Malta’s poor record in the educational achievement of a significant proportion of students completing their compulsory education is a threat to the country’s economic prospects. The European Commission has set tough targets by insisting that Malta, like other EU countries, should reduce early school leaving by 10 per cent by 2020.
The response of the educational authorities to this major social and economic challenge is the formulation of a strategic plan to curb early school leaving. A Strategy Plan for the Prevention of Early School Leaving, published by the Department of Education is a well written document that follows the recommendation of leading EU experts on this subject.
The report spells out the vision and includes a governance structure that should oversee the implementation and monitoring of the recommendations. The plan defines strategic objectives based on “prevention, intervention and compensation” at different levels of the educational system to ideally prevent as early as possible students from dropping out or to rescue them once they lose their way after years of low educational achievement.
The strategy is peppered with some very practical “strategic action” recommendations and defines the metrics for measuring success in this venture. Most of the recommended actions should not be controversial as they stand the test of common sense. Others are less so.
For instance, the Education Minister made a provocative statement when he declared that “Malta should discuss raising the compulsory school age to 18”. He was quick to express doubt on the viability of this option by asking a rhetorical question: “If we often cannot persuade children to stay at school regularly until they turn 16, how do we go about persuading them to stay on until they are 18?”
The acid test of the effectiveness of this strategy is whether it was defined after a proper analysis of the weakness and threats that have become endemic in Malta’s educational system.
The proposed strategy is not very different from what is being proposed in many other EU countries. However, strategies only succeed if the implementation plans that should accompany them are realistic and achievable.
Judging by the feedback of many who expressed their opinion on Times of Malta’s website there is some doubt about the measures being proposed. Some of these contributors are probably frontline educators who work in the coalface of our educational system. They know the real problems being faced by teachers who have to handle mixed ability classes often in the context of a poor management structure in their school.
Diluting educational standards to ensure that a higher percentage of students are certified as having achieved an acceptable educational level may satisfy political aims, however, many educators would probably argue that this amounts to no more than the ‘dumbing down of the educational system’.
Admittedly, high academic achievement is not the only manner in which to measure educational success. Many students could still get on very well in life if the educational system gave them the chance to acquire practical skills to become proficient tradesmen. Indeed, many are asking whether it is time to bring trade schools back rather than simply introducing vocational subjects in secondary school curriculums.
The strategy plan report glosses over the very real question of how the many changes proposed are going to be financed. In fact, it only states that this ambitious plan will be financed by the European Social Fund.
The strategy plan still needs to be honed to ensure that it addresses the realities faced by front line educators.