Grade by Grade
D. Topics in Computer Science · Topics in Computer Science: Sustainability, Ethics, Emerging Technologies and Careers

Evaluating Your Essential Skills and Work Habits

D4.4About 60 minutes
Learning goals
  • I can identify the Essential Skills and Work Habits in the Ontario Skills Passport most important for computing.
  • I can write criteria and collect dated evidence to evaluate my own skills and habits.
  • I can track my growth over time, including with a short Python program.
  • I can set SMART goals for my lowest areas and plan how to show progress.

Words to know

Ontario Skills Passport (OSP)
Ontario's description of the Essential Skills and Work Habits needed for work, learning and life.
Essential Skills
Foundational skills such as reading, writing, document use, numeracy and thinking skills.
work habits
Ways of working, such as reliability, organization, teamwork and initiative.
self-evaluation
Judging your own performance against criteria, using evidence.
criteria
Descriptions of what performance looks like at each level.
SMART goal
A goal that is specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound.

Grading yourself, honestly

In Grade 11 (ICS3U, Essential Skills and Work Habits) you learned the names of the Essential Skills and Work Habits in the Ontario Skills Passport (OSP) and matched them to computing tasks. Expectation D4.4 goes further: you must evaluate your own development of these skills and habits. Evaluation means judging against criteria, using evidence, and tracking change over time, the same thing employers do in performance reviews and universities expect in reflective writing.

Quick review: what you are evaluating

  • Essential Skills (OSP): Reading Text, Writing, Document Use, Computer Use, Oral Communication, Numeracy (Money Math, Scheduling or Budgeting and Accounting, Measurement and Calculation, Data Analysis, Numerical Estimation) and Thinking Skills (Job Task Planning and Organizing, Decision Making, Problem Solving, Finding Information, Critical Thinking).
  • Work Habits (OSP): Working Safely, Teamwork, Reliability, Organization, Working Independently, Initiative, Self-Advocacy, Customer Service and Entrepreneurship.

The federal Skills for Success framework (2021) describes nine related skills, including digital skills, problem solving, communication, collaboration, adaptability, and creativity and innovation. If you meet it in a job program, you'll recognize the same ideas.

For computing, some skills matter especially: Problem Solving (debugging), Document Use (reading documentation, UML and test plans), Writing (comments, bug reports, user guides), Teamwork and Reliability (in the team project in Software Development: Managing a Team Software Project), and Self-Advocacy (asking for help after a fair attempt).

The self-evaluation cycleSet a goalDo the workCollectevidenceEvaluatewith criteriaReflectand adjustrepeat each term with a new goal
Self-evaluation is a cycle, not a one-time survey. Evidence is the step most people skip, and the one that makes the evaluation believable.

From opinion to evidence

"I'm good at teamwork" is an opinion. An evaluation needs:

  1. Criteria: what does each level look like? For example, for Reliability: 1 = often late with work; 2 = usually on time with reminders; 3 = consistently on time without reminders; 4 = on time and helps others meet deadlines.
  2. Evidence: concrete examples with dates: commit history, submission dates, feedback from teachers, teammates or supervisors, a log of hours, a finished project.
  3. A judgment: the level that best fits the evidence, not the level you hope for.
  4. A goal: a SMART goal (specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, time-bound) for the next term.
Worked example

Example 1: Evaluating Self-Advocacy with evidence

Jordan rates their Self-Advocacy as 1 at the start of term. Evidence: in September they spent 4 hours stuck on a bug before the deadline and didn't ask anyone. In November they asked the teacher after 40 minutes of trying and posted a clear question (with the error message and what they had tried) in the class forum. Evaluate Jordan's growth and set a goal.

  1. Criteria (sample): 1 = rarely asks for help; 2 = asks for help, but late or unclearly; 3 = asks at a sensible time with a clear question; 4 = asks well and helps others ask.
  2. September evidence fits level 1: no help-seeking despite being stuck for hours.
  3. November evidence shows a sensible time (40 minutes) and a clear question: that fits level 3, but it's a single example, so a cautious rating is 2, moving toward 3.
  4. Goal (SMART): "By the end of January, for every programming assignment, if I'm stuck for 45 minutes I will post a question that includes the error, the code involved and what I tried. I'll keep a log and aim for at least four logged questions."

