way, could be considered a teacher leader.

Because of their interest and involvement in assessment, evaluation and reporting issues

and their thoughtful articulation of these issues in our contacts, these teachers were

deemed to be candidates with whom I could engage in rich, reflective conversation.

36

The teachers were contacted by phone and all agreed to take part in the study. A

synopsis was then sent to each participant along with a guide to the topics that would be

discussed in our first conversation (Appendix B). When formal permission had been

obtained from the University of British Columbia Human Ethics Committee, the teachers

received and signed a formal consent form outlining the intent and purpose of the study.

They were assured that they were free to withdraw from the study at any time. The

administrators of the schools received letters explaining the study and all gave their

approval.

I chose to gain teachers' perceptions of report card writing using the spring report

card because of the additional challenges it presents in its writing. Report card writing

times take place three times a year: the first reporting session is usually in November,

the second in the spring and the third at the end of June. The nature of report cards

tends to differ for each term. On the first report card, teachers typically report on

students' social and emotional adjustments to school, their adjustments to school and

classroom routines, their work habits and end with comments about academic progress.

The spring report card generally reflects teachers' increased knowledge of the students

and their progress over time and usually contains the most comprehensive picture of the

students' progress. It is often considered by teachers to be the most challenging to write.

The June report card, with its summative nature, differs again from the other two report

cards.

Four schools in the lower mainland of British Columbia were represented in the

study. Two schools are on the west side of an urban community, one is a community

school serving a relatively new housing development and the other is in the northeast

37

sector. The west side schools have stable, highly educated, upper middle-class parent

populations. These parents generally have high expectations and ambitions for their

children. Paula and Andrea teach a combination Grade 1 and Grade 2 class in an annex,

where the parents are very supportive of their program and of their job-sharing

arrangement. In the other west side school, family-grouped classes (or classes enrolling

two or more age levels) have existed for some years at the primary level and are widely-

accepted by parents, although "single-age groupings" of children provide some placement

alternatives. Karey and Jean, the two teachers in the study from this school each teach

family-grouped five-, six- and seven-year-olds. While most parents are accepting of the

family-groupings and support the child-centred approach to learning for the primary

years, they express a preference for "academic rigor" to begin at Grade 4. They are,

however, divided in their opinions of the new legislation requiring that letter grades be

given to students beginning in Grade 4. Some parents would like the grades provided in

an oral conference rather than in written form or only on parental request; others are

pleased with the new legislation. Details of the debate are provided here because of its

"profound" influence on all primary teachers at the school, including the two teachers in

this study.

Janice, another teacher in the study, teaches a combination Grade 3 and Grade 4

class in the community school. The community "instantly" developed when housing,

tailored to a variety of socio-economic groups, opened at approximately the same time.

The population reflects the diversity of housing. There is a high number of single-parent

families in the area and, therefore, a number of children who have experienced recent

changes within their family structure. Because of this, the teachers in this school have

38

placed an emphasis on the emotional development of the students and are implementing

programs which foster positive student self-esteem.

The school in the north-east sector of the community has been designated "inner

city" and represents a number of families in crisis. Educational concerns in this school

are often overshadowed by the more immediate concerns of children exposed to social

problems such as poverty, alcohol and drug abuse. A wide multi-cultural mix exists in

the school population and thus many students speak English as their second language.

Sandra teaches Gradel students in this school.

Settings for the conversations were chosen by the participants. Most took place

after school in the classrooms where the teachers worked. Confidentiality and anonymity

were attempted throughout, although I was aware that descriptions of the roles of some of

the participants could reveal their identities. Pseudonyms are used to refer to both the

teachers and the students in the study. When student report cards were shared with me,

the children's surnames were removed to ensure anonymity. Audiotapes were kept in my

possession and erased upon completion of the project.

Three-face-to-face conversations with teachers in the study took place; the first

two were audiotaped and later transcribed. Each visit was approximately one hour in

length. At times telephone conversations were used to supplement and/or clarify

information.

Conversations were timed to capture the report card writing processes of teachers

for the spring reporting term. The first conversation took place, with one exception,

approximately two weeks before report card writing time. During this time a general

discussion took place around assessment, evaluation and reporting procedures in the

39

Primary Program. An outline of topics was made available to teachers before the talk

(Appendix B). Most teachers mentioned thinking informally about the topics before our

meeting, while one teacher brought and referred to her previously prepared notes. There

was one exception to the timing of our first conversation about reporting: Karey had a

conversation with me during the previous summer as I was engaging in the preparation of

a proposal for this research.

Topics for the initial conversation in this study included personal thoughts and

feelings about the writing of report cards, writing rituals, the audiences(s) teachers wrote

for, mechanical aspects of organizing data, reactions to the ministerial changes to

reporting and the concomitant challenges and dilemmas encountered, and processes

teachers used, or planned to use, to convey whether or not a child fell within the

"accepted range" for his/her age. Although I tried to ensure that these aspects were

discussed with each teacher, the conversations were informal, taking on a flavour that

was unique and deeply personal for each teacher.

Information specific to individual children was obtained in the second

conversation, providing a rich description of how a teacher blends the required elements

of a report card, captures the uniqueness of the individual child and satisfies the variety

of audiences for whom she writes. This conversation took place shortly after teachers

had written report cards so their memories were still fresh. Teachers were asked to

describe how they composed the report cards for two students in their class: one student

whom they felt was achieving within the "widely held expectations" for his/her age range

and one they were concerned may not. In all cases the teachers identified the latter

easily, stating that these report cards took the most time and thought to write. However,

40

because teachers comment on the total child and include statements regarding intellectual,

physical, social and emotional growth and^the development of responsibility, the

stipulation to select a child "within" the widely-held expectations, was "relaxed" when it

became evident that many children could be "within" widely-held expectations in most

areas while slipping into another age range in one area of their development. The second

conversation often started with a prompt asking the teacher to paint a verbal picture to

help me to gain an essence of the child being discussed. Teachers were then asked to

describe the experience of writing the report card.

The second interview also provided an opportunity to revisit some issues and

emerging themes that were identified as I reflected on the first conversation and examined

transcripts. Although most were introduced by myself, in some instances, the teachers

had engaged in thoughtful reflections between conversations and initiated topes for

discussion. Increasingly, questions and themes were "lingered upon," and meaning was

constituted within the context of the conversation.

After conversations were textually reconstructed and themes formulated on the

processes and dilemmas encountered by teachers as they composed the report cards, I had

a third conversation with the participants to gain their perspectives on the previous

discussions and to clarify and verify interpretation of the data. The decision to engage

participants in three conversations, supplemented in some cases by shorter exchanges,

provided for a deeper understanding of teachers' perceptions of report card writing than

would a single interview and allowed for corroboration of data. The sequence of the

conversations (before and after writing reports) allowed for "changed perceptions" as

teachers confronted the writing of their first spring term "structured written report."

41

CHAPTER FOUR

In Conversation with Teachers

As I struggle with the adequacy of words that capture the process of telling teachers' stories of report card writing, 1 am drawn to the poetry of Bateson's (1989) words, "The process of Improvisation that goes into composing a life is compounded in the process of remembering a life, like a patchwork quilt in a watercolor painting, rumpled and evocative" (p. 34). [Researcher's Journal]

As teachers shared with me their thoughts on the lived meaning of report card

writing and the dilemmas and challenges they faced while composing report cards,

audiotapes were made and later transcribed. After reading and re-reading teachers'

words, and the words we together created in our efforts to capture the experience, I

began the process of text-making, weaving teachers' stories into themes that were

emerging and had been reflected on both in conversation with participants and during the

process of journal writing. What follows are the resultant narratives.

In Conversation with Paula and Andrea

Paula and Andrea job-share and teach a combination Grade 1 and Grade 2 class in

a newly-opened annex on the west side of the urban lower mainland community in B . C .

Paula teaches 3 days a week and Andrea teaches 2 days. Paula has long been considered

a teacher leader in the area of Primary Education in the school district in which she

teaches. She began her career teaching a Grade 1 class and after five years went to

England where she taught "on exchange" for two years. After having been introduced to

"family-grouping" in England, she elicited the support of the principal upon her return to

a school in the lower mainland of B . C . , and pioneered the multi-age approach to teaching

children in her school district along with two of her colleagues. A few years later she

42

was seconded to a local university where she taught and supervised pre-service teachers

for 2 years. Her teaching career resumed in a west side school where she continued to

teach and expand the concept of family-grouped classes, serving as a mentor for other

interested teachers. When the new Primary Program was introduced into B . C . schools in

1990, Paula worked at the district level as a Primary Consultant where she provided

leadership in the implementation of the program. From this position, she moved to the

annex where she presently teaches with Andrea. As well as classroom teaching, she

works as a Primary Resource Teacher for 2 days a week, supporting teachers in the

district in furthering their expertise in the area of primary education.

Andrea was one of the colleagues that Paula worked with as they began teaching

family-grouped classes. After working full-time for several years, Andrea took a leave

from teaching to raise a family. As her children entered school, she returned to teaching

on a part-time basis. She continued her liaison with Paula where they jointly conducted

some workshops in the area of family grouping and, for the past 2 years, have job-

shared.

On Writing Report Cards

When asked what thoughts came to mind as report card writing time approaches,

both Paula and Andrea mentioned that without question it was the time involved in the

entire process — from the collecting and organizing of the data to the time when the

children take home the reports. An incident Paula related is typical of the reactions of

most teachers and those who know and are close to teachers:

Just the other day someone (also a teacher) said to me, 'We have to set up a dinner date but because report card writing time is coming we can't do it until

43

April,' and I thought 'Are report cards controlling our lives to the extent that I can't do anything else for the month of March?'

Personalized touches in the report cards are of primary importance to Paula and

Andrea. Although this adds considerably to the time element it is something neither of

them would give up. Paula elaborated:

We include the titles of stories they have written and books they have read and we collect their quotes [about their work]. That's a whole other element that takes time — but I wouldn't want to lose those personal touches ... I love that little personal example ... it makes the report cards more fun to write.

Since the introduction of the Primary Program, with its emphasis on the value of

reflection, Paula and Andrea encourage students to engage in self-evaluation and

individual goal-setting. While believing in the value of each, the addition of these two

elements creates even more time demands. A personal goal stated by each child, later to

be entered on the report card, is captured in individual student conferences held in class

time but not without difficulty, due to all of the interruptions inherent within the life of a

busy primary classroom. Time is taken to teach the concept of self-evaluation and

encourage children to write their reflections. Paula and Andrea record for those students

who are not yet independent writers. They both delight in showing me Allison's self-

evaluation, "I'm very good at 'times,' circumference, homonyms, brackets, getting more

friends, keeping my voice down and being kind and also being very happy!"

Although pleased with these added dimensions in their report cards, Paula and

Andrea failed to make their report cards shorter this term ~ something they had been

determined to do. Paula is adamant about the need to reduce time but reflects on the

difficulty and the conflict:

44

We had the open house, we had the conferences, yet it's like your past experience, your history [of writing long report cards]. You think you have to let the parents know about this child - they may have missed something. On the other hand, you don't want the parents to think you 're not doing anything in the classroom — so it's almost like a promotion of your own program ... We're doing lots of exciting things so you think you had better get that on the report card. So you have to get rid of all that past history you've had since you've been teaching if you're going to change the way you write report card. If anyone, I should be able to do it. I'm out there [giving workshops] and telling people how to do it. Yet when it comes to the writing of it you just want to make sure that the parents value the efforts of their child ... and I want them to know that I have a good program going on here.

When probed i f she felt the conferences with parents captured some of what she was

trying to achieve, she pondered:

These parents know everything that is going on in here — they have had so much [conference, open house] but, I'm the one who doesn't trust that they've picked up what they should know so therefore I feel I have to put it in writing. So I'm back at square one again -1 have to trust more and I have to let go of a lot of things.

Paula and Andrea described how their regular program undergoes changes at

report card writing time and the effects of this on their children. Paula elaborates:

/ think we do put more pressure on the children because we're suddenly thinking, "Oh my gosh, we have to find out how many of them can really tell the time well ... because they work together so much, you can look in their math journal and they have everything right, but it could be that a partner helped them. We suddenly feel the pressure that we have to give them certain things to do so we can watch them.

This, together with increasing self-evaluation sheets and goal-setting conferences,

according to Paula changes the feel in the classroom, "Suddenly, when report cards are

coming, you realize that the relaxing time and just 'going with the flow' is on hold."

On Reactions to the "Structured Written Report Card"

Paula speculated that the "structured written report card" was introduced to "settle

the public down." Both Paula and Andrea feel that as a result of the new mandate their

45 record keeping has become more systematic. Media attention has heightened Paula's

awareness that observations need to be recorded and portfolios maintained, "It is for my

own credibility. There has been more in the media and more attention has been drawn to

the fact that do we really know what we are talking about?''

Paula and Andrea each find that the new requirements which provide a "structure"

for the written report card are helpful. This, together with "permission" to use a point

form format rather than paragraphs, has helped to make the actual writing of the report

card more manageable. Paula finds the component that requires teachers to comment on

"areas of learning that require further development" particularly helpful in that it

reinforces the idea that learning is continuous, a concept that was possibly not as accepted

in the past when parents looked for summative statements on the child's progress for the

term:

... that's where the headings such as 'Allison is working on ... 'have helped because we are saying to the parent that noone is ever perfect, we all have things we have to work on, so these are the next steps for your child. So we're not saying they're so wonderful they don't have to learn anymore, which may be an impression they've had in the past. The child also sees that what we are working on is always part of the report card.

The new mandate states, "Structured written reports are most effective when they

use direct, plain language." Both Paula and Andrea feel that this "permission" to use

jargon-free language makes reports easier to read. Andrea comments, "We're just being

specific. We say 'beginning to read'with more confidence. We're not looking for

different ways of saying things now."

Paula and Andrea find the legislation requiring teachers to comment on, and

document student progress with reference to the "expected" development for students in a

46

similar age range, to be a direct contradiction of the philosophy embodied in the Primary

Program Documents. Their own beliefs as teachers are in keeping with the Primary

Program's focus on continuous learning, enabling learners, ungraded learning and

recognition of the developmental nature of learning in the primary years. Paula's

example expands on the conflict:

If the child has been really showing progress and you have been encouraging them and supporting them and telling them how wonderful they are, and if this report card is theirs as well as their parents and you say they are not within the widely-held expectations — then what is this going to do to their sense of T can do this. Yes, I am a learner and I'm pretty good in math. I have things to work on but I am getting there.' I would feel I have let the child down.

Paula and I explored how mandated letter grades at the Grade 4 and Grade 5

levels based on criterion referencing are affecting primary teachers and how they look at

children. Like many primary teachers who feel they should "prepare" their students for

the changes in reporting procedures in their intermediate years, Paula has introduced the

concept of "criteria" to her six- and seven-year-olds, though she questions this focus at

the primary level:

There's a tension ... it is a word [criteria] that children will have to know for the future because of the changing focus at the intermediate level but in my mind I just keep thinking, Ts this appropriate for children at this age?' I mean, learning is very natural to them ... they never stop to think, 'What am I learning today?'

Paula recognizes that it is a language children can acquire because her own students

demonstrated this in conferences with their parents. She noted, however, that it was all

"teacher language." Students parroted back what they thought they were supposed to say

about criteria in regards to their work:

It is very impressive for the parent to hear their child speaking like that but sometimes the child looks at you [the teacher] as if to say, 'What am I supposed to say?' It's like a little script. It's like some children can read incredible things

47

but they don't have any understanding of what they have read. That's what I question.

