I wrote a column earlier this year on rummaging about up in the loft. On that occasion, I hauled out a pile of my old school report cards.
Last week, for no apparent reason, I decided to take a detailed look at them. And I wondered, would they stand the test of time? Did they predict the future? Were they fair?
I poured myself a cup of coffee and opened the box, carefully taking out the decades-old single handwritten sheets.
What did my teachers have to say about me?
Primary two. Miss Alsop. What a woman she was. She looked like Miss Marple.
I knew her for many years after school. Even went to visit her at her home as she lived near my grannie. She said I’d be prime minister one day…
Yet she also said in my primary two report that I was “over talkative”. Can’t argue with that.
My primary three report from the same teacher said “good at oral and written expression, yet still very talkative”.
Primary four – “George is easily distracted”.
Primary five – While my written work could be “much neater”, in spoken English I was “always eager to contribute”. And the teacher added: “George is a lively and enthusiastic member of the class.”
I remembered being well chuffed and rather smug when I showed my dad that report card. He himself a headmaster at another school said: “Your teacher is being polite, it means you talk too much,” as he clipped me round the ear.
Hmm, we seem to have a pattern here of talking too much.
Primary six. “Must make a conscious effort to listen more.” And: “George is a capable boy in all subjects but I feel he could do even better.”
I remember at the time that really wound me up. How do you know I could try harder lady? Give me a break!
Again P6 – oh this was a stinker. It said: “George talks too much. If he listened more his work could improve. Distracts others.”
Oh dear, that last bit did not go down well with my head teacher father. I was terrified at bringing that one home. But how did I know what was in it? The report came in a sealed envelope after all. Confession time – I steamed it open with a kettle before handing it to my parents.
Primary six – Third report that year and finally some good news! It said, a “general improvement is evident”. And that while my writing was still untidy, I can write good stories. Hallelujah!
Moving on to secondary school. Let’s go subject by subject. Over the years I got comments such as this…
Maths – “Needs to work harder.” No, I’m bored, let me do more history!
Chemistry – It said my effort was 3 (which is not good). Correct, but in my defence, I could say I was bored. Which I was.
Physics – “Having difficulty.” No, just not remotely interested.
Technical subjects – “Could do better. Careless work. Not a great deal of interest shown.” Exactly, I’m bored!
Now, on to the subjects I was good at and actually interested in. Look at the difference reported here, not just in ability but behaviour and effort. Give a child a subject that is interesting to them and they will put in the effort.
English – “His work is always of a high standard. Very capable. Very confident orally.”
History – As well as saying I wrote good essays and showed plenty of interest, it also said I “behave impeccably”. Put that in yer pipe and smoke it dad!
Geography – Attitude and effort very good.
Modern Studies – My teacher was Mrs Thomson. I’ve bumped into this lady over the years and even communicated with her by email as she reads my column. Funny, as we did not get on at school, most likely due to me being a pain in the rear end. Yet my behaviour aside, regarding my actual class work, she has ticked the “highly effective” box on my report card.
PE – Attention was excellent. Effort was Excellent. Excellent swimmer. “Shows positive attitude.”
RE – Interesting comments, for these days I am fascinated by the subject of religion, even though I am not a believer. Teacher said: “George has a lot of ability which he must not waste.”
Home Economics ie cooking – I love to cook as an adult, and back then when I had the chance to finally drop mind-numbing, boring technical drawing, I did and chose cooking. The teacher said my effort and behaviour was “good”.
Yes, I talk too much, always have done. But I find it unfair that teachers who did not inspire me teaching subjects I was not interested in, should just say a one-size-fits-all “must do better, lazy, doesn’t listen” or whatever. Not fair in my view.
I was never a practical kid, but a creative one. That is true to this day. Many years as a tap dance teacher/choreographer, then years as a columnist. All creative jobs.
The fact is, I was awful at maths. Yes, I did not concentrate in maths class – I was bored out of my mind. “Who cares” I thought at the time about sin cos and tan, and right-angled triangles. What good is that to me? Today I feel exactly the same.
As for metalwork, wood work and the worst thing on Earth, technical drawing – oh deary me, I’d rather have watched paint dry.
I detested going to these classes, yet was excited about going to English. It fuelled my imagination.
Why can’t education be more geared to the individual? Could it not be observed that this kid had no aptitude nor desire for certain things? Why not take him out of these compulsory classes and give him extra time in things he enjoys and is actually good at? I didn’t get it then, I still don’t get it today.
It was obvious to the young me, and any teacher who observed me, that making me do the likes of physics and techy drawing was pointless. I would never use these things in my life. I’m sure it must be the same for many other kids.
I’m not blaming my teachers for my 15/16-year-old bad attitude. But it’s fascinating to note that in the subjects I did well in, it was with teachers who understood me, and more importantly, inspired me.
If I had had bad reports in all subjects, then fair enough. But as you can see I didn’t. It can’t always be the kid’s fault surely?
Do you have your old school report cards? What did they say about you? Do the views on the then young you stand the test of time or not? Do get in touch and share.
Did report cards predict our futures? For me, yes, I guess they did. But I don’t think we should take reports on individuals at face value, ie labelling kids as lazy for not trying hard enough.
Should we really judge a person by what is written about them?
You may well have seen this; I came across it many years ago. A friend handed me a piece of paper, asked me to read it, then reply. There are many versions of it out there, but here’s the gist of it.
Let’s imagine that it’s time to elect a world leader, and your vote counts. Which would you choose?
Candidate A: Associates with faith healers and consults with astrologists. He has had two mistresses, chain-smokes and drinks eight to 10 martinis a day.
Candidate B: Was kicked out of office twice, sleeps until noon, used opium, drinks a quart of brandy every evening.
Candidate C: He is a decorated war hero, a vegetarian, doesn’t smoke and has had no illicit love affairs.
So, which of these candidates is your choice?
Most people naturally choose candidate C. I did.
The letter then explains – A is Roosevelt, B is Churchill and C is Hitler.
Food for thought…
But back to report cards. One can only imagine what the school report card of a young Mr Trump might have said…
“Donald is a very capable and determined young boy. He has the potential to go far, but does tend to go into a sulk if he doesn’t get his own way. He must work on this if he is to make friends in class.”
Or how about a young Mr Putin?
“Vladimir has a tendency to be fearful and untrusting of others. He really must make more effort to be likeable and stop believing that everyone is out to get him.”
Conversation