Rethink education reform plan

By Professor Joel Warrican

I want to start by stating clearly that I am in full support of education reform.

I think that it is long overdue and that, done sensibly, can be of superlative benefit to Barbados.

I, however, find it necessary to analyse the current undertaking.

From the time the talk of education reform started prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, certain buzz words and phrases were being tossed around. For example, we heard of a middle school system; centres of excellence; academies; that some schools’ areas of excellence would be linked to CAPE subjects and others would be linked to some kind of skill; and that some students would be given more than two years to complete their advance skill. At the time, I had no issue with this discourse as I believed it to be brainstorming of ideas, which is a good place to commence an exercise of this nature.

I was perplexed when some three plus years later, the same ideas were being presented as the actual plan for the reform. My question was: when did these ideas go from brainstorming to a reform plan? How was it settled that these features would become the reform structure that Barbados would adopt? What happened to the process of transparency? What was even more baffling back then was that after these ideas were documented as the way forward for the country’s education system, the Ministry of Education then made a public show of gathering teachers and other education stakeholder under the big white imposing tent at The University of the West Indies Cave Hill Campus for “consultation”.

Not acceptable

In my opinion, that “consultation” was more than a little late. Is consultation not usually done before a decision is made? And the old adage of “better late than never” is not acceptable here.

Education reform is too important an endeavour for those responsible to be shrouding it in inefficiency. This is the future of young citizens that we are deciding here. From where I stand, that “consultation” appeared to be undertaken to satisfy the need for rubber-stamping of somebody’s ideas.

It has long been acknowledged that reform is needed to establish a fairer system for transferring students from primary education to the secondary level, thus jettisoning a system in which a child’s future is essentially determined by an examination taken on a single day at age 11.

Reform is needed to ensure that all students are educated in a space in which they can actually learn and be successful, in an environment that does not support elitism, as does the current one. These ideas represent a summary of all of the rhetoric volleyed about by the Ministry of Education and other persons who speak on the topic of the need for reform. To me, these are all legitimate reasons for seeking to bring about reform. Now, let us dissect those ideas and how they have evolved in the document made public at the launch of the reform on 5 October, 2023.

First, the concept of a middle school system. What is the purpose of the middle school? How does it address the challenges in the school system? How does it fix the poor performance of students? The fact is that the problems that present themselves by the time the students enter secondary school are already there before they write the 11+ examination.

They begin at the primary school level. So why are we seeking to address them through some middle school system? Whatever happened to the good educational practice of addressing challenges as early as possible such as at the early childhood and primary education levels?

For the most part, by the time the students reach these middle schools, the frustrations of failure have already set in and for some children, this failure is so strongly entrenched by then, that they have already given up.

Now, for those of you who are thinking “But there is no mention of middle schools in the recently launched reform!” Yes, they do say junior colleges, perhaps misguided by the thought that the use of the term “college” elevates the idea. The fact is, though, that even if you glue on a rainbow mane and single horn, a pig is still a pig, not a unicorn.

What evidence is there that these middle schools . . . oh! excuse me, these junior colleges . . . will bring about the real change that is needed in education in Barbados? There is a common recognition in education that what seems commonsensical and logical is often not supported by research data.

Relying solely on what seems to be common sense and logical often leads to bad decisions by policymakers. Anybody on the streets can argue on the basis of common sense and logic (and they often do on the callin programmes), but education professionals must go beyond this and turn to empirical research evidence to inform policy and practice.

And what of these so-called Colleges of Excellence. This sounds suspiciously like the “academies” that were circulating in a document earlier in the year. And as was the case earlier, the notion of the Colleges of Excellence is vague. Yes, much is said about the curriculum, but there is no clear explanation of how schools will be assigned a specific area of excellence.

Rethink idea

I hope that this means that the powers that be are seriously rethinking this initial idea, which to my mind has the potential to perpetuate the system of academic elitism, especially since a senior educational personnel stated on radio that not all children will do well in the traditional academic areas so spaces must be created where they can learn skills and other non-traditional things to be able to survive in the society, perhaps alluding to technical vocational areas.

While I agree with this notion of ensuring that all learners should be exposed to programmes that match their abilities and interests, I do not believe that the implementation of it can be a strategy that promotes stratification of students, with the socalled academically able in one setting and the others elsewhere.

I believe that the Ministry of Education must go back to the drawing board, and when they do, they need to do proper consultation, consultation that does not start with preconceived ideas for which they appear to be seeking validation.

This reform is big, important, and much needed, but Barbados has to get it right. Barbados can be the beacon for the region, it just needs to take the time to get it right. The country must seek to set its own agenda through transparent consultation rather than somebody else’s.

When the Prime Minister called for an abandoning of the Common Entrance Exam and a reform of the system, I supported it and I still support it. But surely, this calls for broad-based consultation from the beginning, including even regional and international experts, rigorous research and a social partnership that is non-partisan. Often, when education change is discussed, we cite Finland.

I have been to Finland and interacted with various stakeholders. What stood out was that the reform they undertook and that is bringing them the success that they are having was not accomplished by a single entity. It was done through a social partnership which included among others, trade unions, NGOs, industry, parent bodies, and importantly, all political parties. And they sought a solution that fitted their context.

They did not reject all “outside” ideas, but they chose the ones that best suited the country. I would like to suggest that this is an excellent way to approach education reform: look at what others did or are doing, but seek a strategy that reflects our circumstances, our needs and our vision for the Barbados of the future.

The authorities should resist the urge to use smoke and mirrors to gain favour for what can only be described as a paltry attempt to bring about change.

Professor Joel Warrican, director, School of Education, UWI, Cave Hill Campus.