Dear Editor,

The hidden curriculum exerts a significant influence, conveying messages that may not have been intentionally taught, yet they are still absorbed. These messages can be either positive or negative.

Recently, during the graduation ceremony at Ascot Primary School, a clear example surfaced. Students who excelled in Jamaica’s high-stakes Primary Exit Profile (PEP) examinations were distinguished by their beautifully adorned gowns, while those who did not perform as well walked the aisles in their everyday uniforms. This was a clear example of segregation at the highest level.

Consider the experience of a 12-year-old child who, not meeting a specific percentile requirement, is told they are unqualified to wear the graduation gown and must remain at the back of the line during the march. These students have done nothing wrong that warrants such humiliation. Those in authority who make these decisions should recognise that every learner is unique. Each individual has distinct learning preferences, intelligence, and interests, and some may simply be classified as late bloomers.

In light of these recent events, I find myself pondering these questions, which may be unaddressed by the relevant authorities: How should we characterise such actions? Do they truly reflect equity? What messages are conveyed to learners through these decisions? Are they being penalised because their learning styles were not accommodated? Additionally, is graduation at the primary level even significant? Is Ascot Primary School the author of this segregation, though? Where and how did it all begin?

Undoubtedly, these actions raise important concerns about equity and inclusion. Additionally, the emotional impact on learners who experienced public humiliation during a significant milestone must be addressed. From my vantage point, the principal has failed those students. No apology can undo the damage that has already been done.

In truth, this practice is carried out in other ways in other learning institutions and begins as early as grade one. Students are assigned positions, such as first, second, third, and so on. These are some lessons learners take from these experiences: I am no good. It doesn’t make sense to try. I cannot match up. The teacher doesn’t like me. Why bother with school? Come on, this undesirable behaviour should be discontinued for the greater good of all stakeholders.

I honestly believe that if one is to lead a learning institution in the 21st century and beyond, they must display the following characteristics.

1) Emotional intelligence: Principals serve as the chief executive officers of their educational institutions and, therefore, they must possess emotional intelligence, a critical component of effective leadership. Their roles entail fostering an environment in which both students and staff can thrive. Emotional intelligence encompasses not only the ability to manage one’s emotions, but also the capacity to navigate the emotions of others.

2) Empathy: The 21st-century principal must possess empathy. This includes the cognitive ability to understand their learners’ feelings, the emotional connection to those feelings, and the willingness to respond appropriately to their needs. Therefore, leaders must show compassion, especially in situations like these. Let us be reminded: The students marched at the back of the line; they wore no gowns or hats. Was empathy displayed in this situation?

3) Character builder: One important aspect of character-building is modelling desired behaviour that can positively impact Jamaica’s future. This is essential in shaping learners’ moral compasses. How could the principal and teachers assist students who scored low on the PEP examinations to build their character? These experiences could serve as teachable moments in which learners are reassured that this setback is not the end of their journey but rather an opportunity for growth, reminding them that they can thrive or bloom wherever they are planted.

4) Love: Finally, managers of learning institutions must possess love. This fosters positive growth. Love puts people first and allows them to see the desired alternative.

Coupled with these characteristics, school administrators should use strategic intelligence in the daily operations of learning institutions. Learning institutions should rely heavily on this critical component. This is when principals use their cognitive abilities and skills to anticipate trends, employ systems thinking, and make rational decisions proactively.

Strategic intelligence should be their third eye. This would empower them to think logically and foresee the consequences of various events. Furthermore, strategic intelligence can help position an institution to maintain a competitive edge.

Gillian Campbell

gillian.campbell0107@gmail.com