Dear Editor,
In acknowledging the relevant concerns of Mr Lowe (KN , August 11), I wish to state that the problem of poor performance of CSEC graduates at the university level has been accruing over a number of years in the botched and uninspiring education system that is being championed by the relevant authorities.
Learning is a relatively permanent change in one‘s behaviour. The process of acquiring knowledge, skills and attitudes is only effective when learning is active and based on learners’ experiences. In these scenarios, learning provides real growth and adjustment in the lives of the students since it is truly meaningful and enjoyable to be a participant in the process. But most importantly, learning is vertical and horizontal. We begin to learn from birth and continue to do so throughout life. The education system in Guyana has failed learners at this level. While the curriculum may have been designed to provide vertical learning experiences so that precision is enhanced and new information is built upon previously learnt experiences, in reality this is not followed through, resulting in Mr Lowe’s observation at the university. Thus, the problem at hand which was clearly manifested in the 2012 CSEC results was not due to the ridiculous notion of ‘nay-sayers’ as suggested by the Minister, but rather a culmination of systematic failures of gaping magnitude that continue to thrive unchecked on a daily basis.
So what will it take to truly improve performance within schools and to produce learners who will become positive contributors to the nation? To answer this question, we need to know exactly whose responsibility it is to improve students’ performance and what mechanisms and feedbacks are in place to access the quality of response from each contributor.
Teachers, parents, the community and the government all have a role in educating the nation. Since education is a public good, governments play a major role in the design, implementation, coordination, assessment and evaluation of the curriculum, as well as in the assessment (and remediation) of students’ performance. Teachers are facilitators in the learning process and are employed, trained and upgraded at the behest of the state.
The Ministry of Education monitors students’ progress continually in schools through the national assessment exams. So how is it that the nation is in shock and despair over the CSEC results? Evidently, the officials at the ministry themselves lack basic maths skills since they failed to accurately extrapolate outcomes from years of data collection. No wonder the students could not perform simple calculations in perimeter, area or algebra. For these students, national standardized assessments were last carried out when they were in Grade 9 and also in Grade 11 in the pilot schools. What did the analysis of these students’ performance indicate? Did they reveal that students lack basic computational and reasoning skills? Assuming that an in-depth analysis was done, I am sure these deficiencies were detected. Knowing these facts, what serious strategies did the ministry implement that could have potentially improved students‘ performance? We know of summer remedial programmes that were implemented. Were they effective in improving outcomes? Were these students able to function in the new class? Where is this assessment and feedback? In order to effectively correct a problem, you need mechanisms in place to identify its cause and then provide immediate remediation – not wait until the end of the year! If teachers are found to be slackers (and I know there are quite a few, including some head teachers), they have to be instantly fired since the government is mandated to look after the welfare of the students.
In order to improve students’ performance, numerous studies have shown that it is mandatory to have small class sizes, of around fifteen to twenty students, in the crucial kindergarten and primary school years of the child. That is where trust develops between the learners, the environment and their teachers. Although expensive in the short term, small class sizes have been consistently proven to benefit learners due to enhanced individual interaction between learners and their teachers, resulting in well-disciplined learners who display more initiative, higher self-confidence, superior engagement, higher academic performance and who read at one grade ahead.
At this early stage of learning, learners develop various coping strategies in the learning environment which will remain for the rest of their lives as seen in Mr Lowe’s letter. In small classes, trained teachers would easily recognize learning difficulties on an individual basis, and have a ministry supervised programme in place to immediately assist the learner to overcome potential barriers to learning down the road. However, failure to recognize and remediate these barriers in literacy and numeracy will only result in continuous poor CSEC results and substandard performance at any university. Furthermore, the ministry’s policy of automatic promotion will soon raise its ugly head when these students are eligible to write CSEC only to see the grades plummet to a new low.
Of what benefit is a laptop if students cannot read? To truly improve literacy, learners in kindergarten and primary schools must be exposed to various multimedia resources. For example, books must be readily available and each child should read at least two take-home books on a weekly basis. The appropriate books should satisfy three criteria: (1) contain the necessary sight words, (2) become progressively challenging, and (3) written on the relatable experiences of the learners. These books should be given to each student and it is the parents responsibility to help the child finish reading the book at home. An agenda should be sent to the parents on the child’s take-home assignment and it should then be acknowledged by the parents that the task was completed and returned to the school.
A similar programme has to be implemented in numeracy. If parents need help in understanding what to do, then, an after-school meeting can be set up with the teacher. Now imagine, if this trend continues throughout the school experience of the learners, do you honestly think they will write garbage in CSEC English or that they will fail in reasoning and comprehension? No, they won’t since vertical learning was effective throughout the school years and most importantly, assessment tools and feedback mechanisms were there to assist meaningful learning.
This being said, teachers are always being blamed about poor performances in schools. Indeed, teachers play a central role in facilitating learning. Yet, little is done to truly enhance the delivery of education by teachers within the system. Ever so often, teachers are only left with chalk (and at times it is rationed!) and a hot sweaty cramped room in order to motivate learners who don’t recognize the long-term benefits of education. Teachers urgently need relevant tools and the proper infrastructure to effectively function within.
They need error free textbooks, sports and laboratory equipment, chemicals and computers to effectively stimulate learners to become discoverers and individuals who are highly self-motivated and who bombard their teachers with critical questions that truly represent the pinnacle of discovery learning. So instead of asking for $65 million for NCN, ask for $65 million for tools that will allow teachers to effectively educate the nation’s children and then let us see if the combined opposition will instead give you $1.
The children of Guyana truly deserve better. They need leaders who are visionaries and pragmatic thinkers. Stop the blame game. Should not then the elected officials discharge their duty and truly serve their constituents?
Yours faithfully,
Aslam Hanief
Canada