Paula appreciates the naturalness of learning in the primary years. She fears that

this "change of trend" in reporting at younger grade levels wil l reshape the Primary

Program as teachers focus on preconceived notions of what they are aiming for, implicit

in the word "criteria," or feel that children should be doing predetermined tasks in order

to prove they are learning:

At the primary level we're trying to help children think of themselves as learners and feel they have a sense of control over some of what they learn and make some choices ...I think they should be spontaneous and bouncy and full of the love of learning, then eventually when they become more confident in their ability to learn they can take some more control. Then we can narrow it down and become more specific with them.

On Report Card Writing Processes

Because of their job-sharing situation, Paula and Andrea collaborate to prepare the

report cards. Prior to their spring conference time with parents that takes place before

the report card is sent home, Paula and Andrea spent time together to plan what they

would say about each child. Over the two years of working together, they have

developed a system to organize, manage and narrow the data they collect. They begin by

brainstorming what they have engaged in with the class over the term; they include

themes, interest studies, "and anything they feel they might want to make reference to in

the report card." They then place the children's portfolios and all of their books and

work for the term around them and begin to address individual children in the order that

they appear in their class list.

In order to really focus on and capture the essence of the child being considered,

they create a profile of the child by placing the child's name in the centre of a sheet of

48

paper and quickly writing down their immediate thoughts; for instance, how they

socialize, how happy they are, what stands out for that child, any strengths and any

special interests they have. Paula and Andrea enjoy discovering whether they have

included similar points for the same child and appreciate the interplay the process fosters,

"Often Andrea says something that brings another thought to your mind about that child."

They continue by addressing what they think the child needs to work on. This is

facilitated by reviewing the term's work. Paula says that the goals for the student's

learning tend to come "bouncing out" as they go through the material and engage in

discussion. At the end of the session, each teacher takes half of these notes home in their

rough form and writes out a draft of the report card "in final form using good English."

They bring their drafts back to each other and make any needed additions. "Sticky

notes" serve as perception checks for the other teacher and are placed all over the drafts

with comments such as, "Is this the right word?" Paula and Andrea feci the teaming

aspect of report card writing is reassuring, "It takes the pressure off you as far as feeling

totally responsible to know that this child is being properly considered, because notes

[written comments] are so permanent." The teachers then collect and transfer the

children's individual goals onto the report card drafts. At least two weeks before report

cards are to be sent home, they are submitted to the office for proof reading for correct

usage of English and punctuation by the administrator and are then given to the secretary

for typing.

Composing Allison's Report

Andrea provided a verbal snapshot of Allison, a child for whom she and Paula

shared the dilemmas encountered as they composed the report card:

49

Allison has social problems and has trouble getting along with children. She wants very much to be liked and to be a part of things but she goes about it in the wrong way. So you've got a picture of a little girl that needs a lot of help and encouragement but it is frustrating at times.

Both teachers felt the need for confirmation on the part of the mother that similar

behaviours occurred at home; i f the mother, too, experienced similar frustrations with

Allison, then an attempt could be made on the part of the home and school to support and

encourage appropriate behaviours on Allison's part. Paula and Andrea felt the mother

should know that although progress was being made academically, Allison was "a bit"

delayed in reading and writing. A dilemma for Paula and Andrea in writing the report

card presented itself both in the fall term and now in the spring term. In conferences, the

mother says her daughter is "doing wonderfully well;" she sees none of the behaviours at

home that Paula and Andrea describe. In spite of this, the teachers "sense" real concern

on the mother's part. She is warm and affectionate with Allison in the presence of

others, but has been heard yelling at her in the hallway. The mother, even in

conferences, compares Allison's work with another child's in the class. Allison, too,

engages in constant comparison with this child's work as well as others around her as she

is working. Student teachers who have worked in the classroom during the year found

that Allison "stood out" immediately and tried to help the teachers determine whether

Allison is the instigator of problems in her dealings with others or the "victim."

Paula further expresses concerns about writing the report:

It's not just the academic abilities but we're very aware of the whole emotional element of a report card ... you are aware of that parent at home, and how they're going to interpret that and what they are going to do to the child ... that's where it takes so long to write because you're trying to word it in a way that gives the message, but in a nice way.

50

The teachers had learned from Allison's kindergarten teacher that she also had

expressed similar concerns to the mother about Allison, "So she came in immediately

with this notion that here's a new teacher, I'm going to let her know that Allison is just

fine." After much deliberation, the teachers indicated in their written comment that

although social contacts were important to Allison, she was being encouraged to move to

a quiet place when she had trouble concentrating on her work. They also stressed that

Allison was "working on" finding ways to work with, and be sensitive to, the feelings of

others.

Our conversation turned to a consideration of how a report card is worded and

whether or not the parents really understand the message. Paula feels that one of the

reasons why report cards have been criticized is that teachers have tried to soften the

message and "hope that the parents pick up on it." She spoke further of this dilemma:

I guess the reason I am so very reluctant to say something out and out negative is because it is so permanent once it's in print and if I feel that the parent is going to overreact to that statement, then you almost feel that you have to protect the child. So that's the dilemma. Like we're told that we have to be honest and I agree with that to a certain degree.

Both Paula and Andrea agreed that they were thinking of the effect of this report

card on the child. Andrea was concerned about Allison's confidence in them, "I think it

would be devastating for her to be reading this with her mother and have the two people

that she thinks really think a lot of her, write something [negative] like that." Paula and

Andrea felt caught between two worlds: that of being both a nurturer of children on the

one hand and an evaluator of children on the other.

51

Composing Bonnie's Report Card

Paula provided a snapshot of Bonnie who is a Grade 2 student, now in her second

year with Paula and Andrea:

Bonnie is just a delightful little bouncy person who could run the classroom on her own without us. She never lets us or anybody else in the room get away with a thing. She knows exactly what the rules are and who's to do what and when. But she has a great deal of difficulty sitting down and concentrating and taking her time. Learning is not easy for her and she is just now beginning to read. Her writing is still very difficult to read but she writes very easily and confidently. She goes to the Learning Assistance Centre to get some help. She is an only child and her mom is very concerned about her progress. They [her parents] can't get her to do anything at home and Bonnie is at the stage now where she refuses to take any books or anything home. She doesn't want to read at home at all.

Andrea indicated that it is hard for them to determine how much pressure is put on

Bonnie at home. She added that the father had been dyslexic and has a "great fear" that

Bonnie may be as well. Paula and Andrea are very aware of the parent's concern. They

are watching the situation closely and agree that some formal assessment may eventually

be necessary.

As Paula and Andrea looked at Bonnie's work over the past year, they were

assured and pleased that progress was definitely being made. Paula talked of their

concerns with the writing of Bonnie's spring report card:

Our big pressure now is that we know she leaves us at the end of the year. We knew last year that we could keep her for two years... at least we were going to fight to have her for two years to give her that time. And the father has been really ill as well so again when we went to write this report card, that whole emotional issue came out.

Andrea feels that the recent progress is wonderful for Bonnie and should be celebrated

but knows there are other issues to be considered. The teachers have been encouraging

the parents to relax and not pressure Bonnie but now Bonnie won't share the "good

52

work" she is doing in reading with her parents. Andrea surmises about Bonnie's

reluctance:

So whether she thought she'd 'slip up' if she read to them ... she so easily could because she is so speedy or she might have thought it wouldn't be good enough for them. So that is becoming a worry because they try not to be worried, but they can't possibly help themselves and letting her know. They are a darling couple, they adore her, and they only want the best but they 're just like this.

For Paula and Andrea, the dilemma of writing the report card became further

complicated. At the open house before the report cards were written, Bonnie shared

her recent work with her parents. The progress was very evident and the parents were

"ecstatic." Now, the teachers were concerned that the parents would be overly confident,

when in fact Bonnie was not working within those "widely-held expectations" for her

age. So while the teachers themselves would just like to celebrate the growth, they feel

obliged because of the new reporting mandate to let the parents know where Bonnie

stands in relation to other children in the same age range, and risk the possibility of the

parents feeling pressured again and further pressuring Bonnie.

As we ended the conversation Paula reiterated that there is a lot more involved in

trying to write a report card than listing the skills children know and what they need to

work on. Andrea added, "It is a lonely job writing reports and I feel sorry for all the

people who don't have a partner. I mean, really, it is a very lonely, stressful time."

In Conversation with Jean

Jean has taught in the same school district for 18 years; for 6 of these years she

taught half time while her son was a young child. She received her Diploma in Early

Childhood education at the University of British Columbia in a select program, enrolling

12 students. After being a kindergarten teacher for 4 years, she taught other single-year

53

primary grades and then taught multi-age classes. Jean is a highly dedicated teacher

strongly committed to the Primary Program. She hosts visitors in her classroom and has

given workshops at the district level.

On Writing Report Cards

When asked what thoughts or emotions came to mind as report card writing time

approaches Jean commented, "At my worst, it is a very big mountain to climb." She is

angry that in her school no time is provided by the administration for "this professional

part on the job." She also talks of being frustrated and even having a "hopeless" feeling

as she tries to write report cards while still being expected to plan and to run an ongoing

program. On the other hand, "at her best," Jean feels that as a teacher she is accountable

and that the report card writing process is "a valuable tool" for setting goals for the next

term. She explains, "It is a time when I can look at each child individually — the whole

child, not the segmented child - and assess where he/she is specifically and then look at

the next steps in the learning." For Jean, report card writing has an element of fun in it

because she knows she is a good writer. She feels that for those teachers who are not

confident writers there must be an added stress to the task "because it is a writing

exercise."

Although Jean finds that while the amount of time and effort required to do the

reports has not changed significantly since the introduction of the Primary Program, "the

environment" around report cards is a lot tenser, "teachers are very unhappy and that is

all you hear about in the staff room." Around report card writing time, Jean's routines

change. At break times she goes outdoors to walk in order to reduce stress and she

spends less time in the staffroom "because the morale is either tense or low."

54

Since the introduction of the Primary Program, Jean, like Paula and Andrea, feels

that teachers have been called to be more specific in their data collection methods. For

Jean, personalizing the report cards makes the writing of them more meaningful and

enjoyable:

I got big on concrete data - specific examples, phrases the child says, titles of pieces of work, specific things they shared in a meeting ... not just that 'so and so likes to share in a meeting time,' but 'Rosie brought shells and told about them during our ocean study. She labeled them and set them on the discovery table.' I write that down.

On Reactions to the "Structured Written Report Card"

For Jean, the introduction of the "structured written report card" was not new for

teachers in her school. They had always included information on how the parent could

support children at home in their learning. The addition of the mandate to inform parents

of their child's standing in relation to others in the same age range is "in line" with her

personal philosophy. Her point of view was "deeply influenced" by her personal

experience as a parent:

/ had a child who was highly at risk. I was given no notification that I remember. It was first brought to my attention by a neighbour ... I was told my son was 'playing in cupboards' and I had better get down to the school. I trusted that teacher. No statements were on that report card that my son did not fall within the widely-held expectations in reading or writing... I feel it is my job to notify parents of that, by June, if that is not so. Teaching is becoming more and more difficult and we are more and more scrutinized for what we do.

Earlier in our conversation, Jean had indicated that, for her, the audience when she

composed report cards was the parents, "It's a document written for parents in parent

language for which I am accountable ... it is a legal document." Jean examines her

thinking in relation to the required comparative statement and extends her argument

beyond the parents:

55

I often think he may not be with me next year— they often hit very different kinds of teachers. I think that teachers question you. I can say that I mentioned in the June report card that he will need more time to develop.

While Jean did not consider the newly provided structure for report cards to be an

issue for primary teachers, she described the media attention around report cards and the

requirement to give grades to Grades 4 and 5 students to be having a "disastrous" effect

on parents and teachers. The Primary Program, deemed by many parents and teachers

throughout the province to be exemplary, was being affected by the changes to reporting

in the intermediate years and by a "small but very vocal minority of parents that is pro-

grades and thinks that this is how kids learn and sharpen up." Jean describes how the

changes are personally affecting her:

What has happened is that the backlash has started to impinge more on the quality of my life because the grades have put the intermediate teachers in a knot and the Grade 3 teachers are more tense ... Rather than have the intermediate teachers adapt to the Primary Program, it's like the Grade 4 and 5 program is pushing down and determining what happens. It's really affecting staff morale and consequently me. People are very stressed and screaming and arguing and talking about it all the time. This place used to be a happy place - it's no longer a happy place.

On Report Card Writing Processes

For Jean, the development of a template was an important factor in managing and

organizing the vast amount of data she collects throughout the term:

I didn't know what to do with all this information I had. I had been trying to report cards in the way I used to do when I taught kindergarten ...so and so is a lovely child ... but it was getting out of control. I had so much information I didn't know how to organize it. After [developing a template] I had the criteria right there.

Jean composes report cards at home and surrounds herself with collections of her

students' work. In addition to the "boxes of work," she has a portfolio for each child

56

containing selections chosen by herself and her students which represent "the entire

term's work." When she is ready to begin the process of writing a report for a particular

child, she immerses herself in that individual by covering the floor with his/her work

samples, projects, art work and self-evaluation sheets. Her observation notes kept in her

"at a glance folder" contain the personalized statements referred to earlier and they

"always go on the report."

Jean anticipated that a challenge in writing the spring report cards would be

presented by those students in her multi-age grouped class for whom she was writing the

"eighth report card out of nine." Because she writes in prose rather than point form, she

is careful to make sure she varies her wording, "You have to be careful to check back

and make sure you are saying things in a slightly different way."

Jean ended our first conversation on report card writing with the statement, "I

know I've done a good job when I have reflected the child."

Composing Keith's Report Card

Keith, one of the older kindergarten children in Jean's multi-aged classroom,

turned 6 on the day of our interview. Despite this, Jean indicates that Keith is

"exhibiting behaviours that don't fit into the usual," that is, they don't fit into the

"widely-held expectations" for social development when compared to other children in a

similar age range. This, together with the mother's prominent position in the community

made "going into the writing of this report card" difficult for Jean. She was not made

aware by the parents of the "considerable amount" of assessment conducted in pre-school

on Keith until she had worked with him for 1 month. A recent visit from the father

alerted Jean to the parent's apprehension over the inappropriate behaviours. It was

57

during this conference that Jean received some past reports from the pre-school and also a

"sense" that the parents wanted Jean to "fix" Keith's behaviour. As she approached the

writing of this report card, she admitted, "Every word was a major decision."

Intellectually, Jean feels that Keith could be gifted and indicated in the report card

that he was a curious and highly enthusiastic learner. However, the concern was his

propensity to identify and engage in behaviours that annoyed others and gained him

attention. The school psychologist observed Keith and noted that he was unable to work

in groups and was still at the "parallel play" stage, exhibiting behaviours common to a 3-

year-old rather than a 5- or 6-year-old. Since entering her classroom six months ago,

Jean still hasn't "figured Keith out" but she notes "some response." After considerable

agonizing over the dilemmas of writing this report card, she structured the comment on

emotional and social development with an emphasis on the gains he was making.

However, Jean indicated that this report card would require a conference, "If his

behaviour falls outside of the widely-held expectations for his age, I have to say very

clearly to the parents that he is not yet there."

Composing Martha's Report Card

Martha, a 7-year-old "high achiever," was in Jean's classroom in Gradel and now

again for Grade 2. One challenge for Jean when approaching the writing of Martha's

report card is typical of teachers who have multi-age classes:

I have written four report cards on this child already and so I am 'chunking things down' because it has all been said over and over again about how wonderful she is. The challenge is to find new foci for Martha in terms of growth and development and for me to come up with new things to say.

58

Jean provided a snapshot of Martha and, in so doing, revealed a second challenge in the

writing of the report card:

Martha is a very high functioning child but under a lot of stress — a real pleaser. I find that sad. The tussle between Martha and I is: 'What do you think about it, Martha? Do it for you, don't do it for me.' This girl is trained by her mother to please, a typical first born girl. I see myself in Martha - a lot of stress, a lot of anxiety: 'If you like my work then that means you like me.'

