Like everyone else it seems, I have also read Ms Appanah’s article where she deplores the lack of engagement from a group of QEC students she met at the school. What really troubled me was the avalanche of criticism that has since been heaped on her, most visibly by current and ex QEC students.  

Why did she single out QEC, they ask? They point out the great things QEC alumni have gone on to achieve, all the multi-talented students they personally know of, and argue that Ms Appanah was wrong in painting the students as passive exam robots, with no capacity for creative thinking.  

I think those critics are missing the point, and are in fact in danger of proving Ms Appanah right. She wasn't having a go at QEC girls specifically but at our ruthless, one-dimensional education system, represented at its most elitist form by QEC. The school is meant to be the crème de la crème of our country's brains (I don’t necessarily agree with that statement, but that is probably for another article) – that is precisely why she was so disappointed by the pupils and the teachers’ attitude. Another school would not have provided the same context for that particular experience of hers, and her article would have created barely a ripple of relevance.  

I spent 7 years at QEC, and I recognise many uncomfortable truths in Ms Appanah’s article. In my Form 5 English literature classes, more emphasis was placed on learning entire passages by heart rather than digging into the character’s motives or the context within which the author was writing. Discussion and debate was limited to uncontroversial themes usually picked by the teacher, and no effort was made to relate them to contemporary situations.  I was not particularly literary, so I did Economics for my A-levels, a subject notorious for its opposing schools of thoughts and endless capacity for debate. Yet very little of this transpired into my thoughts and analysis. Between tuition classes 7 days a week and mounting exam pressure, I duly made sure I had the basic principles right and the practice exam papers ticked off.   

Not all was doom and gloom of course.  QEC was and is full of fabulous characters, and some of my teachers were incredibly inspiring. I arrived at university on par with my peers from around the world when it came to academic knowledge, and that is rightly an achievement to be proud of given we’re a tiny island in the middle of nowhere.  However, it took me a while to adjust when it came to being confident enough in my own opinions to voice them to a critical audience. It was a shock to the system to be marked for the rigorousness of my analysis and critical thinking, rather than for my ability to memorise information. 

One can be proud of one's school while also acknowledging its weaknesses, and whether we like it or not QEC has come to symbolise one extreme end of our education system. You don’t get the right to sing and dance when you get the most number of laureates every year, without acknowledging that you will also be held up as the country’s peak of academic excellence. So when the school or some students don’t quite perform up to the usual standards we should be confident enough to take that criticism on board rather than crying foul.  Yes, like everyone else we are being held back by an education system tied to rote-learning and the cult of exam performance. Why pretend otherwise? 

If the school is really home to the best brains on the island then its students should be the loudest in calling for change, and they should welcome Ms Appanah’s contribution to the debate.