Biology and Educational Performance?

In the last article, I presented one response expressed by many students as to their reason for attending school. That is, they attend school only because of the initiative of their parent/parents and/guardians. I will, in a subsequent article, examine some of the other responses given by students for attending school.

But in this article, I want to present one perspective on the performance of students in the education system which was shared by former Professor of Education, now Emeritus Professor of Education, at the University of the West Indies, (UWI) Mona Campus.

Professor Miller was participating in the discussion programme, All Angleswhich was aired on Television Jamaica on the 22^nd of August 2012. The topic under discussion was “Major Problems in the Education System”. Professor Miller presented some information which I will describe as “a biological profile of students in the education system”. The Professor received his early training in Biology so I have no reason to discount this explanation. He did not present any specific sources. But, there is much information on this issue online. Just input the relevant search terms and you’ll find more information than you can easily absorb. Here is what Professor Miller had to say.

In every group of students born every year, you have about 10% who are developmentally precocious. They do things ahead of the rest. You have about 60% of them developmentally standard, within the normal way, about 20% developmentally lagged. In other words, there is nothing at all wrong with these students. They will achieve everything that everybody achieves but they just need a little more time. And about 10% who have developmental deficits that need to be addressed... And we are missing a lot of children who have developmental deficits that are going undetected, especially those who are socially competent, physically normal

http://www.televisionjamaica.com/Programmes/AllAngles.aspx/Videos/20319

If we use this information that Professor Miller has provided as a template for understanding the students in our schools we may conclude that, at any time in the school system, we will have 70% of students who can competently function, 20% who will eventually become competent and 10% who are educationally challenged, having “developmental deficits” and will need special interventions to facilitate their learning. 

This information puts things into perspective for teachers who, being exposed to this information, may look at their students differently than they did before. Some schools practice streaming. Others do not. In schools where the practice of streaming continues, teachers’ unhappiness will continue to be exacerbated. The top two streams at each grade level will have the “developmentally precocious and the developmentally standard” students. Thus, other teachers perceive the teachers of these streams as having an easy time in the classroom while they struggle with the other less competent students, not being trained to deal with their issues. Would it be better, though, to spread students at different stages of development across one class? Some teachers see this as a good strategy as it will minimise their frustrations. Some managers of schools, on the other hand, see streaming as a good strategy, in spite of the research that suggests otherwise, because they believe that teachers will have the chance to deliver interventions that will address the specific needs of the types of students in their classes.

What we may deduce from the information above, in the context in which it was presented, is that theoretically the performance of students in the education system, will to an extent, reflect the students’ stage of development. So, let us see how the information that Professor Miller provides us with compares to the performance of students in the education system.

 

We learnt from the Minister of Education in his presentation to Parliament that “more than thirty percent of those who move from Early Childhood Institutions to Grade one, cannot satisfy the Grade One Individual Learning Profile” (See article here.). An assumption, which is just that, may be drawn from this bit of statistics that the minister has presented. This assumption is that the early childhood sector is not necessarily catering satisfactorily, for the most part, to the needs of all of its students. While most students who are classified as developmentally precocious and those who are developmentally standard seem to be performing satisfactorily, the developmentally lagged, the developmentally challenged (those with developmental deficits) and some of those who are developmentally precocious and/or lagged need extra help.

 
But, how do students fare by the time they reach grade four? How have these students developed academically? According to the results of the Grade Four Literacy Test (GFLT), of the students from government schools who sat the examination in 2012, approximately seventy two percent attained ‘Mastery’. Twenty eight percent of students did not achieve mastery in literacy and numeracy. Again, we may assume that two percent of those classified as either developmentally lagged or developmentally challenged, along with all the developmentally precocious and developmentally standard students, have benefitted from the strategies employed by teachers to effect learning.

 By grade six, students should be ready to sit the Grade Six Achievement Test (GSAT) which determines their readiness for secondary school. In 2012, the national average for Mathematics, Science, Social Studies and Language Arts combined was just over sixty-two percent while the average for Composition was nine out of ten for both boys and girls. Therefore, we may assume that the system while serving some, if not most of the developmentally precocious as well as some of the developmentally standard students, is still failing some. Approximately, eight percent of the developmentally precocious and/or the developmentally standard would have failed to perform satisfactorily on the GSAT, according to the statistics and using the biological argument.

 Those students who do not perform satisfactorily in the GSAT examination will be placed in All Age and Junior High Schools where they will continue their education up to the grade nine level. At the end of this period, they will sit the Grade Nine Achievement Test, (GNAT) which will determine their readiness for secondary education. During 2012, the national average for Mathematics during 2012 was forty-five percent and for Language Arts, fifty-one percent. We may continue to make assumptions that most of the students who are placed in the All Age and Junior High Schools would fall in the categories of being developmentally lagged and developmentally challenged. And almost fifty percent of them would have benefitted from the strategies teachers employ at this level to effect learning.

Grade eleven is a critical year for students in secondary schools. In grade eleven, students should be ready to sit and pass the Caribbean Secondary Education Certificate (CSEC) examination.  However, approximately five percent of students who sit this examination pass five or more subjects including Mathematics and English and fifty percent of students leave school with only a school leaving certificate and no marketable skills (See the Jamaica Education Statistics 2012/2013 and the Minister's presentation in Parliament). Again, we may assume that the system is failing not only those who are developmentally lagged and challenged but also some of those students who are classified as developmentally precocious and developmentally standard.

So, if we continue with the argument that biology plays a significant role in the performance of students, we may assume that at least seventy percent of students in the education system would “achieve everything that everybody achieves” according to Professor Miller. But only fifty percent of students seem to be achieving everything they ought to at the end of grade eleven.  

To attempt to understand this disparity, we may want to examine the impact of social factors on students’ learning. Professor Miller did not lose sight of these variables. He hastened to add, in his presentation, that a number of social factors do come into play (social factors which I have outlined in a previous article) as well as biology in determining how students perform in the education system.

Therefore, the problem of poor performance of students is a multifaceted phenomenon which will require much more for its solution than the oft cited bit of advice that the teacher should create a  “favourable environment in the classroom to facilitate learning” as has been again recently pronounced by the chairperson of the National Education Inspectorate (NEI).

In the next article, I will continue to examine students’ reasons for attending school.