Community Reflects on Midterms and METICs

By ARYAN AGARWAL, AARYAN PATEL, ADELLE PITTS, and JADE YOO

27 years after its proposal by the Student Council and adoption in 1997, the Academy’s Midterm Effort To Improve Class (METIC) system has much room for improvement. Members of the community agree that change is necessary, but it will require agreement on proposals to enhance it and powerful initiative. With family weekend, midterm grades, and chilly weather on students’ minds,  METICs have become just another item on Exonians’ schedules during the midterm mark. However, the original purpose of the METIC as an opportunity for self-reflection and to give administration and faculty feedback on how students are doing in classes remains crucial and should be prioritized.

The METIC is a process in which students and teachers reflect on the progress and performance of the class throughout the first half of the term. Though there is no standardized process, these METICs typically consist of discussions about what is going well in the class, what needs to be worked on, and feedback for teachers. Theoretically, both teachers and students are meant to take these thoughts into consideration to improve the learning experience for the rest of the term.

On campus, students have different ideas regarding METICs, but a general sentiment seems to be shared between them: they are not happening as well as they should, or in some cases, they are not happening at all. Some raised the concern that they do not accomplish their goal of improving class because sometimes changes are not adopted after the discussion, and the METIC is rather used as a gauge for teachers to evaluate how a class is doing. “It is true that teachers don’t always take the advice of students into consideration,” said upper Sam Altman, “but they are still a useful mechanism for teachers to see where students are at.”

“In some classes, especially if students suggest a concrete plan for change, small improvements can be made. Still, if teachers are more offended by certain comments, change doesn’t seem to happen as often,” continued Altman.

Lower Lena Kook believes that METICs “are sometimes dismissed right after, when teachers don’t apply the feedback from the METIC.” She suggested that “METICs should include a solution section where we actually think of practical actions to apply in future classes.”

Because the implementation and form of METICs is not standardized, classes struggle while balancing consistency and teachers’ freedom in teaching style. Altman suggested that a universal METIC could be “an online version where students can anonymously share comments and then have them be read in front of the class. This way, students can have more time to think out their responses.”

Kook, however, disagreed: “Discussions with the teacher after students, without the instructor, give feedback and solutions, seems efficient, especially because online METICs are disconnected and aren’t really discussed again in class.”

Though advocating for an online form, Altman did highlight that “having the teacher in the room during discussion seems like the worst idea because students are quite literally under duress.” 

On the other hand, Altman recognized the METIC as a two-way street between students and teachers who must all come to the table with open minds and a desire to improve class. “I don’t think just complaining about difficulty is a good thing to talk about in METICs,” said Altman. Though students may find it easy to limit themselves to the views of their peers, teachers are the ones who eventually have the biggest stake in METICs and the improvement of a class. 

Teachers hold varying perspectives on the productivity of METICs. Instructor in Science Caitlyn Sarno holds METICs in her classes by asking her students to put three columns on the board of what is going well in discussions, what they want to improve, and ‘other.’ She then leaves the room for about seven to eight minutes and asks students to explain what they’ve talked about once she comes back. 

Sarno believes that the METIC is the most helpful for “pointing out things that are the obvious problems and giving time to discuss those” and noted that “having an opportunity for students to discuss without the teacher than with the teacher is helpful.” 

The METIC also allows Sarno to “point out things she is seeing and ask why it is happening” to the class, such as if one half of the class is talking much more than the other. Previously, Sarno has also done a form that she found “useful for getting a sense of how long homework was taking.”

Sarno believes that the METIC is beneficial, but at the same time doubts how productive it is, since if the student doesn’t like the class or its structure, it momentarily creates “a hostile environment between the students and the teacher.”

“If teachers want and are looking for feedback to improve the class, those teachers will do something that targets the areas that they want to be improved,” she reflected.

In response to the shared sentiment of students and teachers regarding the discrepancies and ineffectiveness of the METIC, the Student Council has taken the initiative to approach reform. Student Council Vice President Anna Holtz reiterated students’ views on the METIC, saying, “The METIC is not consistent among teachers, which leads to students feeling for whatever reason that they cannot speak freely and give honest opinions.”

The main Student Council committee working on METIC reform is the Policy Committee. Co-head Dylan Richardson said, “Our goal with the work we plan to do in collaboration with the executive board is to create a standardized list of guidelines that let teachers have an individual say towards how their METICs are conducted, while maintaining some amount of standardization, for student comfort.”

Furthermore, the council is simultaneously working to improve Post Instructional Evaluations (PIEs), the end-of-term surveys to reflect on classes and teachers that are similar to METICs. Despite its more standardized form, PIEs have also received criticism from teachers, leading to a council initiative for PIE reforms. 

Richardson elaborated that “The broad idea is to encourage more positive and constructive feedback, as a lot of teaching members of the faculty have come to StuCo leadership or each other over the years, and the general sentiment we’ve heard is that students are often disrespectful or downright mean in their PIE responses, which is not something we want.”

Due to the similar goals of the two feedback systems, PIEs and METICs often go hand-in-hand. Richardson continued, “The METICs and PIEs are the two key forms of feedback between teachers and students over the course of a term, and we are looking at doing this work as one larger initiative.”

However, as the Student Council plans to use this term to address other important initiatives, the efforts to reform the METICs and PIEs will not be evident until later in the academic year. Nonetheless, the council is optimistic that they will be able to reach their goals in the coming few terms. 

“Policy is well occupied with reforming the Dress Code, and Exec seems to be diverting their efforts towards CVP reform and internal management,” Richardson shared. “We are committed as a larger StuCo entity to seeing that this reform does get the attention it needs when our collective attention is available to give.” 

As midterms arrived this past week, the Midterm Effort to Improve Classes returned to many Phillips Exeter classrooms. For a long time, the METIC has just been another task for teachers and students to complete during a busy time of the term, but recently it has come under scrutiny alongside the end-of-term PIEs. Despite many students and teachers appreciating the METIC and its impacts, the reflective process has faced challenges with its consistency and effectiveness. As the Academy’s Student Council formulates its agenda for the year, METIC and PIE reform is creeping to the top of their priorities, with plans to put new infrastructure into action in the coming terms.