Any new education system is bound to fail if skewed policies remain

By Rose Wanjiku

Since its launch in 1985, the 8-4-4 system of education has been criticised for failing in its objective to offer quality and relevant education.

The education model has been accused of reducing learners to robots who can barely understand same instructions given in a different format. Even the teachers who hold no bars to ensure their students go through the system ‘with flying colours’ fault it. They say the competitive nature –– read obsession with passing exams --–– doesn’t give students time for critical thinking and to develop their talent. Yet, reproducing material taught in class at the end of the year is the only gauge for excellence.

During the recent head of schools meeting, one teacher said secondary school is ‘just a preparatory ground for the university’.

In other words, those with no cramming potential in high school face a ‘bleak future’–– something stressed by unemployment statistics.

Country’s Aspirations

Many opportunities are lost to them. But, to label the 8-4-4 system as failed is unfair.

When the system was introduced in 1985, it was hailed. In vision, the model captured the country’s aspirations. There was emphasis on subjects that tested the learner’s ability to ‘think outside the box’.

Then, Agriculture, Home Science, Civics, and Social Ethics were fashioned more than to transform learners to farmers, homemakers and good citizens respectively. In short, the system was to bring out an all- rounded person and prepare them for any challenges ahead. With successive revisions, poor implementation and low budgetary allocation, the system became a conveyor belt. All the principles and skills education was supposed to instil were lost. The system became exam oriented. It has become easy to tell students to describe things rather that ask them to make them practically. Quality has been sacrificed in attempts to ensure ‘ no child is left behind’.

Little Practical Aspects

Mushrooming of poorly equipped private schools has aggravated the situation.

Even at the university level, students get the power to ‘read and write and do what appertains to that degree’. The power is vague. Simply, students are just expected to get first class honours with little practical aspects. Even when they go for attachments or internships, it is to fulfil the degree requirement.

For this reason, lecturers put no effort to update their knowledge, in turn, students feel no need to learn anything beyond the coursework. It is common in the universities to hand down notes and exam papers for generations.

The job market largely also requires proof for passing exams. Many employers have complained about half-baked graduates.

Thus, to blame an entire education system for our failures is to bury our heads in the sand. To read principals and teachers the riot act on poor performance is perpetrating the same problems we say the system has brought.

To call for another system without changing the fundamentals of provision of education is like making a bad bet after another.

Majority of the unemployed blame their situation on not finding a job. Basically, the system has led learners to believe life lies in white-collar jobs. It is seen as the ladder to self-actualisation for many.

An education system should reflect a people’s dreams, goals and the way to achieve them. At the moment, we are caught in the dreaming phase.

The basic solution lies in answering the question: "What do we want to achieve through our education system?

The writer is a sub-editor at Weekend Editions.