Evaluating education system

THE EDITOR: I write to comment on what I see as urgent and important as we evaluate our education system. The debate continues on the performance of our schools at all levels.

Basically, we assess schools on examination results and that too has been under scrutiny increasingly.

How all-embracing are our testing methods? There is a call for even more evaluation to include the multiple intelligencies. As desirable as that may be, the basic literacy and numeracy standards must be maintained. There appears often enough to be arguments against the high standards in these two areas, despite the value to the all-round education of the individual.

Prof Rajendra Ramlogan was fortright in describing the seeming call for lowering the bar as establishing and entrenching "mediocrity over meritocracy," for which he has won deserved high acclaim.

There is great value in challenging our students to higher and higher standards. Far too often we offer our children excuses for under-performing, instead of seeking to have them rise to the desired levels.

The sad part is that schools continue to be unaccountable for their stewardship and poor results at local, district and national standards with ongoing impunity. This is not only on the part of government schools as there is also the misconception that all denominational or board schools are doing well. Some are under "academic watch."

We have seen two publications, endorsed by highly qualified individuals, within recent times supporting the concept of removal of any assessment for transition from primary level to secondary level, based, in large measure, on residence.

There seems to be total disregard for the constitutional right of parents to send their children to schools of their choice. Instead, it is being proposed that the local education authority (whoever is that) determines the secondary school placement of our students.

We may just have to get a decision from our courts to resolve this issue. It certainly cannot be seen as just to have our children placed based on geography or criteria established by an education authority.

Our history in education leads me to conclude that the best thing that has happened in that sector was the concept of Common Entrance from 1960. Prior to that, generally, secondary education was confined to the rich, as poor people could not afford the fees and books necessary at that level, even though their children were the brighter ones.

Additionally, schools were under no obligation to send pupils to write the relevant examination. It was left to the discretion of the head teacher, who very often opted not to have pupils undergo the test.

The Common Entrance concept, by any name, mandates that all children of a certain age must sit the exam. This has resulted in a means of assessment of the school and a measure of accountability.

The debate will continue. To those of us who think meritocracy is the best and most desirable basis for evaluation, it may be time for us to begin a campaign to see the continuation of this criterion. Failure to do so could well see us missing out on the opportunity and misguided decision making in this all too important aspect of national development.

LENNOX SIRJUESINGH

retired principal