Dear Editor,
It is being suggested that Guyana would experience greater progress in social and economic development than it has in the past fifty years, if far more resources were brought to bear on the implantation of scientific/technological/ environmental literacy into the general Guyanese culture.
In an era dominated by science and technology the absence of the above literacies, particularly in the higher echelons of decision-making, must be viewed as an impediment to social and national development. In the war against poverty and ignorance this cultural deficit must be regarded as a major contributor to other types of more widespread poverty.
At various periods during the past one hundred fifty years it has been accepted by many of the world’s leading developed and modernized countries that education generally, and in particular scientific and technological education are the most powerful instruments possessed by society to ensure the process of modernization.
Singapore received its independence from Great Britain in the same year, 1966, as Guyana, but despite the fact that Singapore is not blessed with bountiful natural resources, it has one of the highest per capita incomes in the world. In Singapore the accent is on educational investment in those areas of training which are necessary to national growth. Consequently, educational policy, and curricular arrangements reflect attempts to match the outputs of education with the country’s industrial and commercial needs. To meet the demand for suitably trained manpower and to encourage the growth of technology intensive industries the Singapore government reorganized the entire education system to focus on technical education. The government even went so far as to convert a 4-year degree-granting liberal arts college into a 3-year diploma technical institute.
It has been almost fifty-five years to the date (March 27, 1961) in recognition of the changing needs of the Guyanese society that Guyanese were promised “…the development of creative human beings…well-educated and well-trained in modern technological skills”. However, it would seem that the road from rhetoric to reality appears to be a goal too far. The Guyanese public education system has remained largely unresponsive to changing needs within its environment.
The root causes of Guyana’s inertia to change can be found in our colonial legacy. The distinctive features of English educational practice are well known, but what is less well known is the extent of a) its earlier antagonism towards the sciences; b) its slow growth and development; and in more recent times; c) students forced to choose between the arts, business, or the sciences by 14 or in some cases, 16, and to begin to specialize in their chosen fields by 16, have conditioned the pace of Guyana’s scientific/ technological advance. The cumulative effects of these characteristics, together with our inability to see the bigger picture have had disastrous consequences in Guyana’s scientific /technological education and industrial development. What is ominous is the fact that these legacies are still with us. Until such time as this particular aspect of cultural enslavement is confronted, uprooted and discarded, Guyana will never be able to actualize her real potential.
Guyana and sister Caribbean countries have been cautioned that “our education systems no longer serve the region well.Tinkering with the system no longer works. A new vehicle for human empowerment and social transformation is needed” (Jules D, ‘Rethinking Education in the Caribbean’).
A similar suggestion was made in a paper ‘Science Education for Develop-ment – A Regional Perspective’ at the 1979 Conference of the International Council of the Association of Science Educators, Bridgetown, Barbados. The paper identified and developed curricular linkages between a science core and other subject disciplines and fields, but our inherited colonial inertia to change prevailed. It would appear that our education policy-makers dread the uncertainty of breaking with their past experience, no matter how detrimental it has been to the region’s desire for social and economic development.
In January 2011, a workshop was held at the Berbice campus of the University of Guyana to develop a framework for a national science and technology action plan towards socio-economic development in Guyana. The plan was based on the National Science and Technology policy developed by Professor Ventura of Jamaica.
The given rationale behind the development of the policy was “that Guyana is yet to accelerate the installation of a knowledge society, although this is the goal expressed in recent development plans. It was felt that improvements in the country’s capability in science and technology will accelerate this task. For this to happen, the country’s research and development capacity will have to be deepened, expanded and energized, to gain targeted skills to address local issues, and develop capabilities to identify, select and transfer foreign scientific insights and technological methods”.
To date, apart from the Sagicor project in schools and much talk about Stem/ Steam, there has been little progress in this direction.
Two other benefits of science education should be of particular interest to Guyanese educators. Educational research indicates that a) students comprehend certain mathematical concepts more easily when they are presented within the concreteness of scientific phenomena; and b) teachers who possess science backgrounds make better mathematics teachers.
It is hoped that the recent press report ‘NCERD to spearhead curriculum revamp for education system’, in KN March 11, signals a shift in Guyana’s educational philosophy that will result in the development of modern science-based curricula that will stimulate the imagination of both students and teachers, challenge them to think deeply and become profoundly involved in some significant issues that affect the quality of life in Guyana. The aim must be to design curricula that are modern, integrated, interesting, substantive, provocative and relevant. Other continuing science education and enrichment programmes should be developed for the benefit of the workforce and the general society.
It is conceded that at present the Ministry of Education (MOE) does not have the capacity to do what is required. But MOE must spare no effort to acquire the necessary capacity as quickly as is humanly possible. Other ministries, the private sector and all agencies whose operations depend upon the quality of their workforces must bring pressure to bear on the MOE to modernize. The MOE needs to be restructured and renamed the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology, to reflect the critical importance of science and technological education. The Science and Technology Division should be headed by a well-qualified and experienced professional who reports directly to the CEO.
If the ultimate goal of the new government’s educational policy is to assist in the creation of a peaceful, democratic, and prosperous modern Guyanese nation with the capacity for sustainable growth and development, then the implantation of scientific/technological/environmental literacy into the general Guyanese culture is the minimal and most critical demand of this era.
Yours faithfully,
Clarence O Perry
