Dear Editor,

Tropical storm Caribbean Secondary Education Certificate seems to have whiffed up the patois debate again and the gust is as sophistical and populist as ever. As this debate swirls around, I can detect two distinctly different currents: First, the need for national recognition of our indigenous language, patois, as obtained in many other countries. The other is the exigency of finding a solution to our students’ academic struggle.

I have no problem with the encrustation of patois in our national psyche, but to suggest that it is the answer to the problems of poor academic performances of our students is downright disingenuous. When I used to attend school, teachers used to speak patois, and they continue to do so as the occasion warrants.

The issue facing our students is, therefore, not one of language, but rather lack of comprehension skill and critical thinking. Were patois to be taught in schools, and be the primary language of knowledge delivery, the problems would remain and might even escalate.

The patois in school proponents insist it will facilitate greater understanding. But I hardly think a student having problem with mathematics would find the following problem expressed in patois any clearer than in standard English: change up di faumula C=RT fi mek R di subjek addi faumula; as opposed to transpose the formula C=RT to make R the subject of the formula.

By this stage, a student should have a working vocabulary of the various subjects taught or know how to use a dictionary. Consequently, transpose, formula, and subject should not pose a problem. In addition, most skilled teachers would perhaps use ‘change’ instead of ‘transpose’, thereby eliminating any confusion for the students.

If we really want to help our failing students, please, do not further complicate the issue by adding more burden that has no proven guarantee of efficacy. The real issues are poor comprehension and critical thinking skills. Our failing students have lost these skills or they are seriously attenuated as a result of digital addiction. These students scarcely read — an activity that is a sine qua non to the learning process. When one reads, the mind creates sounds, colours, tastes, feelings, and locale. The imagination is developed. The ability to focus for long periods is developed. The more of this activity, the greater the number of brain cells to deal with problem-solving. These children who are failing do not read anymore; every single thing is now fed to them on a digital platter. They cannot focus for long and their imagination is at such a dangerous level they can hardly think for themselves. Their brains are dying.

Let us put our effort and resource where it really matters and try to find ways to get our children to exercise their minds. Technology is here to stay, so any effort to curtail it would be as unwise as teaching patois in schools. Instead, find ways to make it serve our children.

E Elpedio Robinson

St Andrew

elpediofineart@gmail.com