Dear Editor,
The more I probe and listen, the more I learn about some of the rationales and underpinnings behind the local lessons epidemic. It is a disease that paralyses and petrifies many in this nation.
I hear from distressed and pained students that it is “my parents” who insist/command that extra lessons be attended. What manner of parents are these? What manner of thinking flourishes at the adult level when: 1) the student is above average in aptitude; 2) there is a commendable level of effort; and 3) there is a satisfactory teaching component and complement.
It could be, as further learned, that lessons now function as “insurance.” I can understand, even urge, this investment when the vandals (those masquerading as teachers) perpetuate atrocities and desecrate the educational house. In these now pervasive instances, the insurance of extra lessons becomes an obligation: a time-consuming, expensive, and draining one. The problem is that students end up with the same people who cheat them in the classroom, and who menace them, too.
Having said this, I question this insurance when it is patently not needed. What are parents doing to their children with this all-too-convenient crutch, the equivalent of a third leg?
Editor, to ask and answer, I submit that this is inimical to the self-motivation of self-starters, and dilutive to the self-confidence and self-respect of capable students. It retards the joy of self-discovery. I recall the interest and energy spent on dissecting and starting over repeatedly for hours on a single question or issue; and the pride that came with success. With rare exceptions, I detect that such hard labour is today a thing of the past. The outsourcing of initiative, effort, and learning, both before and after regular school hours has become the Guyanese panacea for academic shortcomings, including those imagined.
But there is a price for taking the easy way out. Having overcompensated at the CSEC level and long conditioned to the dictation and memorization and the regimentation of past examination papers, a great many students and parents run into an unexpected brick wall. It is either the jarring collision with CAPE or college. Say goodbye to memorization and regurgitation and welcome to falling bricks. Students, who could not differentiate between Gregory Peck and OPEC, or Shakespeare and a fruit shake, are now compelled, and in the torturous position of having, to think. They have to interpret and extrapolate; and they have to question and critique. This calls for the comprehension that comes from thinking; it is unknown and daunting territory.
The score of subjects, an abomination to be sure, is unmatched across the region, and frowned upon, if not mocked privately. This is in places where the educational systems are more credible and advanced. The long hours of long lessons, along with long containers of subjects contribute to converting many capable children into cerebral cripples. Save for the exceptionally talented and the very dedicated, the rest are left behind at the higher levels, parents and insurance and all. The emphasis and push for bulk (total subjects and total delivery hours) back students into a murky alley.
For all of the foregoing reasons, I humbly suggest that the Hon. Minister and his senior ministry team contemplate a more sensible line, a more robust line, and a more involved line in the schools and classrooms. This is a first step to accept the situation for what is really: a national disaster; an unnatural one, and one made by tricky human hands and calculating human minds.
I recommend the following proactive steps: a) limit the number of subjects offered to a round dozen; b) design procedures to identify and sanction chronically late students –to deter the early bird lessons customers; c) arrange monitoring of classroom delivery of syllabus; d) arrange for the presence of a resident Ethics Officer in schools, and who reports to the ministry, not the Head Teacher; e) arrange for the Head Teacher, the Head of Department, subject teacher, and the Ethics Officer to certify in writing as to the appropriate delivery of syllabus; f) establish a confidential hotline for parents to report victimization at the hands of teachers who penalize those not attending their lessons; g) penalize those teachers found to be victimizing captive students; and h) encourage, if not mandate, after hours extra-curricular activities. The intent of these baseline remedial approaches is to expose gaps, the creation of artificial demand for lessons, and to hold all accountable. There is also the objective of crowding out unnecessary, and uncalled for, lessons and reiterate that the school is the primary place of learning.
Although, this was written before, I repeat for emphasis. I would go still further, and recommend that: i) teachers must disclose in writing lessons involvement, and seek the ministry’s written permission annually; ii) the Fire Service conduct routine inspections of lessons facilities for safety requirements compliance; and iii) the GRA be recruited to examine for full income tax reporting.
I believe that the culture, the epidemic, and the national disaster that is encompassed by the lessons phenomenon can be successfully addressed. It can be so if the minister and the ministry really desires to turn the tide and save the children, if not secure the future. I daresay that some of the aforementioned steps are mandatory. If there is the will, the way will follow. There has been enough of the hands-off, neutral posturing. The runaway bull must be taken by the horns, and thrown off its feet. Now who is up to the task?
Yours faithfully,
GHK Lall
