Dear Editor,
I refer to the articles (KN June 25, 2008) and (SN June 22, 2008) captioned, ‘Countries not studying Physics are condemned to poverty’ and ‘Physics falling off time-tables,’ respectively.
It’s always easy to play the blame game and make teachers the scapegoat. Lack of teachers is one problem but it’s not the main one as some want us to believe. Teaching science requires commitment, patience and huge amounts of physical support.
Firstly, we need to understand that science is not like Language, Social Studies or Geography. It’s quite abstract and difficult for many to grasp. Perhaps if we analyse this misconception, the truth can be arrived at.
During my career as a teacher, I had always been a part of streaming students to Grade 10. I was always amazed that most Grade 9 students would never choose the science stream because they perceived science subjects as difficult. Our school’s science programmes are taught based on content. Even when some practical sessions are well managed, the content often overwhelms the process of investigation, preventing students from extrapolating what they are doing to more general principles of scientific method.
For a child to love science there should be a hands-on approach to learning and this must happen at an early age. Enquiry can be the most appealing part of science for students of every age since children’s imaginations permit them to carry out abstract processes. This practical process of assimilating knowledge must start in the pre-operational stage where the minds are now being trained in how to think, and it should continue throughout the concrete operational stage so that it can be utilized efficiently in the formal operational stage during adolescence. Failure to utilize this approach to learning science will result in the syndromes now being experienced in the nation. This approach is unknown to the classrooms but taught at all educational institutions. I ask, who is responsible for the suitability of the curriculum and curriculum implementation?
Science (from the Latin scientia, meaning ‘knowledge’) is the effort to discover, understand, or to understand better, how the physical world works, with observable physical evidence as the basis of that understanding (Wikipedia). The primary method by which we as humans establish this understanding is by the use of our senses. We touch, smell, taste which is converted to electrical impulses that our brain uses to learn. In short, we observe, measure and compare. This cannot be done without equipment. The truth of the matter is that the vast majority of Guyanese schools and the University of Guyana have little if any money to invest in laboratory equipment. In schools that have laboratories, the equipment is often outdated and unsafe, reagents are inappropriately stored and safe waste disposal is unknown. How many schools have a thermometer or Bunsen burner or a simple distillation apparatus? I used to borrow a thermometer from a nearby school so that I could do a class practical for CSEC SBAs. The poor Grade 7, 8, and 9 students never saw a thermometer for years! Do you now wonder that students show an acute aversion for science? Now, who is to be blamed here – yes – a lack of ample trained teachers!
Textbooks are vital to learning. They assist and guide a child to logical thinking and clarify misconceptions in the child’s mind. Textbooks need to be readable. Readability is concerned with the problem of matching between reader and text. An accomplished reader is likely to be bored by simple repetitive texts. On the other hand, a poor reader will soon become discouraged by texts which s/he finds too difficult to read fluently. This is likely to happen when the text is poorly printed, contains complex sentence structures, long words or too much material containing entirely new ideas. Quite frankly, Science in Daily Life is a poor example of a science text. It’s riddled with mistakes and sometimes the concepts are misleading. Not only is the text substandard, but also the tests that the ministry sets. Every year the marking schemes have to be corrected due to incorrect questions on the exam papers. I wonder – who is really responsible for this travesty of curriculum supervision?
Teachers and educational workers identified large class size as the most severe obstacle to student success. Studies have shown that as class size increases, the percentage of students who pass the course goes down. Large class sizes mean less individual attention for students, both in class and after hours because of the higher preparation and marking load for teachers with large classes. Class size should be reduced to below 20 students and much lower in the science stream. Can you imagine the work load of a teacher who teaches an exam class with 40 science students noting the CSEC SBA requirements? Believe me, there are many out there but no one cares. I guess we blame the teacher again!
It’s always easy to blame poor results on lack of teachers. Maybe it is and perhaps not only for science since most subjects have poor results. What percentage of schools has a science laboratory technician? Shouldn’t a long-term training, recruitment and sustainable plan be the ministry’s priority to solving this problem? I guess they see things no different than others, why fix something if I’m not going to be in the same position in the next two years. What is worse is that Guyana has two ministers of education!
So we are reaping what we have sowed decades ago! Neglect of resources to schools and an inability to train and retain qualified teachers are our problems. Actions have ripple-effect consequences. It’s no surprise that Physics is not offered at the University of Guyana. Like global warming, it did not happen overnight as some would want us to believe. However, this trend can still be reversed with genuine care and a sound vision for the future Guyana.
Yours faithfully,
Aslam Hanief
