Producing Best Teachers

Last week I got the opportunity to visit several community schools in Far Western and Mid Western Regions under the programme Career Counselling and Motivation, organised by JKK Foundation and has been in operation for quite a while. As with my earlier experiences, headmasters once again told me about their misconceptions regarding the redesigned SEE letter grading system.

While talking to them I felt like they were speaking out of their preconceived notion that no matter what, students who are admitted into the ‘education’ stream in grade 11 are the ones that achieve the lowest GPAs in their SEE. One of the head teachers complained, “I don’t agree with this new type of scoring system which suggests that the weakest of all students should be the ones studying education. In reality, we need the brightest students in this faculty so that they can make the best teachers in the future.”

Yes, I completely agree with the second part of that statement, but her criticism of the SEE scoring system seems unjustified. The descriptive chart for the SEE letter grading system released by the Ministry of Education clearly indicates that the minimum GPA to study science in grade 11 is 2 or “C” and in all other streams including vocational education it is 1.6 or “D+”.

In addition to the minimum GPA of 2 the students have to score 2.4 or “C+” in science and mathematics if they want to go for science otherwise they need to score at least 1.6 (D+) in particular subjects (list of those subjects is also available) if they are joining management, humanities, education or vocational streams, and the minimum average GPA is 1.6. Nowhere is it mentioned that education is the only option for all those students who score the lowest in SEE or who do not get admission in other faculties.

Another issue the head teachers raised during our conversations was the qualifications of the teachers who teach in lower grades. According to a head teacher, the secondary level teachers hesitate to go to the primary level even as substitute teachers. They think that it does not suit their particular skill set. She further expressed her frustration with the fact that the lower grades are the foundation for upper grades, so the teachers who teach these little children must have master’s degree if we really want quality education in community schools. Yes, she was right to some extent; a master’s degree may not be a possible qualification but to be a school teacher at any level a bachelor’s degree is a must in my opinion too.

My argument here is not to support the SEE letter grading system because it may have its strengths and weaknesses, but my concern is teachers’ understanding of it. What is clear from the above conversations is that school teachers need more orientation on the letter grading system so that they will understand that there is no discrimination between different streams in grade 11.

Generally, it is expected that students who choose to study science must have a greater level of academic aptitude, and thus the GPA threshold for the science stream is relatively higher. However, this is not the case in non-science streams. The concerned people should also think about upgrading early grade teachers’ qualifications to offer students quality education from a young age.

 (Published in an English Daily The Rising Nepal on Friday, Nov. 17, 2017 ) 

[The pictures on this blog are posted here with permission from their owners or have been gathered from various sources on the Internet. If you are the copyright-holder to any of the photographs herein do not hesitate to contact me. They will be swiftly removed if desired so.]

Role Of Research

A couple of weeks ago I read two news stories related to medical sciences – one was about Guru Prasad Khanal’s, the newly appointed Rector at BP Koirala Institute of Health Sciences (BPKIHS), determination to heavily prioritise research work and the other was about five KU doctors being blacklisted internationally for plagiarising research findings. While the first one gives the general public hope -- BPKIHS conducts research on more than 300 diseases and treatment systems every year -- the second one is shameful and no proud citizen can take it just like that.

Doesn’t a professional as prestigious and responsible as a doctor realise the importance of research work? How can they cheat others’ work and proudly claim it as theirs? Other people may do it due to their ignorance but this should not be the case with doctors.

In the context of Nepali people not having a strong presence in the international platform, this blacklist pushes us further backwards. One should not forget that we have got all this worldly knowledge because of the efforts of different researchers who devoted their time to create knowledge. Research is only a weapon to satisfy people’s curiosities and questions.

For instance, if our ancestors had not been curious to learn about the vast and dark sky, we would not have been able to gain the knowledge of “space” that we have now. According to Cali Simboli, without research, we would not go forward. We would be a bunch of curious humans who would leave this world without knowing the things we wanted to know. When it comes to constructing knowledge, research is equally important in all fields.

Since it is related to people’s health, life and wellbeing, medical research can be considered to be the most important field of knowledge. Its importance can be summarided in the words of the Minneapolis Medical Research Foundation as, “The high quality of medical care we enjoy today is built upon years of effort by physicians, physician-scientists, PhDs, and other medical professionals investigating the causes of and potential treatments for disease. The tireless effort of these professionals has made many once life-threatening diseases and conditions just a memory.” It is obvious that such research work must be purely original to contribute in the already available mass of knowledge.

In contrast, research is taken just as a formality in most of the cases in Nepal. Otherwise, those blacklisted doctors would not dare to plagiarise other people’s findings. In other cases, a substantial number of university students can also been seen to copy other students’ thesis and defend it as theirs. What is more ridiculous is that the supervisors or examiners also do not pay attention to this plagiarism practice. What can we say about the quality of education of that university where the Vice Chancellor himself has been accused of being a plagiarist?  

It is high time for intellectuals like doctors, university teachers and students to consider research as an entirely original study which deserves to be held in high regard. They should always remember that their hard work to find new knowledge can bring forth findings that are not only revolutionary for their respective fields, but for humanity as a whole.

(Published in an English Daily The Rising Nepal on Friday, Nov. 3, 2017 ) 

[The pictures on this blog are posted here with permission from their owners or have been gathered from various sources on the Internet. If you are the copyright-holder to any of the photographs herein do not hesitate to contact me. They will be swiftly removed if desired so.]