Wellbeing and Engagement

Conversations with Year 11 students regarding cohort culture

Last week, I joined the Year 11 girls in their combined homeroom to discuss their collective influence in defining cohort culture. While our College is dedicated to upholding the values of Mary Ward’s “open circle of friends” and nurturing strong, independent and passionate young women, it is ultimately the girls themselves who shape the acceptance of these norms within their cohort and, by extension, our entire school culture. 

I displayed a single chair and asked the girls to consider which part of the chair was most important. The room quickly filled with lively chatter as they confidently shared their individual opinions.  After a few moments, I asked for a show of hands to indicate their preference for either ‘the seat’ or ‘the legs’. Their response was swift and decisive, and I commended the girls for their independent conviction. 

Next, I invited volunteers to visually represent their beliefs by forming ‘a legs group’ and ‘a seat group’. Given both groups were evenly represented, I assigned the value of a ‘C’ grade to each group. However, without explanation, I changed the visible value of the groups by advancing ‘the legs’ to an ‘A’ grade while maintaining the ‘C’ grade for those in ‘the seat’ group. When I asked the entire cohort to answer the question again, fewer hands were raised and some did not indicate any position at all. This shift prompted me to ask the girls what had happened to the cohort’s confident conviction of importance expressed moments before.  

Those in ‘the seat’ group were given the chance to reconsider their position and move to ‘the legs’ group. Some students chose to remain, standing firm in their beliefs, while others opted to join ‘the legs’ for increased recognition. Now ‘the legs’ group held a clear majority, so I adjusted the grades again, assigning an A+ for ‘the legs’ and given the now reduced acceptance of ‘the seat’ group, I assigned a ‘D’ grade.   

This moment segued into a critical question for those remaining in ‘the seat’ group: if this discussion was not merely about parts of a chairs but about daily wellbeing and social safety, how might these graded conditions influence their perception and convictions.  

We reviewed that both ‘the legs’ and ‘the seat’ had initially received the same grade of ‘C’ and that everyone freely and decisively made their choice. However, when value was applied, blind acceptance and conformity occurred. I encouraged the girls to consider why no one had sought clarification, expressed curiosity, or questioned the validity of the assigned grades to the original question. This scenario illustrates the influence of social status, miscommunication and the average acceptance of norms. Under these conditions, fear can stifle individual thought and complicate the balance of moral reasoning. 

Ultimately, neither ‘the legs’ nor ‘the seat’ are the most important parts of the chair. Both are interdependent, relying on one another to function effectively. The most important part of the chair actually lies in the screws that bind them together. It is this unseen element that enables all visible parts to work together. 

I urged the girls to consider the invisible connections that hold their cohort together. It is what they infer as acceptable. If they focus solely on applied and biased values rather than being open to curiosity, differing perspectives and appreciation for diversity, their culture risks becoming dysfunctional and fractured.  

I look forward to continuing these discussions with the Year 11 students to enhance their understanding of social norms and empower them to recognise influences that can help shape a healthy culture, especially as they make decisions regarding student leadership.  

Suzie Crowe  

Assistant Principal:  Wellbeing and Engagement