Because Martha is a high functioning girl, Jean sees her as having "double the

stress" as she strives to achieve well and also be highly concerned with pleasing her

teacher. She says that Martha is already seeing a doctor about headaches and stress in

her neck and adds, "Her mother is intense; her father is intense and she is intense."

Jean's focus on fostering Martha's ability to make decisions for herself "because her

work is of such a good calibre that she can make those distinctions," was criticized by

Martha's mother. She felt that Jean should "just tell" Martha what she wanted. This

difference of opinion was discussed in conferences several times throughout the last

school year. Jean commented that during this school year, Martha's mother has

decidedly "backed off" and is letting her do her job.

When we discussed how such an issue would be handled during reporting time,

Jean commented: "I'm very careful about making judgements. This issue is handled face

to face in conversation." Jean feels that progress has been made in this area though it

continues to be a focus for Martha. She addressed the issue when writing the report card

as follows:

Martha can be very proud of her accomplishments at school because she is highly motivated and an extremely hard worker. She can analyze and evaluate her work and behaviour realistically and can identify areas to work on when appropriate to achieve improvement.

59

In Conversation with Karey

Karey has been teaching since 1976. For most of these years she has taught in

open-area team-teaching situations. She has taught in two schools; her present school is

situated in an affluent lower mainland urban community. Karey is considered to be a

teacher leader within her school district and has contributed to the ministry resources

developed for implementation of British Columbia's Primary Program. Like Jean, her

colleague at the school, she hosts visitors to her program and has given workshops to

teachers at the school district level.

On Writing Report Cards

I invited Karey to expand on the thoughts and emotions that come to mind as

report card writing time approaches:

I think, 'Oh, my God!' I just look at it as a huge job. I think teachers spend an enormous amount of time just thinking about it even before they begin to write. I've looked at the time. It is about one and a half hours per child and that is time spent out of school that I need to find to do that. And that is just the actual writing of the report card.

Karey conversed about the greatest challenges for her in report card writing. Being able

to write clear, objective report cards and at the same time being able to "illustrate that

particular child" is of primary concern. Karey's concern with capturing "how the child

really is" results in writing report cards that she considers to be too long:

/ know my report cards are too long. When I finish and reread a report I think, 'Does this actually tell about this particular child? Is this what I mean?' You want it to be professional, in a language that the parents can understand. You wonder if you've left anything out - about how the child really is.

Another considerable challenge for Karey is writing for those parents who have a

different belief system than she has as far as how standards should be met:

60

They want to see either a graded system or they want to see education in the same way as they had it when they were growing up. I find it a real challenge to justify what you believe is good for assessment and evaluation and what they believe is good for assessment and evaluation.

Karey also struggles with the challenge of articulating concerns about a particular

child. While on the one hand, she really focuses on wording the concern in a positive

way, she is aware that some parents view it as "a positive" rather than an area in which

their child needs to improve.

On Reactions to the "Structured Written Report Card"

Karey described her frustration when she learned that the "structured written

report card" was to replace the "anecdotal" report card:

It's another document for teachers to read and think about and figure out. They need time to do that and with structured written reports they 're going back to standardization again ... I think it's important for parents to know the weaknesses and strengths of their child but for those children who might have difficulties and might be delayed developmentally and might need that extra six months just to learn a new skill, I think you are pigeon-holing kids into that high, middle and low standard again without really giving them a chance - especially at that young age.

Karey views these changes to reporting as "going against the philosophy of the Primary

Program." She anticipates that intellectual development wil l again become a major focus,

resulting in a lesser emphasis on the child's social and emotional development.

Karey expressed incredulity at the emphasis returning to a more standardized way

of looking at students, "Given the diversity and the inclusion that is happening in

schools - and we are structuring so that can happen - look what's happening to reporting'.

It's going in the other direction."

As Karey writes report cards she is aware of several audiences and indicates that

her beliefs in this regard have changed over the years:

61

/ used to think the audience was strictly that parent but the report card is one way of showing the rest of the public you are accountable as a teacher... not just that one report card the parent reads but the public, in general, knows that, yes, teachers have to be accountable for what they are teaching in the classroom.

For Karey, the administration is also an audience, "You're being accountable to them and

they can get a sense of what you're doing in the classroom." Although Karey would

prefer that the report card was more private, "just between you, that parent and child,"

she knows that for a number of reasons the report card is shared with others:

It is shown to grandparents, neighbors and friends and whoever else. If the parent questions education, if the parent is proud of what the child has done or if the parent doesn't understand something you have written, they may seek a friend's help trying to figure out what you've said before they come back and ask you - so you have many audiences to consider.

On Report Card Writing Processes

In Karey's school, the conference is deemed by teachers to be the most important

part of the communication process with parents. Approximately one month to six weeks

before report cards are sent home, conferences that last anywhere from 20 minutes to one

hour are scheduled with each parent. Time for the conferences is found either before or

after school. The administration at the school supports an extended time period for this

process to occur. Karey includes written statements on the report card from herself, the

child and the parent. Before the conference, a letter is sent home asking the parents to

comment on their child's behavior at home and his/her social development but not on the

academics. She is pleased with this addition to the report card but notes how long it

takes to get these comments back. Parents have indicated how difficult they find it is to

write a comment on their child and several have indicated to Karey that writing the

comment has proven to them how difficult this must be for teachers. An important

62

component of the conference for Karey is collaborative goal setting for the child

involving the parent, child and teacher. These goals are then included in the report card

and are revisited at the next conferencing session.

Karey describes her report card writing ritual as follows:

I write most of my report cards at home. It looks like a bomb hit the place. Sometimes I have to look back at report cards I've done previously because I have the child for three years. I have my Primary Foundation Document by my side and sometimes I have to look back at the descriptors to see where the child actually fits. I have the child's personal file that I try to keep up to date, their writing samples and a portfolio of work. I look at the descriptors to see where the child fits in the various goal areas. I have my conference notes from parent teacher conferences, observation notes, and notes from reading and writing conferences I have with them. I have a lot of their work around me.

Composing Shane's Report Card

Karey described Shane as a 6-year-old boy who came from a traditional

kindergarten class into her multi-year, open-area setting for Gradel because of a need to

separate him from 3 students in his previous class who did not work well together:

When he first came in he was a bright child, full of energy - a cute little boy to look at but he had great difficulty making friends ... Shane is academically bright - right where he should be for his age. He is reading and using lots of emergent writing. He is quick to pick up new concepts but behaviour-wise, it is a struggle. He's had lots of problems on the playground and in the classroom both emotionally and socially ... This child has been physically aggressive: climbing on kids, hitting kids, spitting....

Karey has spent an average of one hour per week discussing the situation with

Shane's Mom and/or Dad in "drop-in" conferences that occur when Shane is picked up

after school. The parents admit that Shane's behaviour is "challenging" but they believe

that it is the environment of the open-area that is the cause and feel a smaller classroom

would be remedy the situation. Shane was in a small class in kindergarten and exhibited

the same "unacceptable" behaviour. However, the parents felt that in that class Shane's

63

needs could not be met because the teacher had a difficult class and as a result her

attention had to be elsewhere. Karey discussed the situation with the school-based team,

consisting of the principal, a psychologist, the school nurse and the counsellor. She had

a number of these people into the room to observe Shane. She and the counsellor have

talked together with the parents.

Karey described the challenges of writing Shane's spring report card as compared

to the fall report card:

Writing the report card in September as compared to now are two different stories. In the beginning I thought it could just be an adjustment period so although I did mention the behaviour I tended to be more positive. This term I also wanted to be positive but I needed to comment specifically on those areas that needed to be addressed so I did that in the area where I comment on a child's social and emotional development. The big challenge for Shane was learning certain strategies to help him get along with other people. I was very conscious how the parents envisioned education when they went through the school system versus what we do here. So they were seeing a child who was not happy but I'm not sure whether his not being happy was a result of the expectations at home or the preconceived feelings they had about the open-area here. The kindergarten teacher as well as myself feel that the child needs limits. They aren't set at home and when we set them here it is a constant power struggle.

Karey and I discussed the mixed messages being received from the parents.

While they appeared to oppose the setting of limits, they valued the more traditional

setting characteristic of their own schooling. Both parents are getting private professional

help with parenting and have suggested to Karey that she use some of the management

ideas that they are gaining from the books they are reading.

After much consideration, Karey indicated on the report card that Shane was a

challenging student who was "working at improving his behaviour by finding more

positive ways of solving problems with his peers." Her comment included a suggestion

to the parents that they continue to to encourage appropriate behaviour at home by

64

establishing and discussing "limits" with Shane. While Karey talked of the need for

Shane to interact with children in order to improve his social behaviour, the parents feel

Shane has been "used as a scapegoat" at school. They feel he needs "time out" from his

peers and his "groups." They decided to withdraw him from school and intended at that

time to try home schooling for the rest of the year. In a letter to the school, the parents

expressed their feelings about the open area, their feelings about the teacher and Shane's

education and how "they just couldn't let it go on." In June, approximately three months

after Shane was withdrawn from school, Karey learned that the parents were enrolling

him in an "alternative" educational setting starting in September where 8 students ranging

from Kindergarten to Grade 5 were also enrolled.

Composing James' Report Card

James, who is in Grade 2, is nearly 8-years-old and was in Karey's class in Grade

1. Academically, Karey describes James as being "nearly a year behind." Although she

is not sure of the reason for this, Karey points to the possibility of a change in family

circumstances caused by a illness that left Jame's father, formerly a professional, unable

to work. James, the youngest of four children in the family, shares in the caregiving for

his dad. Karey commented:

Whether this event affected James is a mystery or whether he came in delayed in his academic learning is a mystery. We did see that he was having difficulty in his beginning Grade 1 year. His reading age was five. He loved to draw and was very active in the centres in the classroom but he was not with his age group as far as being ready to print or ready to read. We weren't sure whether it was developmental or not. Then the father got ill.

James receives additional support in the Learning Assistance Centre four days a

week for 40 minutes. He realizes that reading and writing are hard for him. Karey did

65

not find James' report card difficult to write because she had the support of the learning

assistance teacher and the school-based team:

/ could talk with these people and state in the report card that he was making progress, that he is below the expected age range and then state some of the positive things. He continues to be an emergent reader, can read predictable pattern stories and can write two or three lines in his journal.

The challenge in communicating James' progress came as a result of Karey's

beliefs that effective communication with the home is crucial and that the conferences

with parents are the most important part of the assessment and evaluation cycle. She

describes her frustrations in these areas and the tension on the one hand of knowing about

the family hardship, yet being concerned about her responsibility to communicate aspects

of James' development:

I'm very concerned. It's a lot of work on my part. I spend a lot of time playing telephone tag and sending notes home. It's hard to get the mother in for a conference ... I've had difficulty getting the parent comments back for James' report and I've sent numerous letters home ...I think the home life is so crucial. You have to communicate with parents, talk to them on the phone ... it's all part of communicating and assessing ... the conference is the most important thing so that you can support each other. So often when you 're writing things down on paper, there are so many ways you can read a phrase. I wonder if the parents really know what I am trying to say. We've scheduled four different meetings to meet his mom and dad and they've all fallen through.

Karey is not certain whether the illness is the reason for the communication difficulties or

whether the family "has not organized their lives."

In Conversation with Sandra

Sandra's first teaching position was in 1966 in an Indian residential school. She

was 21 at the time. From the outset, Sandra had a strong personal philosophy that

included the fostering of student decision-making and self-directed learning. She quickly

found that she did not "fit into the system" of the residential school and left to teach in a

66 logging camp on Vancouver Island where she had autonomy within her classroom

teaching 13 Grade 3 students. She then got married and taught for a year on the edge of

a ghetto in Chicago. In 1982, after raising two children, she spent four "demoralizing

years" substitute teaching in the lower mainland before getting fulltime work. She now

teaches Grade 1 in an inner city school where many of the children have "challenging"

home lives. Sandra has been a teacher leader in her school assisting teachers as they

implement the Primary Program and gives workshops at the district level in the area of

assessment, evaluation and reporting.

On Writing Report Cards

Sandra shared with me the thoughts that are evoked for her as report card writing

time approaches:

I have a lot of anxiety about whether I've kept enough assessment records that will tell the story of the child. You go along between report cards and then you think, 'Oh my goodness. I haven't checked on this or evaluated that and I don't have enough information ...just a lot of anxiety.' When I actually write the report card I think it is really valuable to sit down and do that evaluation on a child — to look and see what you should be focussing on next - but there is a lot of anxiety. And the wording, I don't write that easily.

Sandra places a high value on the students' own evaluation of their progress and

considers this to be the biggest change for her since the introduction of the Primary

Program in 1990. "We understand how children are learning by the way they explain

their learning. The parents also learn more about their children." It is important to

Sandra that the child's self-evaluation be included right in the report card because "it is

just as important as the teacher's comments." In keeping with her belief of the shared

contribution to the written component of the report card is Sandra's notion of the

audience she writes for:

67

I mostly think of parents. But then there are comments I want to make to the child. I hope they will be read out to the child and that they will hear themselves being addressed. I used to write knowing that the administrator was going to read them and wonder what the reaction of the administrator would be but I don't think of that much anymore. My comments are unique to that child and I want them to know that they are going to be addressed.

O n Reactions to the Structured Written Report Ca rd

Sandra feels that the media added to her anxiety over writing reports. She

comments:

Educationally, the media has scape-goated us. I don't need it anymore and I don't listen to it anymore. I didn't think I would get to that point because I thought it was really important to respond and I responded and responded and responded. I wrote letters and I phoned radio stations. Now I think it is hard enough to do the job competently as well as have another life without taking on all the commotion from the media. I don't need it any more and I don't want it any more.

Sandra found the introduction o f a set report card format to be helpful "to go

through that process o f making sure the four steps were there." She commented on the

new provis ion asking for comparison o f chi ldren to others in the same age range. "I

think this is still a big problem and really difficult for people to come to terms with ...

You just don't know when the growth spurts are coming. I say to the parent, 'This is just

a snapshot right now.'" Sandra has concerns about the effects on chi ldren i f they are

labeled as not being within the "expected" range o f development. H e r recent experience

teaching at the Grades 3, 4 and 5 levels led her to realize that because o f the

developmental nature o f learning, learning was still " coming together" even for some o f

these intermediate students.

68

On the Report Card Writing Process

For Sandra the greatest challenge in writing report cards is to communicate in

such a way that the parents understand that she really knows and understands their child

as a unique individual. Knowing that the report card itself is not the most important

aspect of communication and is secondary to "ongoing assessment and informal

reporting" helps Sandra put the report card writing process in perspective. "I don't go

over and over the report card in my head - I'm able to let it go." Nevertheless, she

comments, ".. . then again, there is that anxiety at reporting time - it has to be done and

it is a legal document."

, . Sandra describes the environment she creates to write report cards and how she

focuses on the individual child:

/ have to find a spot at home where I can leave things out for a long time and it's hard to find that spot. I arrange everything around me that I will need, books, references, [ministry] 'reference sets.' I have a fair amount of things just available and they gradually become piles around me. I take the time at the beginning to envision the child in my head. It brings up incidences and a caring for that child - they have unique things about them that are really worthwhile. By focussing and envisioning the whole child it brings up some of those phrases which are unique for that child because they are not in books!

Composing Lisa's Report Card

Sandra describes Lisa as a quiet, very capable 6-year-old. She has "taken o f f in

terms of skill development; she writes independently and is reading very well for her age.

While her father is in and out of her life, her grandmother and mother are "very

constant, strong, and able to be there for her." Sandra has been watchful of any changes

in Lisa's social, emotional and even academic development since Christmas when a

69

traumatic incident occurred in Lisa's life which Sandra describes as a "loss of

innocence."

