Abstract
The
quality of education has been one of the most debated issues in the world. For
example, in Bhutan the people have blamed towards the education system for
failing to provide a quality education for Bhutanese children. However, some
educationists argue that the quality of education is a subjective issue and
entails multi-dimentional references and an objective yardstick is needed to
determine what contributes to constructing a quality education. Nonetheless,
this research explores some indispensable indicators, which if observed would
address the problem of lack of quality in education. The paper succinctly
discusses, in sequence, elements such as a high quality of teachers, standardized
curriculum, efficient learners, appropriate resources, capable leaders and
supportive parents, which are all essential for a quality education. This is
elaborated in the form of a Teaching Learning Support (TLS) model of quality
education, which has been deduced in the course of carrying out a literature review.
Introduction
Quality education has become one of the most talked about issues in many
parts of the world. This issue has recently been discussed by Bhutanese people
in social media (Facebook and Twitter) and in public places such as restaurants
and gatherings. In 2006, it was even deliberated at the highest levels of
Government - the legislative body in the National Assembly. As a result, the Bhutanese have questioned
the performance of educators, thereby undermining confidence in the educational
practices and the overarching plans and policies which have been instituted in
recent times with the help of scholars from the renowned Universities of
Canada, America, and Australia, especially from the 1990s. In response to the
increasing interpretation and manipulation of the issue by the Bhutanese
people, a small scale research project was urgently required in order to test the
assumptions and opinions widely expressed in the public domain.
Characteristically, the term ‘Quality Education’ seems to be a
subjective concept and the understanding of it may differ from person to
person; however, a number of definitions regarding a quality of education exist
which testifies the intricacy and varied character of the idea. For instance, UNICEF
(2000) discusses five dimensions of quality education, “healthy learners;
conducive environments; relevant curricula; child-friendly pedagogy; and useful
outcomes” (p. 4). All these elements contribute to building a quality education
in a system, thereby enabling an indispensable right to students
for effective learning. The author has developed a similar model
entitled a Teaching Learning Support (TLS) model.
Therefore, this study seeks in particular to
discuss some of the core dimensions or elements of learning, namely the quality
of teachers, curriculum, learners, resources, professional leaders and parents.
Quality Teaching
The quality teachers and curriculum have
dramatic influences on quality teaching process. The Figure 1 highlights the
first part of a TLS model of quality education. This is further explained in
the following two sub-headings, namely quality teachers and quality curriculum:
Figure1. The First Part of TLS Model of Quality
Education
The quality teachers and curriculum have dramatic
influences on quality teaching process. These two elements are paramount for
successful achievement of quality teaching in the school
Quality Teacher
Quality teacher can be as important as quality curriculum. Osborne
(1999) says that curriculum is nothing more than pieces of paper unless the
teacher converts it to useful learning experiences. Importantly, Josephine
& Amukowa (2013) contend that the root of quality education is a quality
teacher. The Bhutanese people may advocate child-centered education with
elevated passion and zest; however, they cannot deny the fact that it is largely
‘in the hands and minds’ of teachers that brings the best results (Dorji, 2007,
p.68). Thus, in the hands of a
motivated, qualified and well prepared teacher, even the least promising
students are likely to do well in their studies.
In addition, Crahay (2004) as cited in Sherub ( 2008) notes that even
when there are considerable variations in learners’ conditions, teachers can bring
a beneficial pressure on students, thereby enhancing the quality levels of
performance and success. At the heart of an education system lays the teachers who
play a very pertinent role in nurturing quality learning in students (Sherub, 2008).
Nothing is truer when some learned people in the world say that the mistakes of
teachers are reflected on the nation. Quality education is a race between the
quality teacher and catastrophe in the country. Cole & Knowles (2000) &
Shulman (2003) in Pollard & Bourne claim that it is imperative the teachers
embody good academic knowledge to affect efficient teaching-learning processes
in the class. Thus, teachers are the linchpins on which the quality achievement
of an education system hinges. The Figure 1 on page 2 shows that teachers and
curriculum are important elements for the quality teaching process.
Quality Curriculum
A quality curriculum is believed to be as
important as the quality teachers. The purpose of a curriculum or any educational program is to achieve diverse
goals that might have been designed “within a framework of theory and research,
past and present professional practice, and the changing needs of society” (Parkay, F. Standford, B.H. & Gougeon, T.D.
1996). Without a quality
curriculum sounds students learning may not happen.
Essentially, the quality of students’ learning
is strongly determined by the type of curriculum that is in place in the education system. A curriculum which contains
the elements of learning is more likely to enable teachers and students to
explore and enhance the multiplicity of innate potential the learners possess.
