Trinicenter.com
Trinidad and Tobago News
 
 Time
Caribbean Links

COLUMNISTS
Ras Tyehimba  
Susan Edwards  
Dr. K Nantambu  
Winford James  
Dr. S Cudjoe  
Raffique Shah  
Terry Joseph  
Bukka Rennie  
Denis Solomon  
Stephen Kangal  
Corey Gilkes  
A.S. Leslie  
Shelagh Simmons  
Guest Writers  

Affiliates
TriniSoca.com  
TriniView.com  
Trinbago Pan  
Nubian School  
RaceandHistory.com  
Rootsie.com  
RootsWomen  
HowComYouCom  
AmonHotep.com  
Africa Speaks  
Rasta Times  
US Crusade  


The real stakeholders
Posted: Saturday, March 23, 2002

By Donna Yawching

A FUNNY thing happened a few days ago: Wednesday morning, to be exact, at approximately 5.45. My phone rang, jolting me from sleep; on the line was a female who, under the pretext of working for BWIA, asked to "verify" my address (she actually had it pretty close, which is even more disquieting). I say "under the pretext" because subsequent checks with BWIA have established that neither this person, nor this procedure, is bona fide. What's more, no-one in my household was travelling.

I am satisfied that the caller was not in any way connected with BWIA, and can only assume her motive to have been unsavoury. And so, just in case the call had anything to do with this column–in case, not to put too fine a point on it, anyone is planning any mischief–I want to make it very clear that the police have been informed, and will be investigating accordingly.

So much for the public service announcements. Let's move on. The recent problems at the Arima Senior Comprehensive School have raised some interesting questions. It would seem that, while we have been busy blaming indisciplined students for disrupting the education system, there is no lack of indisciplined teachers to compound the problem. Perhaps I should stray from my usual position, and recommend corporal punishment?

Seriously, though, what we are seeing in Arima is nothing less than Mutiny on the Bounty: the crew demanding that the captain be replaced–or else. I'm not sure what the "or else" implies: surely if teachers choose, of their own free will, to stay away from their jobs indefinitely, they can be considered to have abandoned their posts; and justifiably be terminated?

That, frankly, would be my recommendation, harsh though it may seem. I see no reason why a bunch of surly teachers should hold a whole schoolful of students to ransom, just because they don't like their boss. Were I in charge, my approach would be: this is the person who has been chosen to lead the school; deal with it. Cope, or leave. But don't disrupt the students.

It is significant that, so far, no serious allegations of misconduct have been made against the principal, apart from the fact that she is disagreeable and has given the teachers (probably justifiably) poor performance reports. It is difficult to believe that she is actually "inciting" students against their teachers–particularly when all indications are that the school's performance has improved phenomenally under her guidance. On the other hand, knowing how our school system has operated from time immemorial, it is all too easy to believe her claims that the teachers are resentful of her attempts to instill discipline and institute stricter guidelines.

In the past, I've spoken to principals who have recounted tales of teachers arriving in the morning, signing in, and then leaving; or giving identical test marks to all the students because they were too lazy to mark the papers. Even in the so-called "prestige" schools, absenteeism is rampant: my own son (I've started keeping track recently) has had no more than two full days of teaching within a 17-day period that included two half-days and a full day off. Every other day has seen him having between one and four "free" periods. And according to the principal, this is a far better record than exists at other schools of similar stature–in which case, I shudder to think how time is being wasted overall within our education system.

(Let me be fair at this point and add that my son's principal lays much of the absenteeism at the door of the Ministry itself: apparently teachers are constantly being summoned away from classes under one pretext or another: to check CXC questions, or to attend a course. Also, if they choose to enroll in a UWI course, say, they are entitled to time off during school hours. One wonders: why doesn't the Ministry schedule its activities extra-curricularly, so to speak? Teachers, uniquely, have three months of paid vacation per year, a perk which was not divinely carved on Moses' stone tablets. Why not use some of that time for teacher-improvement courses, both mandatory and optional? Obviously, Trinidad and Tobago Unified Teachers Association (TUTTA) will scream at this idea; but would have trouble raising any rational argument against it. And I can't see the general public objecting.)

Back to Arima: it is rare to see students actually defending a strict principal; I think this is the most telling fact of that whole affair. It is unfortunate that more attention is not being paid to what the students are saying: they are the ones with the most to lose, and with no inherent reason to be partisan. When a student says, "We can see what the teacher's doing for the school. She's made it a better place. There are some teachers who are trying, but many don't care", this is cause to sit up and take notice. Instead, the automatic tendency in T&T is to dismiss the students as troublemakers: hence the Arima teachers' hysterical claims about "obeah" (really!), and being "afraid" for their security. One feels ashamed on their behalf.

Education Minister Hazel Manning recently acknowledged the need for students to have a say in the running of their schools–not control, obviously, but active participation through student councils and representatives, rather than hostile reaction through rebellion and violence. This is an enlightened approach, and the only way to go if we really hope to improve the day-to-day operations of individual schools. Interestingly, though, only two days later, Mrs Manning, addressing a symposium on the topic of school violence, urged the "stakeholders" to be part of the solution. Who were these perceived "stakeholders"? Well: TTUTA; Parent Teacher Associations; religious and business leaders. Not a student rep in sight. Does that tell you something?

If problems in schools are to be addressed, the very first stakeholders who should be recognised, and included at every stage of the discussion, are the students themselves. Otherwise, we're just wasting our time, energy and money.



Email page Send page by E-Mail