Teacher formation

One of the few things there seems to be no controversy about is that if our nation is to enjoy a decent future it cannot afford not to invest heavily in education. This is a tall order indeed; much taller than many think. It needs, as everybody knows, considerable financial investment; it also needs the right persons for the job. And this aspect rarely, if at all, reaches the public domain.

There is seldom a discussion on the persons entrusted with this important task. Ibn Campusino's "Which formation is best for our secondary education subject teachers" (The Sunday Times, September 19) tackled one aspect of this problem: how he thinks teachers should be prepared for the profession.

One should hope that his proposals will stimulate reactions from those working in the field. Not just from the academic body but also from the Education Division, which in the final analysis is responsible for the people's education.

I will deal with just one aspect of the issue; it is the factor that I consider the most important - the teachers.

Generally speaking, teachers in Malta enjoy a modest status, well below that enjoyed by, say, doctors, lawyers and architects. Ibn Campusino's succinct history of teacher education in Malta might have sounded to some more like a justification of this rather than as an explanation.

The reference to the accelerated (a mere 40 years have been enough) attainment of prestige by the Faculty of Education compared to the 300 years it has taken other faculties to achieve, might have come across as tongue in cheek in the light of the proposals Ibn Campusino then goes on to make.

It is hard, for example, to reconcile the different proposals he makes for teacher education for the primary and secondary school sectors. While for the former he suggests retaining the four-year teaching degree course, for the latter the one-year postgraduate teaching certificate on top of a first degree is sufficient and could replace the B.Ed. secondary track completely. He neglected to add how the Faculty of Education feels about these two routes to becoming a secondary school teacher, and how the Faculty of Education would react to the elimination of the B.Ed. course for secondary school teachers.

The problems faced by the local Faculty of Education are common to most Faculties of Education elsewhere; they too, and their degrees, have still to convince older Faculties of their worth.

In Malta, the Faculty of Medicine still insists on taking the cream; look at its entry requirements. And this is good for us healthwise, even if not moneywise. The Faculty of Law reaches this objective in a different way. A quick glance at the results of the first three years of the course is convincing enough. And this is also no doubt done in the best national interests.

And the Faculty of Education? Entrance requirements and results of the four years of the course make the Faculty look like the Cinderella of the sisters. She is the youngest and enjoys the best of health but her place is in the kitchen for the more 'modest' chores.

Is teaching less important or noble than healing? Are family doctors more important than our children's teachers? The answer, I should like to think, is neither yes nor no; it depends on the circumstances. The thing is, however, that the status of the two persons doing the work is not.

Or is teaching less important than assuring the enjoyment of one's rights? Most of us refer to 'my lawyer' and 'my architect' very rarely in a lifetime. Some lucky ones even pass through life without ever having to go through the hassle and expense of going to court or building a house.

But everyone needs teachers, on a daily basis, for a good chunk of our lives. All parents would like their children to be in the class of the more reputed teachers and the more assertive parents rightly complain with the authorities if the teachers are not up to scratch. So how does one explain and justify the difference in the social status enjoyed by teachers and the older professions?

Is it because teaching does not create myths? Teachers are rarely the protagonists of films but hardly a day passes without one on doctors, lawyers or even detectives for that matter? The explanation, someone once said, is simple: people prefer drama. And these films and serials deal with the drama and mystery of death. It is death that creates the myths. And teaching is not about death; it is about the art of living, and living well.

Is teaching a much easier job? Do people have the perception that anybody can teach? And if they do, has the track record of the Education Division and the Faculty of Education anything to do with it? Have they declared war on this perception? Very few seem to appreciate just how difficult it is to teach well; how complex it is when you have in front of you 25 patients, not one, each with their own history, motivation, problems, needs, learning styles.

We are no longer in the age of one medicine suits all; the age of lockstep is over, or should be. Publications and conferences on education and effective teaching are as numerous and as scholarly as those of other professions. But are future teachers being pushed and stretched enough to make sure they are up to their task and 'the best' as some other faculties do?

Research is constantly proving just how difficult it is to teach effectively, giving each student the attention s/he needs. It therefore becomes imperative that the Faculty and the Division react to any hint of the perception that the job is given to whoever cares to ask for it.

As soon as one says that, however, one has to have a ready answer to another question: given the state of things, higher status, higher pay, better chances all round in life, better chance these days of not ending on the list of unemployed, why should a high-performing student choose teaching over another profession?

In the times when career choice was limited and we had the numerus clausus, the teaching profession benefited from the surplus of the better Sixth Form arts and science students. Some high-fliers still do opt for teaching. But their number has unavoidably decreased; and this when it is being realised that the teaching profession really needs them.

So if it is not the status or the money, what makes students go in for teaching? Is the answer 'the long holidays'? Or the perceived 'short' working hours? We obviously do not need these teachers. But neither can we expect candidates for teaching to answer they want to do their mission in life here rather than in Africa.

Strong action by the Faculty and the Division is essential if teachers are to grow in stature. But they, the teachers, must grow and be seen to grow. It does not seem that all on campus are convinced yet that this has happened; or that it is even necessary. To my mind Ibn Campusino's Commentary betrays this subtext.

He retains as much more important the possession of subject matter than knowing how to teach it, and hence one should dedicate much more time to learning the subject matter than to pedagogy and methodology.

The first, says Ibn Campusino, deserves a three-year degree course; for the other a one-year certificate is enough. The weeks dedicated to the practicum sound almost like a waste of time. He pushes aside the fact that much of what is done in the BA/B.Sc. (and Honours degrees) is not directly relevant to teaching at secondary level and that the one-year PGCE is not half enough to prepare really professional teachers. Those who really know what goes into effective teaching can never share Ibn Campusino's ideas. And this obviously does not mean that mastery of subject matter is not of the essence.

He, however, makes a point which is rarely, if ever, mentioned and which deserves serious consideration. The education of teachers who will be preparing students for their A-levels. The creation of the Junior College has produced only a partial solution. Several lecturers in this institution hold only a B.Ed. (Hons.) (this is because no others are available on the market; but still this degree was never intended to prepare teachers at A-level standard); all of them, however, had to pass a competitive interview.

The majority have very good academic qualifications. Can it be said that this is also true of their 'professional' training, as teachers? And is there regular teacher development at this institution? Has the Faculty of Education anything to say about this? I am sure that Ibn Campusino does not need me to tell him that at the University of London lecturers are audited for their 'teaching' abilities.

The above compels me to digress briefly. The Education Division still retains part of its old Sixth Form. Here too the situation is not, or was not up to a few months ago, a happy one, Teacher development does take place in the form of an annual three-day in-service course, but when it comes to recruitment there are no calls for applications, interviews, or consultations with the respective Education Officers. This implies the clearly erroneous belief that if one is competent enough to teach at O-level, one can also teach at A-level, regardless of the EO's opinion.

To return to the thrust of this article: the Faculty of Education still has an uphill grind ahead to change the general perception of teachers and to convince even fellow academics that teaching is indeed a profession. The prejudice is not just a subconscious one; quite often it is a very conscious one and in a number of cases perhaps even a justified one.

I conclude by suggesting a step to begin with: an amendment to a clause in the Education Law. I refer to the clause that permits holders of a Master's degree without any professional training to apply for the post of regular teachers with the Division.

This clause shouts out loud that content knowledge is enough; that if you know something, well, then you can surely teach it; that there is no need for theory and practice of teaching. It is a concise declaration that teaching is not a profession; that it does not require any professional formation. The onus to express itself on this anomaly is, and has been for far too long, on the Faculty of Education, as a body. I am confident that the Education Division will silently approve and be grateful.