Dear Editor,
I have been following the intense debate in the media for the past several weeks on the Ministry of Education’s policy on repetition. I was very satisfied that the Minister of Education gave clarity to the controversy surrounding grade repetition verses promotion with remediation at a press conference on Thursday, December 9, 2010.
The Minister highlighted several reasons in support of the policy which were well supported by research conducted by UNESCO, the National Association of Schools Psychologist and the ministry itself. The findings of all the research indicate that there are numerous disadvantages associated with grade repetition. Students who are retained face the humiliation of being kept behind while their classmates progress. They feel alienated and as a result many of these students drop out of school. In Guyana, about 80 per cent of the students who are retained eventually drop out. Grade retention results in larger class sizes which leads to other logistical problems such as additional seating arrangements for students, provision of added resources for curriculum delivery, all of which adds up to unnecessary costs to the government. Parents are also faced with an additional cost to send these students to school for an additional year and in some instances more than one year. Repeating students also display behavioural problems which also place further strain on teachers and administrators. Furthermore, it has been found that most students who are retained still do not manage to achieve acceptable standards. The few who manage to succeed during that year still struggle and in many instances repeat other classes.
So the critics should ask themselves if grade repetition really works? When we examine the social, emotional and economic issues from the students, parents, teachers and government’s perspective, the answer is definitely no. The studies further support this position when it was found that students benefit more from a year spent in the next grade than a year spent repeating a grade. Evidence of this is replete at the Christianburg/ Wismar Secondary School where many students who did not perform satisfactorily at the National Grade Nine Assessment were given the opportunity to progress to the next class. Through hard work, remediation and extra lessons they were able to perform well at the CSEC. Just for the sake of the record, that school achieved a 72 per cent pass rate at the last CSEC examinations following this very approach. So why can’t the same system be used for the students at Grades 7 and 8? For these reasons, the Ministry of Education must be applauded for its stance to promote students and to implement targeted remediation to cater for the needs of those who are struggling.
The Ministry of Education has restructured and intensified its remediation programmes at both the primary and secondary levels. The Fast Track Literacy Programme targets students at the primary level, out-of-school youths and adults. At the primary level, there is the Post Grade Two, Grade Four and Grade Six Remediation Programme. The National Grades Two and Four Assessments are diagnostic in nature. They were designed to identify student’s weaknesses at an early stage. Teachers are then required to use the results of these assessments to formulate and implement action plans to target the identified weaknesses of the struggling students and to ensure a state of readiness for the next National Grade Assessment. The Post Grade Six Remediation Programme is conducted during the final term of Grade Six, after students write the National Grade Six Assessment. Emphasis is placed on developing literacy and numeracy competencies to adequately prepare struggling students for secondary education.
The July-August Vacation Remediation Programme serves both primary and secondary students who are struggling and was implemented nationally at the end of the last school year. Students who failed to achieve acceptable standards at both the primary and secondary levels spent six weeks during the vacation period doing remedial work.
To address the issue of students who are not adequately prepared for secondary education the ministry introduced the six-year transitional programme in targeted secondary schools in 2009. Today there are ninety-five schools in all eleven education districts onboard. This is a first year programme for secondary school students who have not acquired the prerequisite for secondary education. The programme has a specially designed curriculum, 75 per cent of which focuses on instruction for Mathematics, English and Reading.
The Ministry of Education is currently embarking on another remediation programme that targets students at the Grade 10 level. Students who performed unsatisfactorily at the National Grade Nine Assessment in Mathe-matics and English will be a part of a specially designed programme that will enable them to master these competencies.
A point to note is that for all these initiatives, the Ministry of Education has been providing training for teachers in remediation through workshops and continuous professional development sessions. Schools have also been supplied with relevant resource materials and guidelines to implement and monitor the programmes.
Other initiatives of the Ministry of Education include the review of its academic programme at the secondary level and the introduction of the Secondary Competency Certificate Programme. The Ministry of Education is proposing to introduce five core compulsory subjects at Grades 7 to 9. These subjects are Mathematics; English A, English B, Integrated Science, Social Studies plus a maximum of five additional subjects to be determined by the school each year. A low performing school is expected to focus on the five core subjects with two additional technical/ vocational subjects. This initiative will enable the student maximum time for curriculum coverage especially in the core areas.
The Secondary Competency Certificate Programme provides an alternative pathway particularly for students who are struggling academically. This competency–based programme allows students to learn at their own pace and provides a career path in the technical/vocational skills. The programme is known to reduce drop-out rates and improve attendance at the secondary level.
I strongly believe that there is a widespread misunderstanding of the policy. All of the programmes mentioned above help to support the new policy, and collectively are aimed at bringing greater efficiency to the education system. I can hardly comprehend why with the plethora of interventions being taken by the Ministry of Education to improve student performance this new approach is not being given a chance. The critics should ask themselves if it is right to continue with an old system which has not yielded the desired benefits as against replacing it with a new system with overwhelming support from research.
I call on parents and teachers to support this intervention and if it does not work, as the minister said, there will be a review of the policy after two years. It is callous to make wild accusations of the Ministry of Education and call for a consultation on a policy which has only been recently implemented and not tested on its merit.
Yours faithfully,
T Girwar
