Parent Advocate Expresses Concerns over Lack of Engagement in Education Reform Consultation

A local parent advocate is hopping mad over what she sees as the “public disrespect” meted out to her at the most recent public consultation on education reform hosted by the Ministry of Education.

And Paula-Anne Moore says there will be “consequences” for not fully engaging parents in the exercise.

Moore told the Wednesday night session at the Deighton Griffith Secondary School that the government risks expanding the gaps in parental confidence if the proposed education reform turns out to be a rubber-stamping of already-agreed plans.

The parent advocate and coordinator of the Group of Concerned Parents of Barbados and Coalition for Exam Redress also told the public consultation on education transformation that there are “myriad” parental concerns and still too many questions and too few answers.

“There are still too many missing pieces of information relating to project management, change management, communication, details as to how the secondary portion is going to be structured. A number of us are not confident and therefore you risk, if you do not truly engage parents, that this is nothing more than a rubber-stamping exercise and the decision is already made…. You are going to end up widening the chasm as those with means will move on to private schools and there would be a proliferation of secondary schools the same way that there is with primary schools, and you will end up, unfortunately, damaging all the positives that make Barbados a leader in education in the region.”

Moore told the session there was some doubt whether there has genuinely been engagement of a wide enough scope of parents in the exercise.

The outspoken commentator told the head table and those gathered for the meeting, that she was “deeply disappointed” she has not been afforded the respect she has earned in advocating for justice for parents and students over five academic years nationally and regionally. Recognition of that contribution, she said, has been lacking at home.

“There will be consequences,” she warned, as she left the microphone without making any further contribution.

Her submission was immediately followed by a reminder from the moderator Dr Denise Charles that the consultations are public and hence everyone who comes must be afforded a similar opportunity to speak and ask questions. The moderator had, at the start of the session, outlined a three-minute contribution limit. However, Moore requested at least ten minutes on behalf of her group when she rose to speak. That was denied.

Chief Education Officer Dr Ramona Archer-Bradshaw thanked Moore for her contribution and assured her that her concerns regarding the lack of consultation with her group had been recorded.

“We will go back to the drawing board with my team at the Ministry of Education and we will see how that will be accommodated,” she said.

However, in a press release on Thursday, Moore referred to the treatment at Wednesday’s town hall as “public disrespect” and dismissed later attempts to engage the group after the town hall as “a failed attempt at mollification”, adding that

that the experience had only served to strengthen the resolve of parents.

She charged: “The ministry planned against, perhaps due to fear, giving me the national platform to air our constructive but honest analysis of their agenda and to provide feedback on the major parental concerns on timing, lack of basic prerequisites of cost analysis, funding, the risk of disruption of education – and very important student social connections – of the proposed two-tier secondary level, and the insufficient scope of parental engagement in developing the proposals. A rushed prior one-day meeting with parents without any data on the proposals at that time, is not an effective parental engagement.”

Moore said the ministry’s offer, immediately after the public disrespect at the town hall, was conveniently away from the public eye.

She further charged, “These consultations are not serious attempts to engage the public in the decision-making process.”

Moore questioned the reduction in the number of planned meetings saying there has been silence on the reason for them being reduced from 13 to five. (SP)