Tweet
Manifestos, election, education
Wesley Barrett
Monday, May 21, 2007
A general election is now imminent and the increase in verbal election proposals and promises is evident. The increase seems to be a prelude to the release of the manifestos of the political parties. In advance of the release, it is appropriate for the public to set some criteria by way of standards and expectations against which the manifestos would be assessed and evaluated.
The criteria I propose should include presentation, content, tone and general thrust. These are necessary for a determination of the parties' conceptual grasp of the issues that matter most to the electorate, and most important, the plausibility and soundness of the proposals. Indeed, an increasingly sophisticated and mature electorate would need to be in a position to judge the merits of the proposals of the contending parties on relevant criteria.
My first standard is clarity and simplicity of language that the majority of the electorate would understand and appreciate. There should be no need for sweet-sounding phrases such as "creating world-class systems", "getting on the technological super highway" and long-winded statements on "vision". Without speaking down to the electorate, there should be the use of plain English in speaking about goals and purposes. Detailed explanations and notes should be held to an absolute minimum. While a word limit will not be suggested here, those preparing the manifestos should remind themselves that exhaustive presentations will be read only by a few. In the recent past, we have had manifestos that virtually ramble over several pages of material, only regurgitating plans of the past or giving detailed explanations of the obvious.
We should caution against any attempt to borrow from alien manifestos ideas and proposals that are not yet tested, and whose value and relevance to Jamaica remain unknown. It is not surprising that some manifesto proposals in the past have yet to be implemented precisely because they were borrowed and were not carefully studied in terms of their implications and applicability at the time. Transplants remain unacceptable!
We recall, for example, manifestos in the past that proposed making Spanish an official second language within a few years when there was neither the capacity nor the teacher supply nor other support to make it possible. Of course, the country is still trying to make English a functional language for the population and literacy in English a reality for a large percentage of students. The goal of empowering the citizenry with a facility in a foreign language should still be kept in sight but reformulated and addressed in a realistic way.
At a minimum, the manifestos should identify and analyse strengths and weaknesses as well as opportunities and real threats across portfolio areas. Often the party forming the government concentrates almost exclusively on the strengths and threats, and glosses over weaknesses and opportunities while the party in opposition dwells on the weaknesses and some opportunities. Looked at another way, one party usually chronicles what has been achieved and the successes, while the other party recites what has not been achieved and the failures. None of that inadequate and skewed analysis will be acceptable. Balance and fair assessment must be key standards applied.
Generally, the presentations should exhibit realism, feasibility, measurability, relevance, coherence and interconnectivity. Cross-references should not be an "extra" or a bonus, but a requirement. In fact, all the portfolios should be structurally linked so one can see, for example, how national security, science and technology and health are linked to education and vice versa. Targets with realistic time frames would be expected in the various proposals.
While all major areas of national activity are expected to be addressed, some are expected to be given special focus. I expect a focus on the economy, education, national security and justice. Of course, included in the economy would be agricultural production to satisfy local needs and for export. Social education and entrepreneurship would be features of the education portfolio while technology would span all areas. The content of the programmes in these key areas and how they are mutually reinforcing and articulated should be given much attention.
In the case of education, I expect to see some attention given to the Education Act of 1965 which still governs the system. Along with it should be a revised set of regulations which, incidentally, has been in draft form for several years now. The Act and the Regulations should be made to speak to key policy changes relating to (a) discipline in schools (b) educational programmes and organisation (c) public versus private institutions (d) accountability (e) educational financing and other issues that now require urgent attention.
In clear terms, the manifestos should address teacher training, both in-service and pre-service, school attendance, learning support for students and teachers, life-long learning and parent education, instructional time, quality assurance, school governance and innovations. The path to achieving high levels of student participation and performance at all levels, deepened parental participation in the educational process as well as resource mobilisation and provision should be clearly articulated. There should be no promise for a curriculum that will contain almost everything under the sun! Only key learning programmes expected of schools are expected to be addressed.
A mere reference by both political parties to the Task Force Report of 2004 will not do. One wants to see a set of fundable strategic programmes and projects that will drive the reform process forward in a sustainable and predictable way, and that will lead to characteristically high-performing students and teachers.
There is a notion that tertiary and higher education should be left on their own "steam". Such a notion is not well considered. The political parties should need no reminding that growth or development in pre-primary, primary and secondary education depends to a very large extent on the tertiary and higher education sub-sector for direction and delivery of development-enhancing programmes. Unless this sub-sector is empowered and facilitated to do its unique job, then there will be little capacity to engineer development in the lower levels. This means at once that tertiary and higher education must be accorded a special place in the scheme of things. Accordingly, I expect to see much emphasis on, and a strategic role for tertiary and higher education.
