On the shoulders of qualified teachers lies the future of what is termed good education for our children. Follows the idea then that teachers should be up to standard both academically and professionally. It is through ongoing training that our teachers can acquire the knowledge and the assurance required of them. A constant evaluation of the progress achieved is an element that has to be sustained continuously and practices by teachers rectified in the light of discussions at a professional level. There is no place for amateurism in education. The absence of discussion and evaluation can only boil down to approaches in educational practice being a hit-and-miss or trial-and-error ones.

Any hypothesis should only be done through analysis of past and present experiences, in other countries or our own. This is the job of qualified decision-makers. Such a practice can elucidate our understanding of what education for our children should be. However, we must guard ourselves against copying in toto systems of education in other countries, as it is clear that a system in another country cannot be transplanted to our soil. The acquisition of knowledge experience of working strategies in other countries can sharpen our understanding and forecast the type of education desirable for our children.

Our objective, which is now clear, is ‘the overall development of the child’, as proposed by the Reform Strategy “towards a quality curriculum”. The question that immediately arises is how willing are teachers, at the present time, to direct themselves towards the demanding approaches in implementation. How qualified are they who are used to a traditional style of teaching so different from what is at once required of them. Attitudes are persistently difficult to change and training or re-training can involve an endless and sometimes frustrating effort. In addition, we all agree that, without proper teachers, Reform Strategy can only amount to the wonderful copy of a draughtsman with no possibility of giving it the moving force. Again it is so difficult to change the fossilised mentality among teachers, parents and most adults of the community. Confidence among teachers themselves, so essential for change to emerge, can only be built in after a long time. In the short term the felt absence of skill and lack of confidence can only cause teachers to withhold cooperation as a safe haven and they might continue in practice with the traditional, if only with a smattering of acquiescence to requirements of the Reform Strategy. The latter is of course laudable, although many parents who do not quite understand, will consider the ultimate demise of the Certificate of Primary Education (CPE) as perplexing. It is against this reflection that I wish to voice a few points for consideration.

■ <B>The training of teachers</B>

Teachers are expected to acquire proper and relevant training to enable them to put into practice the system and approaches of continuous assessment desirable for the implementation of the novel approach. “No reform will ever be effective unless teachers are trained and supported continuously…” rightly says the report. The teachers should not only acquire the proper skills, but also become familiar with emerging changes and obstacles that may appear throughout the demanding process of educational change. Nothing is static in any human endeavour and much more so in educational development. For the success of the reform programme, we should bear in mind that, in addition to the acquisition of skills to meet the demand, practising teachers should feel confident in their understanding of what is expected of them, then only can they give the reform the moving force.

The element of motivation among teachers should also be given serious consideration. Not only should the teachers be motivated in their contribution to change, but that motivation must be sustained. This can be done through the establishment of conviction among teachers, who otherwise can only be unsure of what is expected of them. That conviction can only be achieved through constant effort to instil in teachers during their training and beyond, a spirit of positive attitudes as dedicated by the need for change. The role of the inspectorate will also be strongly required and redefined in helping the maintenance of the requisite atmosphere and spirit of the teachers. There is an urgent need to shift from the existing authoritarian approach to one of continuous partnership and assistance to teachers, if so required.

■ <B>A breakaway from tradition</B>

“All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy,” goes the saying. This reminds us of parents who used to trust that all work and no play is supreme in helping a child to progress. This appears to be the practice imposed on our present CPE children, where parents believe that children should relentlessly rote learn academic subjects to acquire the newly invented A+ certificate. Teachers are expected to deliver the goods and most are capitalizing on this situation to upgrade their own so-called prestige, not to talk of private tuition.

The traditional belief about primary school education is still looming upon us. It is within the context of this fossilised situation of almost no return, that the suggestion of training and re-training of teachers is proposed. We must realise that teachers may be resistant to change and consequently any training should necessarily be accompanied by training in what may be termed “the formation of healthy and positive attitudes”. The same applies to inspectors.

Having said that, I believe that any plan in school education first starts through the gateway of change in attitude, without which no progress in education can ever be envisaged. The suspicion is that unmotivated and lax teachers, (and they do exist) may not do justice to the proposed continuous assessment as the case should be. It is well known that ignorance and lack of training is a hot-bed for laxity. We must guard against this element and devise ways of minimizing its emergence.

■ <B>Children with special needs</B>

In our primary schools there are a lot of children termed “at risk”. They may be inherently weaker and consequently slower at learning or with learning difficulties. In spite of all arguments, these are the children with special needs who add to the percentage of those who do not get through their CPE examination. The issue here is that many teachers are helpless when it comes to retrieving the children at risk. This situation is due to the teachers’ inability to teach them through lack of training proper to these children’s needs. How then can we reconcile the teaching of these children with an absence of available teachers? It is so very easy to get the referred pupils to repeat the class and be barred from promotion, be it at standard II or IV level. Is simply repeating a class not going to create other problems? (which it is not the purpose of this article to delineate)

■ <B>Conclusion</B>

The simple saying goes as follows: easier said than done. There are many prongs within the context of strategies for change, including teacher training and re-training, attitudes, acquisition of skills to handle the situation of special needs or at risk children, motivation, among others. Let’s remain optimistic provided we really know where we are heading and how to move along the right path to education.

<B>Andre WAN CHOW WAH</B> Associate Professor</I>