adminMorris Mtisi
MR MM, what meaningful researches are carried out by our universities to influence public opinions and national policies? We become concerned when people define terms and processes without understanding their environment. A good example is the unexplained natural processes on the Chivi Mountains. Careful study of the boulders shows that to confine everything to factors of weathering tells how we fall short in our understanding of education. Ideally, the purpose of education is not to narrow our minds and perch them on the summit seeing a wider horizon. Matters are taken as read in the textbooks yet these are basic tools, intended not to limit our abilities and understanding of facts.
On the sidelines we watch amazed, how people calling themselves experts of Geography fail to interpret simple things related to our surroundings to give new knowledge. The world is not still, Mr Mtisi, but we appear to be fixed as we wait for foreign theories to accept as real.
REPLY
Richard you amaze me with your meticulous observations. And I’m fascinated by your insight into our education policy in areas not many have temerity or ability to look into.
You know I’m not a Geography pundit Chauke, but the way you analyze issues makes it so easy even for a lay-man like me to understand. Indeed the Geography of the world is changing, and changing rapidly. One does not need to be a scientist of Geo-whatever to notice the global changes taking place every few years. Yet the books still importantly highlight Geography that has long changed. I put no effort to understand that.
Iwe Chauke iwe! May be that is why we have this curriculum transformation which has gripped the education system landscape. I can only hope it will not only transform the administrative mindset but also review the textbooks that carry the facts and the knowledge or information. Wareketa zvemene peya dhodha kuti we Africans sometimes, if not often, suffer from waiting too much upon foreign aid and ideas to influence our policy. Wabeka peya apapo, kwemene! We need radical change, transformation in the education sector, to bring about not only change for change’s sake, but efficacy. Change that brings desired results. Who are we waiting for to tell us to change even the set-up of our examination Papers? Chinguriyo-since the iron-age, we have been duplicating, recycling if you like, examination structures and no one is suggesting better and new content to test.
The ‘O’ level English Paper 1 is one such paper that is refusing to move with the times continuing to ask questions in an ancient tradition demanding the same old knowledge of facts and skills. I think quite frankly this paper needs overhauling. Why teach all four composition types; Narrative, Description, Argument and Discursive, in preparation for one examination which will require you to choose only one topic? What is the thinking behind this extravagance of talent development? Would it not save time, time needed to strengthen or perfect mastery, if pupils specialized in a particular Composition type, so they become masters in one. This would mean more time to learn specific skills and perfect them rather than attempting to be Jacks of all trades and masters of none.
Section B. Why is there no choice for candidates, why? What is the thinking behind this rigidity? Surely students must choose between Pie-Charts, Reports, types of letters, Speeches etc. What does the guessing-what-may-come game help the teachers or candidates? Why not just set a mixed grill and candidates choose?
Let the candidates choose. What would that compromise? You tell me it is better to spend time teaching and asking students Register obviously whose appropriateness depends on body language, tone and ethnicity or culture to suggest correct meaning? If the English people consider ‘What?’ as rude in their culture, so be it. But does it not matter how the speaker says it and what body language accompanies the remark or question? Does cultural background not influence or decide what is rude or not rude, what is arrogant and not arrogant, what is assertive and what is not, what shows understanding or misunderstanding, what is negative or positive? We can go on forever. Well, while this may seem to be important, is it not far better and useful to test second-language learners on common errors which every day embarrass student speakers and writers (nemadhodha amweniwo nendombi dzayene mumishandomwo)? If it is honourable to master correct English Register, why is it not honourable to make sure you rid the language of humiliating common errors? Test these as well I have said in the past, knowing nonetheless how far I am from the valve of educational change. Has no one heard? And does someone hear now? If we are too small to move the mountains why don’t you move them quietly and claim the credit?
Wabaabhuya peya dhodha Chauke wena! This is the problem. Gold is considered worthless in the hands of the poor and meek. It is gold when it is in the right hands of the right people. And I get you loud and clear when you ask, “Are we waiting for foreigners to give us foreign theories?” before we can meaningfully change things for our own good? But ideas don’t only come from political minds. Even those who have no station in life, they too can immensely contribute in nation building, if allowed to. No matter how big the head may be, it needs the feet down there to carry the gods where they want to go.
It is my hope that democracy in education policy descends down to every thinking PED, inspector, headmaster and teacher. And we have so many of these resources in the country.
The challenge is that most of them are used, not involved. They are passengers, not drivers of thoughts and ideas. They are not agents of change, but life school prefects. . . merely chorusing their master’s voice. . . caretakers without authority. They are not allowed to influence policy and much-needed change. Would you complain if I ended here?
Online Reporter