Although Sandra describes the incident as being "hard for Lisa to deal with," she

notices that Lisa really values a time during the day called "class temperature time"

where she always shares her feelings candidly. For some time, Sandra noticed no

adverse affects on Lisa's adjustment or progress and was pleased with her open

expression of feelings. However, at report card writing time, Sandra noticed that Lisa

rated herself considerably lower on the student report card in terms of skill levels than

Sandra would have. As a result, Sandra wrote on Lisa's report card that she needs lots

of encouragement and reinforcement in order to clarify her ability so that she gains an

awareness of her strengths as a student.

Composing Sam's Report Card

Sam turned six in December, making him one of the younger members in

Sandra's class. Sandra provided the following portrait of Sam:

He is really insecure in that he had a hard time leaving mom to come to school at the first part of the year and so we set up a little contract so that he could get to school positively. Well it worked. But, now this term he is constantly wondering what time he gets to go home. So he spends a lot of time at the little clock I made for him to show him the times or at the window watching to see if his mom is coming.

Sandra describes Sam's home life as difficult; he is the eldest of two boys. There

is no father in the home and the mom is suspected to be a drug abuser. Sandra

elaborates:

It's nothing we can definitely put our finger on but it seemed to me that there was always this sense of urgency, of needing security from his mom. There was a lot of absenteeism. My hunch is that the boys are fed and they are clothed but that

70

Sam is probably feeling, 'What is going to happen today? What is it going to be like today?'

Possibly because he is young and is insecure about his home life, Sam is at the

lower end of the "widely-held expectations" for his age range in language arts and math.

Just before report card writing time Sandra heard that Sam had moved. Writing the

report card so that another teacher and school could grasp Sam's needs was a challenge

for Sandra:

It was really important to get across that he was below the expected level but that he was immature and needed just another year or two just to grow and that there were positive things when he could concentrate. He needed to have a lot of encouragement - he would pick up the skills of addition and subtraction if he was given oral cues. I wanted to be real so they knew he would need a lot of reinforcement in his work.

In Conversation with Janice

Janice has taught for 15 years in the same school district and has taught Grades 2,

3 and 4 and combinations or "dual year" groupings in all of these grades. She teaches in

an open-area setting and team teaches with colleagues around her. She has held a

leadership position within her school as a Curriculum Initiative Teacher Associate

(CITA), a position created to assist teachers with implementation of the Primary

Program. Janice now teaches a combination Grades 3 and 4 class, giving her a chance to

"live with" the Grade 4 students as they receive their first letter grades and also to

experience the reactions of the parents.

On Writing Report Cards

I joined Janice for our first conversation on the morning of her "release day" to

write report cards. Her administrator acknowledges that report card writing time is a

stressful time for teachers and the provision of time is one way in which he can offer

71

specific help. Janice describes the stress she feels as report card writing time

approaches:

I'm anxious about the whole thing. Do I have enough information on the children? Have they shown growth and progress in the areas you said they have to work on? You put a lot of responsibility on yourself. Have I done my best to help them? If I have lots of things to base it on it will be okay. You are always gathering information; you have to stop and get on with it.

Janice described her "rituals" and the environment she creates to write reports:

I do the report cards at home. We're all at the stage where we use the computer. You have to do your report cards in a comfortable environment. I get up early in the morning when I'm going to do my report cards and I work at my brother's big oak desk ...I have all of the students' portfolios in a box beside me on the floor and my 'comment' book where I record my observations and a lot of the work the students have done over the term. I do the overview of the term first. Then I have coffeeand do a few report cards - the first couple are always the hardest. Then I take a break.

Janice follows a pattern as she composes report cards. With an overview of the term's

work close at hand she makes a positive general statement about the child and then

comments on his/her progress in social studies, science, math and language arts. She

ends with the goals for the student the next term and indicates how the parents can

support the child.

Janice feels that her report card writing improved with the introduction of the

Primary Program and its focus on the "whole child." The provision of five goal areas as

a lens with which to view the child has taken the sole emphasis off intellectual

development and created a more balanced way of looking at and writing about children.

Janice commented:

Before this focus on goal areas, I wasn't thinking that way and now when I'm writing my report cards it has all come together. I use the goal areas when I'm observing. I put them in the middle [of a piece of paper] and make a web for each child that I use when I am writing the report.

72

The most positive addition to her program has been involving students in the

communication of their learning to parents through student-led conferences. Janice

describes her initial experiences with this form of reporting, "It was the greatest thing! It

was like hosting the best party and the kids were the centre of attention ... I haven't

stopped doing them and I don't think I ever will." Interestingly, while Janice has found

that almost all of the parents have been satisfied with the student-led conference in the

sense that they have not requested an additional interview between the teacher and parent,

this year because of the addition of letter grades at the Grade 4 level, most of the Grade

4 parents requested additional conferences with her. Janice commented, "It was fine but

they needed a lot ,of explanation about the letter grades."

For Janice the most overwhelming aspect of the changes was the additional

paperwork and record keeping that was inherent in the program with its emphasis on the

collection of on-going "authentic evidence" of pupil growth and development. In terms

of report card writing, Janice feels the added stress of maintaining her regular program

while preparing for student-led conferences and the preparation of reports. She states,

"You have to stop everything else you do to write report cards."

Janice is very aware of the parent as her audience when writing report cards. She

talked of her struggle with one particular report card when she thought of the parent's

reaction to a sensitive topic, stating, "We felt it needed to be written in the report card

yet when you 're putting it in writing you know she is not going to like it." Although

Janice always shares report cards with students before they are sent home so that they can

ask questions and know what has been said, she has the parent very much in mind as she

is writing.

73

On Reactions to the "Structured Written Report Card"

Janice describes her reactions to the ministry's new mandate to write "structured

written report cards:"

/ think what bothered me the most was that, here we were trying to do our best. Teachers felt a responsibility and attempted to live up to it. We would have liked an evaluation of all the things we have done [since the introduction of the Primary Program]. Instead we get slapped in the face ... Now when I think of how I used to meet with parents for a 15 minute conference we give them so much leeway now and they actually see how their kids are doing. You know it is hard for me to understand how parents can really feel they don't know how their kids are doing.

I asked Janice how she felt about the mandate to provide information on the

child's progress in relation to others in a similar age range. She answered:

The primary staff at our school felt that they didn't want to do that on the report so we changed the back of the report [where space was provided for this information] and we left it out completely. We didn't deal with it and we didn't have any questions from the parents at all. We felt that the way we wrote our report card, stating the goals for the children, they were clear and concise ...If we believe learning is an ongoing process and continuous, we have to stick with what we believe in.

Janice, along with the other Grade 4 teacher at the school and with the

administrator's approval, also changed the format of the Grade 4 report card to reflect

their own beliefs and philosophy. For the first term they felt strongly that they did not

want to give letter grades to the Grade 4 students in the subject areas but did agree to

give one for "effort." They prepared the students for a "few" letter grades for the spring

term by setting some criteria for their projects "to let the students know what they were

looking for" and assigning a letter grade based on these criteria.

Janice feels that the mandate to provide letter grades at Grade 4 is changing the

nature of the Primary Program. She fears that teachers feel a responsibility to be more

"straightforward" with parents rather than focussing on the developmental nature of

74

learning at the primary and even early intermediate years. As a teacher of both Grades 3

and 4 she has heard the following comments for the parents of Grade 3 children: "/ /you

were giving my child marks what would you give him?" and "Next year my child wil l

be in grade four and I will find out how they are really doing."

Janice indicated that a particular focus in their school is on fostering student self-

esteem. She finds that assigning letter grades works at cross purposes with this focus.

She explains:

If I didn't have to give letter grades I wouldn't give them at all... We use the Second Step program in the school [to promote pupil self-esteem], we have 'recognition' assemblies, we have a tree of excellence in the hallway. We try to recognize the kids for a lot of different things and make them feel good about themselves then it came to reporting time. One boy who is trying his best won't be seeing an A or B on his report. He's going to see C's and C minuses. Letter grades are not beneficial. It makes the kids competitive and lowers their self-esteem.

Janice feels that the media attention on report cards is placing undue attention

again on the written document when richer forms of communication were taking place,

putting the report card into a more realistic perspective:

We were giving them [parents] lots of opportunities to come into the school and see for themselves how their kids were doing. When they do come they are overwhelmed at what they are doing. I think communicating is important whether by newsletter, student-led conferences, visits ... but we weren't given a chance to continue to get better. It was disappointing to feel there was so little confidence in what we had done.

Composing Dana's Report Card

Janice provided a snapshot of Dana, a Grade 3 student in her classroom:

Before Dana came to me in Grade 3 she had been home-schooled the year before by her mother. Previous to that she had attended an alternate school. Her mother decided on home-schooling because she was going through some personal difficulties that included health problems and a separation from her husband.

75

When Dana came to my classroom she had not been in a regular school setting for any of her school life so there are real challenges in that way.

Janice described Dana as a very sweet little girl who is very overweight. She is very

attached to her mother and finds it difficult to make friends. The nature of the school

community adds to this difficulty because the children form strong attachments and

commitments to each other from preschool onward making it difficult for new children to

"break into" these friendships. Dana is being teased at school because of her weight

problem and sees a nutritionist who has put her on a special diet. She also sees a

psychiatrist because of her low self-esteem, caused in part by her weight, but also for

coping with her feelings of responsibility for the break-up of her parents. Dana's

problems are further complicated by the gaps she has had in her schooling created by her

being allowed to choose whether or not she would take part in certain subject areas in the

alternate school and also by her frequent absences from school.

Janice's open communication with Dana's mother makes the writing of the report

manageable and relatively free of stressors. Dana's mother is aware that it is going to be

a long process for her daughter to be accepted and to feel happy. She is supportive of

Dana's classroom situation but finds it difficult to be supportive of the public school

system in general or the school because she feels her child has been "set up" for a

negative experience by the other children. Janice is aware of the tension Dana's mother

experiences. On the one hand, she knows the mom recognizes that Dana avoids doing

math, an area that she is going to need a background in, but on the other hand, she

supports the choice offered in alternate education. Janice felt a responsibility to address

the issue and worded the comment on the report card in the following way:

76

Continued drill in the basic math facts is strongly recommended. Dana is often hampered by her inability to quickly recall the appropriate number facts when doing more difficult types of questions (i.e., 3 or 4 digit subtraction).

Composing Andrew's Report Card

For Janice, composing a report card for a Special Needs student named Andrew,

presents her biggest challenge. When Janice and I considered whether Andrew would fit

the criteria for this study because he was not within the primary age range, we decided

upon including him because primary teachers in general are being faced with similiar

challenges when integrating special needs students. Chronologically, Andrew should be in

Grade 5 because he is 10 years-old, but the school-based team decided the best placement

for Andrew would be in a setting where he could work at his own individual level with a

group of children he had known since he began at the school in kindergarten. At present,

he is not yet progressing within the expected range for five- and six-year-olds. Andrew

has two special education assistants each of whom work half-time. Janice indicated that

Andrew is very attached to both of them.

Because Janice has had Andrew for two years, she was now writing her fifth

report card for Andrew. She described her difficulty:

He has come a long way since kindergarten. It was easier at the beginning when he worked hard at something and there was progress to write about but now he seems to have reached a plateau time. It's difficult to think of things to say. I feel I'm repeating the same things over and over. It's very hard on his Mom, Linda, because in her eyes he has progressed so much in the last few years. It is hard for her to see when there is a plateau time. Sometimes her expectations are more than he will ever achieve ....

Janice indicated that Linda requests homework and although Andrew requires lots of

repetition with simple activities, she wants him to "move onto the next thing." Both

Janice and the special education assistants, when encouraging Andrew to move onto more

77

difficult tasks, have experienced his growing frustration that eventually results in grand or

petit mal seizures. As a result, at school, they tend to give Andrew "matching exercises"

and "dot-to-dot activities" that make him feel successful and provide necessary

reinforcement of skills. Janice and the assistants face the dilemma of wanting to please

Linda by "stretching" Andrew intellectually, on the one hand, and risking the onset of

seizures on the other. As a classroom teacher responsible for a whole class of students,

Janice has had other concerns:

There were times when Maureen [Andrew's assistant] wasn't around and I was on my own. I would wonder what I would do if he had a seizure - what I would do with the other kids while I tended to him. Now, it's not a problem. I get a pillow and stretch him out and time him. If it goes on for more than 5 minutes, he goes to the hospital.

At report card time, Janice writes what Andrew has been working on but

generally experiences denial or questions on Linda's part. She describes a typical

discussion:

She will get the report and even though we have had individual conferences about Anthony and she has talked to his SEA [Special Education Assistant] about how he has been doing, she will say that that he does numbers up to 20 now when I have said that he is working on numbers from 1 to 10 - you know, little things like that ... One of the things we wanted his mom to know was that he was starting to initiate conversation with others. He was going outside with Maureen and it was raining and she said, 'Hurry up, Andrew, I'm getting wet.' He said, 'You should put up your hood.' That was the first time he had responded in that way. I wrote that in the report card but she said he did that all along at home.

Janice and Andrew's assistants are attempting to present a realistic picture of Andrew's

accomplishments by maintaining a daily journal of his activities, behaviour and

association with other students. They use this data when structuring the report card

comments. Janice feels that Andrew will eventually have to be placed in a special class.

78

CHAPTER FIVE

Themes on the Processes and Dilemmas as Lived by Teachers

as They Write Report Cards

Today as I move on from considering individual teachers and the improvisatory compositions they created for their students, called 'report cards,' I attempt now to weave all of their voices into a polyphonic composition, where each voice will still be heard but in company with others. Bateson's words inspire me:

It is important ...to see that, in finding a personal path among the discontinuities and moral ambiguities they [teachers] face, they are performing a creative synthesis with a value that goes beyond the merely personal. We feel lonely sometimes because each composition is unique, but gradually we are becoming aware of the balances and harmonies that must inform all compositions. Individual improvisations can sometimes be shared as models of possibility for men and women in the future. [Researcher's Journal]

The Voices of Teachers

With the support of the voices of the focal teachers, this chapter will explore the

central questions of the study: What is it like to be a writer of report cards? What

dilemmas and challenges are experienced as teachers engage in this task?

Concerns with Personalizing the Report Card

As taped conversations were revisited and transcripts re-examined, a theme that

predominated and wove throughout all conversations was a concern on the part of

participants in the study to capture the essence of each child by personalizing the report

cards. I became increasingly aware of a parallel. Just as I was concerned with capturing

the voices of teachers as they lived and reflected on the experience of report card writing,

79

it became evident that teachers were concerned with capturing the voices of the children,

and in some cases, that of the parents within the text of the report card.

Immersing the self in the child as the report card is being composed. Teachers

approached the personalizing of reports in a variety of ways. As they described the

rituals they engaged in when writing reports, they talked of "immersing themselves in the

child" and described ways in which they evoked each child's unique qualities. This was

most often attempted by surrounding themselves with reminders of the child. These

reminders included writing samples, math samples, photographs, paintings, pupil-

authored booklets and projects completed in social studies, science and integrated units of

study. In our initial conversation, Jean summed up this process of immersing herself in

the child by saying, "The floor is covered with Corey." Sandra talked of taking time to

"envision the child" in her head, stating, "It brings up incidences, a caring for the child.

By focussing on and envisioning the whole child it brings up incidences and some of those

phrases which are unique for that child because they are not in books."

For these teachers a "living with the child" in their minds in a pedagogically

thoughtful manner was an important prerequisite in the process of structuring written

comments about the child. Van Manen (1990) describes this deep form of pedagogic

reflection as a form of "self-reflectivity" or "the manner by which pedagogy tries to come

to terms with self [ . . . the educator] and other [the child]" (p. 89). As the teachers in the

study met in this reflective way with their students [the other], they were in a sense

developing a relationship that allowed them to transcend their Selves (p. 105).

