If you are going to teach in an RTC it is important to understand how RTCs have developed and how they fit into the educational system of Solomon Islands. Read the following extracts about education in Solomon Islands. After you have read each extract, divide into your discussion groups and discuss your answers to the questions. You do not need to write these answers down.

The first extract was written by a missionary teacher from overseas, Gwen Cross, who taught for many years in Solomon Islands from the 1930s to the 1960s. It is from her book Aloha Solomons published by Institute of Pacific Studies, USP, Suva. It has been adapted slightly.

She starts off by describing education at Maravovo on Guadalcanal in 1931.

The teachers had no formal training and what they had learnt was by inadequate methods; they found it difficult to change their methods, lacked equipment of even the simplest kind and naturally expected the pupils to learn reading, writing and arithmetic in the same way as they had. I could not say when visiting classes that I ever saw a teacher actually teaching. The teacher usually sat at a table, or more likely on it, in order to be at a higher level than his class, and he listened to boys reading aloud in turn. In arithmetic he worked a sum or two, on the board, then set a number of similar ones for the class to do alone. The boys brought their work to the teacher for correction as they finished. Dictation, role-learning and copying were given. Through these methods, or lack of them, the brighter pupils learnt something, which was all that the teacher knew.

Later Gwen Cross herself helped to set up schools at Holy Cross and Bunana in Gela. This is what she wrote about them..

From the beginning, our Holy Cross school was very successful. We knew it must not educate children too far beyond their elders. Girls helped much in their villages; boys had their jobs, but not daily ones like the girls – so school must continue to fit them all for daily village life.

Consequently our plan was to have two full school days each week – Monday and Thursday from 9 a.m. to noon only, thereby giving pupils free afternoons to help their parents.

Thus I began to see the growing development of the school which had been my vision years before. This was a school which was very different from one of academic learning, and not just based on adaptation or use of native culture in work, arts and crafts, and pastimes. It aimed at the deep innermost development of each individual girl in her personality, a growing sense of responsibility, an understanding of being a person created by God to fulfil his purpose … I dare to think this was an ideal education, an education for life, youngsters sharing and doing everything for themselves…

As I had learnt before, Melanesians need the practical achievement and understanding of a subject before they write notes. Writing notes is only useful after they have learnt to understand and practice a skill.

QUESTIONS

1. According to Gwen Cross, what was the early mission education like? What was its purpose? What kinds of methods were used?

2. Did Gwen Cross approve of this kind of education? What did she think was wrong with it? Is her description similar to what you experienced in your own Primary education?

3. She says, “ We must not educate children too far beyond their elders.” What do you think she means by this? Do you agree? In what ways did her school try to keep the children as part of their own communities? Do you think that most education today takes children too far away from their own communities?

4. Look at the last paragraph. What does this suggest about the methods of teaching we should use in RTCs?

5. In what ways was Gwen Cross’ school similar to present day RTCs?

The second story was written by Jonathan Fifi’i, a famous man from Kwaio in Malaita, who was one of the leaders of the Ma’asina Rule movement and later became a Member of Parliament. It is from his book From Pig Theft to Parliament, translated and edited by Roger Keesing; published by SICHE and USP Centre, 1989.

I’ve been thinking a lot about education. I don’t think we’ve been getting the kind of education we should be getting. That problem started a long time ago when the Government first started schools. At first the Government did nothing to teach us. We had to force them, through Ma’asina rule, to give us education.

But when they did teach us, they didn’t teach us anything about our own country, or about our customs or customary laws.

They just taught us about their Parliament and their laws and their Kings and Queens. I’ve seen how all the education, all the beliefs and ideas from foreign places have been brought here. The ideas they’ve brought, the books they have brought, have all been from other places, and other people. I think it has spoiled our way of thinking and our ways of living.

