Editorial | Early childhood crisis

Even before Hurricane Melissa caused major destruction in the west of the island, early childhood education, like the rest of Jamaica’s education system, was in deep crisis.

The storm has made the situation far worse, demanding immediate, and strategic, intervention by the authorities to minimise any developmental deficit of children at a crucial stage of learning, ahead of full entry into formal education.

At the same time, it is important that the government lays out a clear policy for its role in operation and management of the early childhood sector, instead of the we-might-we-might-not posture of the education minister, Dana Morris Dixon, and her predecessor, Fayval Williams.

Early childhood education in Jamaica is provided primarily by the island’s so-called basic schools – a system of mostly community-based, severely under-resourced, privately run institutions, where the majority of the teachers have little or no training for their jobs.

While these institutions provide valuable service to communities, their shortcomings show in the documented inadequacy of many in stimulating children and preparing them for formal education.

Indeed, this issue was highlighted by the Orlando Patterson Commission in its report for the transformation of the Jamaican education system issued more than four years ago.

The Patterson Commission found that, at the time of its review, half of the registered early childhood institutions didn’t meet the Early Childhood Commission’s standards for full registration.

But its more important revelation was of the developmental lag and, therefore, preparedness for the formal education system of the island’s children. Around a fifth (19.2 per cent) of four-year-olds had at least one “development concern”, out of 11 issues tested. This was higher than the global average.

GROWN WORSE

The situation, unfortunately, seems to have grown worse.

In June, this newspaper reported on the 2024 Jamaica School Readiness Assessment (JSRA). It found that, of the 29,729 children tested, 54.4 per cent met the critical development milestones for their age.

However, 11,219, or 39 per cent, needed “further development analysis”, suggesting that, at least at first blush, they didn’t meet the expected developmental standards. These children were referred for secondary screening, including 7.6 per cent who were recommended for classroom monitoring.

Whatever the cause (the advent of the COVID-19 pandemic may have contributed), four in 10 children failing to meet age group development criteria constitutes, in this newspaper’s view, a national crisis.

Indeed, the weakness of this foundation follows on in Jamaica’s later education outcomes: the third of grade six students who perennially complete their primary schoolings still struggling with basic literacy; and the fact that less than 20 per cent of Jamaican students who sit the Caribbean Secondary Education Certificate (CSEC) exams pass five or more subjects, inclusive of maths and English, at a single sitting.

Hurricane Melissa will likely have exacerbated these problems. The predicament, however, will probably be most deeply felt, but less observed, at the early childhood level, in part because of the sector’s informality.

Overall, more than 600 schools, serving over 150,000 students, were severely affected by the hurricane. Many of these institutions have restarted. Where they haven’t, their students have been temporarily transferred to other institutions, or are presumably engaged in other officially approved forms of learning.

Additionally, the government, with the support of UNICEF, has been training hundreds of teachers and guidance counsellors in methods of helping students to deal with the trauma of the hurricane and their disrupted lives, while continuing their education.

NOT CLEAR

What is not clear from the data is the extent of the hurricane’s impact on basic schools, and the early childhood sector generally, and what government support these institutions can expect for their recovery. More specifically, there is need for a clearly articulated government policy and strategic plan for the early childhood sector, including basic schools.

The government does provide support – financial and training – to some basic schools. But, overall, the policy is hazy and lacks coherence and specificity.

Speaking at a University of the West Indies (UWI) colloquium last week, the education minister, Dana Morris Dixon, indicated that the government was, or may be, willing to take over basic schools. If they want to be taken over.

She said: “Many of our early childhood institutions are private non-governmental entities. So, what we have been doing is offering to some … to work with them and the government (to) take them on completely.”

Some of the institutions, she said, had agreed, but others said, ‘No, we prefer to remain independent’.

In the aftermath of the Patterson Commission report, in the middle of the handwringing over what to do with early childhood education, including how it ought to be funded, Fayval Williams noted that only a small portion of the system was controlled by the state. Notwithstanding the government’s regulatory function, it could not readily impact outcomes.

Said Ms Williams: “So, either we take it on as Government or we continue to get what we have right now.”

Government control of the sector, Ms Williams suggested, would mean more trained teachers and environments more conducive to learning.

That intervention by Ms Williams, who is now the finance minister, was more than three years ago. That’s far more than enough time for there to be a national dialogue and a formulation of a clear strategy for early childhood education.

Hurricane Melissa has added urgency to the matter.