Education in Guyana must pass the test of quality, not optics

Sep 28, 2025 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

Education has long been in crisis in Guyana, and while the Irfaan Ali government deserves some credit for recognizing this, the response so far has leaned more toward optics than outcomes. There is a tendency to measure success in education by the number of schools opened, the insertion of “smart” technologies, or the visibility of programmes like GOAL. These initiatives, while not without merit, mask the fact that our education system is failing to produce an adequate number of ably qualified graduates.

Behind the ribbon-cuttings and photo opportunities lies a sobering reality. Nearly half of our students fail the National Grade Six Assessment, which determines entry into secondary school. For those who do gain admission, far too many fail to complete their secondary education. This is in addition to the fact that Guyana has yet to achieve universal secondary education in the first place. The Education Sector Plan 2021–2025 makes clear that drop-out rates are alarmingly high, and even among those who finish secondary school, the outcomes remain dismal.

The starkest evidence of this failure comes from the Caribbean Examinations Council (CXC) results. In the critical subject like Mathematics pass rates remain stubbornly low. English has improved but should be far higher than the present pass rates recorded.

These subjects are the foundation for higher education and employment. Yet a majority of students attempting them are unable to matriculate. We cannot pretend that an education system is working if the majority of its graduates cannot meet the basic thresholds required to participate meaningfully in the workforce.

This, then, is where our measure of education success must shift. It is not about how many schools are opened or how many cash grants are distributed. It is not about Ministers showing up to berate contractors. The test of our education system is the quality of students it produces—the skills, competencies, and character of our graduates. On that score, Guyana is currently holding a failing grade.

One critical impediment to progress has been the splitting of responsibilities between regional authorities and the central Ministry of Education. This bifurcation creates gaps in accountability and undermines the implementation of cohesive policy. A national education strategy requires unified command and consistent execution; otherwise, local variations and bureaucratic overlaps will continue to dilute impact. Unless this structural flaw is addressed, reforms will remain fragmented.

Another deep-seated problem has been the chronic lack of technical expertise within the Education Ministry itself. This has hindered effective planning, monitoring, and evaluation. Too often, the Ministry has had to rely on foreign consultants and international agencies to craft its education policies. For instance, the current Education Sector Plan (2021–2025) was produced with heavy involvement from foreign experts. Likewise, the push toward equity in education over the past five years was essentially driven by an Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) project. While external support has its place, overreliance signals a dangerous void in local capacity.

Guyana needs its own cadre of technical education professionals—data analysts, planners, curriculum specialists, and policy architects—who can design and implement strategies tailored to our unique challenges. Education policy should not be imported wholesale; it should be built from within, informed by local realities and supported by robust data.

Too many decisions are made more on political expediency and tradition than on rigorous evidence. Take for example this idea of a transportation grant which will now be eligible to both those children who have to walk or paddle to school, as well as those who are driven to school in their parents Mercedes Benz.

A truly modern education system demands constant evaluation: Which teaching methods yield the best results? Which schools are underperforming and why? What are the socioeconomic drivers of school dropouts? Without this kind of data-driven approach, reform is little more than trial and error.

To its credit, the government appears to have recognized this gap and is making moves to bolster technical capacity within the Ministry. That is a step in the right direction, but it must be accelerated and deepened. Building schools and rolling out technology may be politically attractive, but without a strong technical core, these initiatives will not deliver the desired results.

At the heart of this discussion is a simple but profound truth that education is not about buildings, it is about people. It is about preparing children to become capable adults who can think critically, solve problems, and contribute productively to society. A system that graduates thousands of students who cannot read, write, or calculate at the level required for the world of work is a system that has failed, regardless of how many new schools dot the landscape.

If Guyana is serious about transforming education, it must recalibrate its measures of success. Instead of counting schools and computers, we should be counting how many students matriculate, how many gain employable skills, how many go on to tertiary education, and how many are able to thrive in the labor market. Anything less is self-deception.

---

• CXC, education, Peeping Tom, test of quality

---