It’s not too late for dialogue on new curriculum

Debate on the Competence Based Curriculum (CBC) raises fundamental questions. First, what is the need for reforming the curriculum? Second, what is informing the shift from 8-4-4 curriculum to CBC?

The CBC is expected to seal gaps identified in the 8-4-4 system. However, it would be important to understand the original intention of the 8-4-4 system. The guiding philosophy of the 8-4-4 system was “education for self-reliance”.

The system was expected to equip learners with employable skills, thereby enabling school leavers at all levels to be either self-employed or secure employment in the informal sector. Although the 8-4-4 system allowed for more options in technical and vocational subjects, it experienced serious shortages of essential resources and facilities, leading to the system being theoretically oriented.

The CBC, on the other hand, is designed to enable a learner be engaged, empowered and be an ethical citizen. Comparison of the intentions of the two systems however shows a lot of parallels in terms of expected outcome; both seek to empower the learner. This empowerment requires adequate resources; and thus CBC is likely to face the same pitfall like its predecessor.

It is also worth noting that failure in the 8-4-4 system is not inherent in the curriculum itself, but in the mode of implementation. Is this the direction we are headed to with the new curriculum?

Was there a proper legal and theoretical foundation put in place to support the new curriculum? Theory in educational reform is important because it supports conceptualisation; it informs methodology and underpins analysis and interpretation. Curriculum founded on a wrong premise is likely to backfire.

One hidden reason why preferred educational reform has been hard to realise in Kenya is because citizens, policymakers and education stakeholders do not satisfactorily agree on what they want from our education system. To solve educational problem is not just a matter of finding the right means to an end as most policy makers would want us to imagine; there is a need to articulate a basis for agreement on a substantive opinion by formulating a theory. Looking at CBC as proposed and documented, it is so difficult to tell the rallying theory behind it, and this is probably the source of the confusion we are currently witnessing.

Were all the prescribed steps in development of a curriculum followed? Can these steps be validated? Curriculum development includes needs analysis, design, piloting and implementation. Analysis of content in needs assessment report done by KICD indicates shocking revelations.

The criteria set for needs analysis as well as the instrument used in the process was faulty. If this simple and important step was not done right, then what else was done right for this curriculum? Piloting done is also questionable. Piloting should be comprehensive enough to capture all levels that the curriculum is envisaged to cover. These glaring flaws are scaring and an indicator that all is not well. A curriculum design can only remedy educational problems if based on a thorough diagnosis, on appropriate research and on positive and relevant practical experience. 

Another question relates to whether the country is ready for implementation of CBC based on teachers’ preparedness and provision of relevant resources to support curriculum. Preparing teachers for CBC is not as easy as some people would want us to believe. CBC requires a paradigm shift in terms of pedagogies. The new curriculum requires innovative approaches; teachers are expected to demonstrate competencies in assessment and be self-reflective, self-improving and supportive to learners themselves. Thus a one-week orientation of teachers may not be sufficient. Trainers themselves are struggling to understand the CBC concept.

In absence of proper methodological support to teachers and lack of clear relevant theoretical framework guiding the conception of curricula, Kenya may not be ready for the new curriculum. Shortage of teachers also compounds the problem since a teacher is expected to handle a small group in a CBC class.

Curriculum development process involves negotiations and consensus building and should not be a one-man show. For successful curriculum implementation, leadership plays a very important role. Good leadership ensures that efforts are coordinated and new directions set through learning, information gathering and dialogue rather than through administrative regulation and hierarchical control. On that note I wish to request the Education CS to retreat and call for urgent meeting of all education stakeholders and experts to discuss the way forward on the new curriculum. 

- The writer is curriculum expert and Bomet Deputy Governor