The nature of the curriculum should be not only gender sensitive and inclusive
but also outcomes oriented (Glatthorn & Jailall, 2000). All curricula are supposed to be
learner-centered, of a standardized curriculum design and free from
discrimination, particularly in terms of cultural diversity, multiple
intelligences, in-born talents and the vested interests students have for their
own learning.
UNICEF (2000) points out, “National goals for education, and outcome
statements that translate those goals into measurable objectives should provide
the starting point for the development and implementation of curriculum.” Curricula
must entail reliable and contextualized studies, whereby, the three domains of
learning, namely psycho-social, affective and cognitive aspects are available to
our students. UNICEF (2003) robustly puts forward the view that while designing
the curriculum, an emphasis should be on deeper learning areas rather than just
a broad coverage of some aspects of knowledge. It is believed that these
learning areas are inevitable attributes. The curriculum is expected to be a value
based education containing literacy, numeracy and life skills putting more
emphasis on child-centered method of teaching (UNICEF, 2000). Raising
the standard of academic curriculum provides an opportunity to embody the interests
and skills of students, hence is more likely to ensure the future of the
students than exposing them to a de-personalized curriculum. A sound curriculum
can help to achieve educational goals of producing well qualified, skilled and motivated
future citizens in the nation.
Quality Learning
The quality learners and resources
significantly contribute to quality learning. The Figure 2 shows the second
part of a TLS model of quality education. This is explained in details in the succeeding
two paragraphs:
Figure2. The Second Part of TLS Model of Quality
Education
Quality learners and approriate resources can
enhance the quality learning. These two important elements account for high
percentage of attaining quality learning in the school.
Quality Learners
Good
health, nutritious diet in early childhood, and nurturing psychosocial
experiences contribute to producing quality learners in the schools. McCain & Mustard (1999) as cited in
UNICEF (2000) maintains that children learn well when
they are healthy physically, socially, and mentally. A healthy childhood life, in particular,
for the first 3 years, renders a base for a good life for academic outcomes to
flourish later. Good food, a balanced diet can provide children with
opportunities for a wholesome development. For instance, a child who has good
health is less likely to miss school and continuity of the teaching learning
process in the class. Regular attendance seems to enable a student to do well
in class and in both curricular and co-curricular activities in the school.
There can be a strong correlation between healthy learners and a quality
education.
Fuller, et al (1999) demonstrates that children who attend the school
consistently do well academically and as a result, this significantly
influences achievement. To cite an example, Miske, Dowd et al. (1998) found that
students who went to school regularly in Malawi had significant gains in
learning and minimal repetition and dropout rates. Good
curricula and teachers are rendered
ineffective if the learners are passive, disinterested or frequently absent
from school. The Figure 2 on page 5 shows the quality learners and resources
contributes to quality learning.
Quality
Resources
Well appointed and stimulating
classrooms and adequate teaching-learning materials have an important bearing
on achieving quality learning. The school facilities are likely to be important along with curriculum and good
teachers in order to produce a quality teaching-learning process. Fuller (1999)
strongly argues that “empirical evidence is inconclusive as to whether the
condition of school buildings is related to higher student achievement after
taking into account student’s background”, however, in India, a study has been
carried out by Carron & Chau, (1996) who sampled 59 schools, out of which
only 49 schools had buildings; 25 schools had 1 toilet; 20 schools had
electricity; 10 schools had 1 library room each and 4 schools had 1 television
set each. The study found that there was a strong correlation between
sufficient resources in school with students’ learning scores in Mathematics
and Hindi (Carron & Chau, 1996).
In Latin America, 50,000 grade three and four students have been sampled
by Williams, D., 2000 who found that schools which lacked the teaching and
learning materials and insufficient library facilities had significantly lower
test scores as compared to the well equipped and furnished schools. William’s finding
concurred with schools in Botswana, Nigeria and Papua New Guinea (Pennycuick,
1993).
The various uses of technology are testimony to have developed
student-centered academic environment in schools. For example, learning through
the internet, video and tele-conferencing and televised educational talk which can
be interactive and time saving may add significance to the quality of
educational processes. Droste (2000) also purports that internet technologies
may be used as a substitute to other methods, an improvement which could be used
by many schools in the developing nations. Chambers (2000) claims, “There are
two fundamental equalizers in life — the Internet and Education. E-learning
eliminates barriers of time and distance, creating universal learning-on-demand
opportunities for people, companies and countries.”
Quality Support Services
The quality leaders and parents essentially
accounts for quality support services in order to achieve quality education.
