“Lebanon Debate”
In light of the controversy over the Ministry of Education’s decision to hold official exams this year, objections are mounting from educational authorities and families who consider that the security, psychological, and living conditions imposed by war and displacement do not allow for an educational entitlement of this magnitude to be undertaken normally.
Between the Ministry of Education’s adherence to holding exams, and some political forces considering that continuing them constitutes a “message of steadfastness,” questions arise about the extent to which the reality of students and families is taken into account, and the reality of the educational sector’s readiness in the affected areas.
In this context, Lama Al-Taweel, head of the Union of Parent Committees in Private Schools, said in an interview with “Lebanon Debate” that, at the beginning of the war, they supported holding official exams, but the course of the war, its expansion, and the high numbers of displaced people and students in shelter centers prompted them to think about alternative options.
She explained that the Ministry of Education was linking the fate of the Lebanese certificate to foreign certificates, especially the French certificate and the IB certificate, considering that after the cancellation of these exams in Lebanon and the region, it was possible to adopt a similar mechanism in Lebanon.
She added that there is a “clear insistence” from the Minister of Education on holding exams, considering that the decision is not only up to the ministry, but also to the positions of partisan educational offices, especially in the environments most affected by the war, which considered holding exams “a form of resistance.”
Al-Taweel believed that no one took into account the psychological and economic conditions of the families, nor the reality of the students, a large number of whom were unable to continue their education normally, despite the educational plans that were put in place during the crisis. She wondered about the effectiveness of these plans and the accuracy of the numbers presented about the rates of curriculum completion.
She added: “If these numbers are correct, then let the statistics be published transparently, and let the schools that have completed their programs actually be revealed, because the reality on the ground is different, and distance education has not been as effective as desired.”
She stressed that their basic position was based on the necessity of first ensuring that the required educational competencies have been reached by students before taking official exams, considering that any additional security escalation may make holding exams practically impossible, regardless of official decisions.
Al-Taweel also criticized the position of some teachers and educational associations, saying that she agreed to hold the exams but linked her participation to meeting financial demands, which made the livelihood issue a priority at the expense of the psychological and security conditions of the students.
She added that “the demands made by teachers were always reflected in the families,” noting that the committees associated with official examinations benefit from financial allowances and allocations linked to external funding, which, as she put it, leads them to insist on holding examinations to justify the disbursement of these funds and grants allocated to the educational sector.
