Let me begin by reiterating that educational reform refers to the action steps taken to bring about a desired transformation in the education system. The term "desired transformation" implies that explicit goals and objectives for the transformation exist. The degree of reform will depend on the degree of mis-alignment between the current system and what ought to be the goals and objectives of the education system in today and tomorrow’s world. Fundamental weaknesses in the economy, the changing nature of global markets, the changing needs of learners, the lack of employment opportunities, and the decrease in government funding available for education, are all critical forces driving the need for reform.Any reform activity must be driven by an explicit mission and a corresponding set of goals. In my opinion, education reform in St. Lucia should have at least the following seven goals:
Goal 1: Maximize the number and variety of learning opportunities for St. Lucians;The education system in St. Lucia is primarily an instruction-based system with the instructor standing in front of the class and the students listening. This is known as the lecture method. From my recollection, there are few, if any, variations of this practice in our secondary schools. Research in the field of pedagogy has shown that individuals learn in a number of ways, and the efficiency of any one given method is dependent on the learner, the subject matter, the capability of the instructor, and the learning environment. For example, imagine teaching a course on ecology strictly by the lecture method in a classroom . One could be guaranteed at least a 20% failure rate for students and little or moderate interest in the course. There is a need for augmentation of the learning process with visual aids (videos, pictures), field trips, lectures on site, discussions, debates, projects, term papers, and group presentations to the whole class.Goal 2: Move the education system from instruction-centered to learner-centered;
Goal 3: Align the education system with the national development agenda;
Goal 4: Create a holistic learning environment which integrates creative, artistic, academic, and vocational learning throughout the curricula;
Goal 5: Develop and implement high standards for learning through a collaborative effort between the learner, the educator, the community, and the Ministry of Education;
Goal 6: Increase learning efficiency and productivity in the overall system;
Goal 7: Reduce costs not associated with learning.
In today’s article, I will focus primarily on the issue of access and learning opportunities.
The (lecture) method is quite passive, easy to use, and relatively easy to prepare. Students will also agree that the lecture method is rather dull in many circumstances. I would conjecture that the failure rates for CXCs and A’ Levels can be largely explained by the fact that teachers use the lecture method to deliver a curriculum for which they have no ownership, and they have little or no control over.
The advent and progress of technology has offered teachers a number of ways to improve the learning process. Audio/visual devices, the internet, intranet, chat groups, computers, courseware, grouper, presentation software, are all resources that were not widely available when I went through the system, but are now more accessible. These devices go beyond simply enabling instruction. Because can be active and not passive devices, they provide opportunities to develop creative and artistic skills in students. Such opportunities are not offered by the lecture method. The Prime Minister has spoken on several occasions of the role of technology in the development agenda of the country. Therein lies a clear case for realigning the school system and making greater use of technology in educational delivery.
The issue of educational access is perhaps the greatest sore point for most St. Lucians. Its effect is felt directly by both parents and students. Implicitly, St. Lucians recognize their right to education, but are used to the practice of educational opportunity as a privilege. There is no guaranteed access to a secondary school or Sir Arthur. The standard reason given is a lack of capacity, and by extension, only "our best" should receive the limited opportunities.
Is there really a lack of capacity? The answer to this question will be yes or no depending on one’s definition of capacity. I believe that by and large, or perception of a capacity problem is a result of what I call "paradigm entrapment". Traditional measures for capacity include: student-teacher ratios, class sizes, number of physical places in a school, and number of units taught by a teacher. If we accept these measures and their limitations, then we have a capacity problem. These measures are what I call measures of instruction capacity or teaching capacity. If, however, we define capacity in terms of learning capacity, then a whole new set of opportunities present themselves. Learning capacity refers to the sum total of all opportunities provided by the education system for an individual to learn and acquire a desirable set of educational competencies. The primary difference between the two capacities is that instruction capacity requires the physical presence of a teacher in the learning process while learning capacity does not. Learning capacity, in fact, is inclusive of both instruction capacity and learning opportunities that does not require the physical presence of teachers. In an ideal world with no constraints on financial resources, teaching capacity should be maximized. However, given our current economic conditions and developmental priorities, we are left with little choice but to explore all learning possibilities.
