Connect with us

Features

Shortage of trained teachers in secondary schools

Published

on

by Anton Peiris, Emeritus Coordinator, International Baccalaureate, Switzerland

(Reduce O / Level STRESS continued)

1. The shortage of Trained Science Teachers 

 The National Curriculum Framework document published by our National Institute of Education makes the following observation:

There is a shortage of qualified STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) teachers and a deployment practice skewed towards urban schools, making it difficult for non-urban students to access STEM streams. As a result, the government’s efforts to increase STEM access in provincial and rural areas by providing additional classrooms and laboratories have not led to the intended results. Secondary school enrolment in rural areas still remains skewed towards arts subjects. It is through science education the children get the ability to understand the world around them in a realistic way.

Lower scores in science discourage students. The A Level pass rate in Bioscience (54%) and Physical science (52%) was clearly lower than in the Arts stream (66%).

Limited access to STEM courses pushes secondary students into the arts stream to boost their chances of entering the university. In 2018, arts, law, management, and commerce accounted for 52 % of the total undergraduate enrolments, while science, engineering, architecture, and computer science accounted for only 34%.

There is a need to establish more Teacher Training Colleges to train Science teachers. Sri Lanka cannot and should not do this alone. We need the help of countries like England, Australia and Canada, to set up a couple of Teacher Training Colleges and to train our science teachers. We need the foreign professors to provide that bit of extra quality and the catalytic effect. They will equip the laboratories with modern equipment for our trainees.

In some countries, a trained science teacher (whose basic qualification is Passes in at least two A / L science subjects) is paid a salary which is only slightly lower than that of a university graduate in the teaching profession. The reasons are as follows: (i) a trained science teacher is professionally qualified, a university graduate has no professional qualification. (ii) the importance of teaching science as a compulsory subject for O/ L exams and (iii) because the work of a science teacher is harder than the work of an arts teacher. A science teacher has to teach not only the theory in the classroom but also the practical work in the laboratory. 

The government should raise the salaries of trained science teachers, but given the dire economic situation that the country is now facing, it is unrealistic to expect any salary increase. Passes in A / L science subjects (not O/ L qualifications) should be the entry qualification for training.  Placing the newly trained science teachers (who have the A / L qualifications) on step 3 of their salary scale (instead of step 1), i.e. giving them two increments at the beginning of their teaching career would be an incentive and a fair interim solution.

In order to overcome the shortage of A/L science teachers in provincial and rural schools, there should be incentives for science graduates to enter the teaching profession. They should be encouraged to follow the one-year Diploma in Education course immediately after getting their B.Sc. degree. They should be paid a salary during this year of postgraduate training. After five years of teaching, they should get the same salary as that of an Administrative Officer in government service or a Staff Officer in a Bank. In Switzerland, an academically and professionally qualified secondary school teacher with five years of teaching experience gets the same salary as that of a university lecturer.   

 

2. The shortage of Trained English Teachers 

In an article titled ‘The Question of English ( The Island 06 June ),  Prof. Nicola Perera (Department of English Language Teaching, Faculty of Arts, University of Colombo ) has stated the following :

In the first few weeks of class, the undergraduates speak of the social inequalities of free education in Sri Lanka. ” We never had an English teacher at all or only intermittently. There weren’t enough textbooks to go around. The English teacher seemed befuddled; read out the textbook; came to class and didn’t teach; engaged in other work”.

The students were reliant on the classroom to learn a language they did not speak at home. They came to university from under-resourced schools that had too few English teachers, poorly trained and poorly paid.

The National Curriculum Framework document published by our National Institute of Education states that English Language education should have the following objectives:

‘’ Students to be taught to speak well and to convey ideas confidently, to have a good vocabulary, to ask questions and to reason, i.e. to gain command over the English language in terms of reading, writing and spoken language ‘’.

Very good, but this cannot happen in many secondary schools in provincial and rural areas due to the shortage of Trained English Teachers, text books, etc.  

There is a need to establish a few more teacher training colleges to train English teachers. Sri Lanka cannot and should not do this alone. We need the help of countries like the U.K. and Australia.  

