Gangs and shootings have been a part of Barbados for over 40 years. Whenever there is an escalation in shootings the Government tries to calm the public – sometimes by announcing new initiatives. That is responsible. However, every past initiative has failed.
With the current escalation, a new Advisory Council has been announced. Based on the established 40-year trend, it may be forecasted, with near certainty, that the council will recommend similar failed ideas. So, it is time for a difficult conversation.
THE PROBLEM.
In 2008, Barbados reported to the OAS that we had 150 gangs with 4,000 members. In 2017, Small Arms Survey estimated the number of illegal guns in Barbados to be 7,000. In comparison, the amount used by the police was 2,000 and the military was 1,675, so the amount of illegal guns was about twice that of the military and police combined.
Things appear to have gotten much worse since then. Any secondary school drop-out likely knows where they may rent an illegal gun. This is consistent with studies of gangs in Barbados that typically identify poor academic performance as a common factor among recruits, with boys as young as 15 years being introduced to the group.
Boys with no academic certificates join gangs because they think it is their best option of making money after leaving secondary school. This is a consequence of the current colonial teaching methods designed to identify and teach to the level of the 20% of early learners. The remaining 80% are simply supporting actors in this travesty of an educational system in which our teachers are forced to participate.
THE EDUCATIONAL SOLUTION.
Walbrent College now has 14 years of data proving that teaching to the level of the 80% benefits all students – including the 20% of early learners. But we are unwilling to give up the old ways or have a conversation about proven solutions. The likely explanation is that the 20%, who were the main beneficiaries of this inequitable educational system that they now manage and/or support, are blinded to its harmful effects.
The obvious solution is to rearrange the secondary school curriculum to teach the more practical, easier-to-learn and monetizable parts of a subject before the more challenging theoretical. This recommendation has been rejected for the past 20 years. Perhaps the recent escalation may encourage them to take it seriously.
THE POST-SECONDARY SOLUTION
Our unsustainable national debt suggests that we should stop funding failed initiatives. Therefore, the Advisory Council should manage a program to assess the effectiveness of at-risk youth programmes for former students who have been most harmed by our secondary school’s curriculum. If the Advisory Council cannot do that, then it should be disbanded and be replaced with a group that can.
Every group seeking public funds for at-risk youth programmes should be allocated 10 boys to mentor. They should have low self-esteem, low ambition and low discipline. This may be measured by: never representing their secondary school in any activity, not playing a musical instrument, being consistently in the bottom third of the class academically, and unemployed since leaving secondary school. They may also be former prison inmates.
RECONING.
At the end of 3 months, the mentored persons should be: knowledgeable thinkers (able to pass CXC English and Maths), talented (able to sing well), healthy (able to run 3 km without stopping), disciplined (able to play a musical instrument), and more polite, hopeful and respectful (employed). The most effective programs should then be adopted nationally.
The Advisory Council is encouraged to allocate to Walbrent College those most harmed by the secondary school’s curriculum, and let the evaluation of all programs be done publicly.
The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.