lessons.’ His point is valid. However, my contention is with the

practice of lessons superseding normal school sessions. This I think

is the hidden fear of Mr. Suseran. The school terms are so laid out,

the days are so planned, and the teachers so employed that effective

teaching is quite possible, right in the class room. So why the

prevalence of after hours and extra-mural sessions?

Many teachers go through the motions. Many teachers are un-inspiring.

Many teachers are not qualified. Well guess what happens-exploitation.

I have noticed that the ‘lesson-culture’ redounds into a club

setting-cassette/cd’s exchanges, cell phone parades, attire boastings

just to name a few. Also the actual physical setting is a deterrent to teaching and learning. This is what I am against, and this is what the

authorities that be must look into and investigate.

I can understand extreme circumstances of teacher sicknesses, shortages, weaker students, sports etc. allowing for a few extra and make up sessions. This also can be conducted right in the school building. I mean why should students make an extra trip to go a teacher’s house, mostly males, for classes that can be conducted right at the school? I think it is far more accommodating to be at the particular school. Something is horribly wrong. If the teaching salary is too small, that is a matter for the teachers and the ministry and not for anybody else. Again I implore the Minister of Education toinvestigate this phenomenon.

As a matter of personal interest, I invite the comments of educators regarding the comparison of the GCE of old and the current CXC/CSEC
examinations. I have encountered many outstanding achievers under the
current system who just cannot read-I mean it.
SHANE RIZWAN.