This is illustrated in Figure3 which also shows the third part of a TLS model
of quality education. An extensive elaboration is provided in the following two
sub-headings:
Figure3. The Third Part of TLS Model of Quality
Education
Quality leaders and quality parents are two indispensable cornerstones
who can provide a quality support services to happen teaching learning
processes in the school.
Quality Leaders
The leadership and management
skills of school leaders impacts on the attainment of quality education in a system.
It takes a few positive words from a school principal to motivate teachers and learners,
and a few negative words to de-motivate them.
The school head is looked upon as the most informed and powerful person
in a school hierarchical system, it is crucial that the leader embodies what
he/she tells and promises for the cause of the school. For example, a phrase
like ‘I saw you going late to the morning assembly from my bedroom window’ would only question the
management and leadership credibility of the head. So, the school head should
be mindful of his words and actions as their leadership and management styles can
seriously affect the whole school system (Thinley, 2014, p 24).
There are certain protocols
which a school leader must not neglect owing to the significant attribution each
has on achievement of quality education in school:
First, there are curricular
and extra-curricular activities in the school which if neglected could erode motivation
of teachers and students which could adversely affect quality learning.
Establishing a tradition to uplift the dignity of students and teachers can be institutionalized
in an accreditation system. Sergiovanni
(2002) in Thinley (2014) robustly says that things get done when there is a
reward mechanism for every aspect of competition and initiative carried out by
the school citizens. The objective of delivering a quality education to
students is more likely to have a positive influence on the culture in a
school.
Second, running a school doesn’t absolutely fall on
the school head alone. It takes a collective and concerted effort of the head,
teachers and ancillary staff to deliver the quality education to students.
Thus, empowerment of all staff with power and responsibilities is paramount as
it promises measurable outcomes.
Finally, an effective head always strives hard for
the benefit of all staff and students. The head ensures that a school is a “homecoming”
for students and teachers. It is a matter of ethics and morality and there is
no denying the fact that practices of harassment, bullying, and corporal
punishment in a school is against the principles of good school culture (Thinley,
2014). Instead, values like honesty, authenticity, integrity and love (HAIL)
must be greeted, claimed and encouraged enthusiastically for the development of
wholesomeness in learners (Treasure, 2013, in Ted Talk, Scotland). The school
is ultimately for the learners therefore, the vision, mission, aims and
objectives of the school must be geared towards development of quality
students.
Quality Parents
In contemporary world, the relevance of parental role towards the education
for their children is of vital significance. The children whose parents are
educated do fairly well in any curricular and co-curricular activities in schools.
In other words, a supportive home ambience when provided to children is
conducive to their academic success (Marzano, 2003). Besides, Barnard
(2004), Henderson (1988), Shumox & Lomax (2001) are of the view that the
performance of students in academic fields depends heavily on the parental
engagement in their daily learning activities.
Krashan (2005) confirmed that learners, whose parents are caring,
supportive, educated, and time-conscious about their learning, do better in
standardized tests than children whose parents are otherwise. Interestingly, some
parents even take part in school activities for the development of their
children which is welcoming and exemplary to others. As a result, the parental support
for the development of the students and success of the school is urgently but
ardently needed.
Conclusion
The elements of successful learning such as the well qualified and
conscientious teachers, quality curricula, motivated learners, abundant resources,
efficient leaders, and supportive parents are the core components that
determine the quality of education in the country. Schools are more likely to
be known for the quality achievement of education if good care has been given
to TLS model of quality education. It may be recommended that educators have
good knowledge on this model before they embark on any new educational undertakings
for the cause of learners and the future citizens of the country. The future of
the country depends on today’s youth. Having access to
quality education has been tacitly understood as the right of the learner. “What
will be the fate of the country if there are high numbers of unproductive youth
in the country?” is the question every person has to ask, listen, understand,
analyze and resolve collectively.
The figure 4 is a summary of some core elements which are necessary for
the development of quality education in a school system.
Figure 4: Elements of quality education
Quality
Curriculum
|
QUALITY
OF
EDUCATION
|
Quality
Teachers
|
Quality
Learners
|
Quality
Resources
|
Quality
Leaders
|
Quality
Parents
|
A quality education is expected when all
the 6 elements as shown in the Figure 4 are incorporated by the curriculum
designers, while framing the curriculum and implemented by the educators while
educating the children.
References
Barnard,
W. M. (2004). Parent involvement in elementary school and educational
attainment.
Children
and youth services review, 26, 39- 62.
Carron, G., & Chau, T.N. (1996). The quality of
primary schools in different development
contexts. Paris: UNESCO.
