The abolition of ranking in 2004, the introduction of compulsory schooling from five to 16, the A+ debate, the unanimity of pedagogues on allowing children to learn at their own pace without the pressure of career-determining exams at 11, the emergence of the first draft of a national school curriculum, all refer to the place we wish to give to competition at school. Let’s revisit this subject at about the time CPE results are coming out, with, for the first time, A+ as a criteria.

Competition as an activity has much to offer in education. Thus a school, which offers a healthy and diverse set of competitive events, is positive, whereas a total lack of competition may lead to think that students are not encouraged to do their best. Competition becomes absurd when the odds to be ranked are so severe as to be totally stressful to those seeking that rank.

The roots of competition are biological. Primitive man, like all in the living world competed to survive. Human children spontaneously seek competition with their peers; they seem to have an innate desire to compare themselves with others, for example, who “can run fastest”, who “can throw furthest”, etc. and eventually, on an intellectual level, who “can calculate fastest”, “can solve this problem or riddle”, etc. Such play is beneficial to a child's development. From spontaneous play, civilisation invented, some 4,000 years ago sporting contests such as the early Olympics.

Educational experts do not always agree on whether competitive desires should be encouraged or constrained. Most believe that, since competition is part of everyday life and since education should transmit skills necessary for “making a life and earning a living”, it is therefore necessary to incorporate competition into education. Others consider competition (as opposed to co-operation, team-work, group-learning, etc) to be a negative element, to be eradicated if not severely curtailed from school life.

However, all educators agree that competition in education should be healthy and kept to a minimum during the early stages of a child’s development (i.e. at play-school, in lower primary and throughout the 5-13 stage), hence competition will not be burdensome, nor take the form of fearful career-determining examinations at these early stages of life, like our CPE was, with its ranking and still is, with its A+.

Three fundamental forms of competition

In the first, as in a 100-metre race or in scholarship contest at the end of Form VI, all concerned are in direct contest with each other. In the second, all competitors (individuals or teams) focus on some external problem set to be solved. The results are twofold: problem-solving skills are acquired by all competitors, while some individuals or teams become the first to find a viable solution to the given real-life problem. The third, as you would imagine, is competition against oneself, aimed at doing better, at improving one’s performance. If a minimum aggregate of, let’s say, 28 at SC is set to obtain admission into HSC, it is perfectly possible for all members of a given class/ school to attain that standard. Better still, peers can help each other reach the required level. Self-competition is not without its dangers, for it can become obsessive, as in the case of the piano teacher who is so demanding that the “poor” student may be spending 10 hours a day at his instrument.

Evaluating different types of contests

Here is a check-list of questions to help determine whether a given competition (like the CPE at 11+, the inter-college sport or the award of University scholarships as per HSC results).

Is it as part of the formal education, bound to the school curriculum OR extra-mural and informal?

Is it fun-oriented OR serious, career-determining competition?

Is it theoretical/artificial OR a real-life competition?

Has it educational value OR is it done for its PR value?

Is it a spectator event (like watching a pro.football match or a Quiz on TV) OR a participatory event?

Is it for individuals OR teams/parties/institutions?

Is it internal to the school OR at national/international level?

Is the competition against others OR against “self”?

Is the competition skill-oriented OR knowledge-oriented?

Is it age, gender, language or other criteria-dependent competition; thus is it a restricted OR open competition?

Is it a yearly, monthly, weekly or even daily event?

Are the results immediately available (as in a 400-metre race) OR is there a more or less lengthy correction period? Are the final results determined by a single period of efforts (like HSC exams) or is there an element of year-long continuous assessment? Is a second chance available for those who fail?

Are the criteria quantitative OR subjective and left to the appreciation of a jury, such as in gymnastic displays, singing/beauty competitions or even correction of long essays?

Does it include handicaps to compensate for differences between competitors, as in horseracing?

Does it require lengthy and specialised training?

And finally a last, all-englobing question about exams and competitively in daily life: Is it worth all that trouble, or is it better to stay out of the “rat-race”?

We all know of the Churchills of this world, who, put off by exams and school competitions, became school drop-outs, only to perform exceedingly well in society in later life. Conversely, we also know of these laureates who“fail” as soon as real-life begins! Amongst educators there is no general agreement as to what constitutes the best way of putting competition to good use in schools.

Some believe that children at school are best served by a break in style, which can be accomplished through tests and other activities (individually or in teams) only loosely connected to the school curriculum, as opposed to formal exams. Hence, the child gains the benefit of learning to compete without his/her position of status in school being in any way threatened, thus enabling guided improvements to be made, which is surely one of the aims of education.

Others maintain that healthy competition is necessary, especially at secondary and tertiary levels, as effective ways of motivating students and providing them with feedback on performance. Thus both continuous assessment tests and exams at those levels are directly linked to topics taught in class.

What is certain is the need in educating a child to strike a healthy balance between body and mind, between the physical, the intellectual, the spiritual, the emotional, the creative, between the artistic and the technological. Nothing less will do! Obeegadoo’s reforms (2001-05), his recent rejoinder “Implications for assessment and certification” (l’express,7.12.2006) are in harmony with UNESCO’S EFA (Education for All project), with ADEA’s findings and certainly go in the right direction.

So does the content of minister Gokhool’s “Strategy for Reform” paper, based in large part on agreed principles, acceptable to both the ministry and the partners in education. What remains to do, with that child (and not party popularity!) in mind, is coherent implementation, with all on board, not the least being the primary aided and the private secondary sectors.

Dr. Michael ATCHIA