In parallel or sequence, but not haphazardly

There are essentially two ways of tackling matters: in sequence or in parallel. The former is chosen when matters to be addressed are somewhat limited in number, and when the execution of one depends on the completion of another, based on the principle of first things first.

Bread cannot be baked before the dough is ready.

By contrast, the latter method is chosen when a host of issues are interrelated and when they have to be addressed simultaneously.

A car cannot be assembled without having manufactured all the parts.

This small introduction relates, among many others, to what is being done and what should be done within the two vital spheres of school and higher education in the Kingdom.

What we see at present in the two sectors falls under neither of these two patterns. It looks, in fact, very much like doing things fragmented or haphazardly, with no particular order or sequence.

With respect to school education, what we have seen so far is an attempt to impose order and discipline with respect to the Tawjihi exam: no disruption of the process, no leaking of questions, no cheating, no interference on the part of parents, toughening the questions a bit, etc.

This is all good.

And there is also the move taken recently to subject prospective teachers to exams that “determine” their teaching abilities.

One is not sure that these hastily prepared exams can in fact measure the potential abilities of the applicants. An interview and a careful perusal of the applicants’ academic history might be a lot more revealing.

Assuming, however, that these exams do contribute to a better understanding of the applicants’ potential, we will consider this a good step.

There is also talk about reforming the curricula. Nothing concrete has emerged yet for one to comment on, first.

Second, talk about the need for reform has been going on for decades, and no satisfactory results have materialised, despite the fact that the Ministry of Education has been “reforming” for decades.

Having said this, however, and having given the ministry credit for its attempts, I must point out that what has been done and what appears to be looming on the horizon is nothing but marginal.

Even if we see a decisive move taken in the direction of curricula, this will still be marginal. The overall bulk of the school education remains archaic.

So much needs to be done when it comes to curricula, learning methods, class management, independent learning, e-learning, key relevant skills, modern testing and assessment methods, students’ attitude, behaviour and personality, subjects students study, teacher certification and qualification, teachers’ morale,  teachers’ pay, teachers’ involvement in decision making, teachers’ social status, school management, management at the level of governorates and the ministry itself, and so many other crucial dimensions.

What is being done at this point is a drop in the ocean.

More significantly, it does not seem to be part of a clear-cut overall scheme. And this is what worries us most.

The exact same thing seems to be happening at the level of higher education. Much fuss and controversy are raised with respect to renewal for university presidents whose terms have come to an end, as well as about raising the cut-off scores for admission to universities.

Again, these two issues are significant. Assuming that one agrees with how the two matters are being tackled, the Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research is to be lauded for the efforts exerted so far.

Nevertheless, these two matters are also marginal. There are so many other vital issues that need to be urgently tackled, among which the very relationship between the ministry and the Higher Education Council (through which the ministry “governs” universities and community colleges), on the one hand, and universities and community colleges, on the other.

One important question should be settled (through legislation) from the outset: Should the ministry and the  council govern the sector or should they regulate for it and facilitate and give universities more autonomy?

What is needed in both school and higher education sectors is a meticulous, robust overall vision of reform and a clear-cut roadmap for action, not isolated moves that do little more than polish the hooves of a dying horse.

Crucial matters are dealt with whole, either in sequence or in parallel.

The ministries in charge of school and higher education need to show the overall map, and we need to know whether they are addressing issues in sequence or in parallel, so as to better judge the value of what we otherwise see as haphazard, isolated acts.