EDITORIAL
How is intelligence defined? Oxford Dictionary describes it as “the ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills”. It is so highly rated, some scientists work on methods through which it can be reproduced in technology – the so-called artificial intelligence, or the ways in which machines demonstrate human capacity for problem-solving and decision making.
It is a bonus in life to be thought smart and clever. Passing school tests provides some indication of a student’s ability to understand subjects well enough to answer questions. But does it fully capture the ways in which children are creative and problem-solution oriented or fully realise the areas in which they are naturally gifted?
We raise this topic in light of the debate on the Barbados Secondary Schools’ Entrance Examination, more commonly known as the 11-Plus or Common Entrance exam.
Prime Minister Mia Amor Mottley has set her eyes on the school placement exam, labelling it a relic of a colonial era and noting that children must not be discarded on “the dump heap of life” at 11, a pattern that may play a large part in contributing to the violent crime we see today.
Since the Prime Minister’s pronouncement, the usual public reaction for and against the exam has surfaced. Those who fear change from what they have long known should recognise that intelligence comes in many forms. A person may not be highly skilled in English, Mathematics or Composition but is a musical genius, a brilliant orator or talented carpenter and they should be given the space and opportunity to so develop.
While we are in support of the creation of specialised schools that would cater to children of those interests, we must also be careful that children are not pigeonholed with little wiggle room to grow. We use Rihanna as a prime example. Who would have thought when she debuted her first song that Rihanna would years later be the entertainment mogul she currently is, with interests in fashion and design? Obviously she needed an environment where she could develop those interests to their fullest. As such, schools of excellence must also provide a fuller scope apart from a child’s early specified talent.
We would also argue strongly that certain essential principles should be taught, regardless of whether a child has a natural affinity for those subjects, and crucially, that would allow the child to survive in the environment in which they live and grow. For example, we live on a small island that has certain natural elements and terrain. To that end, why have we not encouraged training in how to produce our own food, water and wind turbine technology and solar harvesting that allows our society to maximise the benefits of our potential and allows us to make money from the resource we naturally have? In this way, we marry the old way of thinking with a modern twist – in days gone by, most people learned a skill that they could either use for their own good, or turn into a trade; it allowed them to be self-sufficient and to make ends meet on their own; for example, a seamstress or a plumber could handle their own business and make a living from it. The education model pursued after the primary level should
therefore teach that same level of independent trade building, and encourage problem-solving, logical thinking and creativity.
We are long away from the days of the Victorian era, where the pseudo-science of phrenology believed that just by looking at a person’s skull, it could in some way determine their character and mental traits. We are now in the 21st century and – just like the technology these days – we must be smart in our approach to educating our youth.