Life is all about choices.
Sometimes you make good decisions, at other times they turn out to be the wrong ones.
Many of our choices concern little things, with not much of a consequence. Shall I wear the green shirt or the blue one? Shall I cook spaghetti or go for a burger? Shall I watch TV or read a book?
Others are more complicated than this, and there could be repercussions whatever the decision taken. This is especially so when a decision taken today is for the long term.
We have all made important choices in our life. We have all chosen to either move house or stay put; get married, cohabitate or stay single; take up a new job or carry on in the present one. These are ultimately the decisions that can impinge on our way of life, our financial situation and our happiness.
But happiness, in the real sense of the word, is a fleeting sensation. It may take a long time to be reached, but then it goes away so quickly.
The important thing, to my mind, is not happiness, but serenity. It is having peace of mind that leads people to live comfortably – with themselves and with others.
Levels of personal comfort differ from person to person. Some may expect little, and get more, while others would like to reach the top level and are disappointed when they only manage to get half way. Ambition is positive, because it helps people improve, but when it becomes an obsession it is detrimental, particularly when the goals to be reached remain elusive.
Choice is a main topic of family conversation this summer, as both my teenage kids are at a crossroads, and we have discussed their aspirations many a time. While trying to lead them to take a decision that will be fulfilling and at the same time leave options open for other considerations in the future, the final choice will ultimately be theirs. If it turns out to be a mistake, I would like that mistake to be theirs alone; after all, I have made my own mistakes too, and learnt from them, just as much as I would like my children to learn from theirs.
Many other youngsters the same age are in the same predicament. Today, teenagers have so much to choose from and this is sometimes an overwhelming situation. It’s like going to an ice-cream parlour and having just enough money to choose one flavour from among 100 that you like. It’s not uncommon that, when I have the first lick of vanilla, I regret not having chosen amarena.
Having one’s choices restricted is not helpful, and this leads me to make an important suggestion to our educators and to those who draw up the criteria students need to progress in their education at post-secondary level.
Some time ago, for example, a decision was taken by which students need to have a qualification in at least one science subject to continue progressing. I understand that this line was taken because it was calculated that Malta needs more people who are qualified in the sciences. But, conversely, isn’t this measure pushing students to waste time studying a subject they will discard immediately they get a qualification, and losing out on the possibility to study a subject that is more to their liking and on which they could focus in the longer term?
Perhaps I am saying this because I have always preferred languages to science. Today, students have to study two subjects at ‘A’ level standard and three others at intermediate level, but the way the preferences list is structured, they cannot study more than three languages, simply because it is compulsory for them to take two other subjects from different lists, including a science subject.
So, if today students want to study languages in order to pursue a career in which languages are a must, they cannot study more than three at post-secondary level because they have to study two subjects with which they are not comfortable. This inevitably means that they need more time to study subjects they dislike – time that would be taken up from subjects they enjoy. Students who want to become translators/interpreters, guides, journalists or anything else that requires language skills, including many jobs in the tourism industry, can only focus on a limited number of languages during their educational time – which is a pity.
The way the criteria have been drawn up has also meant that the importance that languages are being given in secondary schools has also diminished. In my time, we could study up to five languages; today, this is no longer possible. With Maltese, English and mathematics being compulsory, and with a science subject also a must because students need to continue studying it at post-secondary level, there are restrictions on languages, and very often students are dropping languages early because they must get a qualification in physics, chemistry or biology to further their studies at post-secondary level. Often, students end up studying Maltese, English and just one other language. Again, it’s a pity.
Students who do not like science will end up dropping the subjects anyway, and will do so after losing out on the chance to study a language that is more to their liking, and which they could pursue in the long term in the career they choose – a career that requires language skills and not science.
My suggestion is that in any reform that is made to the education system, students should not be forced to take up subjects they do not like. The situation as it is today is wrong on both counts: it is forcing students to waste time on subjects they will eventually give up and depriving them of time they could otherwise spend on subjects they need.
[email protected]