adminPost Reporter
ST FAITH’S High has torched an academic storm after emerging the national top performer in the November 2014 A Level exams as critics query how one school excels well above all every year? That the school didn’t surpass the 2013 record of 34 students with 15 points did little to pacify its detractors and spare it of microscopic scrutiny from academic hawks that view its monopoly of performance excellence with suspicion.
St Faith had 26 students with at least 15 points – of which one had five As (25 points) and six have four As (20) points. About 21 of its students had 14 points.
The school had 107 candidates who all passed to give it a 100 percent pass rate.
Such an achievement has left the Mr Moses Mukoyi-led highflyer detractors chagrined its detractors who allege “an invisible corruption” at the school.
They said it is important for schools to be accountable for their conduct, professionalism, extraordinary or outstanding achievement and lack of it.
Hawks wonder how St Faith’s remain at the top while others remain stuck at the bottom of nowhere. How does one school with the same teachers, students and textbooks, as other schools, and sitting the same exams excel well above all every year?
It is achievement yes, and good for the school, the achieving students and their parents, but how does it happen? They want answers, at best, so that other poor performing ones can emulate and learn. That is the point. It is not about envy or jealousy. People want to know how some win and others fail. Is it the quality of teaching (teachers), or is it the quality of administration or quality of ? Is it the library, computers, science labs etc, what is it? It is alleged that nearly half of the staff complement at St Faith’s High are examiners and markers and critics query how this can be at one school when other schools have one or none.
How does anybody know if these teachers do not cheat or teach direct exam script content? How does one know if these teachers do not “teach what they know or would have set” thereby putting their candidates at an advantage or simply launder this privileged knowledge to other friendly schools for money? If allegations of this invisible corruption are awash in South Africa, what can stop it from cascading to Zimbabwe, given that alleged high concentration of examiners at one school?
Also related to this are allegations of ‘special markers’ marking scripts of ‘specials schools’. St Faith’s High and Marist High are some of the said special schools. How do exam administrators explain this?
It is further alleged that these high performing schools are “drilling” and not “properly educating” their students for the final exams.
“Teaching to the test” — is an educational practice that is heavily focused on preparing candidates for the final exam.
This practice forces teachers to limit curriculum to a set range of knowledge or skills in order to increase student performance on final exams.
Scholars argue that “students taught using this method lack a comprehensive understanding of subject matter even though it raises test scores. They lack grasp of the key concepts of the domain.
“We call this rote memorization, it excludes creative and abstract-thinking skills and therefore creates an incorrect profile of a student’s achievement and such exam scores are not necessarily a fair indicator of a student’s ability,” said an educationist in Mutare, who refused to be named.
Research by The Manica Post has shown that there is a wide gap between an “item” and “curriculum” teaching school.
In curriculum teaching institutions, teachers focus on the full body of knowledge and skills to assess students’ knowledge about a topic. For example, if students will be tested on fractions, curriculum teachers will cover range of knowledge and skills related to fractions so students understand what fractions are, know how to manipulate them mathematically, understand how to use them to solve more complex problems, and are able to communicate with and about them.
On the other hand, item teachers narrow their instruction, organise their teaching around clones of the particular questions most likely to be found on the test — and thus teach only the bits of knowledge students are most likely to encounter on exams.
This method of “drill and kill” teaching is unethical and misrepresents how much students really have learned about a topic.
It produces an unhealthy focus on excessive repetition of simple, isolated skills (“drill and kill”) and limits the teacher’s ability to focus on a holistic understanding of the subject matter.
Students who have been drilled only on test-like questions do not have the opportunity to master a particular skill or concept though they can answer coached questions correctly.
It is our worry that drill-focused forms of teaching can crowd out opportunities to teach students more advanced cognitive skills, such as how to solve problems and communicate effectively.
Young people who are denied the opportunity to develop such advanced skills will be at an increasing disadvantage in the changing economy of this century.
That means educators who settle for “drill and kill” instruction — or who do not at least balance such instruction with more complex assignments — will be trading long-term benefits to students for short-term gains on standardised tests.
Over-reliance on “drill and kill” and test-preparation materials is not only unethical in the long-term but ineffective in the long-term.
If questions and anxieties people have are not professionally addressed or answered, soon students from students from these miraculous high performance schools will be viewed with skeptical resentment.
It is already beginning, with the media receiving reports of 14 and 15 pointers from certain these high performing schools getting no places for university studies for alleged dubious conduct of achievement. They call their results fake.
Some are saying products of these miracle high performance schools struggle miserably at university when the academic environment calls for intellectual discipline and application. These products are reportedly failing to cope in where the environment calls for knowledge breadth, length and depth of academic propensity and maturity of intellect and thought. In this environment the advantage of drilled exams has no room.
Whatever it is true or not about blatant or professional cheating in these top-of-the-range high schools — a serious and clean audit of what really happens behind these glowing results needs to be done sooner — either to vindicate the achievers or shame the jealous witch-hunting non-believers.
Online Reporter