The people who get to speak on education in the public forum are typically politicians, the majority of whom are not even linked with the sector. Researchers and academics do occasionally voice their expertise on education to the public (as they ought to do) - yet, some more than others.
Therefore, as the question comes naturally, what about students and teachers? When was the last time you heard a teacher or a student voice their experience or view on education? How are students reacting to adults' decisions and impositions on their educational journey? And how are teachers feeling and thinking about the education system and its legacy? The recent circular that was disseminated to educators has not only experienced backlash for its lack of freedom of expression but also for its duplicity. How can we strive for "critical thinking" and "inclusive education" when our educators are being stopped from being critical and inclusive in public opinion? How can we independently pass the baton to students, if our own 'baton' is tethered?
As an ethics educator in secondary education, I host a weekly Debate & Journalism Club in break time, where around 20 students debate several sociopolitical questions, such as: "Is AI more of a threat than a benefit to society?", "Should voting be mandatory in democratic societies?" or "Do power and authority corrupt good people?". Such questions and similar, which go hand in hand with the teachings of Ethics Education, give students the space to critically think about their beliefs and observations; notwithstanding those of others. They also have the opportunity to practice communication, inquiry, and persuasion, abilities which are important in all stages of life. Recently, students have been raising questions about the way forward in education, debating each other on what a better education system can look like. I will be reporting the observed findings, including other comments that were witnessed during lessons.
On homework, exams, and assessments
The reluctance that one can expect from students on homework is not always accurate. Not all students hate homework. The majority expressed that they find it valuable, yet both its frequency and deadlines can be a subject of discussion. For instance, the students expressed that almost all teachers give hefty amounts of homework on Fridays or long weekends, instead of distributing it equally during the week - since "teachers think that we [students] have more time to complete the work." However, the time spent on homework is time lost from other recreational activities and experiences that students ought to enjoy after school hours. Such activities can be crucial in forming students' characters, exploring hobbies, or simply enjoying quality time with families or friends.
As for exams and assessments, the students expressed their opinions on the new School-Based Assessments (SBAs) system that is introduced in secondary education. The SBAs (which are carried out over the 3 years of secondary) cover 30% of the respective O-Level mark. In other words, the students have the option to score up to 30% of their O-Level in assessments, which can allow the student to do well in the remaining 70% exam. However, the students suggested that the SBAs can start in their 2nd secondary year (i.e. Year 10 or "Form 4") instead of in Year 9 since it gives more chance for students to settle in for their new subjects, and since there might be foreign & local students who change schools, or start the scholastic year at a later date; losing lessons in the process.
Choosing subsequent subjects
One of the biggest concerns that students expressed was the choice of subjects that they had to commit to before starting secondary school. In Year 8 (or "Form 2"), the students argued that they were only exposed to the new subjects for just one day in the form of an "exhibition", not providing enough exposure to what each subject entails. Further, the subjects were presented as "completely different from reality, showing us only fun games and activities," as one student remarked, which are starkly different from what the students encountered after choosing their subjects. Together with the students, it was suggested that in Year 9 (or "Form 3"), the first month of the scholastic year will serve as an orientation of the different subjects, in which students can visit different 'workshops' on their own, giving a clearer picture of what each subject entails. Afterwards, the students get to choose which subjects resonate best with their preferences and character. Amongst other benefits, this approach can help students be more attentive and engaged during lessons, knowing that they have the opportunity to choose their subjects with 'better consideration'.
Alas, the system has always inclined on a "career orientated" one, meaning that subjects are reduced to "what can make me more money or get a stable job." Subjects which are not considered as 'lucrative' such as Art, History, Languages, Ethics, Religion, Drama, or Literature are not deemed as equally important to their 'more lucrative' counterparts, including Maths, Sciences, and Computing. Such distinction creates a hierarchy of importance and priorities, to the extent that students take the former subjects less seriously when compared to others. I am not going to go into the importance of the humanities subjects for understanding the human, nor am I saying that STEM is not essential. Yet de-prioritising humanities is surely not the way forward for helping us understand what makes us human. On the other hand, there is much to be said on how one can create relationships between STEM and the humanities. For instance, when discussing AI in Computing, one can include the ethical implications of AI on humans, thus contributing to the formation of the student. Lastly, students felt pressured that from just 12 years old, they are already thinking about what career they have to choose - and hence the subjects to be chosen. Therefore, one must also think of education from the point of view of the student as a person, rather than simply as a prospective worker.
There were other comments from the students on improving the education system, such as revising syllabi to match contemporary issues, teaching public speaking, mental health and financial literacy, having more outdoor activities, revisiting school days and compulsory subjects, having the opportunity to give feedback to teachers, organising open debates on politics and social issues, varying assessment methods, and ultimately, to "help us become better people."
There is much more that can be said beyond the confines of this article. We ought to seriously give students (and educators for that matter) the opportunity to speak - as we are currently out of touch with what is happening inside schools. Academics who invested their time in the education sector ought to also do their duty and be updated with what classes look like today - beyond what the research says. Teaching 25 students at once in today's classrooms, all carrying their different baggage and characters, can show a different reality than the latest academic paper. I am not stating this to discredit academics, on the contrary, I believe that researchers can offer adequate consultation and ways of improving the system by combining their research with regular physical observations.
My last remark goes to politicians. Please, let us not treat education as a political scapegoat or a means to an end. The future of the country depends on a good education system, one which trusts and believes in its educators and empowers its students. Let us not circle around circulars, or use inspiring words without proving their effect on the field. Let us include everyone on the drawing board, and ultimately, let us value education intrinsically, and not just instrumentally.
Luke Fenech is a Teacher of Ethics Education and Casual Lecturer at the University of Malta