charindra chandrasena 00:03 Hello, Danath. Hi, Dhananath Fernando 00:03 Sharinder. charindra chandrasena 00:04 And hello, Dr. Sujata. Speaker 1 00:07 Hello, hello. charindra chandrasena 00:08 How have you been? Speaker 1 00:09 Good, good. charindra chandrasena 00:11 So today we are. It's a special day for us because it's the first time we are having three people at the table. Dhananath Fernando 00:18 Yes. Right. charindra chandrasena 00:19 And it's a new table for us as well. Yes, I think Dhananath Fernando 00:22 we can say we took a one-week break to get this rich. After charindra chandrasena 00:27 after a one-week break, so it's like it's like an athlete who is you know trying to avoid burnout and takes a break and then comes back refreshed and ready for ready for something much better? Run faster, jump higher. Dhananath Fernando 00:44 Abzan, I think we had the right person. Yes, so we had the charindra chandrasena 00:47 right person, and so just a basic introduction to you, Doctor. So Doctor Sujata Gamage is an education policy analyst and also a senior research fellow at Learn Asia, thank you for joining us today. So, yes, you are going to add a valuable element to this conversation. We have been talking for a while, just the two of us. So mainly Dhananath Fernando 01:13 economics and kind of politics. Now you have to bring the education side of it because I don't think none of us are qualified. Exactly, exactly. Kari and I are not qualified politics. Speaker 1 01:22 They are inevitably policy. Everything Speaker 1 01:26 is everything is politics. charindra chandrasena 01:27 But this education now, I mean, this is a pretty hot topic. It has been a hot topic for the past couple of months, and you know why, because of the educational Reforms. So, just tell me, Doctor, in your honest opinion, are the reforms the need of the hour? Are they going to tackle the big issues in our education system? Speaker 1 01:56 Need of the hour, big issues. We need simple solutions, quick solutions. I don't think what's proposed addresses that, because it's really a curriculum revision. You know, it's not a big education reform, but it's presented. These curricular reform revisions, we've been trying to get them off the ground since 2019, and it's gone through four administrations. You know, it started with the Hawaiian government end of the days, and then Gotabey, and then Ranil Vikram Singh, and then now Standard Sanae. So finally, we got it off the ground. These are things that the National Institute of Education should be doing anyway every eight years, right? Dhananath Fernando 02:39 So you mean to say the revision time for a curriculum is generally eight years. Speaker 1 02:43 Eight years, and the funny thing is, the way it's framed now, it takes five years for the primary revision to be over, and the junior secondary takes four years for eight-year curriculum cycle. So I think it's too little, too, too little, not soon enough, too too late. charindra chandrasena 03:02 So, doctor, now just for our understanding, when you say okay, it's a curriculum change, but what you want, what is needed, is a structural change. Structural Speaker 1 03:14 change, right? charindra chandrasena 03:16 What is a structural change? Speaker 1 03:18 Change the exams, three exams as soon as possible. See, if you can be always talk about inputs. You know, we need better teacher training, textbooks. We've been doing that, and the aid agencies they are always supporting. You know, oh, we need more teacher training. So 50% of our teachers come from teacher training colleges. Other 50% are. graduates, and they are given some training. Okay, they can be through on-the-job training, but what we really need is to change the goalpost. You know, have new cuticle all the fancy terms, but if the goalpost is the same, things are not going to change. So, if the schools are judged by how many students get get through the grade five scholarship exam, which means getting 35% or more in two papers, you know how to do that. Then GCO level, how many you pass? Get seven subjects, get 330 5% or more. So that's our goalpost. So without changing that goalpost, immediately there are plans to change it in seven eight years. We have to change something the goalpost as soon as possible. Otherwise, they'll just whatever curriculum you introduce, they'll teach it to the exam. charindra chandrasena 04:38 When you talk about change the goalpost, doctor, is it that it should be more assignment based as opposed to a you know one day in your life is what will decide your future kind of system? Speaker 1 04:52 Actually, assignment based it's going to be difficult to implement. I'll give you example. New Zealand recently made announced one minister of education about. Two months ago, they are going to scrap what is called their GCO level equivalent. It is called the NCEA, right? They are going to scrap it. They said, you know, children are passing exams, but they are not literate or numerate, so they are going to have a national literacy and numeracy test, which they have to pass. Schools can do their all the assignments, school-based assessments, but the then at national level, they are interested to make sure that everybody has a baseline, and you know, then then you can have a higher level. That's another way to measure that. We can talk about it. New Zealand announced that just recently. Dhananath Fernando 05:34 Just to our understanding, now what do you like when the if you since you spoke about a structural change. When have we done the structural change? Like for the last time, how many years ago? Speaker 1 05:46 Actually, very interesting question. 1970s, we got a Sabha Gandhu, you know, the the left-leaning government. 