We have throughout the years inherited an approach to schooling that is rather haphazard in nature. Parents are quite unaware of what we want or heading towards in our system of education. Getting children to the best schools (Primary and secondary) has been and will be the general aim of almost all parents.

■ Brief History (Primary Education)

In the 1950’s, the then Teachers Training College were recruiting primary school trainee to follow a course prior to being embossed as teachers in the primary schools (Government as well as Roman Catholic Aided Schools). (...) After successful completion of the course, they were deemed qualified to teach in the primary schools that constituted of standard one to standard six, with the first intake of children joining the Below Standard (One year before Standard One). The total number of years the students had to be at the primary school amounted to seven.

After completing seven years at the school, the pupils were required to sit for the National Standard Six Examination. Candidates who were successful could sit for the Junior Scholarship Examination held a few weeks after, for the selection of a number of pupils who won the scholarship to follow free classes at the secondary level for seven years leading to the Cambridge Higher School Examination. The number of scholarships awarded in 1950 was eight, with a subsequent increase to twelve in 1952(...).

■ Teacher Education (Secondary Level)

In the 1950’s, anybody so to say, was permitted to teach unchecked by the then Department of Education. The only sparse and unsustained visits in the secondary schools appeared to be rather a semblance of authority, if any. Furthermore, any member of the department who happened to observe the teaching activities in classes, with the assumed intention of any evaluation, never really gave any feedback with a view to establish improvement in the teachers’ ability for the future. (...)

But in 1973, we saw the birth of the Mauritius Institute of Education (MIE). It had the responsibility to cater for the need of the teachers at both the primary and secondary level. The MIE was a sigh of relief for teachers who had been long deprived of the ability to “perform” as it should be.

■ The Nine-Year Schooling

We have throughout the years inherited an approach to schooling that is rather haphazard in nature. Parents are quite unaware of what we want or heading towards in our system of education. Getting children to the best schools (Primary and secondary) has been and will be the general aim of almost all parents. The definition of what best schools mean can be quite vague however. According to parents, schools with better results are those that should be considered desirable.

As far as primary schools are concerned, parents are willing to send their children to schools within their residential area (although the idea of good and bad primary schools still remain). Parents will try by all means, (including providing false addresses of the place of residence - that is actually being the case today) in order to get the children to what they consider to be the best schools. Responsible parties will go to the extent of buying private tuitions for their children to enable them to score marks to join the good schools (the “rat-race” as one minister called it).

In the proposed nine-year schooling, there is a proposition that at the third year of primary education, the children would have to undergo an evaluation examination, and at the end of nine years, another evaluation examination would follow. The reality is that assessment examinations are still here and will stay for a while. The elimination of the rat-race is not being taken into consideration. Hence private tuitions are and will still be breathing healthily.

Six or nine years of schooling, if implemented, will amount to simply changing name or physical structure with no real progress in pedagogical aim. It is simply a change in nomenclature that is rather political and non-progressive. Calling the classes “Standards” or “Levels” will not really amount anything for the better- educationally speaking. Many ministers are now declaring that nine years school is “their baby.” It is difficult to make any sense of these declarations.

Getting then children to go beyond six years to their early adolescence in year seven to nine (if at all) can create different kinds of problems understandably including a diminution of self-esteem. If there is any test at year three to identify those children with handicapping conditions, do we have teachers qualified to cater for these pupils who require a special needs approach? Getting those small children to repeat a class is not the solution obviously.

Andre WAN CHOW WAH

Melbourne, Australia