Dear Editor,
There is much talk about our country’s literacy level as is evident in the discussions in the daily newspapers and academic circles. And unfortunately, the University of Guyana (UG) has come in for some severe criticism for its part in this dilemma. Please allow me to make several points on this seemingly complex issue, especially in connection to UG.
The university has, in recent times, come under fire from the wider society for the quality of its graduates, especially in the area of literacy and analytical skills. Many believe that UG is contributing to the problem of “decaying standards of English” by not doing enough through its programmes. But the “problem” is far more complex than it seems: it is a national “problem”.
The university has been accused of producing substandard graduates. There are several things wrong, in my estimation, with this kind of assertion. While it cannot be refuted that the university does churn out poor quality students, this should not be used as the yardstick to measure the university’s performance. To what extent the quantity of “low-level students” is predominant may be the subject of research. The university does try to fulfil its mandate of “quality assurance” in the delivery of its programme. The university can only do so much in ensuring that its students grasp the skills and behavioural patterns that are necessary for a university graduate. And of course, the university can do so much more. Private sector representative, Ramesh Doohkoo, at the public consultation on UG, is quoted as saying, “We want to see critical thinkers, problem solvers, graduates with high analytical skills and strong focus on reality rather than theory”(SN, 12 January, 2008)… I support that principle.
There are several things significantly wrong with UG, but blame should not be placed solely on the institution. It is generally agreed that the university has an obligation to society. But I wonder if it should be the other way around. Doesn’t the wider society have a responsibility to UG to help it improve? In many developed countries, the private sector plays a major role in the development of universities- not only of the physical infrastructure, but of its policies and programmes. Private firms may sponsor a technology competition or enterprise to stimulate innovation. The solar powered cars, for example, were the products of innovative thinking by university students who were supported by private sector contribution.
Educational goals should always cater to the needs of society. What are our long term goals for our nation? Is the current educational system supporting these national goals? Many times we hear of teachers rushing through the content of a course/subject to meet the demands of a curriculum outline. Do we really want students who are “crammers” or are content based with no sense of real education? Education should encompass individuals’ entire beings: socially, physically, morally, and academically.
The University of Guyana can employ several policies to combat the problem of “poor quality” graduates. It can have stricter codes of admission where applicants must succeed at a stringent language course. It can also consider the option of having a compulsory pre-requisite first year programme that includes courses in various disciplines. And, several programmes can be more practical based in reality as it relates to the needs of society. It can also pay more attention to the analytical process, a process that depends largely on reading.
After attending a workshop for new lecturers at UG in the past week, several issues were passionately discussed in “informal” debates amongst “new recruits”. One of the major points of the debate was the level of English on campus. Why is the level of English poor for many UG students? There are multiple causations that relate to an understanding of the “English dilemma”. Generally speaking, many students enter the university with a poor language background which can be attributed to poor formative years of schooling. Many students, again generally speaking, have not been schooled in the skill of reading. This is a major problem on campus. It is not totally fair to condemn the university’s library for being antiquated either. There are several sections in the library that offer very valuable reading materials. In my estimation, many students have, unfortunately, cultivated the attitude of “easy in, easy out”. We as educators have a role to play in changing that concept. English may not just be acquired or “crammed”. It calls for consistent immersion in a certain “standard” of acceptance. In many instances in high school, for example, a Biology teacher may say to the students that they are not marked for “English” when writing an essay. It is very ironic that the language that students use to express themselves in the essay is English, yet they are not marked for spelling, grammar, and organization. What then happens is that English is only consciously learnt in an English class. Added to the dilemma is the misconception of many Guyanese who think that English is our first language, and who think that there is no need to “study” English.
The title of Stabroek News’s Editorial on the literacy problem aptly captures the issue. Literacy should indeed be a “National Priority” because it is a national problem. It is not only a University of Guyana issue, but one for the entire educational system in Guyana. The problem, in this case, cannot be solved if we engage in a blame game. It cannot be totally solved if approached from the top down, but needs to be addressed from the bottom up: from the grassroots level.
And it is a problem for everyone to address, not only educators. As Martin Carter once wrote, “All are involved, all are consumed”.
Yours faithfully,
Kencil Banwarie