1970s, 1970. They've realised that most children are failing the Oliver those days, and they said this is designed for you know elite children, children of the middle class, and they they designed and made a new exam called National Certificate of General Education (NCGE) Some people out there would know that, right? It had more practical subjects, and but the middle classes were not happy about it, so they first introduced it in 7675, maybe 76, and the new government 77, they promised they'll scrap that because the you know those who are failing the exam they have no voice, so the middle classes have the voice, right? And then we went back to the GCO level, okay. charindra chandrasena 06:41 So the middle class and the elites hijacked the education system. Speaker 1 06:45 They have already, they've always hijacked. Even now, you know, it's a middle class thing. It's hijacked. Yeah, charindra chandrasena 06:50 because I I remember a story, and then maybe you would have a better insight into the story. When CWW Kanangar wanted to establish free education. I won't name the other gentleman who is reported to have said this, but he had he was opposed to this move by C W Whangara, and he told C W R Ghanangara, Chris, what are you trying to do? Are you trying to prevent us having a boy to even pluck a coconut, Dhananath Fernando 07:24 right? Yeah. Right. Speaker 1 07:25 Yeah. Nowadays it would be to charindra chandrasena 07:27 keep to keep the lower classes in the lower classes because it benefits the elite and the wealthy. Speaker 1 07:36 Yeah. This is now nowadays we don't say it, but who will do the security? Who will do the driving for us? Who's going to drive the cars? Who's going to the security? So that's there. That's there. Since you Dhananath Fernando 07:49 mentioned structural, I have this small experience when I was at this Eisenheltish. I had the opportunity to sit for one lecture at Harvard. I wrote about it in single on my Facebook. So there was this excellent educational educational reform is called Professor Fernando Ramus, who is from Peru, Harvard professor. So he taught this subject for master class. I mean for master's programme at Harvard, and he got online the Singaporean educational. I really cannot recall the institute. The person who basically did it, his name was Pakti, Professor Pakti, if I remember right. So he basically said how Singapore had like they developed three streams because he said now generally the aspiration of a teacher is to become a principal, but the moment actually you make the best teacher in the school, the principal, you are losing on both ends because the teacher is good at teaching, and the principal is more an administrative job. So the teacher should be have should have a channel to excel as much as possible, and the salary scale has to be competitive. I mean, by being a good teacher, principal is a it's a different job. It's not it's I mean it's quite different from the role of a teacher. And the principals have a separate stream on the education administration. And there's another stream which you just spoke about on the setting the curriculum. That's a different thing that you have to be. I don't know how the process. I would like to really learn, like how you really evaluate eight years. I mean, after eight years, what content should be brought in, what should be left out, and all that. So, so he brought that example, and he said the how they kept the salary scales very competitive. He said some teachers are earning, I mean, two three times than the principals because they are extremely good at teaching, and some principals they have a different salary scale, so there's no like not there's rather the competition. There's no that you know professional. I don't know whether it's called jealousy or anything. Like okay, why we should do it or you know. charindra chandrasena 09:55 I mean, in Singapore, it's a national policy to compensate properly, right? That's why. Even their MPs' salaries, the political class earns a lot because that is a disincentive to you know engage in corruption. So I think that's a national policy, and it's it's great that it's with the teachers as well. But what? Yeah. Dhananath Fernando 10:18 If I how do you basically bring this after eight years? How do you revise it, or like what are the things that I mean, on an educationalist point of view? What is the institute in Sri Lanka that being done? That's the charindra chandrasena 10:31 and related to that, doctor is now for this this time the the proposal is to bring in subjects like financial Literacy, entrepreneurship, those kind of. So, don't you see that as a progressive move? Speaker 1 10:48 No, actually, there are progressive move would be to drastically reduce the number of subjects. Right now, we have 51 subjects, right, and they are offered. And for A level, we have 60 plus, and they are offered in three languages, two papers. It's a military-industrial complex. It's a exam-industrial complex we have here. Right. Right. I mean, there are people to set these things. There's a huge industry around it. So that has to be. Singapore, for example, has 12 subjects folder. Everybody has to do the 12 subjects, five core subjects. That example. I mean, where do we get this idea that we should have that? So we brought it down to 23 subjects, but still 23. That's too much. And then this history, all this-you know-history is an optional subject, elective subject. So, no, we need to financial literacy, financial literacy, and entrepreneurship. I mean, we have nice titles, but who's going to teach? One principal said, "You know, they can put all kinds of names on this. We teach with what we have. You know, we teach with the teachers. Now, just Dhananath Fernando 11:54 want to understand the economics of it for a second. So, you mean to say, for all levels, up to all levels, we have 61 subjects. Speaker 1 12:01 51 subjects. 