Non-instructor learning opportunities include among others, correspondence courses, multi-media courseware, internet courses, video and audio courses, and the use of television as a delivery medium. Correspondence courses has been around for a while but to my knowledge, has never been used by the Ministry of Education. In Canada, many of the upper -level high school courses are offered as correspondence courses and are open access courses. During the summer, many of our form 5 and form 6 teachers can be put to work in (teams) to develop correspondence courses. Now there are no classroom limits, and no teacher limits. Multi-media course are entire courses available on CD-ROM disks. The student learns at his/her own pace. Multi-media courses can provided exciting learning experiences as they incorporate active graphics, video and audio inserts, tests, examples, immediate feedback, etc.
Internet courses or on-line courses are courses that exist on the internet. Correspondence courses could be placed on the internet and can be accessed by students either from home or from a learning facility such as Sir Arthur. On the other hand, private companies can provide internet access for students. Alternately or additionally, the government may consider the development of three Learning Institutes geared towards non-traditional, non-instructor-based learning. Internet courses would reside on a web site run and managed by the Ministry of education. Video and audio courses provide additional opportunities for access. Students can purchase or rent courses at a nominal price with accompanying materials. One other viable opportunity for facilitating learning, is the use of television as a delivery medium. Some courses lend themselves well to television. Through the TV medium, an entire nation can be reached by a single teacher. Courses can be offered during non-prime time hours when the cost of TV time would be minimum.
In improving learning opportunities and access to these opportunities, the government may want to consider establishing a "Division for Open Learning" which would focus on providing non-traditional learning opportunities for all St. Lucians. That Division would have to work very closely with adult literacy, continuing education, and the division dealing with the regular schools. A well-orchestrated system of open learning would have to make use of tutors to augment the learning process.
In order to provide more learning opportunities and to improve access, we must focus on a critical examination of both instructor and non-instructor capacity in the system. The current emphasis on building more schools and hiring more teachers, in my view reflects a very myopic understanding of how individuals learn, and how to maximize learning opportunities for St. Lucians. I submit, that simply increasing the number of traditional schools is money poorly-spent. The government must first take stock of its current learning capacity. Then with a comprehensive understanding of the educational needs of the country, devise a strategic learning-capacity plan. The plan should have a 25 year vision but a 5-year implementation horizon. Once the learning capacity structure is defined, then the government can disburse funds appropriately.
On a final note, a number of people has asked me, how could we accommodate the elimination of Common Entrance, an action I have repeatedly called for. We most certainly can’t if we continue to leave the system unchanged. A drastic idea requires drastic actions. Eliminating Common Entrance is not a painless actions. Sometimes we have to take painful injections (or bad tasting medicine) to get better health. The reality is that the pie is round, and increasing the slice of the pie for 10-12 year-olds means reducing the slice for others in the system. This is where the need for non-instructor based learning opportunities come in, and a comprehensive assessment of the trade-offs necessary to achieve such a feat. In order to make the system more equitable with its limited resources, older students will have to be educated through greater use of non-instructor means. I have addressed this issue in a previous article in the Mirror last year called "Increasing Capacity without Building New Schools". Since I have no space left to get into the issue, I will revise and republish that article next week.
It is quite difficult to provide an exhaustive expose of such an important and difficult topic in a news paper column. My goal here is to raise ideas for discussion and debate, and hopefully bring some positive influence to bear on educational reform. My ideas are not perfect, neither are they the only possible solutions. The entire nation must engage in this discourse if we are going to bring about meaningful change. So if you are going to shoot down my ideas, please replace them with alternative and better solutions. I would be most happy to hear about your ideas, either in the Mirror or by direct communication with me through email.
