Dear Editor,
The one thing written in stone is that school is reopening. To repeat my position, it is too soon, too risky, possessing too many unknowns. I am firmly against reopening for those reasons at this time. But, reopening it will be, and there is no turning back now, as I can gather from past and recent announcements from the Minister of Education. I say she is on the wrong track, going about this the wrong way. The wrong results, the worst of consequences (God forbid) could visit us. Yet, the minister proceeds without pause, with backing from Cabinet comrades. It is that having taken the plunge from an early hour (months ago), it is full speed ahead. I could have lived with that, but there is no such speed evidenced in what the Minister of Education presented on Friday. There is walking on eggshells, when I examine the numbers and associated percentages of arm’s length, physical reopening combined with the still developing rotational. I looked quickly and converted the number of schools reopening for up close instruction into percentages.
Classroom schooling is scheduled to be 11% (Nursery), 9% (Primary), and the vague, best-to-suffice for the moment ‘several’ whatever that means (Secondary). I could appreciate slow and careful, a minimalist, approach. But, at those low mudflat, watermark levels, it might have been better not to reopen at all, other than for the senior Forms. That is, Forms 4 and 5 (CSEC) and Form 6 (CAPE) students. It might have been better not to subject the younger children, those closer to 12, and their parents to anxieties over vaccine safety, and exposures. For those reopening numbers, it is better to delay a bit; at least, for the rest of this year. This gives the time needed to finalize comprehensive and credible plans, articulate them persuasively, and work tirelessly publicly and behind the scenes to build consensus, admittedly a nonstarter in government circles.
The better way was for the minister to work with the union to find common working ground, but that was torpedoed early, with much finger pointing following. And where we are today convinces me that what the minister puts out for reopening is weak and woeful. The risks outweigh benefits. There is not enough of a nucleus to work with justifying back to the physical classroom, and this is making allowance for later incremental numerical improvements. Also, the supplies and guidance given for at-home schooling amounts to ‘tek dah and try wid dah’, try fuh manage.’ Despite some ministerial reassurances of the consultation and partnership, I doubt that, since the foundation is simply not present. In-depth parent and ministry sharing just did not happen, as it should have, and this is the end of August. Clearly reopening is flimsy with the blind leading the frightened.
Sincerely,
GHK Lall
