The extra lesson syndrome

Nov 12, 2017 News

---

By Olato Sam
The education system in Guyana must recognise and address the existence of the ‘shadow education system’ that has been allowed to flourish to the point where it now threatens the formal structures.
Extra lessons, supplemental tutoring or extra tuition as it is called, has expanded to the point where it openly competes with the formal system on a number of levels. Left ignored and unregulated, it can further undermine its official counterpart, compromising its ability to attain its objectives.
From the outset it must be stated that this is not an attempt to argue for abolition of extra lessons in Guyana, rather it seeks to identify and discuss issues that suggest the need for regulation of the industry. Many of us would not be here today had it not been for ‘lessons’ as we called it.
What must be recognised, however, is that what we experienced in our formative years some time ago, has now evolved into something much different and highly threatening that needs to be addressed through formal interventions. This leviathan has been allowed to take shape largely because of its subtlety and ability to mask itself as part of the formal education structures.
The extra lessons phenomenon that has mushroomed in Guyana in recent years differs significantly from traditional extra lessons that were viewed as necessary remediation or as welcomed reinforcement for the work being done in schools. Traditionally, students who exhibited weaknesses in particular content areas or those who needed enrichment were sent for extra tuition.
This has changed drastically to the point where the prevailing mindset is that extra lessons are a necessity for the success of all students in the system—therein lies the danger. Parents and students are being led to believe that at all levels in the system extra lessons are vital; with the alternative condemning students to certain failure. This raises some critical questions in relation to the value and role of the formal education structures.
There have been cases reported to the Ministry of Education of overt manipulation by teachers where students were intentionally failed early in the academic year as a means of forcing parents to enroll them in the teachers’ lessons. Equally troubling were the cases of teachers omitting key sections of the curriculum during the school day, thereby forcing students to attend their lessons as a means of staying abreast.
Initially these fee-paying lessons were being held in the schools in the afternoons, forcing the Ministry of Education to ban fee paying lessons in schools given its clear bias against the students whose parents could not afford it.
Interestingly enough, due to inadequate oversight, lessons have returned to schools in the afternoon, with teachers informing parents of the ‘donation’ that they can make towards the classes instead of overt fees—placing subtle pressure on parents who can ill afford the extra tuition.
Parents cave in and subscribe oftentimes for fear of victimisation for nonparticipation. These activities raise key ethical questions: Should teachers be allowed to hold extra-lessons for the students enrolled in their class—whether in school or elsewhere? Where extra lessons are being held in schools, whether for a ‘donation’ or for free, who monitors what is taught, the overall impact on student performance and who is held accountable?
If a teacher cannot bring about acceptable performance during the instructional programme in school, should she/he be expected to cause same in less time after school? There are many teachers who are devoted to their students and even provide lessons for free to ensure their students’ success; however, these efforts are oftentimes overshadowed by the less than admirable practices of their colleagues.
The effects of the extra-lessons syndrome go well beyond some unethical practices in schools; however, and are grounded in longstanding structural elements of the system. Guyana inherited a highly elitist and delimiting education system that we have done little to address over the past fifty-odd years of independence.
Most of the interventions made in this regard have been peripheral and the core elements of the pre-existing model remain. The elitism has solidified the concept of good and bad schools, retarding the potential balancing of the system in relation to the quality of offerings throughout the system and has fueled an examination culture.
Success at examinations is equated with the quality of life one will enjoy and provides justification for extra lessons as a worthwhile investment in the child’s future. Extra lessons now exist in all quarters and for virtually all levels and subjects within the education system. What has emerged as a result of the pressures to pass the exams is a parallel or shadow education system.
Where the lessons instructor is not the class teacher, the content being taught is more than likely not aligned with that of the school, forcing students to attempt to cope with two different instructional experiences. Oftentimes, as a coping mechanism, students focus on one—the one being paid for usually takes precedence.
There have been countless cases in secondary schools where students no longer focus on or attend classes in school because they are attending extra lessons that become a substitute for in-school instruction. As such, extra lessons no longer serve as reinforcement for in-school instruction but become an outright competing substitute.
Extra lessons now exist in every corner of the system yet there has not been a commensurate increase in performance at any level. Inadequate or under-qualified teachers in key subject areas such as mathematics, science and English at the secondary level would have forced parents to seek specialist instructors to provide extra tuition.
There have been claims that without these specialists the pass rate at external examinations would be worse. This phenomenon questions the degree of confidence parents have in the formal system and questions whether extra lessons are indeed a necessity. Clearly, there is a demand on the part of parents that teachers are more than willing to meet.
As a result, the practice has spiraled to the extent that extra lessons are being offered by anyone who deems themselves competent. There exists no mechanism to monitor and track the quality of instruction being offered at lessons. In some cases, the exam culture has resulted in lessons being opportunities for teaching to the test, coaching students to pass the exam at the expense of true competence.
The drilling of students with suitable answers to past exam papers is now the norm. Quality instruction has been forsaken for passes at the examinations. Parents simply invest their earning with the hope of an acceptable outcome, with their child being different despite years of evidence of underachievement in some cases.
The key questions of whether examinations demand extra tuition or can the content be covered and mastered through in-class instruction need to be examined and addressed.
The overall impact on the system is far-reaching and not fully understood. Little research has been done on the nature of the shadow system and its impact on performance levels and, more importantly, on the students themselves.
Anecdotal evidence suggests that students are suffering a greater degree of burn-out as a result of the long hours of combined instruction. Extra lessons are now starting at the lowest levels in system and at younger ages, depriving children of key time usually spent on their all-round development.
The primary diagnostic assessments at grades two and four have unfortunately been used as further justification for lessons, forcing pupils at tender ages to be subjected to the unnecessary pressures of extra-lessons. This has undermined the embedding of the diagnostic concepts of the grades two and four assessments, resulting in teachers and parents regarding them as examinations onto themselves that need to be ‘passed’.
Education has now become synonymous with academics at the expense of all of the other pursuits that add value and meaning to one’s existence. Questions have emerged regarding lessons being “cram camps’, leading to students being further “over-schooled but undereducated”.
More importantly, if the extra-lessons industry continues apace, there is no inherent incentive for teachers to work harder and produce better in-school results since underperformance is sure justification for more lessons.
Addressing this multifaceted issue is by no means an easy task. There has to be widespread engagement of all stakeholders on the matter.
Teacher salaries are oftentimes used as primary justification for the extra lessons being offered and must be a key part of the discussion. If the education system is to forge forward however, all of these dimensions must be addressed and aligned with a strategic plan for producing positive outcomes.

---

---