School

Classes here in Rwanda are very, very different from classes at home. Aside from the expected lack of technology, the style of teaching and of learning is very different, as are the associated attitudes.

The typical classroom is quite large; I would guess roughly 50 students though I am terrible at making such estimates. Students are required to wear uniforms, mid-calf skirts for girls and long shorts or pants for boys, usually with a button-up shirt. By North American standards most of the classrooms are very poorly equipped – containing hand-made wooden desks with attached bench seats (students often pack three of themselves onto these benches in a manner that would, I think, be uncomfortably close for any Canadian), a larger equally wooden bureau for the teacher (who continues to move from class to class through the end of secondary school) and large blackboards at the front. Classrooms are generally unadorned, with no pictures, tables or other learning materials on the walls.

The style of teaching is almost uniformly that of a lecture, with the teacher speaking on the subject at the front of the room and writing corresponding notes on the blackboard. Most teachers, especially those who teach sciences, wear lab coats to class for their lectures. There is little consideration of different learning styles and only a few exercises given at the end of each class. Classes are both less and more interactive than those in Canada. There are fewer “toys” or other objects for the students to learn with, fewer demonstrations and models, but many simple questions are asked of the students as the lecture proceeds. To be a kinesthetic learner or to be dyslexic in one of these classes would be incredibly difficult due to the lack of consideration and versatility in teaching styles.

The students are responsible for cleaning the board for the teacher and one student who serves as classroom manager is responsible for having a supply of chalk for the teacher and also of attempting to maintain order in the class – mostly by banging on the desk or hissing to quiet students down. Generally, there are far fewer discipline issues in these classes than in Canadian ones, students don’t act out aggressively or even actively challenge authority. What the teacher says is taken as fact. While the students still seem to learn quite a lot this makes for two huge disparities relative to students in Canada, at least so far as I am able to perceive. Firstly, students are not well equipped to think critically, about just about anything. To be fair I’m not sure how much critical thinking I learned in public school or if most of it came from university, but it is clear that nothing the teacher says in questioned and students are not encouraged to criticize information and ask why as much as students in Canada. Second, students almost completely and totally lack creativity. When I asked the students in the girls school to write something using the pictures of Canada as inspiration I got almost exclusively descriptions of what they saw in the pictures and perhaps a few very reasonable inferences. My encouragements to write a story, to “make something up about the man who lives in the lighthouse” were pretty much completely ignored. Even explaining that so long as they used English they could not possibly be wrong didn’t help. Students are concerned with having the correct answer and little else, and the nature of the schools encourages this pattern of thought.

As negative as this sounds, students tend to approach learning with an eagerness and tenacity distinctly lacking in nearly all their Canadian counterparts. Students generally pay close attention in class and take incredibly neat and complete notes. When a question is asked of the class students are eager to answer, nearly all of them raising their hands, calling quietly “me, teacher!” and making snapping noises with their fingers in hopes of being chosen to answer the question. The opportunity to write the answer on the board rather than simply reply orally only increases the collective excitement to demonstrate knowledge. Equally impressive is the tendency of students to be able answer questions on material taught only a day or two before, implying that studies are taken quite seriously by most and that students consider themselves as primarily responsible for their own learning.

Part of me suspects the eagerness to learn stems at least partly in the fact that education is not a given in Rwanda. Recently the government has said that each child has a right to seven years of primary education and, if I recall correctly, has made the first four of these years free (and I have been told that 90 to 95% of children now enroll in/complete these four years), but the fact remains that basic education in Rwanda has a cost which many families are unable to bear. Thus education is a privilege. I cannot say for certain that all students understand or are lead to believe this but it seems that they must realize at some point during their education that being able to attend classes rather than being required stay at home or to try and earn money makes them the fortunate ones.

The obvious question at the end of all this might be “how do we improve the quality of education in Rwanda (and Africa) and ensure that it reaches more children?” And that is indeed a valid and important question, one for which many individuals, governments and NGOs (millennium development goals, anyone?) are working to find a solution. Nonetheless, the question that keeps nagging and saddening me is “how do we get children and youth in North America to understand, appreciate and not squander the incredible gift they are given in universal public education?”