Robust teachers’ training key to transform education
THE EDITOR, Madam:
TOP-PERFORMING EDUCATION systems in the world might have vastly different educational cultures. However, they share a common understanding, that of expert knowledge of subject areas. Singapore and Finland are two such examples. Their teacher-training programmes have ensured that graduates have the equivalent of a regular subject degree and an education degree. They have done this, by moving teacher training into universities. Since teachers are expected to have strong cognitive skills, admission to these programmes is selective and competitive. Teacher training programmes, in this context, are not alternative degree pathways for candidates who cannot meet the demands of serious scholarship.
Most teachers here are graduates of teachers’ colleges. Our teachers’ colleges are entry points into teaching, for candidates who are often at the remedial level academically, and give diagnostic tests after admission, instead of giving competency tests to applicants to determine eligibility for admissions. The admission requirements to these programmes are modest, but even so are breezily winked at, to have students in sufficient numbers.
In recent years, education departments in local universities have been functioning as alternative degree pathways for students who are unable to acquire regular subject degrees. Typically, these students might have been previously registered to do subject degrees, but failed courses repeatedly. Graduates from these alternative degree pathways go on to undermine the quality of the education system. Cycles are created where even pupils with excellent grade often have big deficits in competence and development. These deficits exhibit if these pupils subsequently attempt to do regular subject degrees. This has been highlighted several times in the media.
Transforming education to ensure that teachers have the foundation on which expert pedagogy stands would entail changing the context in which our teachers are trained. In the short term, we do not have the human resources, or the institutional arrangements, to change to this. Given our present position, transforming the education system to effectively service the economy and enable improved standards of living will take decades. A large percentage of the budget needs to be spent on education and cost benefit correlations established.
Ensuring that teachers have expert knowledge of their subjects is necessary for producing cost benefits. Certifications are currently acquired in a context that makes it mandatory to set standards of competence, instead of conflating certifications with competence. This will require that for each subject, we need to identify the required skillsets, set appropriate and clearly defined standards of competence, and create robust systems to measure the competence of teachers.
Replacing certifications that demand serious work with less-competent alternatives is not the way to go. It will stifle the attempt to transform education and lead to strategic failure.
PHILIP PATTERSON