Chambers, J. (2000). In Pape, L. Online education: The
internet's killer app
Cole, A.L & Knowles, J.G. (2000). Researching teaching: Exploring
teacher development
through reflexive inquiry. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Dorji, R. (2007). Teacher Morale. Unpublished research paper.
PCE, Paro.
Droste, B. (2000). Why reinvent the wheel? VHS is already rolling. The Concord Consortium
Fuller, B., Dellagnelo, L. (1999). How to raise children’s literacy? The influence of
family, teacher, and classroom in Northeast
Brazil. Comparative Education Review,
43(1), 1-35.
Glatthorn, A., & Jailall, J. (2000). Curriculum for the new millennium. In Brandt, R. (ed.),
Education in a new era: ASCD Yearbook 2000.
Alexandria, Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Govt. of Punjab and UNICEF (2003). Universal
primary education: Guidelines for district
education department, Punjab.
UNICEF.
Henderson,
A. T. (1988). Good news: An ecologically balanced approach to academic
improvement.
Educational Horizons, 66(2), 60-67.
Kagwiria & Amukowa (2013). Teacher’s
productivity in promoting quality education in public
primary schools in
Kenya. Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary
Studies. Published by MCSER-CEMAS-Sapienza University of Rome. (Vol 2 No 2). Doi:10.5901/ajis.2013.v2n2p365
Krashen,
S. (2005). The hard work hypothesis: Is doing your homework enough to overcome
the
effects
of poverty? Multicultural Education, 12(4), 16-19.
UNICEF (2000). Curriculum report card. Working Paper Series, Education Section, Programme
Division. New York, NY: Author.
Marzano,
R. J. (2003). What works in schools: Translating research into action? Retrieved
from
McCain, M., & Mustard, J.F. (1999). Reversing the real brain drain: Early years study. Toronto,
Canada: Publications Ontario.
Miske, S., Dowd, A. (1998). Teaching and learning in
Mangochi classrooms: Combining
quantitative and qualitative information to study twelve primary schools
in Malawi. Evaluation study conducted for the United
States Agency for International Development by Creative Associates
International, Washington, D.C.
Osborne, K. (1999). Education: A guide to the Canadian school
debate-Or, who wants what and
why?. Toronto, Ontario: A Penguin/ Mcgill Institute Book.
Parkay, F., Standford, B. H. & Gougeon, T. D. (1996). Becoming a
teacher. Scarborough,
Ontario: Allyn & Bacon.
Pennycuick, D. (1993). School effectiveness
in developing countries: A summary of the research
evidence. Serial no. 1. London: Department for
International Development Education Division.
Sherub (2008). Bhutanese teachers’ pedagogical orientation in the primary
classes (PP-VI): A
factor on quality of education. Quality
of education in Bhutan, research papers. Rinpung, December 7-10.
In-house Publication of the Centre for Educational Research & Development, Paro
College of Education, Paro, The Royal University of Bhutan.
Shulman, L (2003). Those who understand knowledge growth in teaching. In
Andrew Pollard
& Jill Bourne (eds.), Teaching and
learning in the primary school (p. 84-88). London & New York: Routledge
Falmer.
Shumox,
L., & Lomax, R. (2001). Parental efficacy: Predictor of parenting behavior
and
adolescent
outcomes. Parenting, 2(2), 127-150.
Thinley,
P. (2014). Green school: A supplementary text to educating for GNH. Sherig,
Publication
of the Ministry of Education, Thimphu, Bhutan, (Vol.8, Ed.1, pp.
23-26)
Treasure,
J. (2013). How to speak so that poeple want to listen. Ted talk- an official TED
conference,
Scotland. ( Retrived on 20th October, 2014.
http://www.ted.com/talks/julian_treasure_how_to_speak_so_that_people_want_to_listen)
UNESCO (2004). Education for all: The quality imperative. Paris:
Graphpho Print
UNESCO (n.d). Education: Quality indicators. Retrieved July 8,
2006, from
http:/portal.unesco.org/education/en/ev.php-URL_ID=27856&UR
UNICEF
(2000). Defining quality in education: A paper presented by UNICEF at the
meeting
of The International Working Group on Education Florence,
Italy. Working Paper Series Education
Section, Programme Division, United Nations Children's Fund, New York, USA
Williams, J. D. (2000). Standards of care: Investments to improve
children’s educational
outcomes in Latin America. Paper presented at the “Year 2000 Conference
of Early Childhood Development” sponsored by the World Bank, Washington,
D.C., April, 2000.
No comments:
Post a Comment