Capturing the essence and uniqueness of the child through the use of specific

examples. One way common to all participants in the study was to personalize the

80

reports, capturing the essence and uniqueness of students through the use of specific

examples. In most cases an objective statement sometimes phrased in the language of a

curricular intention was followed by a miniature story or anecdote capturing the

uniqueness of the child, thus allowing the parent to better understand and to make

interpretive sense of the written statement. For many people in the study, this practice of

supporting and illuminating a statement with a personalized example was more than a

technique or formula: for Paula and Andrea, the "personal touches made the report cards

more fun to write;" for Jean, capturing specific examples makes the report card "more

meaningful and enjoyable to write;" and, for Sandra, being specific and indicating to

parents that she really knows their child is central to her concern when writing report

cards.

In a sense, teachers were employing in their report card writing a technique

valued in phenomenological writing, which again parallels the focus of this study. Van

Manen (1990) states that to narrate is to tell something in narrative or story form and

"anecdotal narrative allows us to tell something particular while really addressing the

general or the universal" (p. 120). He supports the view held by the teachers in the

study that the use of story or anecdotal material in phenomenological writing is not

"merely an embellishment." He contends:

A hybrid textual form is created, combining the philosophic or systematic discourse with the power of literary or poetic language. Anecdote particularizes the abstracting tendency of theoretical discourse: it makes it possible to involve us pre-reflectively in the lived quality of concrete experience while paradoxically inviting us into a reflective stance vis-a-vis the meanings embedded in the experience. The important feature of anecdotal as well as phenomenological discourse is that it simultaneously pulls us in but them prompts us to reflect, (p. 121)

81

Ironically, while the use of the anecdote is valued by the teachers who use them

and is legitimized by phenomenologists, the use of the term "anecdotal report card" has

disappeared from ministry documents on reporting. As mentioned in the first chapter,

Charbonneau (1993) stated that anecdotal reports" are not working" (p. 1) and hence, are

replaced with the "structured written report card" (B.C. Ministry of Education, 1994a).

Capturing voices within the text of the report card. Along with providing specific

examples, some of the teachers in the study value and incorporate the students' own

perceptions of their learning in the report card in the form of self-evaluations. For

Sandra, capturing the essence of the child in the report card consists of having students

write their own.evaluations of their work in the form of a "student report card." She

encloses this along with the report card she has written, and because it gives the student

the opportunity of hearing his/her own voice, she considers it to be "as important as the

teacher's comments." In the case of Lisa's self-report, it alerted Sandra to the

discrepancy between her own and Lisa's evaluation of her work and a possible self-

concept problem.

For Paula and Andrea, self-evaluation statements were collected and recorded

during mini-conferences with the students where they were encouraged to express

thoughts about their work. Paula and Andrea interwove these thoughts in the form of

direct quotations throughout the written text of the report. Jean collects personalized self-

evaluative remarks throughout the term in an "at -a-glance folder" and indicates that these

are always included on the report card. She also has students record self-evaluations in

writing on sheets that she has prepared for the various subject areas and units of study in

the classroom. These serve two purposes: they are placed in student portfolios and

82

shared with parents and they also serve as an additional source for personalized

statements as she composes the report cards.

The use of self-evaluations is valued by teachers in this study as they assist in

capturing the uniqueness of the individual. Assessment experts also value the practice of

self-assessment: for Wiggins (1993) an "authentic education" makes self-assessment

central (p. 53). Wassermann (1990) contends that the primary years are not too early to

begin shifting "the locus of evaluation" to students, "To hold power for deciding for

oneself about the quality of one's work, including what its strengths and weaknesses are,

is more than just a way to advance one's critical thinking. It is the greatest level of

personal power".,(pp. 222-223). For Wassermann, self-evaluative conferences, as used

by Paula and Andrea, help children grow more comfortable with their skill needs, as they

and the teacher perceive them, "They learn to see weaknesses not as errors deserving of

reproach, but rather as indicators that more work is needed. In such practices the very

healthiest growth toward personal self-awareness and self-acceptance is fostered" (p.

225). Karey is pleased with changes she has made in the past two years that contribute

to the personalization of the report card. She includes written comments from the child,

the parent and the teacher on the report card itself.

Three teachers in the study include goal-setting as a means of personalizing the

report. As well as weaving the child's self-evaluation statements throughout the report

card, Paula and Andrea also have the children state a goal for the next term which is

recorded on the report card. For Allison they wrote, "Allison's personal goal is: 'I 'm

trying to get better at reading.'" For Bonnie they wrote, "I want to read and to write

better and write longer stories." For Karey, the three-way conference with the child,

83

parent and teacher provides an opportunity for all partners to engage in the process of

collaboratively setting a goal which is then recorded on the report card and revisited

during the next reporting session.

Wiggins (1993) postulates, "An education should develop a student's intellectual

style and voice;" he would concur with this concern on the part of the teachers in the

study for including the voice of the child. He states, "It is easy, as a student, to lose that

little voice .. . It is the little voice that most of us do not hear in our students [or

ourselves] unless it is asked for. An assessment should ask for it" (p. 56).

For the teachers in this study, the report card is inseparable from the conference

that accompanies it. These teachers always include the child whether in the form of a

three-way conference or a student-led conference. This view is held by Wassermann

(1990), who believes that a natural progression for students involved in the evaluation of

their own work is to allow them "a voice in parent-teacher conferences" (p. 227). She

contends, "Allowing for self-awareness to grow, uncorrupted by the need to impress

others for good marks, is a key to empowerment" (p 227).

The Tensionality of Finding Time

For the teachers in the study the pressure of the time involved in the preparation

of report cards was a source of significant anxiety and stress. Jean expresses her

resentment of the lack of support for the extra time required to write reports as follows,

"I'm told, 'tough,' use your weekends, wear yourself out, get exhausted, but get them

done!" She recalled writing the fall report cards for the seven 5-year-olds in her class on

Armistice Day, "I started at 10 o'clock in the morning and I went to bed at four o'clock

the next morning." Karey talked at some length about the time factor:

84

Our staff has sat down many times and discussed how many hours it takes each of us. We have come up with from 50 to 60 hours - and that is just the time involved in sitting down and looking through the child's work and actually writing the report card. Some of the teachers have realized how much time it's taking above and beyond their planning and organizing their classroom and they are going to take a [substitute] day or two to get them done - they can't possibly get them done on weekends or after school. [Karey's Narrative]

On Putting Personal and Professional Lives on Hold

Teachers in the study talked of their personal lives as being "on hold" for the

duration of writing report cards. Paula talked of "report cards controlling teacher's

lives" for the month that they were to be written and how teachers kept this time free of

social commitments. Participants also talked of the effects of their preoccupation with

this task on other family members. Jean talked of her husband Walter's support, "7

stayed up all night one night with Walter and he helped me develop a report card

[template]." Walter and her son provide Jean with support during report card writing

time by bringing her cups of tea and preparing meals.

As well as affecting teacher's personal lives, teachers in the study talked about

their regular classroom programs being "on hold" while their programs shifted focus to

accommodate the evaluating of students that was necessary to prepare report cards.

Janice talked of the need to "keep the kids busy" while this information was being

gathered. Paula talked about passing feelings of anxiety onto the children during this

time:

Children are very aware of how you are feeling, and if you are under stress, it is bound to show. They get edgy and cranky. What also adds to the pressure is that we want the children to do some analyzing of their own work and although we talk about it throughout the term we start talking about it a lot more. Suddenly we are giving out lots of sheets to ask them to write about how they are doing. [Paula's Narrative]

85

On the Ineffability of Capturing the Child Adequately in a Report Card Comment and the

Reductionism of the Written Message

Despite the time demands of report card writing for teachers in the study, none

was prepared to compromise the goal of capturing the uniqueness of each child in order

to save time. In fact, teacher's concerns with personalizing the report added considerably

to the time element. Paula is aware that she sacrifices her goal of writing shorter report

cards in order to capture the child adequately. Several statements reveal her concern:

You have to let the parents know about the child - they may have missed something ... I'm the one that doesn't trust they [the parents] have picked the message up ... it takes the pressure off you to know that the child is being 'properly considered.' [Paula's Narrative]

When she discussed the writing of Allison's report card she spoke'of the dilemma of

being attuned to the child but not always being able to capture the full meaning in written

statements:

You get so immersed in the writing of it and you're trying to give the message to the parents [which we've been told we're not doing a good job of] and you're trying to protect the child and you get so caught up in it that you can't see it clearly when you read it back. [Paula's Narrative]

To look at the difficulty of capturing and describing student progress in words is

to examine the nature of pedagogy. Van Manen (1990) speaks of the "elusiveness of the

meaning of the notion of pedagogy" (p. 142) and suggests that we may have to accept

that the notion of pedagogy is ineffable. He adds that although pedagogy is not definable

in a direct manner it does not make it any less a desirable object for our understanding:

Learning to understand the essence of pedagogy as it manifests itself in particular life circumstances contributes to a more hermeneutic type of competence: a pedagogic thoughtfulness and tact. And it is characteristic of pedagogical thoughtfulness and tact that it always operates in unpredictable and contingent situations of everyday living with children, (p. 143)

86

The teachers in the study demonstrated a thoughtfulness and tact in their "considered

regarding" of each child and were sometimes disappointed with the inadequacy of the

written message to represent fully the essence of the child for whom they were writing.

From Nurturers to Evaluators: Looking in a Different Way at the Child

Teachers in the study talked of looking differently at children when preparing to

evaluate their progress for reporting purposes. In so doing, they revealed their feelings

of "being caught" between two worlds: being nurturers of children, on the one hand, and

being evaluators of children, on the other. Paula spoke of the dilemma:

And how do you bring the two together? How do you say to a child who you have spent several months with, encouraging and telling them that what they are doing is wonderful and great and then turn around and say to them on the report card that their writing is 'below expectations?' [Paula's Narrative]

Andrea replied, "And you have probably said you're proud of them because some of

their best efforts are worthy of pride and yet they aren't at the acceptable or 'whatever'

level."

Paula also described the changed feeling in the classroom as the evaluation process

begins when she said, "Suddenly when report cards are coming you realize the relaxing

time and just 'going with the flow' is on hold." Andrea struggled with this dilemma

when talking of writing Allison's report card: "I think it would be devastating for her to

be reading this with her mother and have the two people she thinks really highly of write

something negative."

Van Manen (1990) describes the teacher-child relationship as follows:

[It is] a special lived relation to the other in the sense that this relation is highly personal and charged with interpersonal experience. In this lived relation the child experiences a fundamental sense of support and security that ultimately allows him or her to become a mature and independent person and in this lived

87

relation the child experiences the adult's confidence and trust without which it is difficult to make something of oneself, (p. 106)

What does it mean then, for a teacher to be both a nurturer and an evaluator of

children? Noddings (1984) acknowledges the difficulty:

For the one-caring as teacher, the sort of attributions that are made in evaluating raise difficulty. The teacher as one-caring and the student as cared-for both have difficulty in the matter of evaluation. The teacher has no unusual difficulty in evaluating the student's work for the sake of the student and his progress. Problems that arise here arise everywhere in caring; they require appropriate thought, sensitivity, and open communication. The difficulty is in grading, which is an intrusion upon the relationship between the one-caring and the cared-for. The teacher does not grade to inform the student. She has far better, more personal ways to do this. She grades to inform others about the student's progress. Others establish standards, explicitly or implicitly, and they charge her to report faithfully in observance of these standards. Now the teacher is torn between obligation to the employing community and faithfulness to the student, (p. 193)

A further tension and one that will be discussed in terms of teacher's reactions to

the structured written report card is the exacerbation of this dilemma for primary teachers

with the "changing" look of the Primary Program due to the recent changes to reporting.

In effect, the Primary Program philosophy gave teachers permission to say what

Noddings (1984) sees as a way to relieve the conflict, "You are not yet ready to move

along. Stay with me awhile and we shall work on these problems" (p. 195).

"You are not yet ready to move along" - a notion honored in the Primary Program

and stated by Heidegger (cited in Aoki , 1993b):

Teaching is even more difficult than learning ... Teaching is more difficult than learning because what teaching calls for is this: to let learn [emphasis added] .. . If the relation between the teacher and learners is genuine ... there is never a place in it for the authority of the know-it-all or the authoritative sway of the official . . . . I t . . . is an exalted matter ... to become a teacher ... We must keep our eyes fixed firmly on the true relation between the teacher and taught, (p. 266)

88

Are the teachers in this study experiencing a violation of this "true relation" between

teacher and taught when they are called upon to assume the evaluative role?

The encroachment of a more traditional view of evaluation (signaled by the

"structured written" report card in B.C.) is described by Noddings (1984) as a masculine

approach "designed to detach the child from the world of relation and project him, as

object, into a thoroughly objectified world" (p. 192). The practices embedded in the

masculine approach, equated with the "maintenance of standards," according to

Noddings, works at odds with this end and in fact accomplishes quite a different purpose,

"the systematic dehumanization of both female and male children through the loss of the

feminine" (p. 193).

The caring teacher, Noddings (1984) suggests, does not "shrink" from evaluating

her student's work, but "she feels no need, and no right, to sum it up with a report to the

world" (p. 195). She speaks to the teacher's concerns in this study as she adds, "At this

point the relationship crumbles; it is altered. In many cases, it is utterly destroyed."

As I ponder on the duality of the roles called upon for teachers to perform, I

revisit a journal entry:

Nurturer and evaluator -I am reminded of Aoki's call (1993a): "Let us move away from the curricular landscape of 'centers'(p. 69). If life is lived 'in the spaces between and among' what will be the look of the 'betweenness' for teachers who must fulfill for ministries of education, administrators and parents the functions of both nurturer and evaluator? [Researcher's Journal]

On the Role of Rituals

A l l of the teachers in the study adhere to certain routines as they write report

cards. For Janice, the process traditionally begins in a specific way. She states, "I get

up early when I'm going to do report cards. I work at my brother's big oak desk. We

89

take all of his things off the desk and I get to put all of my things there . . . . " As

mentioned earlier, Janice has coffee, does a few report cards to get herself started and

then takes a break. Jean buys and eats "junk food," a practice she engages in only when

she writes reports "to help get her through." As she nears completion, she celebrates by

"having a glass of wine." For Sandra, the envisioning process, almost a form of

meditation, helps her focus on the individual child and prepares her for writing the report

card. For all of the teachers in the study, the placing of and surrounding themselves with

student work in very specific and individual ways, form part of a sequence of events that

is followed at each reporting period. These practices on the part of teachers in the study

are not unlike the observance of rituals, defined in the Oxford Dictionary as "procedures

regularly followed" that surround important events in our lives. A careful listening to

teachers in this study as they talk through the rituals they engage in as they write report

cards has revealed the significance and import of this event in their lives.

As the teachers tried to convey the lived experience of report card writing and

their particular rituals, all made mention of the spaces in which they worked. Van

Manen (1990) describes "lived space" as "felt space." He writes of the distinction

between mathematical space and lived space:

... lived space is more difficult to put into words since the experience of lived space (as lived time, body) is largely pre-verbal; we do not ordinarily reflect on it. And yet we know that the space in which we find ourselves affects the way we feel . . . . lived space is the existential theme that refers us to the world or landscape in which human beings move and find themselves at home. (p. 102)

Van Manen further states that to understand the nature of a particular experience, it is

helpful to inquire into the nature of the lived space that renders that particular experience

90

its quality of meaning. "Phenomenologically, it appears the structure of the [report card

writing] experience asks for a certain space requirement" (p. 103).

On Reactions to the "Structured Written Report Card"

For the primary teachers in the study the introduction of the structured written

report card and the mandate to provide comments on what the student is able to do, areas

in which the student requires further attention and ways of supporting the child in his or

her learning are not new. The teachers were comfortable with and had always included

this information.

