Out of Many, Two Educational Systems

Michael Waul, Contributor

The heated wage war between teachers and the Government has dominated news headlines, both in print and on television, for months. However, problems with the beleaguered education sector extend far beyond the educators' financial battle: CXC pass rates are low, the number of high-school dropouts is staggeringly high, and GSAT continues to send thousands of illiterate children into the high-school system each year.

Moreover, these issues seem to primarily affect students from marginalised socio-economic backgrounds, giving rise to disparate educational experiences manifestly evident in the preparatory/primary and traditional/ upgraded high-school divide. Access to quality education remains largely determined by societal class, a fact evident not only in the differential resources available to schools but also the background of students entering better-resourced institutions. The education system, in its current format, perpetuates historical societal divisions, rewarding those from higher social classes while placing those from lower classes at an increasing disadvantage.

Colonial system in post-colonial society

Certainly, the mere use of the terms 'traditional' and 'upgraded' to classify secondary institutions further underscores the educational divide: one which has existed in our society since early post-colonial times and has its origins steeped in classist regimes. Indeed, the late pollster and political historian Carl Stone attributes this dichotomous system to a "dominant class ideology that assumed the wealthy and the highly educated had a natural claim to national leadership [and] pre-eminent political influence".

Therefore, in order to establish and reinforce a hierarchy of power and ownership, wealthy capitalists ensured first-rate education for their children, while actively excluding members of the lower classes from this luxury. Lacking the skills to seek meaningful employment and with no means of upward social mobility, these disadvantaged individuals turned to crime, comprising what Stone called a "parasitic lumpenproletariat".

This class structure and system of education has survived to present times, albeit in a more nuanced way. In his contribution to the State of the Nation debate, Opposition Education Spokesman Senator Basil Waite aptly summarises the concept when he opines: "It is unacceptable that in today's society our 'poorest' schools are in the poorest communities, poorly preparing our poorest children for a life of, yes, poverty."

Analysis of the statistics lends further credence to this argument: results of the Grade Four Literacy Test, a national benchmark for assessing literacy rates, reveal marked differences in the pass rates of students across institution types. In 2003, fewer than half of all-age and only 58.6 per cent of primary-school candidates were successful in the examination, whereas a whopping 92. 1 per cent of students in preparatory schools achieved the required mark. Over the years, this difference has contracted, but remains troubling. Even as early as the first grade, prep and kindergarten children are far outperforming their public infant and basic-school counterparts, with as much as double the percentage achieving 'full mastery' in the (now-defunct) Grade One Readiness Inventory.

Disparity in Performance

What, then, leads to the noted discrepancies between the achievements of these educational institutions? Surely, students in preparatory schools are not inherently more intelligent than their schoolmates in the public system.

What differentiates them is largely a matter of economics: wealthier parents are better able to fund the private schooling of their children in institutions which are better equipped to meet the students' learning needs. Similarly, parents who lack this financial standing are more likely to enrol their children in the public system, itself severely limited to government-provided resources.

Certainly, there are exceptions to this statement, but they do very little to change the rule. Indeed, the fact that some caregivers will make tremendous sacrifices to fund their children's private education reinforces the (perceived) notion that the public system is of inferior standard.

These troubling trends translate into the secondary-school system as well. Pupils who achieve top marks in GSAT seek and gain places in highly subscribed traditional high schools, leaving low-performing students to fill the available spaces in upgraded secondary schools.

Fast-forward, then, to the grade 11 CSEC exams. While upgraded schools have spent five years playing catch-up, attempting to achieve a baseline standard of literacy, traditional schools have moved far ahead with their syllabuses. Some traditional high schools have enjoyed heavy financial input from accomplished alumni and generous parents which they have used to boost resources and equipment.

Upgraded schools, on the other hand, have suffered high dropout rates and low levels of attendance. (While further division occurs even within the bifurcated traditional and upgraded categories, it is the differences between them which remain most astounding).

