In April 2014 when Boko Haram invaded the Government Girls Secondary School in Chibok and kidnapped several schoolgirls, two of the girls, Joy Bishara and Lydia Pogu, who fortunately escaped were later given scholarships.
As of the time they were leaving Nigeria, they could not express themselves well in English. But after just 7 years in the United States of America (USA), the US school system transformed them.
Experts suggest that many children, especially in the world’s poorest countries, learn only very little in school.
According to Friday Erhabor, a public affairs analyst, “The level of transformation the Chibok girls got from the USA schools is a pointer that the problem of learning is not with our brain, but the school system of teaching, learning environment, learning aid and infrastructure among others are the core problems. That is why when Nigerians leave our school system and go to developing countries, they shine like million stars.”
Furthermore, Erhabor reiterated that education and teaching should be handled by professionals and that it ought not to be an all-comers affair.
“Teaching should not be left for people who cannot get other work. Go to most private schools, the teachers there are not professional teachers.
“They are people that probably read some courses that did not give them access to paid employment and they just enter the classroom to start teaching as a stop-gap pending when they have a better job.
“If you read geography and you are asked to teach the English Language, how will children comprehend you? First, you do not have the psychology of teaching. Secondly, you are not even a major in the course or subject you are teaching,” Erhabor noted.
Roseline Abiodun, an educationalist, traced the problem in Nigeria to majorly be a lack of teaching aids, teaching techniques, and poor facilities.
According to Joāo Pedro Azevedo, an education researcher, and his colleagues estimate that in the very poorest countries of the world 90percent of children are not able to read with comprehension when they reach the end of primary school.
These education researchers say many primary and secondary schools do not live up to their promises because in many of such schools children learn very little.
Many of these children are not adequately exposed to learning as they ought, though some do eventually learn how to read, however, the problem of poor learning persists.
The problem here is that by the time these children are leaving primary schools, they are already behind and the issue compounds over the years so that many of them leave school with poor education.
This abnormal development is predominantly found in less developed countries as the best-off countries do not have much of such challenges with less than 2percent of their children failing to learn how to read with comprehension at that age.
Children need to learn to read so that they can read to learn. When we fail to provide this to the next generation, they have fewer opportunities to lead rich and interesting lives that a good education offers. It crucially also leaves them in a poorer position to solve the problems of tomorrow.
Olayinka Bolarinwa, a social affairs analyst believes that 90percent of children from poor countries have poor comprehension because of many factors such as nutrition, which he said is a very fundamental aspect of children’s growth.
“The kind of food that we consume helps to build our brain matter. The brain matter itself obviously functions along with the central nervous system. All of these are all part of what enables the mind to be able to capture images and of course words and be able to interpret them for communication.
Q: The reason why many children do not learn is beyond the claim that they are not in school. The problem is more than that. Many of these children do not learn even in school
“Most children in poor countries have very poor nutrition. And this is why United Nations has always been making a case for proper nutrition for children. Even in Nigeria you have the feed the student or feed the school program. All of these help in order to build the inner capacity, immunity, and development system of the child.
Read also: Atiku, Tinubu eye market economy as Buharinomics fails
“This is why you realize that certain people, for example, the Indians are very good with mathematics. The Chinese have one area that they’re quite good at. Most rich children, oftentimes do not have a problem with comprehension because they have that balanced diet and nutrition that helps to compliment, you know, their ability to be able to study and at the same time understand what they study,” he said.
Besides, Bolarinwa cited environment and sleep as other major factors that affect children’s comprehension in school.
“The other aspect is the environment; it is a very critical aspect that can enable a child to comprehend faster than normal. When an environment is not conducive to learning your ability to take in information and have that information, stored becomes a huge task.
“A lot of children from poor countries do not have very good rest and sleep. Your body needs rest for comprehension,” he stated.
According to UNESCO data for the year 2019, of the world’s 787 million children of primary school age, 8percent do not go to school, that is 58.4 million children.
However, during the pandemic, this number increased temporarily, but even at pre-pandemic levels to which the world will hopefully return soon, the number was much too high. 58 million children out of primary school mean 58 million who do not even have the chance to learn how to read and write.
The reason why many children do not learn is beyond the claim that they are not in school. The problem is more than that. Many of these children do not learn even in school.
Research has shown that getting children into the classroom is only half the battle. Many educational systems are failing to ensure that the children who arrive at school every morning actually learn.
Erroneously, people, most times think that a child’s quality of school attendance amounts to quality of education.
Experts believe that one way of assessing which schools live up to their promise is to study test scores. Besides, they maintain that an excessive emphasis on tests in school education is misplaced.
Most education successful countries such as Finland, and the USA avoid educational inequalities along with the income distribution almost entirely.
One of the things Finland did to improve education and learning in the country is to intensify investments in the teacher education system, all teachers receive 3 years of high-quality graduate-level preparation completely at state expense, plus a major overhaul of the curriculum and assessment system designed to ensure access to a “thinking curriculum” for all students.
A recent analysis of the Finnish system summarised its core principles as follows: resources for those who need them most, high standards and support for special needs, qualified teachers, and evaluation of education among others.
According to Pasi Sahlberg, a Finnish educator and author, the process of change in Finland has been almost the reverse of policies in the United States.
Over the past 40 years, Finland has shifted from a highly centralised system emphasising external testing to a more localised system in which highly trained teachers design curriculum around the very lean national standards.
This new system is implemented through equitable funding and extensive preparation for all teachers. The logic of the system is that investments in the capacity of local teachers and schools to meet the needs of all students, coupled with thoughtful guidance about goals, can unleash the benefits of local creativity in the cause of common, equitable outcomes.
Meanwhile, the United States has been imposing more external testing, often exacerbating differential access to curriculum, while creating more inequitable conditions in local schools.
Resources for children and schools, in the form of both overall funding and the presence of trained, experienced teachers, have become more disparate in many states, thus undermining the capacity of schools to meet the outcomes that are ostensibly sought.
Sahlberg notes that Finland has taken a very different path. He observes:
“The Finns have worked systematically over 35 years to make sure that competent professionals who can craft the best learning conditions for all students are in all schools, rather than thinking that standardized instruction and related testing can be brought in at the last minute to improve student learning and turn around failing schools.”
He identifies a set of global reforms, undertaken especially in the Anglo-Saxon countries, that Finland has not adopted, including standardisation of curriculum enforced by frequent external tests; narrowing of the curriculum to basic skills in reading and mathematics; reduced use of innovative teaching strategies; adoption of educational ideas from external sources, rather than the development of local internal capacity for innovation and problem-solving; and adoption of high-stakes accountability policies, featuring rewards and sanctions for students, teachers, and schools.
By contrast, he suggests, “Finnish education policies are a result of four decades of systematic, mostly intentional, development that has created a culture of diversity, trust, and respect within Finnish society in general, and within its education system in particular.
“Education sector development has been grounded on equal opportunities for all, equitable distribution of resources rather than competition, intensive early interventions for prevention, and building gradual trust among education practitioners, especially teachers.”