Participants, however, varied in their reactions to the mandate to compare each

student's progress to the expected development for students in a similar age range. Jean

was strongly in favour of the inclusion of this information:

I am a parent of a child who was highly at risk. I was given no notification that I can remember . . . 7 trusted that teacher. There were no statements on that report card that Steve did not fall within the widely-held expectations in reading or writing so that has deeply influenced my point of view. I feel it is my job to notify parents of that ...It is in line with my personal philosophy. [Jean's Narrative]

On Concerns About a Changing Primary Program

Karey feels the legislation goes against the current valuing of diversity in

classrooms and the developmental nature of learning in the early grades and is

reminiscent of the past "pigeon-holing" practices of children into "highs, middles and

lows." Janice indicated that the teachers at her school felt so strongly that they did not

want this information to be recorded on the report card that they changed its format:

they recopied the report card and excluded the box indicating whether the information

had been communicated. However, Janice knows that even though they were not

comfortable with the mandate, it wil l have to be addressed on the final report cards.

91

Both Paula and Sandra feel the categories were very broad and few children would be

outside of the widely-held expectations. Paula voiced her concern that the "little handful"

who are not, are the very children that need positive support. She added, "I'm not sure

that as a young learner [sic] they need to be told over and over on every report card that

they are not doing well enough."

A l l of the teachers in the study expressed concern that the requirement to provide

letter grades at the Grade 4 level was having a deleterious effect on the Primary Program

and was even changing the way teachers view children at the Grade 3 level. Jean shared

the hope of the other teachers in the study that the Primary Program philosophy would

influence and be compatible with the Intermediate Program: "Rather than the Grade 4

teachers adapt their program ... it is like the Grade 8 program pushing down and

determining what happens at the elementary school level."

Paula, too, feels that subtle changes are taking place in the Primary Program

philosophy even though the co-ordinators at the Ministry of Education maintain that the

Primary Program is still "intact" (personal conversation). She seriously questions the

growing practice of teachers focussing on the setting of criteria with young children in

order to prepare them for the criterion referenced letter grades now beginning at the

Grade 4 level. She feels that teachers often don't trust themselves to work with children

in more natural ways and not always to feel that they have to be doing certain things in

order that they "prove that they are learning." She comments:

We're trained as teachers to look for those learning outcomes ... they become the filter. We design everything so they become evident and we have proof. Of course we have skills we want them to acquire but the outcomes for curriculum are broader and they change and flow as events happen in the classroom. So you

92

don't always have to have a preconceived notion of what you are aiming for. [Paula's Narrative]

Paula's experience with having children set and discuss criteria with parents confirmed

for her that although children can "parrot back" the information in script-like fashion,

impressing their parents, it was in fact "teacher language." Van Manen (1990) expresses

similar concerns:

In education, we often confuse what is possible with what is pedagogically desirable. For example, even i f it were possible for many children to be able to read by age four, that does not mean that children should be reading at that early age. (p. 150)

Paula's view of the naturalness of learning in the early years and the focus on the

individual is also shared by van Manen (1990):

No matter how challenging it may be to develop theories .. . no learning theories ... wil l tell us what is appropriate for this child in this situation. That is the task of pedagogical theory. Pedagogical theory has to be theory of the unique, of the particular case ... The educational theorist as pedagogue, symbolically leaves the child - in reflective thought - to be with the child in a real way, to know what is appropriate for this child or these children, here and now. (p. 150)

On the Tensionality of Conflicting Ministry Voices

For all of the teachers in the study, the contradiction between the non-graded,

continuous progress philosophy of the Primary Program as outlined in the B . C . Primary

Program Foundation Document (1990) and the new reporting policies (B.C. Ministry of

Education, 1994a), requiring a comparison of children with others in the same age range,

created a tension. Paula views the new reporting legislation to be "a direct contradiction

of the philosophy embedded in the Primary Program" and wonders, "What is it [stating

that a child is not up to the age range expectations] going to do to their sense of 'I can

do?'" Both she and Andrea struggled with wanting to celebrate Bonnie's progress but

93

worrying that because her progress still was not within the stated "widely-held

expectations" any "celebration" might give the parents false hope.

Sandra views the conflicting philosophies as "a big problem - you just never know

when those growth spurts are going to occur." Janice agrees that the new reporting

mandate does not reflect the beliefs and philosophy of the Primary Program and would

concur with Paula and Andrea that the reporting mandate is responsible for changing the

way teachers look at children in the primary years. Just as Aoki (1986) questions "the

tendency of educators to reduce the idiom of educational evaluation to the paradigm of

scientific research" (p. 27), the teachers in this study question the reductionism involved

when student learning is viewed in terms of age "expectations" rather than

developmentally. Van Manen (1990) speaks to the issue of pre-determined expectations:

... the organic or physical growth [of the child] needs its time and cannot be accelerated by human intervention. Here the educator needs a lot of patience ... Tensions wil l necessarily be created between the faster moving expectations of the educator and the slower progress of other-than-expected developments of the child. Parents and educators are disappointed i f the child remains behind expectations or i f the child is not developing in the ways that were expected. Here we meet a serious question: Is it at all permissable to impose distinct expectations on a child? (p. 192)

Paula feels that the "structured written report card" was introduced to "settle the

public down;" she struggles with the resulting contradiction of an ends-means orientation

creeping into a program characterized by its non-gradedness and continuous progress.

Aoki (1986) describes the ends-means view to curriculum evaluation as being

achievement-oriented, goal-based and criterion-referenced (p. 32). His words provide

possible insight into the reasoning behind the new legislation:

The ends-means evaluation orientation has for the pragmatically oriented a commonsensical ring carrying with it the validity of popular support . . . . But what

94

does this orientation imply in terms of cognitive interests and assumptions held tacitly? I suggest that underneath the avowed interest in efficiency, effectiveness, predictability and certainty .. . is a more deeply rooted interest - that of control.

If "public support," "teacher accountability" and "control" are at the heart of the

legislation, where is the space in which the teachers in this study, who are caught

between orientations, reside?

On Reactions to the Media Voices

A commonality throughout the conversations with teachers in the study was the

feeling among participants that the media created the climate for the political intervention

that resulted in the changes to reporting in the province and the conflicting philosophies

now embedded in the Primary Program. Jean described the effect of the media articles

regarding the Year 2000 program, of which the Primary Program is a part, as having a

"disastrous" effect on school climate. The media debate over programs and letter grades

promoted debate amongst parents and teachers resulting in two opposing "camps." Jean

described her reaction to the conflict:

It has all started again. There was only a break of about a week. It was all of October, November and December to the point where I wanted to put up a sign in the staff room declaring this a 'report free' area. It is so tense and with the media! We have a small but very vocal minority here that is pro grades, that thinks this is how kids sharpen up and learn. It's probably my biggest dread! I'm getting out and walking as much as I can so I can avoid the atmosphere in the staffroom. [Jean's Narrative]

Sandra expressed her changed views on reacting to the media. After "responding and

responding and responding" she feels that "they don't understand the movement" and she

now refuses to make an already difficult job harder by taking on "the education of the

media."

On Report Card Writing and Accountability

95

A l l of the teachers in the study viewed the report card as a means of

demonstrating their accountability to others. Paula feels that the media debate has called

upon teachers to be more accountable stating, "I'm more aware now that we have to

have something in writing in case we are ever challenged about a child. It is for my own

accountability. The media has drawn attention to whether we really know what we are

talking about." Too, for Paula, the report card is a way of promoting her program to

parents. I want them to know I have a good program going on in here." For Karey, the

report card is a way of demonstrating accountability not only to the parent who wil l read

it but to "the rest of the public" and also to the administrator who gets "a sense of what

you are doing in the classroom." Jean describes the report card as "a valuable tool" for

proving that she is accountable as a teacher. For several teachers, the audience for whom

they wrote the report card and those to whom they felt accountable were inseparable.

Perceived Report Card Audiences

The focal teachers talked of the audiences they had in mind as they were writing

report cards. These ranged from the parents, the child, the administrator, and in Karey's

case, the community as a whole. Sandra writes "mostly for the parents but hopes the

child wil l hear themselves addressed." The audience varied for different reports. As

Andrea wrote Allison's report card, she was thinking of the "effect of the report card on

the child." Jean spoke adamantly of having the parents as the sole audience as she

writes, but later in conversation, admitted to being concerned with "next year's teacher's

reactions" to her report card on a child. Janice "always shares the report card" with her

students before they go home and has this audience in mind as she writes.

96

Examinations of the transcripts of conversations held with teachers as they talked

about writing specific report cards revealed complexities that teachers had not given voice

to in their initial interview where they talked about "audience" in general terms. A l l of

the teachers displayed awareness of and sensitivity to a number of audiences as they

wrote report cards.

Teachers in Relationship With and Sensitive to the Voices of Others

Andrea's words stay me ... 'It is a lonely job writing report cards ... it is a very lonely, stressful time.' Alone, yet not alone. Stressful perhaps because of the number of 'others' teachers are, in a sense, in relationship with and being sensitive to. [Researcher's Journal]

Despite the solitude of report card writing, an examination of the transcripts of the

second interviews in which teachers described the processes and dilemmas of composing

report card statements for individual students, revealed the complexities and various

considerations that teachers were sensitive to as they approached their writing. Paula

summed this up by saying, "It is not just talking about academic abilities, but we're very

aware of the whole emotional element of a report card."

On Being Sensitive to the Effect of the Report Card on the Child

Throughout the interviews teachers talked of being sensitive to and concerned

about the effects of their report card comments on the child. When structuring Keith's

comment, Jean indicated that his parents' anxiety over his behaviour "added tension" to

her task. "Every word was a major decision." Andrea talked of being concerned about

violating Allison's trust by "having the two people she thinks really like her a lot" write

negatively about her behavior. Paula was concerned in general about the long term

effects for a child of putting a negative message in writing:

97

I guess the reason why I am very reluctant to say something out and out negative is because it is so permanent once it is in print. You are aware of that parent at home and wonder how they are going to interpret the report and then, what they are going to do to the child ...Ifl feel a parent is going to over-react... you feel you have to protect the child. [Paula's Narrative]

Paula and Andrea were both aware that when the parents read the comment on Bonnie's

report card stating that she was making fairly slow progress, they were likely going to

put pressure on Bonnie.

On Being Sensitive to Differing Views of Education

A l l of the teachers in the study found it challenging to write a report card on a

child when the parents had differing views from their own on various aspects of

education or of managing children. There was a tension for Janice when she thought of

the parents' reaction to a sensitive topic that she felt needed to be addressed in the report

card and she knew the mother "was not going to like it." Janice was aware of Dana's

mother's preference for an "alternate school" approach and thought about her aversion to

the "structure" within the public schools as she was composing report card comments for

Dana. Too, Janice was aware of having to be realistic about Andrew's abilities when

composing his report card even when she knew it would interfere with Maureen's "hope"

that her son could function in a regular class. As Karey wrote a comment on Shane's

inappropriate behaviour at school she was attuned to his parents' view that the open area

in which Karey taught was the cause of the negative behaviour. She knew too that her

suggestions for James' parents indicating how they could support him in his learning were

likely to go unheeded because of his family's past history of lack of support. Similarly,

Sandra expected her comments detailing the home support Sam needed would be

forgotten because of the unstable home environment. Addressing Martha's "pleasing

98

others" behaviour was stressful for Jean because the mother reinforced this very quality

in Martha.

On Softening the Message

A l l of the teachers in the study talked of the challenge of creating a report card

comment that stated a concern in a positive manner. Paula elaborated, "... that's where

it takes so long to write sometimes because you're trying to word it in a way that gives

the message, but in a nice way." At the same time she feels a tension: the changes to

reporting came about because the message was not clear to parents. She commented, "I

think that one of the criticisms of our report cards is that we're trying to soften it and

hope that the parents pick up on it." Karey echoed Paula's concern:

I do feel the parents have to know some of the difficulties their child is experiencing but you have to really think about how you put that down and whether when they see it they will view it as a positive rather than a weakness. [Karey's Narrative]

Passing the Child On and Looking Differently at the Child

It became evident from our conversations that as the teachers in the study were

passing children on, whether to the next year's teacher or to another teacher in a different

school, they looked at children in a different way. The teachers, in a sense, broke away

from their role as nurturer. This "different way of looking" seemed to be more

"objective" and seemed to be an attempt to look through the eyes of "another" at the

child. The teachers also displayed a hope that in passing the child on, he or she would

be accepted by the new teacher. Karey talked of this feeling:

I think it is a difficult thing because you create this wonderful relationship with the child and the parents and you feel you really know the child ... You suddenly realize that other teachers are going to have them and you hope they will like them and accept them as you do. [Karey's Narrative]

99

Sandra deemed it a necessity to pass on to Sam's new teacher the information that while

he presently experienced difficulties as a learner and was at "the lower end of the widely-

held expectations" there was a reason:

He was immature and needed just another year to grow and there were these positive things when he could concentrate. He really wanted to do well; he just needed a lot of encouragement and if he had the oral cues he would be able to pick up the skills of addition and subtraction ... so I wanted to be real so they would know he would need a lot of reinforcement of work. If I was keeping him it would be okay, but when he is going somewhere else you have to clear and also he has a very difficult life. [Sandra's Narrative]

For Paula and Andrea passing Bonnie on to a new teacher meant hoping that she

would feel "as successful as she feels now." Aware that Bonnie could easily regress and

"give up," the teachers discussed what they said on the report card to support for Bonnie

in her reading, "We would like to see her reading for a variety of purposes and wil l

encourage Bonnie to help the younger children read thus giving her an opportunity to

reinforce her own reading skills." Paula added that Bonnie was "just wonderful at

gathering a couple of children around and reading to them."

Aoki (1991) talks of the meaning for teachers of having lived with, and then

"passing the child on:"

... teachers know that at the end of the year, they and their students wil l part, the students to the next grade or to another school. Yet, it is their very leaving that allows them the possibility of return - a turning again to the experience of the present. And the teachers know that watching the students depart at the end of the year is a watchfulness that is filled with hope that wherever they may be students do well and be well, and that no harm wil l befall them. (p. 5)

In their sensitivity to others and shaping report cards accordingly, the teachers in

the study exhibited another quality described by Aoki as essential to teaching - that of

thoughtfulness - in the case of these teachers a hope for their students and a mindfulness

100

of the effects of their own words, not only on the child, but on those others in relation

with the child.

A Personal Note ...

By listening to the voices of the teachers in the study, the lived meaning of the

report card writing for each individual unfolded, giving a glimmer of insight into the

unique processes undertaken by the teachers and the complexities of being in relation with

others while writing. Each teacher displayed a deep sensitivity to the effects of their

words on the various audiences, namely, the child and parent. Certain commonalities or

themes were revealed. I saw how the teachers in the study entered into the writing of the

reports, how they immersed themselves in the child, how they engaged in specific

"rituals," and how they crafted their statements with thought, feeling tensions and

struggling with dilemmas while "feeling the effects" of their words on others; I saw how

they displayed hope for their students and a "watchfulness," captured in Aoki's words

(1991), " a watchfulness filled with a teacher's hope that wherever his [her] students may

be, wherever they may wander on this earth away from his [her] presence, they wil l fare

well and no harm wil l visit them" (p. 4).

