Who is Making the Grade?

by Simon

•Simon is a young Bahamian with things on his mind who wishes to remain anonymous. His column 'Front Porch' is published every Tuesday in the Nassau Guardian. He can be reached at frontporchguardian@gmail.com

The recent release of the BJC and BGCSE results, including the accompanying national grade averages for these exams, was followed by the usual arguments, wailing and gnashing of teeth, surface analysis, finger-pointing and spin.

The results do tell us something about the teaching and learning in our schools, particularly in our public schools.

They are symptomatic of a rusting and outdated assembly-line system that has produced tens of thousands of students who lack basic competency in the most basic subject matters.

But the fixation on this numbers game obscures broader issues. Standardized content tests only tell you so much and tend to partially measure the information in your head. They tell you precious little about genuine aptitude or common sense.

This is not to depreciate the role of testing, but it does suggest that teaching and learning are more complex. We know that many of our kids are not making the grades we desire. But neither are scores of those who lead and manage public education.

Rather than ritually copying national student averages from an annual report, the media might consider an original homework assignment by regularly examining the learning plans of those who devise, administer, grade and teach to the tests.

Students are not the only ones who are not making the grade.

Our education bureaucracy is populated with many well-meaning veterans who have dedicated their lives to educating our children. Many of them have made considerable sacrifices in this regard and are deserving of more gratitude.

But their best intentions are not producing the numbers of graduates of competency and character committed to civility and citizenship that the country needs and deserves.
Good intentions and hard work are necessary but not sufficient when it comes to transforming our schools. Of course, this is not the sole responsibility of educators.

Our schools are not designed to be foster homes that replace the role of home and family life. This is neither desirable nor possible. Moreover, students must be held accountable for their own achievements and behavior.

Still, the bureaucracy that runs our $300 million dollar a year public education assembly line is maintained by an often Byzantine Ministry of Education complex and a teachers union often equally resistant to urgent reform.

Like many organizations, both entities are often more consumed by status, self-promotion, perks and organizational charts. Moreover, both are held back by far too many people resistant to higher standards and greater accountability.

The assembly line is also run by alternating political leaderships who help to tweak its gears every now and again. That tweaking has improved our education system by introducing some new programmes and adjustments.

But the assembly line does not need to be tweaked -- it needs to be dismantled. Its outdated parts need to be placed in a museum. Its workable parts can be incorporated into a modernized system capable of producing more students of competence, character and citizenship.

Such a system can not be designed and built without a more compelling vision for Bahamian education. Unfortunately, while politicians, civil servants, educators and union leaders have seen a glimpse of the future, many continue to run our education system with outdated mindsets.

A step in the right direction can be seen in the results of the 2005 18th National Education Conference under the theme, Transforming Bahamian Education for the 21st Century.

Still, such a vision must be linked to broader national goals. Absent such goals and a compelling vision, proposed changes and the introduction of new initiatives will deliver piecemeal results.

Neither major political party has demonstrated the clarity of vision and imagination, tenacity and ambition, nor the political boldness needed to rethink and transform public education.

This new vision may include the dramatic expansion of the magnet school concept and experiential learning methods; the adoption of more transformative character education and citizenship programmes; and broader initiatives to link the classroom with parental involvement and corporate engagement.

But none of this will succeed without dramatic changes in the quality of leadership and teaching in our schools. Too many educators are obsessed with job protection over accountability and classroom effectiveness.

There are scores of capable administrators and teachers in the public system, and there have been various initiatives to improve the accreditation standards and professional development of educators.

Still, an extraordinary amount of the teaching in our classrooms with regard to content and methods is shockingly ineffective, unimaginative, boring and outdated. As many veteran educators will attest: by improving the quality of teaching you are providing long-term solutions to disciplinary problems and school violence.

But broader efforts to require higher standards and greater accountability from teachers will not be easy, particularly in light of the political power of the BUT’s membership who can serve as a swing vote in many parliamentary seats.

Issues like merit pay, teacher testing, dismissal of hopelessly non-performing teachers, and expanded evaluation of teachers, are subjects to which teachers’ unions are usually hostile.

However, improved standards should be unreservedly linked to requests for new salary and benefits packages. That’s a political argument that can be won. So can the demand for more vigorous evaluation of administrators regarding vision, management, innovation, student achievement, teacher improvement et al.

A school with good leadership and capable teachers, with few computers and larger classroom sizes, is preferable to one filled with the latter and lacking in quality educators. The human element is indispensable.

But reform in the field requires reform at Headquarters including retraining where possible and sidelining when necessary the layers of mid-managers who can support or stymie efforts to help students make the grade.

Mid-management must be lead by and held accountable to a senior leadership that combines experience with a commitment to change -- not for the sake of change, but for the sake of inspiring our children to recognize and express the promise and giftedness, which a teacher’s touch can help to unleash.

Reform of our public education enterprise is a matter of social justice and national security, economic advancement and political maturity, and individual and social responsibility.

Towards this end, the Director of Education (DOE) is, in many aspects, as important as the Director General (DG) of Tourism or the Financial Secretary.

The DOE should be accorded the status, independence and tools needed to renew and revise one of the more important instruments of national development, one that has the largest share of the national budget.

It is also essential that the post be held by a highly competent, battle-hardened and tenacious civil servant who can inspire and stand up to various groups, including the politicians.

We will know how serious political parties are about reform by the individual they place in this critical post. This individual along with the Minister of Education and the Permanent Secretary must further streamline a bloated and overly centralized Ministry.

There are many social and individual factors which effect student achievement. But in jurisdiction after jurisdiction, superior educational leadership and good teaching have made a significant difference in the lives of young people.

One major reason our test scores are so low is the poor leadership and mediocre teaching that occurs in too many of our public schools. This along with a lack of parental support and a more stable family life has created a perfect storm of student underachievement.

If one definition of insanity is repeating the same behaviour and expecting different results, public education is decidedly off-kilter and dysfunctional, and in need of a more acute diagnosis and decisive intervention.

Comments

[Judith L.]

Well said, Simon. Your criticisms, however, could be leveled at many school systems, including those in the US. I think the change must begin with the teacher-training institutions who must attract and produce strong, intelligent teachers who are able to resist the lure of the unions and the comfort of joining the old guard incompetents currently in charge.