I worry about the way schools turn people away from village life. Young people who have grown up in town don’t know how to live in rural areas. They don’t know how to build a house of bush materials. They don’t know about trees and building materials from the bush. They don’t know where to find vines, posts and poles. They don’t know how to make sago thatch panels for roof and walls. Lots of them don’t even know how to make gardens and feed themselves. Schools have taught them lots of things, but have kept them from learning lots of things which are important in our country.

So they’re only fit to live in town. They are used to lots of people, to sports, movies, all the forms of entertainment. If they go back to the villages their parents came from, they don’t know how to live there. They don’t find any of the things they are used to, and don’t like being there. We’ve raised a whole generation of Solomon Islanders who aren’t really Solomon Islanders. I think they will live to regret it.

QUESTIONS

1. According to Fifi’i what things did most schools teach about?

2. Did Fifi’i approve of what was taught? What did he think was wrong with the schools?

3. In what ways does Fifi’i agree with Gwen Cross that Solomon Islands education often takes children too far from their communities?

4. In what ways do the present RTCs try to solve the problems mentioned by Fifi’i? Can we educate people without turning them away from village life?

As a result of criticism by people like Fifi’i, the British colonial government set up a Commission of Enquiry into education. This was a group of Solomon Islanders led by Francis Bugotu who were asked to find out what sort of education system most Solomon Islanders wanted. Their report, Education for What?, was published in 1973. Here are some of the things it said.

One of the main concerns was the alienation of the children from their parents, their villages and the village ways and customs, by what the people regard as a foreign system of education. It was felt that education at all levels should be offered as close to the pupils home as possible and that primary schools should be located in the home village with pupils attending as day pupils, so that the child grows up as part of the village and remains with the village customs and codes of behaviour.

The content of the primary school course should be geared towards the majority of children who are going to remain in the village and not towards the few who will continue their education at academic secondary school.

It was felt that the present secondary school course was too narrow and was foreign to the Solomons. It was agreed by most people that practical and vocational courses should be given greater emphasis and that school should be made more self supporting by pupils growing their own food.

It is suggested that in standard 6, pupils with an academic bent should be selected for entry into academic secondary schools, while the remainder should be given the opportunity to enter terminal Form 1 and 2 courses with a practical bias at area high schools.....The courses offered should be geared to the needs of that area.

QUESTION

1. In what ways did this report agree with the things said by Gwen Cross and Jonathan Fifi’i?

As a result of this report new kinds of secondary schools, eventually called Provincial Secondary Schools, were started in 1976. These were based on practical / vocational subjects, while the existing National Secondary Schools were based on ‘academic’ education. Here is how the Ministry of Education described the two types of schools in their Curriculum Development Handbook 1985–86, published by the Curriculum Development Centre, Ministry of Education.

Provincial Secondary Schools

Provincial Secondary Schools are secondary schools with a practical / vocational bias aimed at helping students to acquire practical skills which will be useful to them when they leave school, especially skills likely to be useful to those who return to a village life. They offer a three year course based on Agriculture, Industrial Arts (including woodwork and mechanics), Home Economics and Business Studies and a background of English, Maths, Social Studies and Christian Education. There are now 12 schools which cater for about two thirds of the total secondary intake …They are based on principles of self help and self reliance and all students regularly take part in activities such as growing their own food, building school buildings, making furniture or growing or making things for sale. Students also do all maintenance and cleaning of the schools and most of their own cooking …11 of the 12 schools are situated in rural areas, spread throughout the islands, with one or two in each Province, located in response to population and local needs rather than accessibility to ‘modern’ facilities. Buildings are low cost, many of local materials and traditional designs.

By 1978, soon after these schools started, some parents and politicians were putting pressure to change the Provincial Secondary Schools into academic schools or to enable the bright students to transfer from Provincial to National Secondary Schools, which was not allowed at that time. This included introduction of an assessment and testing procedure after Form 3. There was also greater emphasis on English and Maths teaching by introducing these as formal teaching subjects on the timetable.

