The vast majority of parents in British Columbia easily understood letter grades on report cards but are now confused by the provincial government’s nouveau “descriptive” grading in schools, according to a new poll.

In September 2023, despite overwhelming opposition from British Columbians, the Eby government replaced letter grades—such as A, B, C, D, etc.—on K-9 report cards with a “proficiency scale,” which includes the descriptive terms “emerging,” “developing,” “proficient” and “extending.” If these four terms seem confusing to you, and make you miss the old letter grades, you’re not alone.

According to the new poll (conducted by Leger and commissioned by the Fraser Institute), 91 per cent of B.C. parents said the letter grade “A” was “clear and easy” to understand while 84 per cent said the letter grade “C” was “clear and easy” to understand. (For the sake of brevity, the poll only asked respondents about these two letter grades.)

By contrast, 55 per cent of B.C. parents said the descriptive grade “extending” was “unclear and difficult” to understand and 66 per cent either did not know what “extending” meant or were unable to iden¬tify the meaning of the term from a list of options. Moreover, 43 per cent of B.C. parents chose the wrong description of “extending”—the highest proportion in any province in Canada.

It was a similar story for the descriptive grade “emerging,” as 64 per cent of B.C. parents were unable to correctly identify the term. And although 36 per cent of B.C. parents were able to correctly identify the term—higher than the national average of 28 per cent—that’s only about one-third of parents in the province.

It’s also worth noting that the poll simplified the definitions of the four “descriptive” grading terms. The official definitions, which can be found on the government’s website, speak for themselves. For example: "Extending is not synonymous with perfection. A student is Extending when they demonstrate learning, in relation to learning standards, with increasing depth and complexity. Extending is not a bonus or a reward and does not necessarily require that students do a greater volume of work or work at a higher grade level. Extending is not the goal for all students; Proficient is. Therefore, if a student turns in all their work and demonstrates evidence of learning in all learning standards for an area of learning, they are not automatically assigned Extending.”

So, what are the consequences of this confusing gobbledygook? Well, we already have some anecdotes.

Before the government made the changes provincewide, the Surrey School District participated in a pilot program to gauge the effectiveness of descriptive grading. According to Elenore Sturko, a Conservative MLA in Surrey-Cloverdale and mother of three, for three years her daughter’s report cards said she was “emerging” rather than clearly stating she was failing. Sturko was unaware there was a problem until the child’s Third Grade teacher called to tell Sturko that her daughter was reading at a Kindergarten level.

Former Eby government education minister Rachna Singh, who lost her reelection bid in last week’s election, has justified the change saying descriptive grading will help students become “better prepared for the outside world” where you “don’t get feedback in letters.” But parents clearly aren’t happy.

Based on this survey data, switching from letter grades to descriptive grading makes it much harder for parents to understand how their children are doing in school. In one of its first post-election moves, the next B.C. government—whoever that may be—should take a red pen to this confusing new policy before it does any more damage. B.C.’s experience should serve as a warning to any province or school board thinking about adopting this type of convoluted descriptive grading.