In Sri Lanka, the salaries of teachers are low. It is one reason why qualified people are not attracted to the teaching profession. It is unrealistic to expect any salary increases for trained teachers. Given the pathetic situation that exists in the teaching of English in provincial and rural schools, other avenues should be explored in order to improve the quality of teaching. For example, make it a three-year training course instead of two years and pay the trainees a salary during their third year of training. The first year should be an intensive course in learning English to the exclusion of everything else, i.e. to gain command over the English language in terms of reading, writing, spoken language and by taking part in drama, debating, etc. During the second and third years of training it should be the usual psychology, pedagogy, methodology, etc,. plus further training in English, including a bit of English Literature. That will ensure the delivery of properly trained English teachers to our provincial and rural schools.

This is the last instalment of my article and I take this opportunity to touch on one peripheral matter (TVET) and to recap on a couple of other matters.

 A recent newspaper article on TVET (Technical and Vocational Education and Training) stated that the result of providing a trained and fully job prepared skilled worker to the market is not yet in place. The inadequacies of the TVET system and some of their problems are due to the shortage of suitable instructors, obsolete training equipment and machinery and lack of practical input to develop the curriculum. This is another area in which Sri Lanka needs foreign experts to revamp the curriculum, to install modern equipment and machinery and to run our existing TVET schools. We need the help of countries like Germany, Sweden, Switzerland, the U.K. and Canada to set up a couple of technical training schools and to procure foreign experts to train our instructors and our secondary school leavers.

About 70 years ago, in the 1950 s, some of my schoolmates in Moratuwa entered the Harding Institute in Gal Oya Development Board to be trained as Surveyors. Mr. Harding and his British assistants not only trained them to become Surveyors but also gave them some practical training in Civil Engineering. Some of these graduates of the Harding Institute went on to clear forests in Malaysia and build Airstrips and Airports and to build roads in Labrador (frozen Northern Canada). The Harding Institute in Gal Oya was established by our first Prime Minister, D.S. Senanayake. Now you know one reason why I keep saying that we need a few foreign experts to run a couple of our Teacher Training and TVET schools.  

 1. In the first instalment of my article (Reduce O/ Level STRESS ) published on 03 rd May, I have stated that, for students who have very little ability in mathematics and also for others who do not need this subject for their future studies, an easier option called O / Level Maths Studies Course and an O/ Level Maths Studies Exam should be introduced. 

Cambridge Examinations board in the UK has solved this problem by having an extended exam for those who need mathematics for their future studies and a Core Exam for the others.

The Syllabus outline that I have proposed for O / L Maths Studies has the advantage that it includes a bit of easy Statistics and Probability. e.g. Pie Charts, Histograms, Standard Deviation, Permutations and Combinations, addition and multiplication of Probabilities, use of the simple Z-Score formula and the coefficient of Rank Correlation formula. These topics sharpen the students’ ability to do critical, analytical and logical thinking.  

2.  In the third instalment of my article (A Solution to the problem of extra heavy school bags ) published on 17 th May, I have suggested the installation of Lockers, one for each student. One reader has suggested that, because some schools lack the additional space to keep the Lockers, classroom desks should be made with a lockable compartment underneath the writing surface to store the text books. It is a good temporary solution. The disadvantages of that method are as follows: (i) It reduces the amount of leg-room under the desk and students will not be able to stretch their legs occasionally and (ii) It will be difficult to move or displace such heavy desks. 

(The writer has taught GCE O/L, A/L and IB mathematics and physics for 45 years in Sri Lanka, Kenya and Switzerland.)

 



Features

Form-ation of Higher Education in Sri Lanka

Published

on

By Hasini Lecamwasam

Improving higher education in Sri Lanka is not only important, but essential and long overdue. However, seeking to achieve higher ‘quality’ by ‘form-ising’ the performance of teachers (or the practice of forcing the entire teaching-learning exercise into forms designed to communicate exactly what and what transpires in a classroom) may not be able to bring about the desired change. A new set of four forms introduced recently to this end requires, among other things, drawing up a minutely detailed plan of each and every lesson to be delivered in class, aligned with the Course Learning Outcomes (CLOs), in turn, to be aligned with the Programme Learning Outcomes (PLOs), which should all then be tied to the graduate profile, or the kind of graduate we seek to ‘produce’ at the end of it all. This may, on the surface of it, sound reasonable enough and not encourage serious debate or resistance because, after all, it is only some forms that need to be filled.

