Tweet
EDITORIAL - A real revolution in education?
published: Thursday | August 9, 2007
The importance of the political parties vying for office putting out their ideas and proposals in the form of manifestos for public evaluation has been underscored by the analysis presented in yesterday's edition by our columnist, Peter Espeut.
He suggests that the education component of the Jamaica Labour Party's (JLP) manifesto amounts to a major departure from past practice. For, by extending the normal [COLOR=black! important][COLOR=black! important]school[/COLOR][/COLOR]-leaving age from 16 to 18 years old, a JLP administration would make a [COLOR=black! important][COLOR=black! important]high [COLOR=black! important]school [/COLOR][COLOR=black! important]education[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR] the norm for Jamaican children. This important revolution in education policy has not featured in the hustings, where the focus has been on the more populist mantra of 'free' education.
If Mr. Espeut is correct, this policy shift amounts to a real revolution, requiring the construction of 500 new [COLOR=black! important][COLOR=black! important]high [COLOR=black! important]schools[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR] across the island. Such a major policy shift would occupy many ministries for many years, and would have a ripple effect across the whole economy, but the authors of the manifesto do not seem to realise the fundamental importance of the shift.
We note that another [COLOR=black! important][COLOR=black! important]education[/COLOR][/COLOR] policy in the JLP manifesto is 'Zoning for GSAT placement'. If the norm will be that every Jamaican child would have a right to a high school place, why would we still need GSAT? Will inequality be written into the new secondary school system requiring a selection process? The manifesto raises many questions.
This underscores our point that the short time between the release of the manifesto and election day does not provide sufficient time to evaluate its contents.
This also raises the broader question of policy formulation. Who do the parties consult as they develop their political platforms and ideas? Is there even adequate internal consultation? How well-developed are these ideas when the manifesto is published? How open are they to negotiation before they become settled government policy?
In the past, the tendency has been for the public to put itself in the hands of politicians, leaving them to decide what the future will bring. As Jamaica matures into a modern democracy, there needs to be a greater consultation and consensus on the way forward.
In between elections, our political parties - but especially the Opposition - have sufficient time to consider the policies and strategies which they believe will benefit the country and its citizens, and to put them before the public for open discussion well in advance of Nomination Day. An important way of raising the level of the campaign is to focus on issues rather than personalities.
We cannot avoid the suspicion, as we have said before, that some within the parties fear that their ideas will not be able to stand up to public scrutiny. After 45 years of independence we would hope that our political parties would be mature enough in their approaches to governance to share with our people their ideas on the way forward.
Our misgivings notwithstanding, the JLP proposals suggest that there are policy wonks within the party who have given some thought to a broader range of issues confronting Jamaica's education system beyond subsidising fees and early childhood education - important though these issues are. We trust that sector leaders and stakeholders, including parents, will peruse the document and the proposals carefully and demand clear explanations from the party on the feasibility of its ideas. In the meantime, we await the People's National Party's document, with some expectation that it will point to something better than what obtains at present.
published: Thursday | August 9, 2007
The importance of the political parties vying for office putting out their ideas and proposals in the form of manifestos for public evaluation has been underscored by the analysis presented in yesterday's edition by our columnist, Peter Espeut.
He suggests that the education component of the Jamaica Labour Party's (JLP) manifesto amounts to a major departure from past practice. For, by extending the normal [COLOR=black! important][COLOR=black! important]school[/COLOR][/COLOR]-leaving age from 16 to 18 years old, a JLP administration would make a [COLOR=black! important][COLOR=black! important]high [COLOR=black! important]school [/COLOR][COLOR=black! important]education[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR] the norm for Jamaican children. This important revolution in education policy has not featured in the hustings, where the focus has been on the more populist mantra of 'free' education.
If Mr. Espeut is correct, this policy shift amounts to a real revolution, requiring the construction of 500 new [COLOR=black! important][COLOR=black! important]high [COLOR=black! important]schools[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR] across the island. Such a major policy shift would occupy many ministries for many years, and would have a ripple effect across the whole economy, but the authors of the manifesto do not seem to realise the fundamental importance of the shift.
We note that another [COLOR=black! important][COLOR=black! important]education[/COLOR][/COLOR] policy in the JLP manifesto is 'Zoning for GSAT placement'. If the norm will be that every Jamaican child would have a right to a high school place, why would we still need GSAT? Will inequality be written into the new secondary school system requiring a selection process? The manifesto raises many questions.
This underscores our point that the short time between the release of the manifesto and election day does not provide sufficient time to evaluate its contents.
This also raises the broader question of policy formulation. Who do the parties consult as they develop their political platforms and ideas? Is there even adequate internal consultation? How well-developed are these ideas when the manifesto is published? How open are they to negotiation before they become settled government policy?
In the past, the tendency has been for the public to put itself in the hands of politicians, leaving them to decide what the future will bring. As Jamaica matures into a modern democracy, there needs to be a greater consultation and consensus on the way forward.
In between elections, our political parties - but especially the Opposition - have sufficient time to consider the policies and strategies which they believe will benefit the country and its citizens, and to put them before the public for open discussion well in advance of Nomination Day. An important way of raising the level of the campaign is to focus on issues rather than personalities.
We cannot avoid the suspicion, as we have said before, that some within the parties fear that their ideas will not be able to stand up to public scrutiny. After 45 years of independence we would hope that our political parties would be mature enough in their approaches to governance to share with our people their ideas on the way forward.
Our misgivings notwithstanding, the JLP proposals suggest that there are policy wonks within the party who have given some thought to a broader range of issues confronting Jamaica's education system beyond subsidising fees and early childhood education - important though these issues are. We trust that sector leaders and stakeholders, including parents, will peruse the document and the proposals carefully and demand clear explanations from the party on the feasibility of its ideas. In the meantime, we await the People's National Party's document, with some expectation that it will point to something better than what obtains at present.