51 on the books, but the students have to do only nine. Nine. So basically, Dhananath Fernando 12:08 okay. So is that a reason why some classes become like you know two, three students, and there are no teachers? Because I'm sure there are some subjects like only like four people is interested. I don't know. When I was studying, there was this natya ranga kalala, and like the kids has to like you know take their chair and like move out, and then the under a tree or something that the the tea is is that what you mean to say? Yeah, but Speaker 1 12:33 for all practical purposes, schools offer only about 14 subjects. Right, that's 50. So right now we need to bring it down to that 14, so. But Dhananath Fernando 12:42 when you have 51, someone has to set exam papers for that. Speaker 1 12:45 Yeah, Dhananath Fernando 12:46 and this has to be a continuous process. That's what you do. Textbooks, Speaker 1 12:48 teacher guides, Dhananath Fernando 12:50 right? Okay. Speaker 1 12:50 Imagine the quality of that preparing 51 of those as opposed to 12, 14. charindra chandrasena 12:56 So what you're saying, doctor, is that you're not conceptually against it. You are just saying practical realities dictate that there should be lesser number of subjects than large number. Speaker 1 13:07 Yeah. If the charindra chandrasena 13:08 practical realities were different, if we had the resources, then of course we can. No, Speaker 1 13:12 even otherwise, you know, it's too complicated. You know, simple is, you know, to keep things simple is difficult. Right. So no, we need to keep it simple. When you look at practices everywhere, if you take China, the Gaokao is a GCA level equivalent. They have only 12 subjects. The whole whole of China, you know, they have three, you know, math, science, and three social science subjects, three science subjects, math language. They of about five six languages. Okay, that's charindra chandrasena 13:44 all. Speaker 1 13:45 See, so you can specialise when you go to university. I don't know how we evolved. Everybody wants to put something law here, entrepreneurship here, economics here, and then it just keeps getting bigger. charindra chandrasena 13:55 Okay, doctor, just just personal sort of thing I've had for a long time is that people who go to university they focus purely on the elected subjects that they have. That's the reality of it, right? Speaker 1 14:13 Yeah. charindra chandrasena 14:14 So law, if you didn't, if you don't study law, yeah, you're not going to know the law unless you take a private interest and do private study. So in Sri Lanka, one of the main problems is lack of knowledge about the law and lack of knowledge about economics. And Dana can speak to this as well. So what Dana is doing technically now with his shows is creating that awareness because that gap is there, you know. So, wouldn't it make sense to try and fill that gap, but it is a little bit give a basic understanding of? I mean, there is a lack of understanding, doctor, about demand and supply. Yeah, you know. But if Speaker 1 14:54 you put it as a subject, no, they will not learn. But what I'm saying is, you can have the. Basic core subjects, you can have projects. You know, when you do a project, it's not. It project comes with learning outcome. With having done this project, they should understand supply and demand. It could be a polar. They'll be doing a polar project, but they'll have a pre some lectures on you know this. Then after that, they can have questions saying, okay, where's the supply? Did you have so they learn it through by doing it. So we really need a good projects with good learning outcomes, well-designed projects. Because everybody says we need law. I said no. You can do one project. Okay. For example, there's a traffic issue outside the school. How do we resolve that? You give it to a team, find ways to resolve that. Then they'll have to understand what are the traffic laws. Who do we have to talk? Right. That's a way to learn law. So I mean, we should financial literacy, entrepreneurship. These have to be learned through projects, but they have to be well designed. Projects have to. They can. We've done those. You know, these are the learning outcomes. And then you have pre-project sort of lectures, classes after-project reflection. It will go in. You you remember how you remember the things you rem you know things you remember now. That's because here Dhananath Fernando 16:12 I may have. I'm not sure whether I have a different view to Dr. Okay, definitely I I agree on that traffic and all that on economics. Definitely I don't recommend entrepreneurship to be taught because charindra chandrasena 16:25 you do or don't. Dhananath Fernando 16:25 I don't entrepreneurship because you know entrepreneurs are quite odd characters. I mean, you know, you really cannot teach it on a you know you basically do the complete opposite of what everybody has been taught you, and that's charindra chandrasena 16:39 you're a rebel. You're a rebel. Exactly, Dhananath Fernando 16:41 and and very. I mean, that's how you transformation. But I think all together, I'm not sure what. How do you theme it? But the basics of it, even to even to having that awareness, that entrepreneurship is an odd thing. That awareness has to be there. So that and basic like how the world works, like for an example, when there are too many people asking for the same commodity, that the price has to go up, and you know, pricing is like it's a scarcity of resources. That thing can come under one theme. I don't know whether it's CV education or like what you know under what stream, but that can come definitely. That has to be there as a content. I'm not sure whether it's a subject. Again, law. I agree with you. I mean, not law as a subject, but in that civic education, you should basically know the basic. It's like the basic etiquette. Like you know, you say thank you, you say sorry, you smile. You know, those basic you know behaviour should be taught. I'm not sure. I'm not the person to do that. charindra chandrasena 17:42 And also fundamental rights, Dana. Yeah. Complete lack of understanding about fundamental rights. Correct. Dhananath Fernando 17:49 But not as a subject. Like you know, you just bring it under one stream, so you cover the learning outcomes or whatever that the educationalist terminology that you can say. But not as a subject. But definitely their education. I mean, the economics content and law has to be there somewhere, but not as a subject. Subject covers in the because charindra chandrasena 18:08 I am actually not partial towards entrepreneurship. I just brought that as an example because they have put that in. Speaker 1 18:15 Yeah, charindra chandrasena 18:15 but for the longest time, I've believed law and economics. I learned economics after. Well, I mean, I learned economics at a later stage in my school career. Before that, I didn't have any basis. And law, I didn't learn at school at all. I