Form by tedious form, however, the teaching-learning process at state universities is becoming increasingly constricted, fragmented, monitored, controlled. In this piece, I wish to briefly ponder on the implications of these requirements and the larger trends they signal, while also attempting to reflect on what instead we may do to ensure ‘quality’ in the delivery of higher education.

The problem with form-ation

The larger ‘Quality Assurance’ (QA) landscape in which these developments take place was discussed in detail in an earlier Kuppi Talk by Kaushalya Perera. In a nutshell, QA seeks to standardise education such that study programmes can be assessed against each other, assigned numbers, and ranked accordingly. The deployment of overarching yardsticks for programmes with hugely varying mandates, methods, and content has been the subject of much critique lately the world over, not the least due to its rather warped understanding of ‘quality’ as something that can be objectively established through metrics and audits.

While I do not question the bona fide motives behind the initiative taken with the aforementioned forms, I do think serious reflection on where these developments push us in the longer term is needed. My primary reservation here has to do with the impact of this lesson-wise breakdown on the creative and democratic exercise that the teaching-learning process is supposed to entail. When each topic is broken down into such fine detail prior to the actual occurrence of the ‘lesson’ (for want of a better word), outcomes are foreclosed rather than collectively and organically evolving in the course of the ‘lesson’, which is particularly important to many of the subjects offered in the Arts Faculties. Exactly how many of us are actually quite so democratic in our classrooms is a valid question in this regard, and one I will return to. The point for me here, however, is that for those who do have a sincere commitment to such a democratic classroom environment, such forms and the limiting of the teaching-learning experience they constitute, may be tantamount to strangulation.

Even if the majority of us admit to being very controlling in our classrooms anyway, does that justify going one step further with these forms and institutionalising such control? Should not our commitment be to the emancipatory ideal, rather than simply what most are on board with? There should be meaningful space for creative, organic, and democratic teaching-learning processes to unfold for teachers who wish to make that choice, and for students to explore and think beyond the teacher’s frame of thinking. Micromanaging beyond the general content of a course (laid down in enough detail in the course syllabus) is inimical to even a possibility of democracy existing in the classroom and within the larger university space.

This complete subservience of the teaching-learning process to red tape signals a larger and troubling trend of corporatisation. Corporatisation may be defined as the restructuring of a publicly owned institution to be managed as a business place would be, with a view to privatising in the long term. In state universities, this shift is couched in the supposedly ‘progressive’ language of student-centered approaches and interactive classrooms, hijacked from the democratic pedagogy of the likes of Paulo Freire, but bereft of any of the emancipatory politics within which these methods assume meaning. Despite the use of these catch-phrases, however, such minutely detailed forms signal a return to an extremely teacher-centered model due to the absence of the possibility for students to meaningfully influence the outcome of a lesson, as it is predetermined for them.

The result, as the Kannangara report worried with remarkable foresight some 80 years ago, is students “with much knowledge and little understanding. They have not read books; they have “studied” texts. They cannot write, they produce essays after a set style. They can answer questions but not question answers … Their imagination has been stunted, their originality suppressed, their capacity for thought undeveloped, their emotions inhibited.”

What alternative can we propose?

A valid question countering what little resistance there is to form-ation asks how we can ensure the education we currently deliver is of an acceptable standard, and that everybody observes such. There seems to prevail tacit and widespread agreement that the ‘democratic nonsense’ within universities is what has allowed many to hide behind debates, deliberations, appeals to creative freedom, and so on, without actually doing their work.

In my view, this is an arbitrary causation to draw. Blaming internal democracy for negligence of duties fails to take into account the highly anti-democratic practices at universities that may better explain such behaviour.

