Sixty-two young men and women participated in the Fourth National Dialogue in the Eastern Province yesterday. Their discussions, or rather what we learned about their discussions, reflected sharp minds and a strong desire for change. Most of the participants talked about the Saudi educational system and their opinions of it. Their observation was that the curriculum is outdated, contains too many subjects and that in many cases, teachers are unqualified for their jobs.
The discussions stressed the importance of diversity, both cultural and religious. An intolerant one-sided view was blamed for the wave of terrorism that the Kingdom is battling.
As much as we welcome the national dialogues, as much as we insist on utilizing their findings to create a new atmosphere of frankness and openness in our country, there is a common point that has characterized all of them. The media was excluded from the discussions.
The mere fact that the discussion sessions were closed to the media is not a good sign. The media was allowed only in the opening session; subsequently, members of the press were given official press releases of what had gone on behind closed doors. Reading today’s newspaper coverage, I was surprised to find all our papers carrying exactly the same information — in other words, they carried an official press release.
Now this is exactly what makes people put so little faith and interest in such events. If we agree in the first place to have forums and to discuss our problems openly, it makes no sense whatsoever to keep the discussions closed. That reflects a lack of trust in the media and it basically defies the concept of transparency that the conference was supposed to initiate.
One journalist wondered sarcastically if the discussions contained any secrets. He thought that if the media were not a part of the concept of dialogue, then the effectiveness of the dialogues was considerably reduced. A female participant in the dialogue said, “My students wanted to follow all the discussions and asked for a televised conference so that they could follow the discussions.”
In spite of all this, if we overlook the disappointment of having only official press releases to depend on, there are still some interesting things that came out of the sessions. “Our curriculum discourages religious and intellectual diversity,” one participant said in a paper.
He added that all that students are ever exposed to is only one side, one way of thinking and that they are never taught the other side or how to rebut and reject it — if indeed it deserves rebuttal or rejection.
Reading the transcripts of the discussions, one feels that maybe youth is more aware of the situation than the older generation. In their discussions, they exhibited a desire to know, to discuss and, most importantly, to learn from mistakes. As the beginning of the forum coincided with the terrorist attack on the American Consulate in Jeddah, there were calls for moderate, open-minded religious approaches from all attending.
Another major point was the failure of our educational system. An engineering student delivered a paper that attracted many comments and much attention; he stressed what he thought were our main problems. He pointed out that our educational system is almost totally irrelevant to the needs of our job market. He gave an example from a study by the Ministry of Planning for the year 1420 (1999-2000). The study showed that 82 percent of graduates specialized in humanities and religious studies; those in medicine and applied science accounted for only 10 percent of graduates.
Nothing shows more clearly than those numbers the need to coordinate the needs of the job market with what students study in our universities.
There has recently been much talk of closing the humanities departments in some universities since humanities graduates often do not find jobs. That is surely a far too dramatic solution; perhaps the universities themselves should limit the numbers accepted by certain departments that in turn would end the oversupply of unemployable graduates.
In general, the study opened our eyes to a reality that must be dealt with quickly and efficiently before the numbers of frustrated young people increase and easily fall into extremists’ hands thus creating an explosive situation.
Another point of the paper is that research is not taken seriously in our educational process. The fact is that Saudi Arabia spends only 0.3 percent of its educational budget on scientific research compared to 3 percent in Japan, Sweden and the US and 4 percent in Israel. Money of course is only a small part of the issue; what is far more important is the attitude. Here in Saudi Arabia not only do we not encourage inquisitive minds, we actively discourage them. Investigation, scientific and objective approaches are not a part of anything our students are taught — regardless of whether the level is primary, intermediate, secondary or university.
Saudi students are taught to listen to elders and teachers and to react in a pleasant and agreeable way. This is another aspect of the one-sided version of things in our curriculum.
Participants at the meeting stressed the need for a variety of approaches, especially in religious studies. To be flexible, understanding and tolerant and to accept other people’s freedom to their views and opinions is an important ingredient in any society that calls itself enlightened.
The forum has addressed very important issues and has given a good idea of our young people. What is important now is that their words are listened to and their aims considered in order making them feel a part of society. After all, they will one day be society and the future belongs to them.