- wesebar@yahoo.com
Wesley Barrett
Monday, May 21, 2007
A general election is now imminent and the increase in verbal election proposals and promises is evident. The increase seems to be a prelude to the release of the manifestos of the political parties. In advance of the release, it is appropriate for the public to set some criteria by way of standards and expectations against which the manifestos would be assessed and evaluated.
The criteria I propose should include presentation, content, tone and general thrust. These are necessary for a determination of the parties' conceptual grasp of the issues that matter most to the electorate, and most important, the plausibility and soundness of the proposals. Indeed, an increasingly sophisticated and mature electorate would need to be in a position to judge the merits of the proposals of the contending parties on relevant criteria.
My first standard is clarity and simplicity of language that the majority of the electorate would understand and appreciate. There should be no need for sweet-sounding phrases such as "creating world-class systems", "getting on the technological super highway" and long-winded statements on "vision". Without speaking down to the electorate, there should be the use of plain English in speaking about goals and purposes. Detailed explanations and notes should be held to an absolute minimum. While a word limit will not be suggested here, those preparing the manifestos should remind themselves that exhaustive presentations will be read only by a few. In the recent past, we have had manifestos that virtually ramble over several pages of material, only regurgitating plans of the past or giving detailed explanations of the obvious.
We should caution against any attempt to borrow from alien manifestos ideas and proposals that are not yet tested, and whose value and relevance to Jamaica remain unknown. It is not surprising that some manifesto proposals in the past have yet to be implemented precisely because they were borrowed and were not carefully studied in terms of their implications and applicability at the time. Transplants remain unacceptable!
We recall, for example, manifestos in the past that proposed making Spanish an official second language within a few years when there was neither the capacity nor the teacher supply nor other support to make it possible. Of course, the country is still trying to make English a functional language for the population and literacy in English a reality for a large percentage of students. The goal of empowering the citizenry with a facility in a foreign language should still be kept in sight but reformulated and addressed in a realistic way.
At a minimum, the manifestos should identify and analyse strengths and weaknesses as well as opportunities and real threats across portfolio areas. Often the party forming the government concentrates almost exclusively on the strengths and threats, and glosses over weaknesses and opportunities while the party in opposition dwells on the weaknesses and some opportunities. Looked at another way, one party usually chronicles what has been achieved and the successes, while the other party recites what has not been achieved and the failures. None of that inadequate and skewed analysis will be acceptable. Balance and fair assessment must be key standards applied.
Generally, the presentations should exhibit realism, feasibility, measurability, relevance, coherence and interconnectivity. Cross-references should not be an "extra" or a bonus, but a requirement. In fact, all the portfolios should be structurally linked so one can see, for example, how national security, science and technology and health are linked to education and vice versa. Targets with realistic time frames would be expected in the various proposals.
While all major areas of national activity are expected to be addressed, some are expected to be given special focus. I expect a focus on the economy, education, national security and justice. Of course, included in the economy would be agricultural production to satisfy local needs and for export. Social education and entrepreneurship would be features of the education portfolio while technology would span all areas. The content of the programmes in these key areas and how they are mutually reinforcing and articulated should be given much attention.
In the case of education, I expect to see some attention given to the Education Act of 1965 which still governs the system. Along with it should be a revised set of regulations which, incidentally, has been in draft form for several years now. The Act and the Regulations should be made to speak to key policy changes relating to (a) discipline in schools (b) educational programmes and organisation (c) public versus private institutions (d) accountability (e) educational financing and other issues that now require urgent attention.
In clear terms, the manifestos should address teacher training, both in-service and pre-service, school attendance, learning support for students and teachers, life-long learning and parent education, instructional time, quality assurance, school governance and innovations. The path to achieving high levels of student participation and performance at all levels, deepened parental participation in the educational process as well as resource mobilisation and provision should be clearly articulated. There should be no promise for a curriculum that will contain almost everything under the sun! Only key learning programmes expected of schools are expected to be addressed.
A mere reference by both political parties to the Task Force Report of 2004 will not do. One wants to see a set of fundable strategic programmes and projects that will drive the reform process forward in a sustainable and predictable way, and that will lead to characteristically high-performing students and teachers.
There is a notion that tertiary and higher education should be left on their own "steam". Such a notion is not well considered. The political parties should need no reminding that growth or development in pre-primary, primary and secondary education depends to a very large extent on the tertiary and higher education sub-sector for direction and delivery of development-enhancing programmes. Unless this sub-sector is empowered and facilitated to do its unique job, then there will be little capacity to engineer development in the lower levels. This means at once that tertiary and higher education must be accorded a special place in the scheme of things. Accordingly, I expect to see much emphasis on, and a strategic role for tertiary and higher education.
- wesebar@yahoo.com