RETHINK SCHOOL ZONING
CAN SOMEONE please explain why we are so wedded to the idea of zoning schools and forcing parents to send their children to educational institutions that are in proximity to their home?
I’ve long lost count of the innumerable suggestions from young professionals (and some older ones) promoting this idea, on and offline, whenever there is another heated debate about the plethora of problems in our educational system and the wide disparities that exist among schools.
For some strange reason, they seem to think that zoning is an important policy action to take to aid us in addressing the plethora of challenges that limit our children’s ability to achieve their fullest potential while pursuing an education.
The idea of a zoned school system makes perfect sense, if certain criteria were to be met. There needs to be a minimum/acceptable standard across all schools that is sufficient to guarantee every child, regardless of their socioeconomic circumstances, a fair chance to succeed.
It means that resources would have to be more equitably distributed and those that might need more can get the support they need to come up to par with all the schools. All schools must have the same student-toteacher ratio, the necessary labs and equipment for science and technology, etc.
Let’s be brutally honest. Why would a parent in Kellits, Clarendon, who wants the best for their child, opt to send them to Kellits High School and not Clarendon College, which is 24km away, or Glenmuir High, which is much farther at 42km?
In 2015, only 5.4 per cent of students at Kellits obtained five subjects, including maths and English, while 69.2 per cent and 95.14 per cent of students at Clarendon College and Glenmuir did. I bet you didn’t even know that school exists. If I were that child in Kellits, I’d certainly want to wake up very early to go to Glenmuir, though it’s so far from home.
The performance of the majority of schools is so dismal. I can’t quite fathom how zoning will be possible in 10 years, as was announced recently by Minister Ruel Reid, in a society which favours cosmetic programmes to address social inequalities; and where those with power and those closest to them continuously deny how stratified our school system is and pretend it’s mere laziness why the majority of our students do so poorly every year.
‘FORMALLY’ ACCEPTED
I saw in the news last week that zoning was formally attempted with this cohort of students who sat the Grade Six Achievement Test (GSAT). According to the reports, this year, three per cent, or 1,438 of the 39,510 students who did GSAT, were placed manually in high schools in proximity to the home address they submitted.
Seventeen per cent, or 6,524, of the 39,510 GSAT students were placed in schools that are in proximity to the institutions they currently attend. Eighty per cent, or 30,789, of the 39,510 students who sat GSAT were placed in one of their preferred schools.
The three per cent and 17 per cent piqued my interest. I’d honestly love to know more about the 20 per cent of students who were placed in schools according to their address or in proximity to the schools they currently attend. Perhaps the minister could apprise us about which schools these children attend, and will attend, where they live, and more about them and their parents.
We need to create a standard across all schools, so every child can learn and achieve their fullest potential. The Early Childhood Commission’s tag line, ‘Standards Matter’, is quite apt and should be adopted across the education system to promote improvements in schools at all levels, whether or not we will pursue zoning.
Truthfully, the education system is too broken and classist for zoning to be possible in 10 years. If we are unwilling to rid it of the stratification and unequal distribution of resources that exist, there is no point.
Let’s talk about fixing schools first. Then we can talk about possibly restricting people to attend schools closest to them.
Truthfully, the education system is too broken and classist for zoning to be possible in 10 years. If we are unwilling to rid it of the stratification and unequal distribution of resources that exist, there is no point.