Minister plans better monitoring of all schools

Education Minister Louis Galea says he wants to turn the Education Division into an authority that would regulate educational standards more effectively in state, Church and private schools.

In an interview with Mark Wood, he also admits the university needs more financial support.

Last year, a report by the Auditor General had raised serious concerns about the safety of children on school transport, citing lack of supervision. At that time your ministry had said that supervising the entire school population was unwarranted as there was no worrying history of accidents. After last week's accident in which a girl fell off a school van and was seriously injured, do you still stand by this position?

Yes, I do. Because it is only one accident and we ferry more than 30,000 students to and fro every day. A board of inquiry is now investigating whether there was a breach of contract on the part of the transport contractor.

Shouldn't the board also be looking into the responsibility of the Education Division?

We have catered for the responsibility of the division and the safety of the children through the agreement we signed with the contractors in September 2002. The contract explicitly states that the contractor must guarantee the capability of the driver, roadworthiness of the vehicle, insurance coverage and that the passengers are the direct responsibility of the driver. It is the first time safety conditions have been included in the contract and there is also a penalty clause in case of infringement.

But isn't there scope for more monitoring by the division?

I think we are monitoring the transport system very closely. If a contractor goes for children in a vehicle other than that contracted for, it is not always possible to check this abuse at source.

One of your proposed reforms in the education system is to cluster primary and secondary schools together by region in order to provide more continuity in children's education and other benefits. Children would stay within the same structure throughout their school years. Would this mean scrapping Junior Lyceums, along with the streaming system and entrance exams that go with them?

This is still a stage of information gathering and research. I have not as yet expressed an opinion as to my favoured option or the one I can propose to government for consideration. What I have done so far is to identify the strengths and weakness of the system, and I am asking the education authorities and other experts to help me solve them.

There are three main weaknesses. First, the fragmented process by which children go through the state educational experience, as opposed to the continuous flow (from primary to secondary) experienced in many Church and private schools.

Secondly, state schools lack the managerial and administrative tools to take and implement decisions at the level where they affect students. This is hampering the children's educational experience and hindering the school from adapting itself to the needs of their students. Schools are tied far too closely to a centrally controlled framework. I believe that if they were more autonomous and self-managed, it would result in better management of the curriculum, syllabi, and the quality of educational output.

The third weakness is that despite more decentralisation, there is still too much fragmentation between the schools. I would like to see more networking taking place. For example, primary schools in the same region do not have a framework within which to share each other's strengths and support each other in areas of difficulty. And secondary schools cannot divorce themselves from the reality of their feeder schools, as is the case today.

Surely the solution to cluster schools would imply a change to the Junior Lyceums system.

Not necessarily. Under the scenarios that are being researched at this point, it would still be possible to have a cluster of schools with a Junior Lyceum and secondary school. The school in Gozo has both sections, and we are looking into its strengths and disadvantages.

I am very conscious of the delicacy of the issues involved, and we have learned that changes in the education system should be carefully crafted and planned through in-depth and genuine dialogue with all concerned.

There is currently no monitoring or inspection system to make sure that schools, including private and Church schools, conform to a set of defined standards. Is it not about time that we have one?

It is more than about time. In fact, this is part of the direction I am giving. The division is currently responsible for this function and also fulfils the role of manager. I believe this presents a conflictual situation. I am therefore holding discussions on turning the division into an education authority divested of its management role but preserving the functions of standard setting, inspection and quality assurance. This would not be so much by adopting an inspectorial attitude but more by helping schools carry out an internal educational audit and then verifying that audit with the help of foreign auditors. If the education authority is to be the guardian of Malta's standards, they need to have an international context.

And this plan applies to Church and private schools too.

Yes. The division is already the regulator of all schools, looking into teachers' credentials, minimum standards and so on. What we need to do is organise it into a much more effective mechanism.