As I take leave of these teachers and reflect on their experiences of report card

writing, I am aware of a change in my own thoughts about the experience. As I "lived

with" teachers through their retellings of the experiences of report card writing, I felt

their tensions, their struggles, their despair and their agony. I have emerged from the

experience with an awe and a deep respect for the artistry the teachers displayed in all

their sensitivities to the child and parents - an artistry captured in the term

"improvisation." I am drawn to Bateson's (1989) words:

101

... in thinking about the ways in which each speaker [report card writer] learns to combine and vary familiar components to say something new to fit a particular context and evoke a particular response, sometimes something of very great beauty or significance, but always improvisational and always adaptive, (p. 3)

102

C H A P T E R SIX

Reflections on the Process of Researching

How quickly I had forgotten! Had I become so removed from the experience of report card writing myself that I would schedule this important conversation with a teacher in the study on the day report cards were being handed in? This explains why 1 felt disappointed with the lack of depth. In my attempts to capture her thoughts on writing those report cards while the ideas were still fresh in her mind, I was, in fact, interviewing a very drained, very tired teacher. [Researcher's Journal]

On Using "I" . . . (The "Silenced" I in Scholarly Papers)

As I began the writing of the study I felt the return of a concern I felt once

before during a graduate course when I was given "permission" to write in the first

person. I revisit a journal entry written during this course in order to reflect further on

that renewed concern:

On meeting with a friend who lent me her A.P. A. Manual [an essential accoutrement for grad school] I received the following advice, "Never, ever use the first person when writing papers. 1 did that once until a professor said, 'Who, in the scheme of things, are you?'" Being freed of this constraint for purposes of writing this paper, I am reminded how quickly her counsel had taken effect, how on my short journey to finding my "scholarly voice" I had become increasingly adept at suppressing personal thoughts and opinions and increasingly comfortable with honoring the voices of others through the use of direct quotations. I am nervous as I begin this exercise. 1 wonder that if in attempting to develop a "scholarly voice," a voice "schooled" to voice in a set way, I have lost any personal voice 1 once had. [Researcher's Journal, Summer 1994]

I recall the challenges of the summer of 1994 - taking two courses and writing in

two different voices: the scholarly and the personal. The "schooled" path felt as it had

for the other six required courses: safe, impersonal, formulaic. The personal voice,

slowly and painfully regained, felt freeing, deeply personal and, so being, deeply

103

satisfying. Memories of tears and joys of that summer-writing were evoked as I moved

toward deeper understandings and meanings captured through the process of writing and

rewriting.

Why the return of a concern about writing in this more satisfying way? Was it

the relative safeness of a journal as compared to the "publicness" of a thesis? By using

the scholarly voice I could preserve identities. I felt vulnerable as I approached the less

travelled journey of writing a thesis phenomenologically. Could my "I" carry the

responsibility? Could I recapture the feeling briefly felt this summer of being freed -

freed from the constraints of "figuring out" what was wanted from the professor - what

was "correct," what was "scholarly"?

Struggling with the Approach to Inquiry

After accepting that capturing and interpreting personal narratives almost

necessitated the use of the first person, I imposed other concerns on myself - concerns

about my ability to proceed with only a beginning knowledge of interpretive inquiry. M y

journal details some of this struggle:

/ am immersing myself in Ted Aoki's writing. I am inspired ... thoughts and ideas beautifully crafted, stimulating thoughtful reflection on my part. The idea of writing as an interpretive inquiry calls to me. Why am I hesitant, why is the idea disturbing my sleep? Ted's "lingering" on the pedagogical theme in "Anjin's story" touches a chord, hinting of my reluctance to commit myself. I can relate to the poet, Octavio Paz, as Aoki (1991) quotes:

By a path in its own way ... the poet comes to the brink of language. And that brink is called silence. A silence that is like a lake, a smooth and compact surface. Down below, submerged, the words are waiting. And now, one must descend, go to the bottom, be silent, wait. Sterility precedes inspiration, as emptiness precedes plentitude. (p. 45)

"Down below the words are waiting" ...if only I could be sure of that. [Researcher's Journal]

104

More reading. This time, Marjorie Mclntyre's dissertation ( 1993 ) . Marjorie,

too, expressed doubts about employing an interpretive inquiry approach. Her

exploration, like mine, led her to readings. She shared her discovery of David Jardine's

work. I felt the tension of being pulled, on the one hand, to interpretive inquiry and, on

the other, to a "safer" traditional approach. Today, Jardine's words kindled a new

tension and resulted in yet another frustrated journal entry:

Interpretive disciplines are grounded not in an alternate method or procedure but in the always already desires and interests of everyday life. (Cited in Mclntyre, p. 24)

Methods and procedures ...I realize how schooled by and comforted in methods and procedures I have become in grad school. By developing the required 'scholarly' voice, following A.P.A. procedures, quoting voices of others, I was ensured of success. Why not just get on with a "qualitative" study and get on with my life? [Researcher's Journal]

On Labeling ...

M y concern over how to proceed was followed with a new and, once again,

"sleep-disturbing" concern. The preceding paragraphs talk of "interpretive inquiry." For

two months, there was a gap left in all of the places in my study where I felt a "label"

for the methodology I intended to employ should appear. A journal entry captures the

irony:

Labeling ... the very term disturbs the landscape ... a practice I have often cynically referred to as a favourite past time of adults ... the very practice I railed against and one that was compelling me to proceed with the study, is consuming my thoughts. The labeling of children is propelling me to investigate report card changes while the blanks in the text of the study awaiting the "correct label" are haunting me. Am I not engaging in the very activity I am so seriously questioning? (Researcher's Journal)

What began as a qualitative study proposal completed as a course requirement in

the early part of the summer of 1993 , was to soon become a phenomenological study,

105

inspired by an advanced curriculum course with Dr. Aoki and further inspired upon

meeting for the first time with my "committee." I lived with van Manen's "Researching

Lived Experience" (1990). I grew increasingly attracted to and excited about the

question, but anxiety persisted about what to call it. If I could not label it, did I have the

knowledge to pursue the study in this way? Van Manen (1990) says that pedagogy

requires a phenomenological sensitivity to lived experience (p. 111). I felt comfortable

with that. I felt truly committed to and had a deep interest (inter-esse, to be or stand in

the midst of something) in my question (p. 43). So I could confidently describe the study

as phenomenological. M y fundamental orientation was pedagogic. But was it

hermeneutical? Pondering on my anxiety over labeling, I was drawn to Husserl's phrase

"back to the things themselves" (cited in van Manen, 1990). Van Manen's exploration

of the comment reminded me to "be mindful of the ease with which we tend to search for

the principles (nomos) that seem to organize the life to which the theory was brought" (p.

45). He states:

We read theories into everything. And once a theoretical scheme has been brought to life we tend to search for the principles (nomos) that seem to organize the life to which the theory was brought. In our efforts to make sense of our lived experiences with theories and hypothesizing frameworks we are forgetting that it is living human beings who bring schemata and frameworks into being and not the reverse, (p. 45)

Curious. While labeling adults as labelers, and examining the phenomenon of labeling I

was faced with this very tendency within myself; so faced I felt a broadened

understanding of the phenomenon and a realization that my concern with "naming" would

draw me away from the lived question to the understandings others give to the terms

"phenomenological" and "hermeneutical."

106

In my examination of "labeling" I am confronted with, and can no longer avoid,

reflecting on my request to teachers to identify, to "label," two students for whom they

composed report cards: one who they felt was "within" the widely-held expectations for

their age range and one who was at risk of not being so. I feel a need to recapture my

original thinking. I return to a journal entry:

1 am reminded of that moment when sitting at my desk after school when the last pupil had gone for the day, 1 opened a new document from the ministry of education entitled 'Primary Program Foundation Document.' My first thought was, 'This is a Ministry document?' I was enticed by the prospect of doing openly what for so long I had felt I was doing subversiuely - acknowledging that children grow and develop at different rates and in their own ways, a going with rather than against their natural interests and rhythms, acknowledging the development of the total child and not just their intellect, fostering self-esteem, emphasizing process as much as product, focussing on growth over time. This program, so honoring of the way in which young children grow and develop was a government document - and one that I would have been proud to author! [Researcher's Journal]

I reflect on the hopes of teachers whose belief systems are in keeping with the tenets of

the Primary Program that the philosophy would move up through the grades. Early signs

of public discontent with the program, as reflected in the media in January, 1992, grew

to "full-blown" media- bashing by February, undermining in its second year what was to

have been a program with a ten year implementation period. Was this another example

of the adult need for labels? The facilitative role of the teachers was scorned. Cynicism

surrounded my examination of the discontent with the Primary Program that led to the

changes:

What was the source of the discontent? Let children unfold in their own good time? Focus on what they can do well? Provide gentle support and nudge them along the continuum of skill development? Trust that children have within them the desire to learn? Where is the adult voice in this? Facilitative roles do not satisfy the adult need to classify, label and sort - to orchestrate learning. [Researcher's Journal]

107

How wil l teachers come to terms with a program that lies in neither one tradition nor the

other - a program that is ungraded yet graded, a program that calls for continuous

progress, yet mandates teachers to identify and relate to parents whether their child fits

within the "expected" age range? M y own struggle with this tensionality between the two

opposing viewpoints, together with the knowledge that the new legislation calls for

teachers to live in-between these two curricular orientations guided my thinking when

asking teachers to engage in the exercise of labeling children for this study. I am

reminded of Aoki's (1991) mention of "how in the field of curriculum we have come

under the sway of discourse that is replete with performative words such as goals and

objectives, processes and products, achievement and assessment - words reflective of

instrumentalism in modernity" (p. 29). I see the "expected age-range" term to be one of

those "administrative" categories to which Aoki refers. I am heedful of his words:

The danger in speaking this language is that we become the language we speak. And in so becoming, we might become forgetful of how instrumental language disengages us from our bodies, making of us disembodied, dehumanized beings, indifferent to the nihilistic drying out of inspiritedness. (p. 30)

On the Publicness of the Inquiry

As my work progressed, I became aware of the possibility that not only I, but the

participants in the study could be identified. As the focal teachers shared their

experiences of writing report cards for specific students, confidential details about

students as well as personal biases teachers held about certain students were revealed.

M y growing concern was validated by one of the teachers in the study when, during a

taped conversation, I felt a drawing back, a sudden guarding of words. In the middle of

describing the troubled homelife of a family, that influenced the way in which she would

108

approach the writing of a report card, it seemed that the ethical dilemma of divulging

such personal information struck a chord not only with the teacher involved but with

myself. Another teacher talked freely during the interview but was disturbed to see her

words in writing when the text was shared. Together we negotiated changes that she

could accept. How could I achieve the attempted rich descriptions of the situations

without threatening the confidentiality and anonymity of those involved?

On Arriving at and Reshaping the Question

Why the topic of report card writing? As a teacher I had worked with a staff who

grew increasingly discontent with the traditional reporting format. This consisted of

hours and hours spent away from the children, painstakingly producing lengthy

documents, sharing them with parents in those 15-minute assembly-line style conferences

and invariably being asked that fearful question, i f not verbally, then by implication, "But

how is he/she really doing?"

Our growing discontent led to a questioning on all our parts, a thoughtful re­

examination of the way in which we spent our time, and a collaborative decision to

change our reporting practices. These changes essentially involved the reallocation of our

time from a focus on "paper proof" that growth was taking place to a more intense focus

on the child through observations of process, documenting of conversations with children

and longer conferences with parents and students during which the collected "evidence"

was examined and appreciated. Written report cards became shorter and included the

major gains made during the term and a few specific comments detailing the focal points

for next term. Pleased with the process, I recollect the feelings of anticipating a bringing

109

of the "how to's" of successful reporting procedures to others in my new job as an

"implementation" consultant for the Primary Program.

As I reflect on my original question, my initial thinking about the "intent" of my

researching, construed now as the identification of "useful" report card writing strategies,

then "giving to" teachers the knowledge that I possessed and they lacked, I search for the

catalyst or the "seeds" of the reshaping of the focus of the study. A re-reading of journal

entries revealed a recurring interwoven theme: my growing interest and concern with the

"silenced" voices of teachers, a term first encountered in Aoki's writing (1991), and

echoed over and over again in my observations and encounters with teachers.

What were the beginnings of this concern? As I think back, they arose in an early

research course where I was first introduced in a formal way to research in education.

As I reviewed the literature in the area of report card writing in preparation for the

course assignment, a research proposal, I felt drawn to a group of teacher research

studies, because they revealed real teachers in real situations attempting to take action to

improve the writing of report cards. I recall having to justify their inclusion in a

literature review due to the lack of generalizability of the findings because of the small

number of participants and concomitant threats to both internal and external validity.

Having struggled with my preference for real experiences over controlled research,

Aoki's words (1991) were to have a lasting impression:

Hence, they (researchers) typically cast their studies into a before and after research design, concealing the domain of teaching in a black box, nonessential for research purposes, thereby displaying a willful ignoring of the lived world of teachers and students . . . . In this black box view of teaching, what I resent is the way in which in ignoring the lives of teachers and students, they are cast into nothingness . . . . And by being forgetful, they commit violence by denying the humanness that lies at the core of what education is. (p. 1)

1 1 0

The earlier mentioned teachers' "grassroots meeting" strengthened my resolve to

capture teachers' voices. Noting that teachers are adept at "making things work," at

silencing their own voices despite the ever-increasing diversity within classrooms and the

realities of financial restraints, I revisit my journal:

J welcomed the opportunity to attend the "grassroots" 'Let's Talk about Report Cards' meeting organized for teachers by teachers - silenced voices rallying the support of fellow colleagues to talk about Issues of concern! Teachers, the great shelterers, sheltering students from cutbacks, spending money from their own pockets to buy special art supplies when cupboards contained only the most basic of supplies. I remember it only too well - the ubiquitous purple and black pile of construction paper appearing earlier and earlier In the year leaving as a memory the taller multi-colored stack available only in the first term. Teachers, outwardly masters at making It all work for kids, but inwardly deeply affected as mounting numbers of teachers on stress leave confirm.

It took a while. Teachers arrived - tense at first, the rhythm of their day still reflected in their faces ... As those 'making It all work' layers began to peel away, comments were made that will stick with me ... 7 agonized for a week when I had to write on the report card that a kindergarten student didn't fall within the expected range of development for his age!' and 7 couldn't sleep for a week before those report cards were sent home. It feels like a real betrayal to those few kids who need your encouragement the most .... ' [Researcher's Journal]

I think back over the last few years and my planning for primary teachers -

inservice programs for professional development days, after school workshops, new

resource materials and realize I have been struck by this before:

/ allowed myself a mental walk down the hall at the board office to consider other Individuals who also had as their mandate planning for the primary teacher: first to the 'Personal Planning' consultant, then to the Race Relations department, the First Nations department, the Staff Development specialists, the Curriculum Management department, the English as a Second Language department... The primary teacher was the recipient of all of those voices! [Researcher's Journal]

I l l

New Understandings of Implementing Curriculum

I am heedful of my changed thinking over the course of the research journey. I

am drawn to van Manen's remarks (1990), "Shouldn't we shudder at the incredible

arrogance and inevitable sophistry implied in the idea of teacher education? Who dares

to elevate himself or herself to such exalted status?" (p. 148). I am drawn for two

reasons to these words. First, the process of researching has made me watchful of

teachers' forethought and caring as they ponder painstakingly over the selection of

appropriate words and statements to characterize and capture the essence of the child for

whom they are composing a report card. I look back over my journal and find

confirmation:

What strikes me is that in spite of how "messy' it all seems [organizing and managing report card data] with piles of materials stacked here and there, observation notes, records of conversations and lots of lots of "snapshots" taken over time that each teacher has a well-thought out and very methodical organizational system that works for her. [Researcher's Journal]

It wasn't enough for Paula and Andrea to settle for a general description of

Allison's progress in the area of social development; rather they anguished over the right

wording, agreeing, then rethinking only to change it again before the final copy went

home. Teachers' considered portrayals and knowing, based on living daily with their

students leads me to wince at the neglectful nonvaluing and noninclusion of teachers'

voices; further, it calls into question the emphasis by ministries and boards of education

on the work of curriculum developers who plan for teachers away from teachers in areas

they deem important for others to implement.