All must then face the same examination; can the results possibly be surprising? Only 14 per cent of candidates in upgraded high schools were successful in last year's English language examination, compared to 64 per cent for traditional high schools. In spite of this disparity, all these students must compete for the same spaces in tertiary institutions and enter the same competitive job market.

Clearly, they cannot achieve the same outcomes: unfortunately, some will gain no social or economic advancement via education and will watch helplessly as their own children face a similar fate.

Personal Experiences

For a long time, I remained largely unaffected by this vicious system. It was not until I signed up as a volunteer chemistry teacher at Old Harbour High that I came to realise the striking educational divide. There, I found dedicated teachers and students willing to learn, yet stifled by financial constraints.

In addition, amenities I had enjoyed as a student at Campion College and taken to be standard across all high schools were now revealed to be rare luxuries. (I want to stress that the two institutions mentioned are not polar opposites on the traditional/upgraded school divide, but nonetheless constitute good examples through which to further illustrate my argument).

For instance, Campion's sixth-form building was a self-sustained unit, possessing all the classrooms, lecture halls and laboratories needed to serve its students. Science labs were stocked with the necessary chemicals and equipment, and student-to-teacher ratios were low to moderate.

At Old Harbour High, I was always in a struggle to find classroom space. Though I taught senior students on the morning shift, quite a few of my timetabled sessions extended into the more highly populated afternoon shift. For the first few weeks, my students and I were as nomads, holding class in the computer lab, then in the home economics room and even on the business block, being forced to move each time to facilitate afternoon classes. Finally, we settled in a tiny room used for Schools' Challenge Quiz practice, but had to often endure noise emanating from drama classes in the adjacent hall.

Laboratory access was severely limited, and when we compromised by convening on Saturdays for practical exercises, our experiments and demonstrations were confined by the dearth of chemicals at our disposal.

Need for Reform

My ostensibly incomparable experiences at Campion and Old Harbour underscore the need to move towards a more egalitarian education system. However, proposing that the Government is not spending enough in this sector would be unfounded: education already consumes a large portion of the fiscal budget, and short of immediate wide-scale economic reform, there is simply no source of added funds.

Some also suggest repealing the policy of tuition-free education, citing its financial unviability. While this might possess some partial truth, it would fail to address the underlying educational inequalities. Indeed, three years ago when school fees were in effect, the destructive and divisive system to which I allude remained widespread.

What we need, then, is a change in how the money is being spent, a shift towards establishing a high quality of education that is standard across the entire public sphere. In order to achieve this, a larger portion of available resources must be channelled to primary and upgraded high schools, even if it comes at the expense of wealthier traditional secondary schools. Why should some schools possess tennis courts and swimming pools, while others lack classroom space to contain their growing populations?

Until those institutions which have been historically disenfranchised are financially bolstered, we will continue to shun transformation for maintenance of the status quo, facilitating and perpetuating a system of educational classism. There must be a clear message: all students possess the right to the same high level of education irrespective of their socio-economic background.

Conclusion

Any discussion on education reform must position the Government as the primary agent of change. At the most fundamental level, policymakers must be prepared to make tough and unpopular decisions if the current system is to be amended. After all, the pursuit of quality education is a personal affair: parents will seek, first and foremost, what is best for their children. The parent whose child is enrolled in a Campion or an Immaculate is happy for the quality of education this child receives; s/he does not focus his/her energies on the problems faced in less well-resourced schools. Even in countries with the best public-education systems, wealthy families will still seek private alternatives they perceive to be better.

The onus is, therefore, on the Government to enrich the public system in such a way that it more effectively competes with its private counterpart. In addition, efforts must be geared towards establishing and maintaining a standard across all schools within the public system. This will have far-reaching implications: after all, education is a merit good with enormous benefits for social and economic advancement and is the foundation of any well-functioning society.

Michael Waul, Jamaica's 2009 Rhodes Scholar, is currently reading for a master's degree at the University of Oxford in Britain.