(Right click on the link above to either download the pdf document or to open it in another browser tab or window. You will need pdf reader software such as adobe in order to open the document)
With some justification, people will be tempted to say that parents and pupils can only aspire to the very best of International 21st Century learning, when they have access to an education that delivers on the most basic of fundamentals first to at least a decent standard. The fundamentals of reading, writing, mathematical skills and ability to think scientifically are the core foundational skills that need to be acquired by any student from their years of schooling.
It was in order to measure, compare and raise standards in these areas that the PISA tests started to be used by OECD countries, the results tabulated, compared and widely circulated. The tests are taken by children aged 15 and the last set of published results were for the 2012 tests (the 2015 results will come out in December 2016).
Inevitably, the reality is that the data can make for very painful reading and some hard questions for government. For example, considering the wealth levels of the country and amount spent on education, the US data has long been a cause for considerable concern in that country. It has the potential to inspire, motivate and encourage innovation, but too often i fear it motivates knee-jerk reactions and a greater tendency to make achievement in a test the goal in children’s education – rather than a means to an end and a tool.
Here’s an article that carries an interesting analysis of the data. It highlights the unacceptable numbers of children who are being failed by the education systems in so-called developed countries that spend considerable sums of money on public education. If these people cannot achieve even the acceptable minimum learning levels they are pretty much denied the ability to play a full and active part in the economy throughout life. The article also, quite rightly stresses that there are so many factors that impinge upon the performance of education systems that the best comparisons are those between countries which are geographically and culturally similar. Such a comparison makes Malaysia’s results even more intolerable (when compared with the likes of Singapore). The final article is one of optimism – where the will exists, positive change can be achieved that brings great benefit to young people’s lives and the society as a whole;
India took part (once), but sadly found the results so embarrassing that they simply withdrew and said they ‘didn’t want to play’. The government (read Sheikh Mohammed) of UAE took their typical approach – they decree from the top that something will be a certain way, and then just demand that others do whatever it takes to make that happen. In this case, they’ve set an ambitious target (considering where the country’s students scored in 2012) to see the country placed in the top 10 worldwide.
For Malaysia, the evidence is clear – there’s much work to do. I’m not aware of whether the original data reflects just students from government schools, or whether private sector students were included. Nevertheless, the data reflects an education system that is failing to give enough students an adequate grounding in education basics and fundamentals, let alone aspiring to deliver a truly holistic Twenty First Century education. As private sector schools, and especially as the expatriates within them I believe we’re duty bound to do all in our power to share knowledge, techniques, principles and ideas, to help people to understand and believe in what’s possible educationally. We need to be ready to share key messages about what’s required for children to be educated in ways that will enable them to excel and succeed in the wider world.
As I mentioned earlier, there is an inevitability that countries that jealously eye those top spots in the league tables look to see what they can emulate (copy), in the shortest possible time in order to drive similar results through their education systems. We see this in the UK and US conservative interests in the systems of Singapore and Shanghai. Where there are cultural similarities (Singapore and Malaysia) the temptation to simply mimic is even stronger.
However, here’s an excellently written article that delves in to the Singapore system that carries all the warnings about simple mimicry. In fact, it shows that Singapore, just like China has recognised that topping these league charts is only one element in a much more complex education equation and that, in fact, there are ways in which their rigid, teacher-centric, delivery based models carry fundamental weaknesses, however well they’re implemented. Thus, as others begin to see how to mimic Singapore, the small nation state is doing careful analysis about how they can reform and modernise the system they have;
Among the senior team at Tenby in recent weeks we’ve been having a number of discussions about the critical importance of our educators (especially contractual expatriots) ‘leaving a legacy’. The growth in International education means that in the next few years there is going to be a shortage of talented, trained and motivated local talent. We have to play our part to make ours an attractive professional choice for local teachers and we need to ensure that the training, mentoring and support is there to enable the local teachers to understand and acquire the skills that put them on a par with teachers available from anywhere in the world.
Lots of work ahead.
Filed under: Educators of tomorrow, Leadership, Life, Our Environment, School, Teaching Practice | Tagged: India, Malaysia, OECD, PISA, Singapore, standardized testing, teach to the test, Tenby, Twenty First Century learning, UAE, World Economic Forum | Leave a comment »