Will Guyana’s goal ‘One People, One Nation, One Destiny’ ever Be attained?

Dec 25, 2010 Letters

---

Dear Editor,
From the day (May 26, 1966) Guyana received political independence, this country was faced with the challenge of building a Guyanese nation – “One People, One Nation, One Destiny”.   It is doubtful whether the implications of building such a nation were fully understood by those in authority.   Two hundred years ago, a German philosopher said: “What you want the nation to be, you must first put in the schools”.
It could be said without fear of contradiction, that the challenge of building a Guyanese nation was not seen as an opportunity to transform Guyana’s colonial and elitist school system into a quality education system for all Guyanese.    I have, elsewhere, defined quality education as education that not only meets the needs of individual students, but also, the needs of teachers, the needs of the communities in which schools are located, the needs of Guyana and the needs of the Guyanese society.
Education policies in Guyana must be contextualized, that is, relevant to the economic, social and political realities of Guyana.   Education policies must also serve the purposes of each individual, the larger society, and ultimately Guyana, if they are to be considered adequate and effective.   Education policies in Guyana from 1966 to this day have fallen far short of these requirements.
It is imperative that Guyana undertakes the steps necessary to modernize and democratize her school system now.   A truly modern and democratic Guyana will remain a dream until such time as our educational practices are modernized and democratized.   This process has tremendous implications for all levels of the education system: the laws regulating the practice of education; the organization, management and administration; and, most particularly, the teachers, teaching methods and classroom organization.    It is now widely recognized that a lot of traditional “teaching” interferes with how many children learn.   Teachers are the caretakers of democracy and they must be adequately prepared for their tasks.
We need to understand that the modernization of education is more than building new schools, more than enhancing physical infrastructure, and increasing the availability of books and modern equipment.   Essentially, the modernization of education in Guyana must be a process of freeing the potential in individuals, maximizing their ability to share in the determination of the goals of their communities and the larger society, and to participate creatively and effectively in the realization of these goals.   Although, all “students are bright and talented” in their own individual way, at present, our education practice does a very efficient job of suppressing the innate abilities of significant numbers of these “bright and talented students”.
It is in our schools and in the lives of Guyanese citizens that the process of development ought to begin.   This human element must always be our first concern in any attempt to solve the problems of education for the twenty-first century.  As Guyana pursues the goal of building a nation of one people with a common destiny, the issue of social justice is not optional.   It is fundamental to what quality education is all about.
Teaching and learning are social practices.   They always involve questions about purposes, criteria for action, the application of resources, accountability and the consequences of action.   These issues cannot be evaded.   The “Hidden Curriculum” contained in the way schools treat their pupils is as powerful an educational force as the official curriculum.   The mistreated pupils will become the parents of the next school generation.   We must not be dismayed if when they become parents, they are reluctant or unwilling to support the efforts of schools because their experience as pupils has been one of alienation.
The moral quality of education is inevitably affected by the moral character of schools..   If the school system is dealing unjustly with some of its pupils, they are not the only ones to suffer.   The quality of education for all others is degraded.   An education system which privileges one child over another is giving the privileged child a corrupted education, even if it gives him or her a social or economic advantage.
The claim has been made that the “No Repetition Policy” is the outcome of “extensive research, debate and consultation with various education stakeholders.”   One would have expected more specific and targeted initiatives among the research outcomes, instead of the “one size fits all” no repetition policy.   It would be of interest to know what were the research questions, and who were the participating “various education stakeholders”.
Indeed, one of the outcomes of such extensive research (assuming its relevance), should have been the identification of “Education Priority Areas” (EPAs), that should have been targeted for appropriate (relevant and adequate), and specific interventions.
A situation analysis would have provided baseline data for more relevant research and study.   Subsequent analyses of demographic data might have revealed that although the overall size of the Guyanese population has remained static (750, 000 – 800,000) for the past thirty years, that segment of the population that is least well educated (including those with “poor parenting skills”, as observed by the Minister of Education), is also the fastest growing.   This will mean, relatively speaking, that the better educated segment is shrinking or disappearing.   This is the stark outcome of Guyana’s continuing elitist education policies, among others, over the past forty-four years.
Some very significant implications of the population explosion in Guyana since the 1950s, continues to elude education decision-makers.  To continue to ignore this demographic phenomenon, is to continue to put this nation at risk.   Ponder the economic, political and social consequences, unless this trend is arrested and reversed without further delay
Every rational Guyanese
should be alarmed and frightened by these trends.   If this situation is not dealt with urgently, it will lead to increasingly significant reductions in the knowledge and skill levels in the Guyanese workforce.   There is substantial evidence that such erosion is already taking place in many areas of Guyanese economic and social endeavours.   Even the Ministry of Education acknowledged this phenomenon:   “In the 1960s, Guyana’s education system was considered one of the best in the Caribbean.   Today it is considered one of the weakest” (MOE Strategic Plan 2003-2007)
A survey of relevant research suggests:
1. The influence of the home on educational attainment is 3 or 4 times as great as that of the school;
2. Home influence is mediated not so much by poverty or social class as by            (a) parental attitude to education, and (b) level of literacy in the home;
3. Environmental influences bear most heavily on the youngest children, and particularly pre-school children;
4. Educational deficit is cumulative, from pre-school onwards.
This last observation suggests that to wait until Grade 7 and the secondary phase of schooling to address underachievement, is to attempt to “close the stable door long after the horse has bolted”.   This does not make much sense.
Strategically, education “policy initiatives” should aim at arresting, reducing and ultimately eliminating education deficits while the task is much more manageable, less costly, and the learning curves of individuals are ascending.   The efficiencies and effectiveness of such strategically placed interventions or initiatives should be obvious to all.