112

Ways of Working with Children and Teachers: A Gap

I am drawn for a second reason to van Manen's remark: it reflects my innermost

beliefs of how I work with children and in so doing, raises a curious question. I revisit

an earlier journal:

Being freed ... freeing ... My personal teaching journey could be characterized by a gradual relinquishing, a setting free, of all those behaviours I experienced in school and in teacher training that were associated with being a 'good' teacher engaging in 'good' teaching - as a friend once said of her own teaching - a 'perfect' teacher in control of a 'perfect' world. I have thought often about the beginnings of this surrendering of my image of perfection.

What occupied the spaces left by this abandonment of formerly-held, and now seriously-questioned ideals? ... Being trustful comes to mind ... and, with being trustful, being courageous ... having the courage to stand back and trust children. Trusting that students have something [and some things profound] to bring to the situation and that If one listens carefully to children, listens to and feels their rhythms, their vibrations, one is led to and is invited into, the surfacing of their curriculum. [Researcher's Journal, Summer 1994]

Trustful, courageous ... standing back ... their rhythms, their vibrations, their

curriculum ... I am aware of a gap. Can one espouse and come to terms with working in

one way with children and in ways one has abandoned with adults? I linger in the

question. In my changed way of working with children, characterized by a thoughtful

and intense listening to, feeling their rhythms, their vibrations, I dwelt, as Aoki (1993b)

describes, "in the curricular landscape between the curriculum guide and the lived

curricula" (p. 255). By dwelling with teachers in their lived worlds of report card

writing, I have become humbled and respectful of their deep knowing and caring for their

students. In so doing I am aware of the need for a trusting and honoring of each teacher

who brings considered ways of working and caring for students through having lived

daily with them.

113

Dwelling in the In-between

As my writing and reflecting leads me to new understandings, I am confronted

with my having been caught between two worlds - on the one hand the world of

curriculum implementation from the viewpoint of the curriculum specialist, and on the

other hand, the world of the teacher who makes sense of, and "implements," mandated

changes within her own unique curricular landscape in her own particular way. M y

"role" as curriculum implementation consultant for the Year 2000 initiative led me to

readings of curriculum implementation experts and to the world of conducting

"workshops" - planning for teachers, away from teachers. New understandings crowd

my thinking. I turn to Aoki (1993b) and his notion of "disturbing the categories" that

populate the traditional curriculum and instruction landscape. Having lived with teachers

in their reflections on report card writing, I welcome his call for legitimizing curriculum

as lived by teachers (p. 255) and for posing the challenge to curriculum developers (and I

would add curriculum implementers) to be heedful not only to the task of curriculum

development, but more so to their "deeply conscious sensitivity to what it means to have

a developer's touch, a developer's tact, a developer's attunement that acknowledges in

some deep sense the uniqueness of every teaching situation" (Aoki, 1991, p. 10).

Processes Informing the Inquiry

M y struggles with the approach to the research journey included anxiety over

being able to find the time to write in a journal. Having kept a journal for the graduate

course, as mentioned earlier, I knew its value. I found the process of writing and re­

writing to be luxuriously therapeutic, a time to engage in self-exploration and a time to

make explicit previously unexamined thoughts, beliefs and actions. The journal kept for

the course, however, had been the assignment. Did I really have time for this luxury

114

during my time of researching? In the initial stages I was tempted to be "accomplishing"

and seeing "evidence" of my work in the form of numbers of pages in the actual thesis

being written. However, I persevered. As time went on I came to see that it was

through the process of journal writing that my most thoughtful "material" for those pages

came. I would often write the objective or surface thoughts, returning later to

deconstruct these thoughts and constitute a deeper meaning. Journalizing in this way is

described by Aoki (1992) as "layered writing," where initial words are revisited, opening

ourselves "to a deeper understanding of the meaning of the lived experiences we

experienced, to a deepened sense of what it is to be human" (p. 30).

As the "objective" thoughts were revisited, a phrase or theme would inevitably

beckon further thoughtful reflection. Lingering on questions such as, "What does it mean

to be a nurturer and an evaluator of children?" often stimulated thoughtful reflection on

the more objective writing. As I embraced the habit of layering writing, I noticed that I

was employing a similar questioning when conversing with people in the study in what,

over time, became conversations rather that interviews. I increasingly valued the times

when meaning was constituted within the context of the conversation. Paula and I, for

example, together explored the "different ways" we look at children, depending on

whether we are evaluating or passing them on to another teacher or when we are

nurturing them in our daily interactions.

Reading, too, provided new insights. As I paused in my reading to reflect on

Bateson's (1989) words regarding improvisation, the quality I admired in teachers of

"making it all work" took on a more poetic and elevated meaning, "Today, the materials

and skills from which a life is composed are no longer clear. It is no longer possible to

115

follow the paths of previous generations" (p. 2). What do these words have to say to

teachers and their task of writing report cards? It seems to me that it is "the art of

improvisation" described by Bateson as involving "recombining partly familiar materials

in new ways, often in ways especially sensitive to context, interaction, and response" was

at the heart of the lived meaning of report card writing for the six teachers in this study

as they hearkened to and considered a myriad of voices and a multiplicity of factors when

composing a report card.

I feel changed both personally and professionally as I bring closure to the research

process. A glance at my original proposal and my hopes that I would bring something

"to" the profession in terms of implications and recommendations for further study and

"to" teachers in the form of ideas and techniques to improve their report card writing

skills, is the best indicator of my changed thinking. Instead, I leave with a sense of awe

and deep respect for the "considered" ways in which the six teachers in the study

worked. As I dwelt with them as they shared their report card writing processes and

dilemmas, I heard their voices, felt their sensitivities, their concerns and, at times, their

agony. I saw teachers, who themselves had strong and "considered" pedagogical beliefs,

move from these spaces to "dwell poetically" in spaces with others, enabling them to

craft statements with a sensitive attunement to their students and their students' parents

and, all the while, "feeling" the effects of their every written word.

R E F E R E N C E S

116

Afflerbach, P. P. , & Johnston, P. H . (1993). Writing language arts report cards:

Eleven teachers' conflicts of knowing and communicating. The Elementary School

Journal, 94, (1), 73-86.

Anthony, R. J . , Johnson, T. D . , Mickelson, N . I., & Preece, A . (1991). Evaluating

literacy: A perspective for change. Toronto: Irwin.

Aoki , T. (1986). Interests, knowledge, and evaluation: Alternate approaches to

curriculum evaluation. Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 6, (4), 27-44.

Aoki , T. (1991). Inspiriting curriculum and pedagogy: Talks to teachers. Edmonton:

University of Alberta.

Aoki , T. (1992). Teachers narrating/narratives teaching: Pacific Rim Experiences.

Victoria, B C : Queen's Printer.

Aoki , T. (1993a). The call of teaching. Vancouver, B . C . : B . C . Teachers' Federation

Press.

Aoki , T. (1993b). Legitimizing lived curriculum: Towards a curricular landscape of

multiplicity. Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 8, (3), 255-268.

Bailey, J . , Brazee, P. E . , Chiavaroli, S., Herbeck, J . , Lechner, T., Lewis, D . ,

McKittrick, A . , Redwine, L . , Reid, K . , Robinson, B . , & Spear, H . (1988).

Problem solving our way to alternate evaluation procedures. Language Arts, 65,

(4), 364-373.

Balcom, S. (1993a, February 9). Parents give year 2000 a failing grade. The

Vancouver Sun, pp. A l , A12.

Balcom, S. (1993b, February, 18). School children learning 3R's, but in a different

way. The Vancouver Sun, p. B6.

Bateson, C. (1989). Composing a life. New York: Atlantic Monthly Press.

B . C . Ministry of Education. (1990a). Year 2000: A Framework for Learning. Victoria,

B C : Province of British Columbia.

B . C . Ministry of Education. (1990b). Primary program: Foundation document.

Victoria, B C : Province of British Columbia.

B . C . Ministry of Education and Ministry Responsible for Multiculturalism and Human

Rights (1992a). Anecdotal Reporting: Quality of communication with parents.

Victoria, B C : Research and Evaluation Branch.

B . C . Ministry of Education and Ministry Responsible for Multiculturalism and Human

Rights. (1992b). Building firm foundations. Victoria, B C : Province of British

Columbia.

B . C . Ministry of Education and Ministry Responsible for Multiculturalism and Human

Rights. (1992c). Supporting learning: Understanding and assessing the progress

of children in the primary program. Victoria, B C : Province of British Columbia.

B . C . Ministry of Education and Ministry Responsible for Multiculturalism and Human

Rights. (1992-1993). Assessing Student Learning: Second Annual Survey.

Victoria, B C : Research and Evaluation Branch.

B . C . Ministry of Education. (1993). Changes to B.C's education policy. Victoria, B C :

Province of British Columbia.

118

B . C . Ministry of Education. (1994a). Guidelines for student reporting for the

kindergarten to grade 12 education plan. Victoria, B C : Province of British

Columbia.

B . C . Ministry of Education. (1994b). Review of the primary program in British

Columbia: Report 11, charting change: Summary. Victoria, B C : Province of

British Columbia.

Bredekamp, S. (Ed.). (1987). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood

programs serving children from birth through age 8 (exp. ed.). Washington, D C :

N A E Y C .

Bredekamp, S., & Shepard, L . (1989). How best to protect children from inappropriate

school expectations, practices, and policies. Young Children, 14-24.

British Columbia Confederation of Parent Advisory Councils (1993). B C C P A C

convention survey. Survey conducted at the annual convention of the BCCPAC,

Vancouver, B C .

Brown, R. (1992). Max van Manen and pedagogical human science research. In W. F .

Pinar & W. M . Reynolds (Eds.). Understanding curriculum as phenomenological

and deconstructed text (pp. 44-63). New York: Teachers College Press.

Brummet, T. (1993, February, 11). Can you say inflexible? Thought you could. The

Vancouver Sun, p. A15.

Charbonneau, A . (1993). Review on methods of reporting in the Primary Program.

Victoria, B C : Province of British Columbia.

Cohen, D . (1993, February 15). Learning to make the most of Year 2000 [Letter to the

editor]. The Vancouver Sun, p. A l l .

Crusius, T. W. (1991). A Teacher's introduction to philosophical hermeneutics.

Urbana, Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English.

Evans, B . (1993, February 12). Parents give Year 2000 a failing grade. The Vancouver

Sun, p. A9 .

Farrell Research Group. (1993). Primary program reporting procedures: A random

survey of parents. Victoria, B C : British Columbia Confederation of Parent

Advisory Councils.

Fennell, H . (1993, January 11). What's wrong at school? MacLean's Magazine, pp.

28-32.

Goodlad, J. L . , & Anderson, R. H . (1987). The non-graded elementary school. New

York: Teachers College Press.

Grant, W. (1993). Reporting to parents: Can we tell them what they really want to

know? Victoria, B C : Ministry of Education.

Hall, K . (1991). Determining the success of narrative report cards. Virginia:

University of Virginia, Carry School of Education. (ERIC Document

Reproduction Service No. E D 334 013)

Hiebert, E . H . , & Hutchison, T. A . (1991). Research directions: The current state of

alternate assessments for policy and instructional uses. Language Arts, 68, 662-

668.

Hood, W. (1989). "If the teacher comes over, pretend it's a telescope!" In K .

Goodman, Y . Goodman, Y . , & W. Hood (Eds.). The whole language evaluation

book (pp. 27-43). Portsmouth, N H : Heinemann.

120

Horm-Wingerd, D . M . (1992). Reporting children's development. Dimensions of Early

childhood, 21 (1), 11-16.

Hughes, M . , & Thomas, D . (1993). Job sharing and anecdotal reports: The dilemma.

Victoria, B C : Ministry of Education.

Jongsma, K . S. (1991). Rethinking grading practices. The Reading Teacher, 45 (4),

318-320.

Kemmis, S. (1982). Action research and curriculum research. In Deakin University

Press (Ed.), The Action Research Reader (pp. 5-8). Geelong, Victoria: Deakin

University Press.

Kerby, C. & McGregor, S. (1993). Reporting as a process: A district perspective.

Victoria, B C : Ministry of Education.

Kilian, C. (1993a, October 14). Exchange rate wreaks havoc on grades. The Vancouver

Province, p. A21.

Kilian, C. (1993b, January 12). Truth will cure school ailments. The Vancouver

Province, p. A21.

Kline, C. L . (1993, February 2). Reading, writing and 'rithmetic taught without a

measuring stick. The Vancouver Sun, p. A l l .

Kundera, M . (1986). The art of the novel. New York: Harper & Row.

Lewington, J. (1992, December 20). Conflict over the classroom leads to politics. The

Globe and Mail. p. A10, A l l .

Marzano, R. J . , Pickering, D . , & McTighe, J. (1993) Assessing Student Outcomes.

Alexandria, V A : Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

121

McCormick, S. (1993, February 15). Learning to make the most of Year 2000 [Letter

to the editor]. The Vancouver Sun, p. A l l .

Mclntyre, M . (1993). Constituting understanding: The meaning of being understood in

illness. Unpublished Master's Thesis. University of Colorado.

Mickelthwaite, J. (1993). Anecdotal Reporting: Issues, investigations and reflections.

Victoria, B C : Ministry of Education.

Mitchell, A . (1993, January 12). Parents attack the problem. The Globe and Mail. p.

A l , A5 .

National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) . (1988). The

N A E Y C position statement on developmentally appropriate practice in the primary

grades, serving 5- through 8-year olds. Young Children, 43 (2), 69-80.

Nikiforuk, A . (1993, June 11). Andrew Nikiforuk talks to a rebel without a cause -

saving a city's schools. The Globe and Mail. p. A24.

Noddings, N . (1984). Caring, a feminine approach to ethics and moral education. Los

Angeles: University of California Press.

Page, F . M . , Page, J. A . , & Tremble, J. W. (1987). Parents' priorities in educating

their children, The Clearing House, 60, 270-272.

Perrone, V . (1991). Expanding Student Assessment. Alexandria, V A : Association for

Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Province of British Columbia. (1989). Minister of Education Order No. 8. Victoria,

B . C . : Province of British Columbia.

Ramage, D . (1993, March, 10). Teachers deserve major pat on back. The Vancouver

Sun, p. A3 .

122

Satterly, D . (1981). Assessment in schools. (Theory and practice in education, no. 1).

London: Blackwell Press.

Shipman, M . (1983). Assessment in primary and middle schools. London: Croom

Helm.

Stiggins, R. J. (1994). Student-centered classroom assessment. New York: Macmillan

College.

Story, P. G . (1994). The evolution of a report card: An ethnographic study of

documentation practices. Unpublished Master's Thesis. Simon Fraser University.

Van Manen, M . (1990). Researching lived experience: Human science for action

sensitive pedagogy. London: Althouse Press.

Wassermann, S. (1990). Serious players in the primary classroom: Empowering

children through active learning experiences. New York: Teachers College Press.

Wiggins, G. P. (1993). Assessing student performance: Exploring the purpose and

limits of testing. New York: Maxwell Macmillan.

APPENDIX B

124

Interview Guide

In what ways have your assessment, evaluation, and reporting procedures changed since the introduction of the Primary Program in 1990?

What were the most difficult aspects of assessment, evaluation and reporting to implement?

What thoughts or emotions are evoked for you as report card writing time approaches?

As you think back on your experiences of actually writing report cards, what thoughts come to mind?

Describe the typical report card environment you create as you write reports? (e.g., Where you are most comfortable writing your reports?) Do you have any particular rituals that come to mind as you prepare to write reports?

Describe any particular ways you have of managing and selecting the material you collect in order to write your comments.

What audience(s) do you have in mind as you compose report cards?

What for you are the greatest successes and challenges as you write report cards?

What successes/challenges/dilemmas did you encounter in writing your first "structured" written report card in November, 1994?

What do expect the successes/challenges/dilemmas to be for the spring reporting term?

What were your reactions and thoughts when Charbonneau made his announcement that "anecdotal report cards" were to be replaced by the "structured written report card?"

Discuss the procedures you will use to determine whether or not a child falls within the expected range of development for students in a similar age range.