Dear Editor,
Of recent there has been some attention given to the Technical and Vocational Education Training (TVET) of our students, especially those who are less academically inclined. At a time when the education sector has not been producing the kind of output really expected from the magnitude of the investment in the education process, this intervention appears very timely. The Secondary Competency Certificate Programme (SCCP) is taking the lead role in ensuring that every child is accounted for and given a chance.
Statistics will show that the ratio of students entering formal secondary education to the number completing is definitely a cause for concern. As a teacher who always searches for answers to educational problems especially, I more than welcome the rationale of such an intervention. A number of questions however have been troubling me. As I express my concerns and make my recommendations, it is my hope that someone will heed my contribution and find some merit so that together we can help to make the education sector one of a kind as we push to develop those for whom we are accountable – the children of our nation.
Firstly, have statistics been compiled to determine at what levels there is the highest drop-out rate in secondary schools? How do we determine which schools are the ‘at risk’ schools and in need of such an intervention? Where in this process do the ‘top performing’ schools fit in? Should we be targeting schools or rather catchments? What is the role of the national grade nine examination, and more so, the role of CXC? With the new ‘six year programme’ recently implemented, are we saying that there is really a ‘seven year programme’ instead? Are we taking the correct approach to fixing a problem by dispersing valuable and limited resources to a number of interventions? Or should we evaluate one before attempting another?
I am at present working at one of the fortunate schools in which the SCCP is implemented. During my short tenure at this school, it has alarmed me that the drop-out rate is unlike any other I have experienced. The most alarming fact is that grades 8 and 9 are the most affected. The SCCP is presently conducted in grade 10. I somehow get the notion that this pattern may be the same for other schools in the same category. If we want to give the ‘most at risk’ a chance, then it is my belief that we should start earlier than grade 10.
Coming from a different culture altogether, I often wonder why it is that schools have to be categorized (at worst stereotyped)? It is time we give all schools equal attention, or on the contrary give the low-performing schools more attention. If we want to develop our education system, shouldn’t we be placing our best resources (human and otherwise) into these challenged schools? Hypothetically, if we could exchange teachers from the top schools and put them into these challenged schools, what would be the result? What about our graduates and specialists? This is an area on which I could share much thought, but for now I will focus on the issue at hand.
Is it coincidental that the challenged schools targeted for interventions belong to a catchment of questionable socioeconomic status? I think we are heading towards a situation where catchments should be identified as high risk for education and ensure that the programme for these catchments matches the needs. I hate to say it, but in some of these communities, I see skills training taking prominence over academia. It is just my thought that the ideal for these communities would be fully resourced skills centres, albeit with the presence of ‘academic’ centres (traditional secondary schools).
It must be a tedious task for the Ministry of Education to monitor and evaluate the several initiatives currently running in the system. The continuous assessment programme that ends in grade nine (with the national grade nine examinations), the new ‘six year programme,’ CXC and now SCCP. It is just my hope that there is some transparent system that justifies the cohesiveness of these concurrent interventions.
If the six year programme is successful, then by the time these students get to grade 10 or 11, there should not be the problem we are now experiencing. I am not taking anything away from the SCCP, but as a matter of focus and concentration of resources, I just think that the development of literacy and numeracy should be a real target of the education sector. It is my heartfelt wish that these programmes, having already been implemented, should really complement each other and that the results are tangible. This would be the evidence needed so we could truly say that our education sector was heading places, and we could rest assured that our future was in good and capable hands.
Yours faithfully,
Marti De Souza