National Secondary Schools

There are 8 National Secondary Schools.

These schools are similar to secondary schools in most parts of the world. They follow a basically similar “academic” curriculum emphasising English, Maths, Science and Social Studies as core subjects. Agriculture, Home Economics for girls, Industrial Arts for boys and Business Studies are also taught in all schools. Students take all these subjects for 3 years but only one or two as options in Forms 4 and 5.

The courses in all main subjects lead to the Solomon Islands School Certificate Examination in Form 5. This exam, started in 1978, is entirely set and marked in Solomon Islands and replaced the former Cambridge Overseas School Certificate. Students take six or seven subjects in this, with English, Maths, Science and Social Studies being compulsory in all schools and New Testament Studies compulsory in most. Practical subjects are options, but all students take one or two of these, and most of these subjects contain practical work as part of their assessment.

QUESTIONS

1. Would Gwen Cross or Fifi’i have approved of the National Secondary Schools (NSS)? Why?

2. Would they have approved of the original Provincial Secondary Schools (PSS)? Why?

3. In what ways were the original PSS similar to the present RTCs?

4. What made the PSS change? Do you think these changes were good?

5. What do we need today: more schools like NSS or more schools like original PSS? Why?

As you can see from these extracts, there are two main ideas about education in Solomon Islands: 

1. that it should train people in practical skills, especially those useful in rural areas;

2. that it should teach ‘academic’ subjects like English, Maths, Science and Social Science, largely based on overseas ideas and leading people to expect paid employment in towns.

                   
The demand for different kinds of education usually changes according to the employment situation in the country.  In addition to the ‘formal’ schools already described there were always some RTCs and Vocational schools offering more ‘informal’ training in practical skills, mainly to adults who had left school.
 
When there are good prospects for further education and training and for paid employment, the demand for formal, academic education tends to increase.
 
When there are less opportunities for further education and training and for paid employment the demand for skill training like that offered in RTCs or the original PSS tends to increase.

Suggest which kind of education / training was in greatest demand at the following times:

• During colonial times.

• During and immediately after independence.

• 20 years after independence.

• During and after the period of ethnic tension.

 

Read the following brief summary of the history of education in Solomon Islands.

Draw a time-line graph like the one below. Put the time from 1880 to the present on the horizontal axis along the bottom. On the vertical axis, put academic education at the bottom and skills training at the top.

As you read the history, draw a graph to show the importance of academic education and skills training at different times. The graph will go down when academic education was important and up when skills training was important.

Briefly note the reason for the changes at appropriate points on the graph, to produce a time-line of the development of education.

Brief History of Education in Solomon Islands.

This did not mean that people were not educated. Children learnt by doing. They accompanied adults, usually their own relatives, when they did their everyday work - growing crops, fishing, cooking, hunting, making mats, building houses or making canoes. They learnt these skills by watching and imitating what the adults did, and sometimes adults would actually teach them or give advice. Usually girls learnt different things from boys.

When the Christian missionaries came at the end of the nineteenth and beginning of the twentieth century, they introduced formal schools in which students sat in a special room in front of a teacher. At first the missionaries mainly taught reading and writing, so that students could study the Bible, but they soon introduced practical skills also. They wanted to help people improve their farming, build better houses, learn how to make furniture, to sew dresses or to cook in better ways. During the first 45 years of the twentieth century, until the end of World War 2, all education was run by the missionaries who tended to emphasise practical skills, as well as literacy and numeracy.

After 1945 Chiefs on Malaita and elsewhere formed the Ma’asina Rule movement, which demanded, amongst other things, that the government should provide more and higher education. As a result the government opened KGVI Secondary School at Aligegeo on Malaita. It put much greater emphasis on academic education, and Solomon Islanders begun to be educated to Form 5 and take the Cambridge Overseas School Certificate. Each mission also introduced their own academic secondary school. Tenaru, Selwyn, Goldie and Betikama started one by one, all taking the ‘Cambridge’ exams.