Growth from 1 to 2 (moving toward 3), with a specific, measurable goal and a way to collect evidence.

before = {"Reliability": 2, "Organization": 2, "Teamwork": 3,
"Initiative": 3, "Self-advocacy": 1}
after = {"Reliability": 3, "Organization": 3, "Teamwork": 3,
"Initiative": 4, "Self-advocacy": 2}
growth = {habit: after[habit] - before[habit] for habit in before}
for habit, g in growth.items():
print(f"{habit:14} {before[habit]} -> {after[habit]} ({g:+d})")
lowest = min(after, key=after.get)
print("Average now:", round(sum(after.values()) / len(after), 2))
print("Next focus:", lowest)

A dictionary comprehension computes growth for each habit; min(after, key=after.get) finds the habit with the lowest current rating.

Reliability 2 -> 3 (+1)
Organization 2 -> 3 (+1)
Teamwork 3 -> 3 (+0)
Initiative 3 -> 4 (+1)
Self-advocacy 1 -> 2 (+1)
Average now: 3.0
Next focus: Self-advocacy

Output of the program above (what Python prints).

Work-habit ratings, start and end of term (from the program)Reliability23Organization23Teamwork33Initiative34Self-advocacy1201234start of termend of termrating (1 = beginning, 4 = strong)
The program's ratings as a chart. Four habits grew by one level; Teamwork stayed at 3; Self-advocacy is still the lowest, so it becomes the next focus.
Just for fun

Reliability is the habit of showing up on time.

Procrastination is the habit of showing up on time... tomorrow.

Hands-on activity

Skills evidence portfolio and self-evaluation

You need: a document or folder, your work from this course (programs, the team project, reports), and Python.

  1. Choose three Essential Skills and three Work Habits most important for the computing career you explored in Careers and Postsecondary Pathways.
  2. Write criteria for levels 1 to 4 for each (adapt the Reliability example).
  3. For each, gather two pieces of dated evidence from this course or from work, volunteering or home (a commit log, a bug report you wrote, feedback, a schedule you kept).
  4. Rate yourself now, and estimate where you were at the start of the course using your earliest evidence. Enter both into the program and run it.
  5. Ask someone who has seen you work (teacher, employer, coach, teammate) to rate two of the habits. Compare their ratings with yours.
  6. Write one SMART goal for your lowest area and a plan for collecting evidence of progress.

What to look for: criteria written as observable behaviour, dated evidence for every rating, honest ratings (not all 4s), an outside perspective, and a SMART goal that targets the lowest area.

Your turn

1

What is the difference between describing a skill and evaluating your development of it?

2

List four OSP Work Habits.

3

Give a piece of evidence for Problem Solving from a programming course.

4

What does SMART stand for?

5

Make this goal SMART: "I'll be more organized."

6

What does the program print for Initiative?

7

Why ask someone else to rate your habits?

More practice: warm-up

1

What does OSP stand for?

2

Name two Thinking Skills in the OSP.

3

Which Essential Skill is used when reading a UML diagram?

4

What is the program's average rating after the term?

5

Which habit does the program choose as the next focus?

More practice: on your own

1

Write level descriptions (1 to 4) for the Work Habit Teamwork in a programming team.

2

A student rates themselves 4 in every area with no evidence. What is wrong with this evaluation, and how should they improve it?

3

Modify the program to print every habit whose rating did not improve. What does it print?

4

Connect three OSP skills to tasks in the team project from Software Development: Managing a Team Software Project.

5

Why is Self-Advocacy important for a junior software developer?

Challenge

1

Extend the program to track three terms with a list of ratings per habit (for example {"Reliability": [2, 3, 3]}) and print the habit with the largest total growth. Show your code.

2

Your rating of your Reliability is 4, but a teammate rates you 2. Describe how you would investigate the gap fairly.

3

Explain how the self-evaluation cycle is similar to a software development life cycle.

Check your understanding

Quiz

1.

Which is the strongest evidence of Reliability?

2.

Which goal is SMART?

3.

Which OSP Essential Skill is used most directly when reading a library's documentation?

4.

Ratings before {A: 2, B: 3} and after {A: 4, B: 3}. What is the growth for A and B?

5.

Why is an outside rating (teacher, teammate, supervisor) useful?

6.

Which is an OSP Work Habit rather than an Essential Skill?

For parents and teachers

Big idea: D4.4 asks students to evaluate their own development of the Essential Skills and work habits identified in the Ontario Skills Passport. The key shift from Grade 11 is evaluation with criteria and evidence, tracked over time.

How to help: Offer to be the outside rater in step 5 of the activity, using specific examples rather than general praise or criticism. Help your teen turn a vague goal into a SMART one. Share how evaluations work at your workplace.

Common difficulties:

  • Rating without evidence, or rating every area at the top level.
  • Writing criteria as personality traits ("is responsible") instead of observable behaviour ("submits on time without reminders").
  • Vague goals that can't be measured.
  • Taking an outside rating as a judgment of character. Treat it as one more piece of evidence.