Restructuring education - 3

A decade after refounding the University of Malta and stipending our undergraduate students, it is clear that not all is well with the schools and the university system, in particular at tal-Qroqq. In the 15 years or so that many of us have been back, it has never felt so bad! It is good to ask why? There are many reasons and they are not all strictly financial.

I do not doubt for a moment that a long succession of politicians and education professionals have done their best to improve education in Malta. Most of their efforts have been patchwork. With all due respect to them, the outcome is that we now have a tapestry of different systems and alternate social, economic and political goals with haphazard funding. In the meantime, the academic status has been curtailed. I submit that it is time to have a critical overlook of the entire system of schooling and in particular, "higher education and research".

If one had to do a business analysis, the "instructional content" appears to be good. It may even be considered too good, because we have a tendency to over-teach compared to the level of qualification. It contrasts sharply with the educational maxim that recommends teaching less and taking more time to do it better. The national minimal curriculum (NMC) sets good standards for the schools. Alas, it does not seem to be translated yet into good practice across the board. At University, my impression is that most first-degree courses are also over-taught.

The same cannot be said for the "process" or the structure.

Plainly, we have to confront fundamental questions regarding the restructuring of our educational system, while harmonising both institutionally, nationally and EU-wide. There are strong guidelines within the terms of the Bologna Process to which we are signatories. After all, "Bologna" reflects the Humboldtian model of the older German and the newer research universities of North America that strategically position higher education and research as the engines of social and economic growth.

The Humboldt model implies a university system deeply engaged in research and innovation, as creators of knowledge, rather than mere curators. It contrasts somewhat with the other models, in which, a university behaved as if it were an isolated monastery of scholars.

I think that the national goal for a school and university system consistent with a demanding social and economic project should now be to harmonise without losing identity, and to invest heavily in graduate education and research while consolidating the achievements in undergraduate education made thus far.

We could start with a six-year secondary school programme running the recently approved NMC leading to a single school-leaving or matriculation certificate. Whichever way one looks at it, there is no need for the sixth forms as currently conducted. They are the colonial remnants of an outdated educational system that sought exclusion rather than inclusion.

Instead, as many as possible of the secondary school graduates should be admitted into superior Junior College(s) that lead to a first or bachelor's degree. They should not take longer than three years.

It is important to grasp that this bears both on University funding and student support by decreasing costs while student numbers continue to increase. It is difficult to understand why it takes us two or three years more than others to educate certain professionals let alone basic graduates in the humanities, the arts and the sciences, physicians and lawyers.

No wonder our young people are discouraged from the sciences. There are too many unnecessary hurdles. They need to be removed. Most of our examinations give the impression that they have been set to parade the cleverness of the examiner.

Rather, matriculation and other examinations are there to document objectively the ability of the candidates to show that they have learnt what they are supposed to have been taught subject to curricular criteria.

The success we have achieved in undergraduate education, imperfect as it might be, should now be followed by a strong effort to invest in graduate programs and research. Our next challenge is to further develop our professional teaching and above all else a competitive graduate school linking basic sciences with business development possibly through corporate academies with full participation of the economic sector in education and research.

The lack of support for graduate studies is one of the most grievous deficiencies of the current stipend system. The MCST-RTDI programme should be strengthened. It could provide a range of fellowships for students reading for higher research degrees while contributing to build the national effort in scientific research and technological development.

The number of doctoral level research scientists, physicians, and engineers is far too low and requires urgent attention. Otherwise, national competitiveness and efforts to improve research and graduate studies with business innovation are bound to fail.

We are aware of reports being prepared concerning various aspects of organising and funding education. As yet there has not been any debate among the academic community. One should hope that the wealth of know-how and world-wide experience at Tal-Qroqq is deeply involved before any are concluded.

Reform should not be piecemeal. Otherwise, we risk being stupid in loosing the economic benefits as one said, or render asunder on what the other said, and forfeit, reading his lips, more taxes without benefits, both at our expense.

This is the last of three commentaries entitled "Restructuring education" by Professor Felice. Parts I and II appeared in The Sunday Times of October 3 and 10.