studied law afterwards. If I didn't study law, I wouldn't know even the little bit I know now, right? So you get what I'm saying. So this is most people apply it, and they don't even realise that it's a problem. Speaker 1 18:50 Yeah, but we can learn all that. As I said, that Singapore has these 12 subjects. There's no subject called law. There's social science, but there's a project. So projects you do every term. There's a project. Projects have been really well designed, as I said. You know, everywhere. So at the end of the day, we should make sure that they have the learning outcomes in law, learning outcomes in economics. They are within the projects. So no, I think we can't introduce any more subjects into the curriculum. It's just we really need to release the curriculum because social emotional learning where you learn it? Dhananath Fernando 19:22 Now, then I have a question. Now, what is going to happen then? Like, okay, if we bring down the subjects, now I'm sure there are teachers, so we had to retrain them. And how do we basically assign? You know, Speaker 1 19:32 that's a problem. Yes, Dhananath Fernando 19:36 but of course, there's no point if you have too many subjects. No point just for the sake of fully filling the teachers' jobs. No, but charindra chandrasena 19:41 I'm. I also wonder whether technology can come in handy in this scenario, where you know one teacher could teach a large number of students, not in like the tuition class kind of way, but if you have a limited number of teachers. Who are qualified to teach a particular subject? Whether technology could be used to take that to the provinces itself, it doesn't have to be live. Can be a recording, right? Because at least that will fill the gap. I believe it's still better than somebody who is not qualified trying to teach that subject because wrong information is sometimes better than no information. Speaker 1 20:23 Actually, no. Actually, teaching. You know, schools play a very important role that we don't recognise, keeping children off the streets. So when you put them in the classes, you need people. There's a babysitting function. You know, not babysitting. It's called loco parentists. You know, it's they are they are acting in place of a parent in the school. I mean, just imagine. I remember first day I left off my youngest one in school and put her into the bus, and you know the feeling, you know, somebody else is in the bus. Driver is taking them there, and in the school, they're in the U.S. Right. So the teachers have that function, and it's been practised. You have master teacher videos or whatever, but the teacher has to direct the class. Of course, yeah. There has to be physical presence there as well. Yeah, yeah. So they can be, you know, there are difficult. They can be just the animate. I don't want the word. They can be the managers of the class. Absolutely, absolutely. So they we'll have to you know redefine that role. Yes, redefine that role. Yeah, and we we need managers. We need lots of managers. So these teachers, but we need master teachers, and they are teaching recordings and things. Yeah. Dhananath Fernando 21:34 No, I think that it's important that we just going a quick step back. Why this conversation is so important because when you speak, like I also reflected through, because now every every parent, even when they, as soon as they get married, they are thinking of the kid. I mean, when they come to the stage that they're thinking of the kids, they think of okay, to which school that I am going to send my kid and all that. Now, charindra chandrasena 21:56 how how long before you start thinking? Dhananath Fernando 21:58 I actually haven't thought about it now. I no, I think we all think about it. It's like you are thinking about the wedding, not the marriage. Like you know, you think about the school, but you are not thinking about what am what what the school is going to teach my kid because that's the most important thing. So I think that's where this conversation is very relevant because everyone wanted like they change their birth certificates to you know residents to everything to get their kid to a good school, but no one really focuses on like what is being taught and how they are being taught and whether actually we are teaching them in the right way. I mean, what's the point of sending your kid by spending most of your wealth and like teaching them the wrong thing or teaching the so this charindra chandrasena 22:40 this concept now this government has spoken about everybody having a good school within a three kilometre radius. That doesn't mean that there's a school every three kilometres. Just means it's a radius of three kilometres. You can find a decent school. So I think the previous government had a similar initiative called Langamma Pasala, Honda Pasala. So you can have it in whatever name. Speaker 1 23:05 Forever, yeah. Yeah, charindra chandrasena 23:06 you can have it in whatever name. But how realistic? Just because you brought this up, how realistic is that, doctor? Speaker 1 23:13 It is very much very realistic because you can have the primary schools close by, charindra chandrasena 23:17 okay, Speaker 1 23:18 and then you can have the middle school, maybe further away, and a central couple of high schools, and we already have that in the ministry. They've done the work for a long time. It's called school clusters. That we had to find the new nerve for that groups or whatever because the cluster came with the 1980 s white paper now, and we threw that away. So no, within a cluster we can have that, and children can be bused from, you know. And as I said, the number of children are going to go down drastically. So we have to rethink all this. Yeah, but the thing is that decision cannot be made from isurpa. You know, if you say 50 children for a school is too much, no. Some school might have 55, and it's very important. Some school might have 30, and still locally, these decisions have to be made locally and get approval. Dhananath Fernando 24:10 Chari, now I'm going to make it so complicated. Now, why this three-kilometer thing is a outcome of a more integrated plan, which is very difficult to