Education is one of the pillars of our society. The development of a country’s people depends on a stable and functioning education system – one that offers choice and caters for the present and future needs.

It is extremely important that equilibrium is maintained throughout a child’s education. However, with society constantly evolving, with technology putting emphasis on new subject areas, and with today’s generation showing a much greater aptitude for learning, the educational framework has to adapt to these changes.

The Education Ministry on Tuesday published a report that makes a number of recommendations for changes to the current Matriculation exam system or Matsec. If accepted by the government, they could be introduced by as early as 2008.

The report recommends that the April to June Matsec exam session be moved to June and July to enable teachers and students to have more time to finish the syllabus. Furthermore, the government will also be looking into shifting the supplementary examinations to November and December.

Moving forward the April to June session makes sense. Many teachers (and students) have complained that they have to cram a lot of material, if they are to finish the syllabus in time. Gaining that extra month or two will ease the pressure on teachers and on students.

However, in making such a change, the supplementary exams or re-sits, will also have to shift to November or December. Thus, those students who were banking on passing their re-sit to be able to go to university will be “forced” to miss a year. If the results of the supplementary exams come out in January, students will not be able to apply for a course at university, where the academic year begins in October.

The chair of the review board, Dr Grace Grima, said that students would not be losing a year, but they would be gaining more time to better their grade. The aim is to improve the quality of students going to university. The recommendation is also based on a study that shows that university students who entered university after passing a supplementary exam did not do as well, academically.

Granted. But there are a number of points to be made here. First, not every student who fails one Matsec exam, passes the re-sit and goes to university does not do well.

The board is also assuming, and dangerously so, that every student sitting for the supplementary exam will, after the results are published, be willing to wait nine months before going to university. In all probability, that student will be joining the list of job-seekers well before the results are out. The government should carry out a study to assess how many students who take a year off actually go back to school.

The report also assumes that students will use the “extra” time to prepare for the exam. This makes sense – but only if the students know they are going to university when the result is published. For many students, the attitude will be “why bother? I’m losing out on a year whether I pass or fail”.

The government should analyse the situation in more depth before accepting such a recommendation. Too many assumptions are being made on the basis of one report. The government also risks a scenario similar to that when certain university courses were only available every two years. The Nationalist Party had decried such a system.

The other recommendations are welcome. Increasing the price for each exam by Lm2 to make up for a Lm120,000 loss makes sense, as does the recommendation to introduce basic certification for those who are not O level standard. Changes to “revision of paper” procedures are also necessary and the credibility of the system would improve.

We agree with the education minister’s assessment that these changes are crucial to the Maltese economy and that the recommendations have to be implemented holistically. However, as we argued above, the government has to be careful that it does not disturb the equilibrium of the Maltese education system.