Specifically, I think it is the rigidly entrenched hierarchy within universities that blocks the possibility of even dialogue, let alone debate, particularly when it comes to holding those higher-up in the ladder accountable for their actions (or the lack thereof, as the case may be). Hierarchy is why, among many other things, students cannot question the content or the methods chosen by their teachers. As previous Kuppi Talks have endeavoured to show, hierarchy is silently, and therefore very effectively, observed at every level, ensuring the trumping of students by teachers, juniors by seniors, women by men, minorities by the majority, and originality by tradition. It impedes questioning, stifles dissent, and smothers alternative thinking altogether. The problem, therefore, is not that we have too much democracy in universities, but too little of it.

We must make a sincere and sustained effort to radically democratise the university space by relaxing the classroom to allow open and honest exchange between students and teachers; changing the relations of power between seniors and juniors, starting with undoing the practice of deferential treatment; refusing to tolerate snide and not-so-subtle references to ways of dressing and similar gendered remarks; questioning the exclusive use of the majority language in official communications, as a starting point. In doing so, we would be subverting the crippling hierarchy that inhibits thought and practice within the university. Such a radical change geared towards improved quality through mutual accountability, for me, is the only acceptable way of introducing accountability to a space that, admittedly, sorely lacks it.

(Hasini Lecamwasam is attached to the Department of Political Science, University of Peradeniya)

Kuppi is a politics and pedagogy happening on the margins of the lecture hall that parodies, subverts, and simultaneously reaffirms social hierarchies.

Continue Reading

Features

THE LOGIC OF PRESIDENT’S PLEDGES IN NEW YORK

Published

on

by Jehan Perera

The significance of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s speech at the UN General Assembly, in New York, last week, was his use of the time allocated to him to provide an outline of the government’s policies towards the main challenges besetting the country. The President covered the main issues that confront the world with his focus on Sri Lanka. These included measures to contain the Covid pandemic, the economic crisis, environmental degradation and violence. In the final section of his well-crafted speech, the President went into some depth regarding the government’s approach to national reconciliation. However, the response within the country, has been muted and for good reason. Those who voted for the government, on an entirely different platform, which emphasised ethnic majority nationalism and anti-international sentiments, are quite probably at a loss.

It is only recently that the government has started to speak in terms of reconciliation and obtaining international support for it. At the two elections that brought this government to power, the Easter Sunday bombing and the consequent threat to national security, took centre stage. The majority, who voted for the government, did so to protect it from a variety of security threats they were told of, both within and outside the country. The wretched failure of the previous government to prevent the bombing, the first terrorist act of any magnitude since the war ended a decade earlier, was attributed to the personal weakness of the then government leaders. It was also attributed to the 19th Amendment which sought to give state institutions protection from use for partisan reasons by government politicians and to consequent disintegration of the system of command and control.

A second theme, at the two elections, was depiction of ethnic and religious minorities as potential security threats. This stemmed from the country’s experience of three decades of internal warfare with the armed Tamil separatist movements. This was followed by the Easter bombings by extremists from the Muslim community, who were feared to be having a vast support base both internally within the country and also externally. In these circumstances, the re-centralisation of power within the government hierarchy and greater role given to the security forces, received public acceptance as being part of the government’s democratic mandate. At the same time, by denying the equally legitimate concerns of the ethnic and religious minorities, the electoral results demonstrated the existence of an acute polarisation, and wound, in the body politic that continues to fester to the point of bringing in involuntary and imposed international interventions.

EU MONITORING

The challenge for the government is to represent the interests of all communities and not only the majority who voted it into power. The problem is that the government’s mandate comes, by and large, from the vote of the ethnic and religious majority in a country that has been polarised on ethnic and religious lines, for many decades. An ugly part of this reality is that in the prisons are several hundreds of Tamils and Muslims for the most part who are in custody for periods ranging from a few months to many years without trial. They are being held under the Prevention of Terrorism Act, ostensibly until the security forces find adequate evidence to put them before the courts of law. This contradicts the rule of law and the presumption in our legal system that we are innocent until proven guilty can have negative consequences.