execute, which I'm saying it by knowing the difficulty of it. Now that's where this urbanisation and the planning needs to come in, because ideally, if you have the residential areas, then it's easy to locate schools closer to that. So then the students, students' commuting time and everything can be brought down. Now what we are doing is we are basically scattering our population, like you know, from Colombo now it has gone to Morotour, Ragama, and now the suburbs are getting filled up exactly. And now it's becoming so complicated. We can experience it with traffic and all that. Kids are waking up at like 4:30 a.m. and they get to the school van or the bus by 6 a.m. and you know. So they are basically we are wasting a lot of time, and also the I mean quite heavy capex because schools are operating till 130, and generally three months are schools are closed, including the weekends. So basically our all the capex budget, which is mainly going for schools and hospitals, schools, which is not basically utilised second half of the day. So basically, it's a waste of money. I mean, if there's a function that we can bring, like I don't know, with day caring or whether extracurricular activities or vocational training or something, because anyway the parents has to pay spend that money if we are speaking about the middle class for a daycare or somewhere to do the same function with additional cumbersome because someone has to pick up the kid from the school, then drop it off at the daycare centre, and then someone goes and pick them up in the evening. So it's very complicated. So that's where this housing and this urbanisation plays a pivotal role, and that's why I mean, when people say when we say bring down the tariff on cement and wall tiles and floor tiles, don't people don't see that chain reaction? But ultimately, it boils down to that because when your housing cost is so expensive that someone cannot afford a small apartment or something that they cannot do a proper development that ultimately ends up in traffic jam as well as your kid waking up at 4:30 a.m. directly or indirectly so that's why it's important you know you really cannot have a school I mean if there's a village that only five families are living ideally rather than having a road and electricity to that particular village, it's far reasonable and cost-effective to bring that five families to a area that to a certain centre, urban charindra chandrasena 26:49 centre, and Dhananath Fernando 26:50 then you develop the industries and all that. But that's a that's as I said, it's a very complicated thing. You cannot expect the suprupai or the educational reforms to reformists to do that. But we should have a at least overall understanding the other implications of this issue because it's broader than we think. Yeah, charindra chandrasena 27:09 but then then it goes beyond education as well, no, Dana. Where it has to have the the support and the collaboration of the Urban Development Authority, maybe the housing ministry, whatever, whatever, all this, the road development authority, all of that, Speaker 1 27:27 and the market is also working now. These suburbs are developing, and the private schools like ICM and they are moving to those, and Saint Peter's and other schools. I think they have, they begin to have satellite schools in there. So the private sector is responding to the market demand. They don't, so I think it's a government that has to government schools like Ananda. These I think the enrollments must be you know going down now. charindra chandrasena 27:52 They are what must be enrollment. The demand demand is going down. Speaker 1 27:55 I've heard that Royal has expanded their you know catchment area to Dematakoda and so on. I know recently I heard that somebody from Demeter Gota got admission from based on distance. So so now now it's happening charindra chandrasena 28:10 legally. Yes. So you don't have to give a different address now. Yeah. Speaker 1 28:14 I think the demographics is changing. The culture is changing a bit. So it's funny, you know. But in spite of government, yeah, the market. You are an interesting Dhananath Fernando 28:23 point. The population is declining, right? Yeah, that's from which year? Speaker 1 28:28 Population actually it's been declining since 1980, so even before. Then it perked up in 19 late 2000 around 2000, and it was at a high of more than 350,000 is high. Then it reached a peak of 387,000 in 2007. Number of births per year. We don't know why women started having more births, as demographers don't know. But still, then after five years, from 2007 to 2013, started going down really high, and 2024, believe it, 40% drop from high of two, 380,000 in 2007. After 17 years, it's 224,000 in 40% drop. 40% drop. That's going to be reflected in the school admissions. charindra chandrasena 29:20 Yeah, I mean, also it's understandable, I think, because parents just can't afford to have multiple children nowadays, and maybe one is the limit. Speaker 1 29:31 One is limited to, or even some people are not choose choosing choose it not to, charindra chandrasena 29:35 and there may be other reasons as well. Whether you know whether they are ready for parenting and you know those reasons as well. COVID Dhananath Fernando 29:41 and economic crisis all affected. But I get the attention of Speaker 1 29:45 young people Dhananath Fernando 29:46 absolutely, and I get the pulse because I live next to the temple. Yeah. And Rokuhamudra is saying now that the Hampa sala the grade one very difficult to find students for grade one. Same is reflected in my school in Morotua. I mean, I think they are considering to either to cut down a class or bring the number of students down. I think that is. I'm not sure how it happens in the other schools, but I think that is indicated to an extent. Speaker 1 30:14 Yeah, you know, demographers have these fancy names for demographic trends, but to me, the fascinating thing is how many turn 18 every year. Just think about it, right? 