Written by a BU family member – Blogmaster
While the 4th Minister in this BLP government must be applauded for at least trying to present something concrete when it was clear that they are not sure what to do about reform, they must not be applauded for any groundbreaking change regarding Common Entrance. Why not you ask?
The Common Entrance was pilloried as promoting elitism. It was said that it was unfair to students with different learning styles. That it only tested academic subjects. That it didn’t cater to students with learning and social challenges. It was said since 6 years ago that it had to go entirely. But what do we have now instead?
Instead of Maths, English and an essay, we have added two additional academic reading subjects in Social Studies and Science.
Instead of a one day exam, we have included two years of continuous assessment.
But, the traditional cut off marks remain. The pecking order of the schools remain. The perceived elitism remains. The use of academic subjects only remains. The purported colonialism remains. Have we fixed the “so called problems” that according to this government were “crippling” our children and stifling our development?
Now tell me this. If a child was not equipped to pass Maths and English. Do we really believe they will be equipped to pass Science and Social Studies?
Tell me as well, Do we really think that a child who performs poorly in Class 3, will miraculously improve in one year in Class 4? Will continuous assessment change that?
And, can the Minister please explain for us simple people, how do they intend to standardize the instruction, marking and assessment process across all 69 public primary schools, so that what happens at School A is the same as what happens at School B. Are we really levelling the playing field for everyone or are we simply moving the same football match from one pasture to a next?
The Minister speaks about learner profiles. About National Diplomas. About Social and Emotional Learning. About Inclusive Education.
The public should do well to know that these are exactly what were proposed in the year of our Lord 2001 under the then BLP administration in their EDUTECH Curriculum 2000 plan. A combined 16 years of governance later, and we are still trying to implement them. But we should also ask, are those plans from 2000 fit for purpose or practical in 2025?
There is so much more to be said but, I will end by saying the obvious.
The student who was well prepared, well monitored and well supported will do well in any Common Entrance and any modified system.
The student who was not well prepared, was not monitored, was not supported or who had learning or other challenges along the way will probably NOT do well in any Common Entrance and similarly, will probably NOT do well in any modified system UNLESS they receive support, intervention and attention at the earliest stages of school or at the earliest manifestation of their challenges.
The Common Entrance Exam itself was never the problem. This supposed modified structure is not a solution although, it can be seen as a good backpedal to the middle school proposal fiasco.
If you want the solutions, ask any of the practicing nursery and primary school teachers who have already identified the problems and have been begging for support and resources to address them for years. It is that simple.
As for the Ministerial statement. As usual, long on talk, long on catch phrases, long on buzzwords and slogans, long on promises for 2026, 2027 and 2028…maybe.
But short on specifics, short on clarity, short on connecting the dots with an executable time bound budgeted plan to show us simple people how real measurable results will come and how everything will connect for the good of all.
Feels like déjà vu.
From a current educational practitioner who does not wish to be identified for fear of what happens when you are.
The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.