The more things change...

The committee’s work is ongoing and no one is yet privy to the possible outcomes. However, TTUTA highlights some ongoing concerns with the curriculum that is currently being implemented in primary schools as the Ministry of Education continues to roll out this innovation even as possible change is being considered.

The curriculum in use in our primary schools today (often referred to as the PCR, an acronym for the Primary Curriculum Rewrite) was introduced in 2013 on a phased basis. From inception it has been fraught with many challenges including insufficient resources, inadequate training and political expediency.

Despite concerns echoed by teachers across the length and breadth of Trinidad and Tobago, and by TTUTA, the roll-out of this curriculum continues unabated with its current expansion to all levels of the primary school system.

The questions may be asked: Why this concern? Why are we writing about this? Because if we are not careful and systematic in what we do we may find ourselves in a situation that is detrimental to our children in the long term. We must keep a watchful eye on what is happening. This is why.

This curriculum is not simply a revised curriculum, but one that is based on a fundamentally different philosophical foundation to what teachers were accustomed to practising prior to its introduction.

Presented as an integrated, thematic approach to curriculum planning, this curriculum requires teachers to begin with the end in mind and work backwards to identify the critical understandings about core topics that have been identified for children to know.

In the process they must examine the ways in which knowledge and skills from various subject disciplines may be integrated across a particular topic to provide children with a holistic understanding of the topic.

Educationally, a relatively sound idea; in practice, there has been some challenges in its implementation.

Why? Teachers’ initial training did not prepare them for this.

But that can be fixed, you say.

We agree, but not with three or four-day crash training workshops.

This results in teachers falling back within their comfort zone, especially if they are concerned that they don’t have the knowledge and tools to do the job effectively. The consequence — a misalignment between what is intended and what is enacted.

Moreover, when you throw into the mix the possibility that there may be a possible imminent change arising out of the work of the committee charged by the Cabinet with reviewing this curriculum and making recommendations for change, one cannot help but wonder if the Ministry of Education works in the integrated manner in which it expects teachers to perform.

The all-important question is this: If the Cabinet has appointed a committee to review the curriculum under the auspices of the ministry, if the committee is not finished with its work but there is the potential that it may result in change, why is the ministry proceeding as though it’s business as usual? Shouldn’t it postpone any continuous roll-out of new aspects of this innovation until the committee’s work is complete? The Ministry of Education needs to think both systemically and systematically in its efforts at systems improvement.

When it fails to do this, it creates self-sabotaging conditions that militate against its broader goal of improving education service delivery to the society.

TTUTA on Tuesdays will be keeping a watchful eye on this developing scenario.