2025. Oh yes, 2007. I said it's a maximum. They're turning turned 18 in 2025. So 380,000 were born this year. You know they came to society. We took them for granted. You know we look at oh so many past the A levels, you know, how do we find universities for them? No, there's whole but much more. So we can't afford to ignore them anymore. We have to make sure each one we give them something so that they go to the workforce, you know, ready. We've been ignoring them so charindra chandrasena 30:58 from an education point of view, and this might sound like a weird thing to say, but isn't it? Doesn't it make the job easier for the education system if there are less enrollments? Speaker 1 31:08 Yeah, but people, we were, you know, to look after us. You know, older generally, these guys will be, you know, working and paying taxes, and that's how we are going to live. No, from selfish point of view. No, we need you know you guys to have children and do the job. charindra chandrasena 31:26 Yeah, I have a very different view on this. I think I think I think I think a part of that burden will be borne by AI. I genuinely believe that that we will get to a stage where. So when people talk about this demographic crisis that the whole world is going to face, I'm not that worried about it. I think certain certain roles could be filled. I think maybe the care roles, Speaker 1 31:53 care roles, right? So, charindra chandrasena 31:55 so you you your point is taken on that, doctor. Yeah, the care roles that human element may not be replicable, but generally, I think will be okay. That's Speaker 1 32:07 interesting. Yeah, it would look at it that way too. Yeah. charindra chandrasena 32:10 But generally, getting back to the education pointer, doctor, is there any sort of engagement that you've had with the government on this matter-that you're on the wrong track. This is what you should be doing. Speaker 1 32:27 Actually, we've been writing. Yeah, so the not directly, but from outside. Yes. Actually, I was in the previous government, 2320, 420-224-2224, Yeah, yeah. So we were developing an education policy framework, and there's some lessons from there which we are trying to communicate. But most important thing I want to communicate is the curriculum revision is not looking after those who are leaving school 2025 to 2030. The critical time, because by the time those who benefit from this leave school, it'd be 2029, 2031, 2029 when they first leave the O level, and so too little, too late. I mean, these next five years are so critical. charindra chandrasena 33:15 So you're again talking about the 207 bonds now, right? Yes, that they are the ones who are leaving school. Yes, Speaker 1 33:21 exactly, and we are enjoying that sort of dividend. And dividend is going to end in 30. Remember, I said 2013 was the higher seven was higher, but 2013 we had about 350,000. From then it going down drastically. So these five years also five years are very uncertain times. I know. Maybe I think the most uncertain face by event, even right, climate change, AI, economics. The whole world order is changing. Yeah. So these are really critical times, and you can do curriculum revision starting with grade one and grade six, and next year we do grade two. It can happen, but we have to think about these five years. Really, 25/23, But what charindra chandrasena 34:06 can be done, doctor? Yeah, exactly. Another structural, and also isn't it a bit too late now to do anything about it? Speaker 1 34:12 No. What I'm saying is, have this numeracy and literacy test for an English test for everybody, national test. So instead of teaching to get 35% in a paper, what I'm saying is make sure everybody has that. There are two levels. One is basic level, and the other one is we need to make sure those who pass the exams actually learn something. Right now, they are actually not learning something because our exams, if you compare them with international benchmark, they are way way behind. We know we have the evidence to show that because there are two exams, international exams and several others, but two main ones: PISA and TIMS. PISA is Programme for International Student Assessment. OECD does. And Tim says trends in international mathematics and science. When our children who ace our exams, they do this, they get 50% less marks for those. So two things we have to do: the basics we have to test immediately, so that you know children who leave school now without anything to show for it, and those who are joining the labour market, they they have a certificate to show that they have literacy and numeracy. Not only a certificate, they'll have literacy and numeracy. Literacy charindra chandrasena 35:30 does it mean the what what does it involve exactly? Exactly, Speaker 1 35:34 it's not the old literacies. The basic literacy is to be able to read sentence out. Exactly. This is actually literacy is now broadly defined to know how to get information, how to understand it, synthesise it, and communicate. So it's like you know your test would be like not on a subject, but you are given something and to interpret that, you know something you would see in a newspaper, whatever. Those are the kinds of tests you will do for them. So charindra chandrasena 36:02 something that you can't just memorise and parrot out, which is what most Sri Lankan exams are about anyway, right? That the ones with better memory get ahead over the ones with critical thinking. Speaker 1 36:13 Yeah, exactly. Good question about literacy. It's not your old literacy anymore. Exactly. Dhananath Fernando 36:17 But it's interesting also. We are not in the index of PISA tests, right? We charindra chandrasena 36:21 are not in the index at all. Speaker 1 36:23 Yeah, we have not been participating. Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia-they are in the PISA. They've been doing that. They are not performing well, but they are, you know. At least you know where you are. Yeah, for transparency for self-assessment. Speaker 1 36:37 Yeah. So our ministry actually, sad to say they have not even been they have been resistant to publicising these reports. The reports are done by NEREC National Education Research and Evaluation Centre at the University of Colombo. They've been doing these 1416, and 20. They've been doing this. charindra chandrasena 36:59 Oh, so the evaluations are done. National Speaker 1 37:01 these these are. samples. charindra chandrasena 37:03 Right. These Speaker 1 37:04 are some. You do the sample test and say, you know, we need to change our exams, change our exams, but it's not going to happen. So what I'm saying is, quick thing is to do like New Zealand to do a national literacy and numeracy test, which we can do in 2027, 2027, and those who leave school 2025, they can go back and do that and get the certificate, right? Then they will tuition masters. Everybody will come together and get our students, you know, ready for that. Initially, it'll be you know they'll be learning cramming for that, but still it'll be more useful than you know, cramming, you know, getting a lot of knowledge content in. So yeah, that's a basic thing I would argue for an English test, an English test, functional English. We have English O level, Dhananath Fernando 37:54 but now there's an argument since you brought that out. Also, me coming from a very singular background. Now there is a conversation at which age that you teach your student like a second language. Some parents or there's a one school of thought. It has to be grade one. Some things it has to be later on. Like what's the global standard or how does it happen? Because there's an argument like when you don't speak in your mother tongue that your creativity. How do how do you respond to that? Speaker 1 38:23 There was actually one school in Horan area. They were doing this Hamduro was doing teaching in the. No, this is not about second language. It's about whether English medium is used to learn. Dhananath Fernando 38:35 Right. Speaker 1 38:36 That is the issue. They were learning in the English medium in the primary school in Horan area. Then the ministry kept telling them to stop, and they they went to courts, and the court said there's no policy. You go can do a policy. So National Education Commission did a policy. It's out there draft policy. They just the Supreme Court said you know international schools are able to teach in English, while public schools are not. This is you know this is differential treatment, but they just like as if they did not hear that they went. I said no primary schools, it has to be mother tongue, and after that there's bilingual education where some people can some subjects can be taught. So we really the policy is very outdated because the experts said from primary you can do bilingual. At least teach one subject in English, English medium. So, but all these are difficult things. But we have something called ABO, activity-based oral English for schools. So they teach that better if there's a test at the end. We don't have a test at that. So what I'm saying is, you have some national tests for these simple things. Simplify the other exams, you know. Just on charindra chandrasena 39:46 that language thing, doctor. How competent are Sri Lankan teachers at teaching English? Speaker 1 39:54 English, by your experience. No, they are not because they have. These are people who pass the OLA. Does not mean anything that you are, you know. Even if you do A level English, I don't know. But O level English credit doesn't mean anything. But the thing is, we can't wait for the teachers to become competent. English is where we can have apps and lots of technology. Right. Yes. What I'm saying is, if we wait for the all the input to come together, we'll be waiting forever. What we should just focus on the outcome and set the goals on the outcomes we want. So this is something I've been trying to get into, even in the last previous government. They're so used to input. No, no, no. We need more teacher training, better textbooks, everything. So I think change the goals. Dhananath Fernando 40:37 Charlie also want to know from you since you are quite, I mean, converse on this political, I mean, spectrum. Like, how does this education thing, in your view, has taken it on a political ground? Because there's also also politics. No, generally, when a government tries to bring education reform, opposition, whatever, they always generally they are opposing it, and the history subject comes on and off, and every time there's something comes and that's the thing. charindra chandrasena 41:06 That's a sad thing, Dana. That now when I am when we are talking to Doctor Sujata, right? It's a substantive discussion. So she's at odds with the government on what the path forward is, but it's on substantive grounds. She's saying this is the wrong way to go. This is the right way. I would do it. When it gets when it gets minimised to is history compulsory or not? Speaker 1 41:34 Yeah. charindra chandrasena 41:35 I mean, Speaker 1 41:36 absolutely. charindra chandrasena 41:37 I'll tell you. I'll tell you a bigger problem. I have a problem with Sri Lankan history, the way it's taught in schools. Why does history stop in 1980, 1948? Okay, and I think it's still the case when we were in school, right? When the two of us were in school, did you learn anything apart from the fact that Sri Lanka became a republic in 1972? Those little milestones brushed on. Did you learn anything about post-independent Sri Lanka? What an interesting history we have. We've had two assassinations of heads of state, right? Well, the leaders in the their respective times. We've had a civil war, 27-year-old civil war. We've had clashes before that. We've had two insurrections. I mean, this is stuff that we've had. We've had two prime ministers at the same time. This is fascinating history, but it's not being talked about, and I understand the reasons, also practical reasons, because whichever government is in power at the time of formulating that curriculum will, you know, erase the the unfavourable bits. So, but if it's led by independent educationists, I don't see why why we can't. I mean, that's I would have been so interested in history if I without just learning about the kings, right, and the and the and the and the insurrections we did to gain independence, I would have been so much interested. Dhananath Fernando 43:11 No, interesting point. Slightly out of the conversation, but on that point of history, why only particular part being taught? My mentor, Captain Elmo, he was asked to author a