Two opinion pieces (TMID, 14 February) dealt with the reception class as proposed by the Malta Labour Party. One was for and the other against.

Sean Zammit, a young(er) teacher is opposed to the concept and sees it as an expensive, unproductive and impractical and gave good reasons for his analysis.

On the other hand, Carmel Tabone, a retired Education Officer sang the praises of the proposal and opened his defence by quoting a dictionary definition of the word ‘reception’. He defined it as ‘the act or an instance of receiving or the process of being received’. All well and good. I am quite certain that those opposing the reception class concept did not require a dictionary definition. They named it a ‘repetition class’ because they analysed its true meaning.

What Mr Tabone did not tell us is what our children will be doing in the process of being ‘received’. Review what had been taking place in the kindergarten year? Start on the curriculum of year 1? One gets the impression that the ‘reception class’ will amount to no more than repeating some of a kindergarten class and borrowing some of year 1. Just simply to fill an extra year of schooling! The shortage of teachers and the expense of setting up this new system will no doubt create huge additional expenses which would be better spent in other areas of the education system.

That the present syllabi need fine-tuning I have no doubt and ought to be done not by the government alone, but by direct consultation with the teachers.

I am a senior citizen myself and the education system in my almost forgotten young years was crude by today’s standards, yet I pride myself that very rarely do I find it necessary to use my spell checker since I acquired a good knowledge of the English language taught by both Maltese teachers in the primary school and by English teachers while attending the Lyceum. That was in the 1950s!

My level of language literacy was indeed influenced by the teaching standards but even more so by my interest in the English language. So, let us not get over excited about going into statistics which indicate that in some cases our literacy standards are suspect and/or lag European ones. It is more a case of motivation rather than a necessity to extend the school years by another year.

We should not forget that motivation to excel was limited to some extent until the last few years. A high school student saw barriers in front of him/her since proceeding further into tertiary education meant going into traditional professional positions such as the legal, medical and architectural. Beyond that, options were limited. Today, with a forward moving economy, our union with Europe and the better equipped schools, students’ options have multiplied and we should make them fully aware of these new opportunities. We have reached a situation where we have more job openings than we can get workers to fill them. Faced with this (good) problem, why would we try to delay graduates by a full year?

Mr Tabone’s argument went into statistics which on close examination actually prove that the reception class proposal is without merit. For example, how would the introduction of a reception class stop early school dropouts? If the dropouts found school too boring and we increase the school years by one full year, would they not drop out with one less year of useful education? If 5,190 students were eligible to sit for JL exam but only 3,170 applied, is it because 2,020 were ill prepared? Is it a lack of motivation to proceed further? Of the 2,020 how many applied for entry into other technical schools such as MCAST?

In my opinion, the fundamentals remain strong. It is between the primary and tertiary years that one may find a motivational gap. This may be partially due to too much cramming, too many subjects which later on in one’s career are found to be unusable, or the teaching system is unable to make learning an interesting and rewarding experience for the students. Better career guidance in the formative school secondary years may spark the motivation to continue studies into tertiary and post graduate education.

In any case, a reception class is no solution.

Joe Martinelli

London, Ontario, Canada