In June this year, the EU parliament passed a resolution that the GSP Plus tariff privileges, made available to Sri Lanka should be withdrawn unless the government fulfilled its obligations in regard to the upholding of human rights. The resolution, expressing “deep concern over Sri Lanka’s alarming path towards the recurrence of grave human rights violations”, and makes specific reference to the use of the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA). The resolution notes the “continuing discrimination” against and violence towards religious and ethnic minorities, while voicing “serious concern” about the 20th Amendment passed in 2020, and the “resulting decline in judiciary independence, the reduction of parliamentary control, and the excessive accumulation of power with the presidency”. It also highlights “accelerating militarisation” of civilian government functions in Sri Lanka.

A delegation from the EU is currently in Sri Lanka to meet with members of the government, Opposition and civil society, to ascertain whether the country is fulfilling its obligations to be a beneficiary of EU trade benefits. It is likely that the delegation will be provided with evidence of human rights violations and acts of impunity. There are hundreds of persons languishing in prisons without being put on trial, many of whom are Tamils, suspected to be LTTE members, and more of them are Muslims, suspected of having links with the Easter bombings. When questioned in parliament about the latter, the minister in charge justified those detentions on the grounds that Muslim youth, including the Muslim parliamentarian who had questioned him, could contain Islamic State ideology in their heads and therefore be security threats.

NEW DIRECTION

At the last elections, the most potent theme was the failure of the then government to act effectively to protect the country from the Easter suicide bombings and the pressures from human rights actors in Geneva. Among the issues that loomed large at the last election was also the charge that the previous government was giving in too much to the Muslim community within the country. The fact that the Easter attacks were by Muslim suicide bombers added force to this charge. The prioritisation of national security in the election campaign had popular support. The influential religious clergy, associations of professionals and mass media also joined the battle in earnest and their messages reinforced one another. The recent debate in Parliament suggests the government’s thinking continues to be in sync with the mandate it received at those elections.

However, in his speech in New York, President Gotabaya Rajapaksa has shown signs of diverging from the politics of the past. The President said “Fostering greater accountability, restorative justice, and meaningful reconciliation through domestic institutions is essential to achieve lasting peace. So too is ensuring more equitable participation in the fruits of economic development. It is my Government’s firm intention to build a prosperous, stable and secure future for all Sri Lankans, regardless of ethnicity, religion, or gender. We are ready to engage with all domestic stakeholders, and to obtain the support of our international partners and the United Nations, in this process.” However, the President’s speech continues to be at variance with the ground realities at the present time and the general manner of governance since the President took office in November 2019.

So far the pledge of a new direction is articulated in words. The time for the government to make the President’s words real and act accordingly is now. This will help to overcome the deep and dark cynicism that has enveloped the country regarding promises made by politicians. The first step would be to apply the logic of the Justice Minister in Parliament. Replying to an Opposition Parliamentarian who called for the arrest of Minister Lohan Ratwatte who stands accused of entering a prison and threatening prisoners with his gun, the justice minister said that everyone is entitled to the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. This also applies to the hundreds of Tamils and Muslims in jail without evidence to charge them in a court of law. The better way to deal with the threats to national security is to win the confidence of all the communities in the Sri Lanka by treating them without discrimination, as children of one mother, as our national anthem proclaims.

Continue Reading

Features

Face shields, sans masks, on TV shows!

Published

on

Face shield ONLY does not provide protection from Covid-19

Covid-19 has claimed many lives, in our part of the world. Quite a few musicians, too, have had to face the music, where this deadly virus is concerned.

However, one is perturbed with the setup seen on some of our TV shows, especially where musicians are concerned.

The Covid-19 guidelines are never adhered to – no masks, no social distancing, etc.

There were reality shows held, post pandemic, where judges were seen even hugging their favourite contestants – with no masks.

With the virus turning deadly, some of the judges took to only wearing face shields. And, we now know the results of their stupidity.

By their irresponsible behaviour (wearing only face shields), they seem to be setting a trend for others to follow.

The question being asked is what are the health authorities doing? Why haven’t such folks been taken to task!

If the man on the street is arrested for not wearing a mask, how come these law-breakers go scot-free!

If wearing a mask is a hassle in an air conditioned setup, then such shows should be put on hold, or held virtual…live stream, zoom, from home, etc., and not with the participation of several artistes, in a studio.

Continue Reading

Trending