Nations must treat education as a top priority, according it as much prominence as is allowed to anything. Officials and decision-makers everywhere promise their populations to introduce radical reforms in their countries’education process in order to catch up with others. This was vividly illustrated in the 1950s when the Americans woke up to find that the Russians had beaten them by sending the first man into space.
Changes were immediately made and implemented. In our beloved country, committee after committee is formed at every level. They debate matters ranging from who should drive taxis and who should sell vegetables; they also debate what should be taught in our schools and how we can assure the quality of our teachers. Everybody, students included, is unhappy with the present syllabus. Is our educational system really that bad? To the extent that both the ignorant and the educated find it an easy target to attack?
The education problem that has become a dead body under such heavy blows was last week referred to the Shoura (consultative) Council for debate. This is good news for all — parents, students and teachers.
The council will discuss all issues related to the education process: looking at problems with buildings, encouraging self-education and innovative initiatives, linking graduates to the job market, outlining mechanisms needed for overhauling the system, including the provision of required staff and, perhaps most importantly, assigning the reform of the syllabus to specialized bodies.
We must admit there are loopholes in the system. It is natural that the problem be opened for debate. The difference, however, between other countries and us lies in the rules and regulations that make education a continuous process backed by strong legal authority. The expected resolutions may include adding or reducing teaching hours for some subjects, rewriting and introducing new text books, building new schools to international standards, benefiting from other countries’ experiences as well as many other cliche-ridden resolutions usually passed by committees.
What we really need is a qualitative shift, especially in the way teachers convey ideas to their students. What must change is the way the present teaching process is conducted. This means the textbooks must change. What must also change is the way syllabuses are force-fed to students. This is not going to be easy and will require special talents and skills. Students’ minds, like those all over the world, are busy with things they consider more important than learning — sports, entertainment, romance and such. The solution lies in qualifying the teachers through continuous training. But the question here is what will happen if teachers refuse to improve themselves and fail to fulfill their required duties since they know they will continue to draw a salary at the end of the month?What can school managers or even regional directors of education do in such cases? If this issue is not resolved, our education system will remain a dead body for a long time to come, no matter how many committees are formed.
11 November 2002
