The World Bank Director for Caribbean Countries, Lilia Burunciuc in an article carried by Barbados Today, dated February 18, delivered a scathing denunciation of Caribbean educational systems, labelling it as and I quote a “crisis”. In her comments, the chief education officer concurred and condemned the region’s exam-driven culture, which she argued prioritises memorisation over genuine understanding and application of knowledge.
However, on the heels of this assertion, the ministry in its quest to fill the positions of education officer and master teacher, has opted to subject the applicants to, yes, you guessed it, a paper and pencil test but more to the point, a Kangaroo Court Test.
I regard it as such for several reasons, the first is that one of the fundamental rules of assessment is that persons being assessed must be at least aware of the parameters of any such assessment. Any examining body worth its salt would have at least provided a syllabus or syllabi which would have outlined the areas to be assessed. After that it is up to the candidates to prepare themselves thoroughly. My instructions were that none of the applicants received any guidance on what was to form part of the assessment. If the purpose of the assessment was to select the best persons for the positions, why was there so much secrecy surrounding the test? Also, how many of those who designed and will correct the test were subjected to a similar test to secure their posts in the Ministry of Education? I would go out on a limb and say, not one.
The second reason is that, fortuitously, I happened to be passing near a truck and a document fell off the said truck. On closer examination, I realised that it was the assessment that was given to the candidates, who were subjected to the examination. I was appalled at the lack of content and construct validity of the test. There was little correlation between competencies required for the positions advertised and the multiple choice and short answer questions. For example, one item was, what are students allowed to drink while they are in class, the answer was obviously water. A second item was, how many primary schools are there in Barbados. To add insult to injury, the last part of the test included an essay, where the candidate was supposed to basically laud the transformation efforts to date; however miniscule or cosmetic. Are we really serious about transforming education?
The third reason is as it relates to the correction of the assessment. What for example, is the pass mark, and is there an independent body responsible for the corrections or will this be done by those who prepared the assessment? Will there be inter-rater reliability and observance of all the other assessment principles that give the candidates objective scores?
I am of the view that given the protestations from those who endured the assessment, there should be some inquiry into this and any other assessment which purports to select the best candidates for these and other positions. If assessments are the new way to fill vacancies, then there needs to be some parameters and guardrails to govern the process. The unions should also be a part of this. To do otherwise would be to make a mockery of the recruitment process and perpetuate the much vilified, exam driven culture.
Dr Ian A Marshall is a lecturer at the Educational Leadership School of Education, University of the West Indies Cave Hill Campus.
