ALL DESERVE CHANCE TO SHINE
Transforming a student’s life for the better is a true measure of a good educator
IT recently dawned upon me that our academics may have a massive adjustment to make on how we view our role as educators in higher-learning institutions.
Many a time our efforts are focused on high-potential students, readily opening doors for them to excel and challenging our smartest proteges to achieve their best.
I reckon that many of us may not realise that the preference we make for talented and smart students is gradually causing our higher education system to deny equal opportunities to the average student majority.
Based on personal observation and experience, what we lecturers seem to fear most is the general perception others have on us that we are not “smart enough”.
In turn, our preoccupation with “smartness” leads us to flex our “performance” at each other through our high-flying students, who will, in any case, most definitely rise up to any challenge.
Shouldn’t our accomplishments be judged on how much we enhance each of our student’s capabilities, instead of showcasing the talents of a selected few?
How and when did our obligations change to allow us to discriminate against those below the high-potential bar?
If we regard teaching as a noble profession, then we have committed a great injustice to our nation.
Working with average and below-average students (which is more challenging), sadly, does not garner as much merit as coaching high-flyers to become leaders, for instance, due to the bias we created in the institutional structure.
The rating system of higherlearning institutions employs a resource-based view, where good output is a result of good input.
As a consequence, many learning institutions scramble for academically high performers in their student intakes because getting smart students is advantageous in many aspects.
Student retention and study completion are almost guaranteed if we are not dealing with underperformers and the lessprivileged.
Therefore, it makes perfect sense that we choose to devote much of our resources towards ensuring high intakes of school leavers with strong academic credentials, rather than to invest long term in more daunting and less-pronounced efforts of transforming weak students.
What happens then to the majority of mediocre graduates, who make up a large segment of our society?
It is already increasingly tough, even for those with the competitive advantage, to excel in the tight job market. If we only dare to make that drastic change in our admission requirements and teaching philosophies.
Could broadening the criteria of how we evaluate student admission bring about that newfangled idea that will push us to re-evaluate our methods and approaches in teaching and learning?
Imagine including factors, such as experience with adversity or special talents, for consideration during student intake.
These are factors that are not under teachers’ supervision or recorded in school testimonials, and giving them weightage would give under-prepared or less-privileged students the chance to improve their lives.
Otherwise, they will always be at a disadvantage due to their poor academic performance.
Let’s assume this change in policy would reward us with that paradoxical outcome that would allow us, as academics, to be more effective in our efforts to impart knowledge and be efficient in the number of lives we transform.
We see how young students are overwhelmed during their transitional period. How many times have we muttered under our breath about our wish for students to be more matured, more focused, or more appreciative of the activities we have embedded in our curriculum?
Why do we blind ourselves to the benefits of emotional intelligence or affective skills and traits, when they are all lacking in our graduates?
While we hope for change to happen, as academics, we should do our part to revisit our priorities and strategies to support quality teaching, and in cultivating intellectual and affective skills for successful student transformation.
No matter how daunting or how unsure we are with the methods we employ, it is certainly more worthwhile to sacrifice time and effort, investing in the challenging task of nurturing, facilitating and grooming underachievers to become high performers.
Let it be seared in our minds and hearts that the educator’s true accomplishment is to be able to accept students of various levels, just like diamonds in the rough.
We will have our hands full and it may not be possible to polish every stone for a perfect gleam, but we certainly will be able to find ways to make all our diamonds shine.
No matter how daunting or how unsure we are with the methods we employ, it is certainly more worthwhile to sacrifice time and effort, investing in the challenging task of nurturing, facilitating and grooming underachievers to become high performers.