Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed by the author(s) do not represent the official position of Barbados TODAY.
by Ralph Jemmott
I was listening to the Brass Tacks Program when the father, whose name was subsequently given as Kenneth Durant, called to complain that his child was being expelled from school in fourth form.
From the beginning it seemed to be an unbelievable and frankly a rather silly decision. If a boy or girl reaches fourth form, even if he fails the fourth year promotional examination, one would think that he should be given an opportunity to go into the fifth year to complete the secondary cycle of schooling whether he is likely to do well at SCSEC or not.
Education or formal schooling is about more than certification.
Apparently even according to the school’s administration the boy showed the capacity to sit and presumably pass at least two SCSEC subjects.
All the more reasons to let him complete the fifth year.
It would appear that the student had only failed once in second form. Even if this is his second failure,
this is no reason for not giving him a chance to reach the fifth year.
Another consideration expressed by Mr. Durant is that given the stresses and strains associated with COVID
and the obvious difficulties involved in on-line learning, it does appear unreasonable that the school made the decision it did.
In most schools, decisions related to expulsion or superannuation are made not only by the Principal, but by a Management Committee comprising the Deputy Principal, Year Heads and or Heads of Departments
and each case debated on the merits. One is left to ask, what went on here?
We often pay lip service to the notion that children should be allowed to make the most of their abilities whatever those capacities are.
It is a notion more honoured in the breach than in the observance as we assume that be bright or smart is to
be academic or bookish.
It is an idea that is deeply rooted in the culture that may be difficult to overcome, but which we must struggle against. The idea that abolishing the Common Entrance exam will automatically change things is misguided.
We do children an injustice when we incline them to believe that if they do not perform well in an exam, they are doomed to inescapable failure, whatever in our narrow mindedness we deem to constitute ‘failure.’
There are some factors that might explain the so-called superannuation. One is if the child is behaviourally incorrigible and by his conduct poses a threat to other students or teachers or seriously inhibits other students from learning.
Another factor might be if he or she is known to be promoting a culture within the school that is not conducive to its probity. According to the child’s parent and the school’s seeming admission misbehaviour does not appear to be at issue in this case which makes the school’s administration’s decision doubly questionable.
It is usual for students in the so-called newer secondary schools to be allowed to complete five years of secondary schooling whether they are academically inclined or not.
This is sometimes negatively referred to as the ‘Up and Out’ policy.
Extensions of the student’s school life is sometimes accorded where students are reasonably well behaved or are good at athletics, football or cricket and are felt to be capable of contributing to the school’s sports program and the general culture of the institution.
Again education in the broader sense is not just about academic attainment, it is about enhancing whatever abilities a person possesses.
Educators should read or re-read Howard Gardiner’s treatise on Intelligence or Intelligences.
It is a very enlightening thesis. The whole issue raises the question as to what any school perceives as its mission and what it is doing in pursuit of that mission if it can conclude that in fourth form it can no longer do much for a non-academically gifted child and throws him or her out a year before he or she is due to finish his or her secondary education.
Ralph Jemmott is a retired educator and regular contributor on social issues.