So far we have concentrated too much on educational inputs - how much money is invested, the quality of teachers, the school environment... What we need to do now is to also judge quality in terms of measurable educational outcomes, which involve more than exam success rates. The outcomes include literacy, numeracy, IT skills, communication skills, active citizenship, awareness of environmental issues, grasp of democratic principles and institutions, the world of work and so on. One can test the understanding of young men and women in many of these areas. The curriculum is already oriented in this direction.

Too many children still leave school without any qualifications to speak of. Are you directing any specific measures towards this segment?

First, I am trying to get a clearer picture of the situation. Too many statistics are bandied about and when I try to check the basis for these figures it is always difficult to identify the criteria, definitions...

What about those who don't pass their Matsec exams or don't even sit for them?

But that is a very a partial picture. You can't judge the quality of the educational system by it. If you take an age cohort of 5,000 who finished fifth form last June, roughly half sat for their O Levels. But close to 4,100 have gone on studying, at sixth forms, MCAST, in other post-secondary schools and courses. So I don't think you can really judge the competencies and skills of young people simply by reference to O Levels. On the contrary, they prove very little.

That is why I have just initiated a review of the Matsec system. While I am satisfied with the credibility and recognition that these exams enjoy, I believe that we need to fine tune them.

Today, only a percentage of students sit for their O Levels, while the others finish schooling with no recognised certification. We need to have an examination that serves two purposes: to gain entry into post-secondary institutions and as a national benchmark for all 16-year-olds that would be exchangeable on the labour market.

A survey of parents commissioned by the Sunday Times recently found that the majority consider state schools to be the best. Do you agree with this assessment?

It was very good news to education people in the ministry. I think the generally positive picture presented by the survey has to be carefully analysed, because I am very interested to identify the weaknesses of the system.

The survey clearly shows that people at large are now feeling quite positive about the policy direction that is being taken, and they are impressed with the effort that the government, Church and private sectors are putting in to upgrade the environment of schools. I only feel encouraged to continue to pursue these policy objectives and achieve a situation where Maltese parents really feel they can effectively exercise their right to choose where to educate their children.

Do you mean that all schools would be of a certain quality, such that parents would not mind whether their children go to a Church or state school?

That is my objective. I would like to ensure that the quality of state schools does not leave anything to be desired vis-à-vis our competitors in the Church and private schools. I will continue to work hard to have plurality, and to channel these different schools towards evolving their own identities.

Your answer implies that you don't quite agree that state schools are the best, but you're working on it.

No, first of all as education minister I am very conscious of the strengths and weakness of all the schools, in all sectors. I get reports of deficiencies in fee-paying private schools and Church schools as much as I do about state schools. Unfortunately, the media tends to report deficiencies in state schools but not so much in the others.

My feet are very much on the ground. I know where the strengths and weaknesses lie, and I can intervene more directly in the state sector.

In its strategic plan, the university says that current state funds are "utterly inadequate" to meet its academic commitments, and if the situation persists, academic quality will suffer. As minister for education you should be worried by a statement like that. Are you going to do something about it?

First of all, I am verifying that statement. It is not something the minister of education alone does in this case. The whole of government will look into the financial needs of the university.

Whether state funds are utterly inadequate or not is something that we still need to assess. I am sure the university has done its homework, but I am also quite sure that there are more measures it can take to ensure a more effective and efficient use of the resources it has at its disposal.

When all is said and done, however, I am also aware that the university is going to need more financial support. This is the case with universities everywhere.

Universities are also conscious that they have to operate within the limits of the national budget, and it is within those limits that we have to continue to guarantee quality.

In the light of this situation, and with university attendance growing from year to year, don't you think student stipends in their present form are unsustainable?

Whereas in Europe close to 25 per cent of students continue on to tertiary level, in Malta the figure is still close to nine per cent. So I don't think that at this stage we can do away with the financial support we give to students to encourage them to carry on studying.

The 1998 Galdes report on the maintenance grants system had recommended a further critical analysis in five years, and that review will soon start. The government will discuss the issue in the light of its recommendations.

Yes, the grant represents a financial cost, but I believe it is a good investment.