Arguments, information not slogans

Now that the electoral battle is on, and the acrimony bound to increase, one could perhaps make an effort not to transform every issue, trivial or crucial, into a political weapon. (Having spent my working life in education) I am saddened when serious educational matters become ammunition for electoral guns. The most recent addition to this arsenal is the "reception class".

Three academics from the Faculty of Education have thankfully publicly expressed their opinion on the matter (The Times, February 6). True they were not in agreement among themselves, but at least it should now be clear to all that the idea of a reception class is not entirely novel, much less stupid, and at an academic level, debatable. Some countries have adopted it, others have not. We are, however, aware that it has been adopted in countries known to be frontrunners in educational achievement.

No doubt a great deal still remains to be said about the idea from a purely educational stance.

It is only this kind of information, backed with research findings, foreign and local, which makes for an informed public. Slogans and labels like "a class of repeaters" or "a waste of time" simply increase the heat and add nothing substantial to the debate.

The literature says that a reception class (or the equivalent under one name or another) is, or should be, meant to equip better young learners for the start of their formal schooling. It is meant to promote basic skills (including social, verbal and numerical) through an environment that is neither entirely informal (as should be the case in the kindergarten years) nor the formal one (as is the case in the infant years).

Minister Louis Galea seems to be convinced that all this is being done, "with much success in our nurseries and kindergartens" (February 8). He does not seem to see any connection between this "sterling work" and the far from flattering results our children achieve in the Junior Lyceum entrance examinations. Or even with the poor SEC results! Why is he and his entourage excluding the "reception class" as a remedy to this predicament?

It is hardly realistic to expect a sincere debate on any one issue now that we are on the home stretch. In all fairness one has to acknowledge that the MLP binds itself to introduce the reception class only "after serious preparation and the necessary consultations". One now expects that when we have a Labour government the proper consultations will include all the stakeholders and not only academics and Education Division officers.