As we have seen, the report Education for What? led to the setting up, in 1976, of Provincial Secondary schools (originally called New Secondary schools) based on training in practical skills rather than ‘academic’ education. However, these schools soon changed. A motion was introduced into Parliament calling them ‘dead end’ schools, because they did not lead to paid employment or further education. Formal teaching of English and Maths was introduced, leading to an exam in English and Maths at the end of Form 3 to select people to transfer to Form 4 in National Secondary Schools. This would also help people gain paid employment.

Gradually this changed the PSS into more and more academic schools, with emphasis on English and Maths teaching and a decline of the practical subjects. There was pressure from students, parents and teachers to merge the curriculum of the PSS with that of the NSS. This happened between about 1982 and 1985. In the practical subjects the NSS adopted the PSS syllabuses, but in most subjects the PSS adopted the NSS syllabuses and, by 1985, the two kinds of schools were almost the same, except that the PSS still only went up to Form 3.

Under pressure from parents and politicians this also changed and by the early 1990s almost all the PSS had added Form 4 and 5. The original idea of practical / vocational schools, teaching skills for rural living, had disappeared completely.

At the same time the number of students in Primary schools expanded at a much faster rate than the secondary schools, and more and more students were ‘pushed out’ at Standard 6. This led to the idea that Standard 6 leavers should be offered some further training in practical skills suitable for rural areas, where most of them lived - the original idea of the PSS! Most churches started or expanded Rural Training Centres, and some introduced practical skills into Bible schools. This formed the basis of the present RTC movement.

In the 1990s the problem of school ‘push outs’ at Standard 6 increased and these were joined by more and more Form 3 ‘push outs’. The RTCs began to expand to cater for these. The Solomon Islands Association of Rural Training Centres (SIARTC) was formed and in 1993 began to be assisted by the European Union.

Starting in 1995, parents and communities began a new way to solve the problem of Standard 6 leavers. They began to add Forms 1 to 3 to existing Primary Schools to create Community High Schools. The Ministry of Education proposed five, but within 5 years there were over seventy, largely unplanned and coming from grassroots support. This has reduced the number of Standard 6 leavers, but increased the number of Form 3 leavers, so the demand for RTC training has continued to increase, but more of the intake is now from Form 3.

During the late 1990s the economy started to decline due to lower prices for overseas exports, and the number of jobs in paid employment declined at the same time as the number of those leaving secondary school was expanding rapidly. This change was speeded up by the almost total collapse of the money economy in the period of ethnic tension. Students and parents began to realise that academic education. leading to Form 3, Form 5 or even Forms 6 and 7, was the ‘dead end’ education, as there were almost no prospects of paid employment or scholarships for further training, and even the College of Higher Education seemed to be collapsing.

This situation gave a further boost to the Rural Training Centres, as people began to realise that the training they offer may be more useful than that of academic secondary education. The number and size of Rural Training Centres increased, especially with the help of SIARTC and the European Union. The RTC movement gained strength and more support from the government, including a promise that teachers in RTCs would be paid by the Teaching Service on the same rates as Secondary teachers with the same qualifications.

This led, in turn, to the opening of the Vanga Teachers College, where you are now, as the government said they could only pay RTC teachers if they had a teaching qualification. You will be amongst the first to gain this qualification. At the same time, many of the existing RTC teachers have been trained on the SICHE Adult Learner Training Programme, ALTP.

The idea of practical skills training, therefore, has gone up and down in the history of Solomon Islands education. Today it is at one of its high stages, although the majority of students still go to academic secondary schools and government policy is that all students will go to such schools up to Form 3. Will this lead to a decline in RTCs, or will the numbers leaving Form 3, or even Forms 5 and 6, lead to an even bigger increase in the demand for RTC places? What do you think?

-- page break --