Dear Editor,
‘GTU favours subject limit for CSEC students -Manickchand finds it ill thought out, dumb’ (Sunday Stabroek June 18). I see the union’s position as sensible and practical, while that of the one-time Minister to be surprising, and a tad bewildering.
First, there is acknowledgment of the quantitative, as in all these subjects offered and taken. The results can be outstanding, but heavily skewed towards the performance of a ‘super-six’ or so standout students at the top schools. Now I ask this simple question: what has been the translation and extension of those overwhelming numbers at the levels beyond CSEC? Other than Cecil Cox, how have of the other sterling CSEC performers fared at CAPE and above over the years? Have they maintained that singular numerical excellence? Or have they become bogged down, and lost in the pack, of the merely good of which there are multitudes? I suggest that they peaked too early due to being trapped and overworked and drained in an avalanche of subjects at an early age.
Further, I venture that industrious young students, still in their formative years, (and unwise adults, parents and educators included) have so tormented synapses and waking hours that there is not much left in the brain tank after CSEC. Instead of taking off and soaring after CSEC, they level off at lower achievement altitudes. Reports have circulated of other fallout.
Second, using twelve subjects as a guide, there has to be serious concerns, as a practical matter, of how much material could be covered, perhaps forced, into a six-hour five-day official class week. That six-hour day is really closer to five, when one factors in lunch and daily breaks and assembly time. To reiterate the obvious, as the subjects essayed per student increase, the situation could only deteriorate in terms of comprehensive coverage and those all-important ingredients of any education standard, which are the doubts and scepticisms that push to new frontiers. I submit that the higher the number of subjects taken, the greater the necessity for rote learning; the suffocating straitjacket of focusing on and revising past CSEC examination papers; and the force-feeding of superficial coverage of content. As a quick aside, anyone taking the time to scrutinize the CSEC examination from the last two decades will be sure to observe a general ‘dumbing down’ of the questions posed, in that they are neither of a challenging nature nor do they call for much thought. They are simpler and more insulting by the year.
There is little space, less regard, and no drive towards the new, the cerebral, and the creative. There is no contention, only the damning stagnation of memorization. It is why the sparkle of many superior Guyanese early achievers dims after CSEC.
Third, and related, because of these limited, rushed, opportunistic in-class realities, the thought is planted, uncertainty cultivated, and marketing fostered that more instruction is needed. This transports to that superseding and primary schooling system for many, now represented by the lessons culture. It has come to embody the mainly negative. It is negative in terms of the gruelling hours, the opportunity costs of adjacent pursuits, a balanced student, and real childhood. Civilized societies do not demand continuous fifteen hour days from its adult workforce, and then ask them to take home work. I advance that that is the life of students in this country.
This only deteriorates as the subject load grows more burdensome. Ten subjects at the old GCE was the squeeze of a full school day and a full brain. That 50, 75, and 100 per cent more subjects is the routine of today is mindboggling. How is that possible, given that the school day is still the same? Yes, I am aware of the sleight-of-hand of subdividing one subject into three and so forth, but one hour is still sixty minutes.
Fourth, and continuing with the practical and now qualitative, there is a close correlation between the number of subjects sat for, and the number of clock hours required. This is so even when there is available the rare advantage of home tutoring and guidance. In view of this inarguable nexus, outstanding students have to do some reading. But the same cannot be said of learning, interpreting, comprehending, critiquing, and advancing (mentally). There is only the splendid display, an academic spectacle, really, of heavily stuffed turkeys regurgitating standard fare for public consumption and public recognition. It is why the rarefied excellence of post-secondary education seems to elude even those stars that shone once at the CSEC level. If this is the lot of the better students, then one can only imagine the ordeals of those less blessed; of that great lumpen mass of underachievers, the forgotten, and the discarded.
Fifth, and having said all of this, I invite anyone to enlighten me (and the nation) as to either the value or point of eighteen, or twenty, or twenty-two and counting subjects. Perhaps, I should have started at fifteen subjects. I see this along certain lines: mandatory Mathematics and English Language, plus three subjects in the science stream totals five; throw in another five subjects for any purpose and that is ten; pursue another two due to special interests, and that is still a grand figure of twelve subjects. It is why I encounter heavy seas with anything above that number, and with those so advocating.
Sixth: Editor, it should be noted that I have written very little so far today on those students and schools outside of education’s spotlight and close embrace. This invisible, perhaps inconsequential majority is ignored, and lost in the pageantry of the soaring numbers of the precious favoured few. And the latter are all of these, particularly in the favoured department, for that means individual accolades, be they for the adults or institutions. I go farther on this uneven unlit road. It is human nature to be entranced and buoyed by strivers and producers; these would be the few gifted and unflagging students. That means less attention for the less focused and less achieving. These are the casualties of lack of energy and interest from overseeing adults. After all, there are no encomia or photo opportunities from that lot.
Seventh, I return to the world of grownups and of work. There are those times when the hardworking and overwhelmed raise hand and object: enough! Cannot (should not) be done. Prioritize. Decide. I think that Guyana is at the same suffocating place with the plethora of subjects allowed at the CSEC level. I applaud the GTU for its stance; I struggle to appreciate the former minister’s thinking. I am perplexed that such a commonsense issue as the number of subjects should rise to a national conversation, or even provoke philosophical disagreements.
Yours faithfully,
GHK Lall