It is essential that education “policy initiatives” which are intended to benefit students at risk, be grounded in an adequate conceptualization of the “big education picture” within identified EPAs.   Learning is influenced by a multitude of factors within the environment of the learner – even as early as the pre-natal stages.
The “big picture” or systems approach will not only reveal all the interconnections and relationships, but also, the strategic loci where inputs will have a multiplying effect and result in the maximization of impact.
Given the above, an integrated multisectoral approach to the problems that exist in EPAs is demanded.   It ought to be realized that investments in student remediation, or, even in superior curricula, will only be squandered unless the more pressing needs of children and their parents (such as the reduction and eradication of poverty), have already been addressed.
Children cannot learn efficiently if they are undernourished and hungry.   Schools ought not to focus on remediation alone, which in many cases is tantamount to “blaming the victims” of inadequate education policies, low teacher expectations, inappropriate teaching methods, and teacher absenteeism.   Parents and communities play a prominent role in education.   Programs and resources at schools within EPAs, should directly reflect the needs of EPAs as decided by the community members.
Imagine EPAs with residences for various kinds of staff within the school compounds.   EPAs that have several pre-school and all-day kindergarten facilities, and schools that are open all year with extended hours.   In addition to multilateral curricula, they offer after-school and weekend programs for both children and adults.   A variety of social and other services, recreational opportunities for all ages, industrial arts shops and hobby clubs are available and easily accessible.   There are childcare sections, libraries, literacy centers, and parent counseling aimed at teaching parents how to help children to learn.
More needs to be said about remediation.   As plausible as the reasons offered by the Ministry of Education in support of “automatic promotion” are, there are other reasons why this approach needs to be rethought.   First, whether this remediation takes place in Grade 7 of the new six-year secondary program, or during the vacations, or at the further and tertiary levels, the Guyanese taxpayer will be paying twice, or thrice for the acquisition of knowledge and skills that should have taken place before.   Second, even when permitted to graduate as a result of automatic promotion, employers may have to finance training programs aimed at providing new employees with basic knowledge and skills.    The costs of this training will be incorporated into the organizations’ products and services, and ultimately passed on to the consumer.   Third, if these underachievers are unemployed, unemployable, and become guests of the State (hospitalized or incarcerated), the taxpayer pays.    So, how many times do Guyanese taxpayers pay?
Multisectoral policy initiatives ought to focus on the elimination of the need for widespread remediation.   This must be interpreted as the mitigation and ultimate eradication of poverty. This is not to say that extra tutoring (peer group, or one on one) will not be necessary in specific cases.   However, another strategic locus where initiatives aimed at arresting, reducing, and eliminating the need for widespread remediation is in the education and continuing education of teachers.   The occasional workshop is insufficient.   The content of pre-service programs will have to be reorganized and upgraded to prepare teachers adequately for today’s classrooms.   For those teachers who have already been trained, continuing education which does not require teachers to be absent from classroom duty, will have to be made easily available, using a combination of technology and vacation institutes.
The University of Guyana ought to have been in the vanguard of this movement.  Enrichment programs aimed at enhancing literacy in a wide cross-section of human endeavours, can be beamed into homes where the first teachers (parents) and other adults can benefit.
It should be patently clear after forty-four years of insufficient progress, that understanding the relationship between education and nation building is not an optional matter for our leaders and senior functionaries.   It is an imperative.
I would take the opportunity to urge the Minister of Education to demonstrate his commitment to Guyana’s national goal of “One People, One Nation, One Destiny”, by doing the right thing: redraft the “Draft Education Bill 2008”.   Please keep in mind, Hon. Minister, that what you want this nation to be, you must first put in the schools.    You, Sir, cannot plant limes and hope to reap oranges.   To reap oranges, one has to plant oranges.    Quality education must also nurture democracy.   In its present form, “Draft Education Bill 2008”, will not facilitate the modernization and democratization of education in Guyana.   It will achieve just the opposite.   It will not succeed in transforming our school system into a quality education system for all Guyanese, in which teachers will be willing to be held accountable for what transpires in their classrooms.
My analysis of the older education bill reveals that the Chief Education Officer (the top professional), was tasked with about two hundred and fifty (250) responsibilities or decisions, while the Minister of Education (a politician) was tasked with about fifty (50) responsibilities or decisions.
In the new “Draft Education Bill 2008”, the situation is almost completely reversed.    The professional arm of the Ministry of Education has been virtually marginalized, while the “power relationships” instead of being modernized and democratized, are now brokered by the Minister.   This is a giant step backwards. You cannot use yesterday’s tools to do today’s job and expect to be in business tomorrow.  What is needed, Hon. Minister, is more professionalism, not less!
To say that this situation lends itself to tremendous abuse, is to be extremely courteous.   I will submit that the Minister is ill-advised to attempt to micro-manage so large and diverse a system.    Surely, such practice could never be in the interest of education development in Guyana.
Attempts at total control from the political directorate whether in the guise of “effective supervision of the system” (KN 17-12-10), needs to be replaced with enlightened management: a method of management guided by the principles of collegiality, assistance, support and quality.
The political order within a system (and for that matter within a school) is an important determinant of the way it will deal with educational reforms.    A hierarchical and authoritarian system (or school) is not likely to look with favour on reforms that emphasize social justice as exemplified by participation by the stakeholders and especially student decision-making.
On the other hand, it is likely that the more democratic the political order of the system, the more likely it is to deal effectively with the issue of social justice and equity.   Democratic structures are more open to initiatives from below.
Democratic structures are more open to debate and debate offers opportunities for subordinated and marginalized interests to find a voice and be heard.    A boss managed, adversarial system is, to say the least, anti-education.   There will be no clash of ideas, only “total concurrence from the senior management team” (KN 07-12-10)
Clarence O. Perry

---

---