book for the for the 100 years of the Air Force, like it's the history of Sri Lankan, like basically you know operating in sky. So in his book, so he had a chapter. So he said this story. So he authored the book, but he did not attend the launch of the book, and he gave the reason I'm telling with all due respect to him. So he said, in when he went through the history, he said I really cannot recall the exact story. There was a gentleman who first got the private plane licence. I think PPP or something was a bus driver. I think from Gampaha or like a bus owner, someone who basically got money and I think wanted to get the licence, and then he had a separate. So he had a story of that, like because if you think charindra chandrasena 44:12 of, if Dhananath Fernando 44:12 I remember right, you know, but someone coming from a very common background, of course, after accumulating wealth, he got the first this private first store one of the one of the private licences. So he had to incorporate that story. Not many people were happy about it because you know it's a and then he had a separate chapter very interestingly for the LDTE Air Force. That was where it became controversial, but his logic was: Look, of course, I do not endorse. I I basically do not agree with what they did. But when you speak about the history of aviation with the minimum resources, they also had a chapter on sky. I mean, I would be unjustifiable. To ignore it, so he said. So as a result, I think they were not happy. But it's under him, but he did not. And I think people wanted to remove that chapter, but because of his pressure, they are finally. But it's a it's an excellent book. But I want to bring out since you mentioned history. I mean, you should have the patience to accept okay the good things that we did, and also to reflect and agree, okay, we did something wrong, and we correct. charindra chandrasena 45:24 Revisionist history and erasure of parts which are inconvenient is terrible. Speaker 1 45:30 There is a reality is also there, but so we can do a timeline, but then we have to develop some learning outcome. I'm always coming to the learning outcomes, right? Design the learning outcomes so that it's more objective, like LTT. You know, just you know, what to sell mechanics of it? How did they do that? So whether it's a good thing or not, then we can have learning outcomes that sort of evaluate that part. So we could do that. And even I Dhananath Fernando 45:56 was recommending in that case, if that the case, you have to have President Rajapaksa in the history book, like oh, you know how that period went through, and to basically show what what has happened, which is important regardless of the political, you know. charindra chandrasena 46:10 Absolutely, I mean you can be pro anything, anti anything, but when you are putting it in the curriculum, it has to be objective. That's what I believe, you know, because now see Germany went on this whole thing of erasing Nazi history or painting it in the worst light imaginable, and now they are having to deal with far right extremism all over again. Speaker 1 46:35 Yeah, that's true. charindra chandrasena 46:36 So you can't suppress history; it'll you know come out at one point. There's a movie called Downfall, which is made in 2004, I think, about Hitler's last few days in that bunker, and the actor who plays it does such a fantastic job, Bruno Ganz, I think his name is, but it also humanises Hitler. It shows Hitler talking to his secretary and his people in a kind manner. People were not happy about that because they wanted to portray Hitler purely as you know, and he was a monster. But like you know, a monster can have these other little things as well. So that's why. So I mean, for me, this history. So coming back to your question, it's sad that it got minimised to history when history, the way it's taught, is not even ideal. Actually, when when what we talk about with doctor is more substantive, you know, you can have faction figures. Speaker 1 47:34 I mean, the history they could have easily explained why they don't have it for the O levels, because you know, I think because no explanation why it's not there, so then it gets reduced. But I think is you know it's is it a all levels? If it's a core subject, core subject is you have to add building blocks. Maybe in history, what we need to do at that level is not add more building blocks, but take the timeline and learn to interpret that, so that you don't need to have exams. So something like that. They should have explained, no explanation, just the list of core subjects. History is not there. charindra chandrasena 48:08 Yeah. Speaker 1 48:09 So people ask him why. There's nobody giving explanation. So I think it should have. charindra chandrasena 48:14 I think you're you're you're you're right in that way because what I actually remember them saying Speaker 1 48:22 is, they. Explanation charindra chandrasena 48:29 is that it's it's an elective, right? It's not a core subject anymore, but Speaker 1 48:34 it's an elective that's not tested at the national level. Yes, but I can give Dhananath Fernando 48:39 your question. I found it more interesting. While you debate on whether history is in the curriculum or not, you first go back and check whether how illustration of history is whether you are teaching the right history. charindra chandrasena 48:52 Are we really? Because I I I don't. I never believe that. Dhananath Fernando 48:55 Because no point arguing whether history is in the curriculum or not when you're already teaching the wrong history. We are charindra chandrasena 49:01 teaching about who we lost the Kerala, right? And yeah, that's important. But aren't these incidents important? SWRs assassination, isn't it? Doesn't it say a lot about? Speaker 1 49:12 And have you looked at the history O level paper? There are about 50 multiple choice questions. Gosh, nobody can answer those. We really have to remember so many facts. So that's why it rewards memories, so actually it is whether we test it at the national level as a competitive national exam or not. Exactly. They should have done an explanation. There's nobody in the. Transcribed by https://otter.ai