Tweet
ISSA's academic bar too high
Published: Wednesday | February 19, 2014
Owen Speid, Guest columnist
Owen Speid, Guest columnist
On the surface, the academic eligibility rule imposed by Inter-Secondary School Sports Association (ISSA) approximately two decades ago looks good. As it now stands, the rule states that:
1. For a student to represent his school at ISSA-run sports, he must attain a minimum score of 45 per cent in at least four subjects. This must be achieved by the student in the term prior to the competition;
2. A student may also qualify to represent his school if he achieves passes in a minimum of four Caribbean Secondary Education Certificate (CSEC) subjects - but this only applies if he attains these passes in the term immediately preceding the given competition; and
3. A student will be allowed to represent his school at ISSA-run sports if he is in a sixth-form programme at his school and has minimum scores of 45 per cent in three CAPE subjects.
ISSA seems to have forgotten that chief among the original reasons for having inter-school sports is for students to develop socially, physically and emotionally. Does ISSA ever stop to think that its academic eligibility rules are most likely to disenfranchise a sector of the Student population that needs the outlet provided by sports most? Do ISSA officials believe all our great sports personalities are/were above-average academic performers?
DISCRIMINATORY BY DESIGN
I see clear signs of discrimination against a certain cadre of students in our school system. These students are generally from the lower socio-economic strata of society. Indeed, there are many special-needs children in our regular school system - many who won't be able to attain the qualifying scores to play ISSA-run sports. Many of these students go on to secondary schools, give it their maximum effort, but never get good enough scores. They, however, possess excellent athletic abilities, but, based on ISSA's eligibility rule, will experience a shutout from sports and a chance to make a living for themselves and their families in the long run.
Who will take up the case in defence of children in our schools who are disenfranchised by this crazy rule? The public defender? Children's advocate?
If you examine aspects of the rule, you will find that it doesn't take a genius to figure out that it could easily miss its intended purpose if not monitored from within the schools. Why not then just leave the monitoring of students' effort and academic performance to the parents, the Ministry of Education and the schools?
Looking at Section 2 in the rules, as set out earlier in this article, you see that footballers in their final year at school could become qualified for participation from as early as June in the previous academic year. What then will guarantee that these students will do any form of schoolwork throughout the football season from September to November, and worse yet, throughout the rest of that academic year?
Similarly, cricketers could achieve their qualifying scores from as early as the first monthly or six-weekly test in the Christmas term. The delinquent ones could then simply decide to waste time for the rest of the school year. These factors make the rules insignificant in achieving even a small slice of what ISSA had set out to accomplish when the rules were first coined some two decades ago.
UNEVEN PLAYING FIELD
By the very design, footballers may become qualified to play, coming out of a whole year's work, which includes their CSEC passes. Cricketers and track and field athletes cannot. Instead, they can only become qualified in the Christmas term, since this is the term immediately preceding their competition.
Much has to be wrong with this. Can anyone in this country imagine having in excess of seven CSEC subjects and not being able to represent your secondary school, on academic grounds? As presented here, my understanding of the rule is that if a cricketer or a track athlete who is in the sixth-form programme decides to study only two CAPE subjects, he would not be eligible to represent his school in ISSA competitions - never mind how many CSEC subjects he has passed.
I challenge ISSA's officials to produce the evidence to prove that since the implementation of these rules, we have been getting better academic performances from our high-school students. If they are not able so to do, it may be time to allow all to compete in the pool of potentially great cricketers, footballers, track athletes, among others.
Owen Speid is principal of Rousseau Primary School.
Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and speidowen@yahoo.com
Published: Wednesday | February 19, 2014
Owen Speid, Guest columnist
Owen Speid, Guest columnist
On the surface, the academic eligibility rule imposed by Inter-Secondary School Sports Association (ISSA) approximately two decades ago looks good. As it now stands, the rule states that:
1. For a student to represent his school at ISSA-run sports, he must attain a minimum score of 45 per cent in at least four subjects. This must be achieved by the student in the term prior to the competition;
2. A student may also qualify to represent his school if he achieves passes in a minimum of four Caribbean Secondary Education Certificate (CSEC) subjects - but this only applies if he attains these passes in the term immediately preceding the given competition; and
3. A student will be allowed to represent his school at ISSA-run sports if he is in a sixth-form programme at his school and has minimum scores of 45 per cent in three CAPE subjects.
ISSA seems to have forgotten that chief among the original reasons for having inter-school sports is for students to develop socially, physically and emotionally. Does ISSA ever stop to think that its academic eligibility rules are most likely to disenfranchise a sector of the Student population that needs the outlet provided by sports most? Do ISSA officials believe all our great sports personalities are/were above-average academic performers?
DISCRIMINATORY BY DESIGN
I see clear signs of discrimination against a certain cadre of students in our school system. These students are generally from the lower socio-economic strata of society. Indeed, there are many special-needs children in our regular school system - many who won't be able to attain the qualifying scores to play ISSA-run sports. Many of these students go on to secondary schools, give it their maximum effort, but never get good enough scores. They, however, possess excellent athletic abilities, but, based on ISSA's eligibility rule, will experience a shutout from sports and a chance to make a living for themselves and their families in the long run.
Who will take up the case in defence of children in our schools who are disenfranchised by this crazy rule? The public defender? Children's advocate?
If you examine aspects of the rule, you will find that it doesn't take a genius to figure out that it could easily miss its intended purpose if not monitored from within the schools. Why not then just leave the monitoring of students' effort and academic performance to the parents, the Ministry of Education and the schools?
Looking at Section 2 in the rules, as set out earlier in this article, you see that footballers in their final year at school could become qualified for participation from as early as June in the previous academic year. What then will guarantee that these students will do any form of schoolwork throughout the football season from September to November, and worse yet, throughout the rest of that academic year?
Similarly, cricketers could achieve their qualifying scores from as early as the first monthly or six-weekly test in the Christmas term. The delinquent ones could then simply decide to waste time for the rest of the school year. These factors make the rules insignificant in achieving even a small slice of what ISSA had set out to accomplish when the rules were first coined some two decades ago.
UNEVEN PLAYING FIELD
By the very design, footballers may become qualified to play, coming out of a whole year's work, which includes their CSEC passes. Cricketers and track and field athletes cannot. Instead, they can only become qualified in the Christmas term, since this is the term immediately preceding their competition.
Much has to be wrong with this. Can anyone in this country imagine having in excess of seven CSEC subjects and not being able to represent your secondary school, on academic grounds? As presented here, my understanding of the rule is that if a cricketer or a track athlete who is in the sixth-form programme decides to study only two CAPE subjects, he would not be eligible to represent his school in ISSA competitions - never mind how many CSEC subjects he has passed.
I challenge ISSA's officials to produce the evidence to prove that since the implementation of these rules, we have been getting better academic performances from our high-school students. If they are not able so to do, it may be time to allow all to compete in the pool of potentially great cricketers, footballers, track athletes, among others.
Owen Speid is principal of Rousseau Primary School.
Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and speidowen@yahoo.com
...but that would be my guess.
Comment