Columns

• Sustainable education reform requires adequate stakeholder consultation and national consensus

The need for education reform to meet the complex demands of the 21st century has been the consistent cry over the years among educationists and other concerned segments of society. The current government’s educational reform programme, signals an attempt to shift away from the legacy of an examination-driven, content-heavy system. The consensus on the necessity of reform is widespread, yet the path to sustainable transformation is fraught with structural, political, and philosophical challenges, many of which echo the difficulties faced by past administrations.

The core of any reform must endeavour to seek a delicate balance: producing employable graduates who can fuel economic revival while simultaneously fostering thoughtful, ethicalcitizens committed to character building and societal betterment.  

The fundamental question —what kind of citizens do we hope to produce?—is central to the current debate. While the most visible driver for change is the urgent need to address the glaring mismatch between educational output and labourmarket demands (evidenced by the small percentage of students entering higher education and the large pool of youth without employable credentials), the discourse correctly points out that education’s purpose cannot be reduced to economic language alone.

Any reform framework must therefore have a dual purpose.

Firstly to produce a workforce that is productive, innovative, and informed, capable of navigating emerging global priorities like Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Climate Change. This involves a shift from rote learning to critical thinking.

Secondly there must be a moral purpose which will ensure value-based education and result in a system that facilitates the “full flowering of the human personality,” emphasising values, character building, and the development of good citizens with civic consciousness. This is seen as essential for preventing social deterioration and enhancing the quality of community life.

This emphasis on creating “thoughtful citizens” alongside “skilled workers” is a crucial philosophical leap. A lasting transformation requires embedding this dual goal into every level of the system.

The current reform effort is encountering significant hurdles, many of which are characteristic of Sri Lanka’s history with educational policy.

The most pressing challenge, as highlighted by critics, is the perception of a top-down planning approach with insufficient consultation. The necessity for national consensus is vital for sustainability; reforms must be able to withstand changes in government.

Historically, educational policies in Sri Lanka have suffered from a lack of continuity, with political regimes frequently introducing and then abandoning initiatives. The often un-planned  or inadequately planned policy changes of the past has been a major inhibitor of long-term progress.

The current effort too has attracted criticism from stakeholders, including teacher unions, educationists, and parents, who have voiced discontent over being excluded from the core decision-making process. The call for a comprehensive White Paper and broad public dialogue is indicative of a perceived deficit in transparency and participatory planning. Without buy-in from teachers and local administrators, who are the ultimate implementers, even the best-designed policies are destined to fail.

The proposed changes to the school hours and period lengths exemplify the failure to have adequate consultation. Experienced teachers would argue that increasing the period length from 40 minutes to 50 minutes may test students’ attention spans to the maximum, particularly for younger children, contradicting the goal of moving towards a more engaging, critical-thinking-focused pedagogy. This specific criticism is a proxy for the broader issue: a failure to adequately harness the experience and knowledge of key implementers—the teachers—in designing practical classroom strategies.

Sri Lanka’s recent economic crisis has also severely strained public finances, directly impacting the education sector.

Meaningful reforms require increased State expenditure to fund teacher training, improve infrastructure, and procure necessary technology. Critics note the policy framework is silent on securing new financial resources, leading to fears that the state will not adequately finance the recommendations.

The education system is characterised by wide disparities between well-resourced urban schools and under-resourced schools in rural and plantation sectors. Any reform, if implemented selectively or without targeted resource allocation, risks widening this gap, contradicting the constitutional right to equal access to education. Past policies, such as the competitive Grade 5 scholarship exam, have unintentionally intensified competition and pressure, further fueling this inequality.

The deep-seated societal reliance on a high-stakes, examination-based credentialing system represents a cultural barrier to reform.

For decades, the system has prioritised high marks in public examinations (GCE O/L, A/L) as the sole gateway to social mobility and higher education. This has created a massive private tuition industry and ingrained rote learning in students, parents, and teachers alike. Changing the curriculum to promote critical thinking and project-based assessment requires a fundamental cultural shift in how success is measured, a change that is notoriously difficult to achieve. The heavy focus on exams also causes significant mental pressure on students from a young age.

Any education reform programme must simultaneously enhance employability and cultivate character and citizenship. The move to prioritise critical thinking over rote memorisation is commendable and long overdue. However, to ensure these reforms are sustainable and effective, the government must move past the initial laudable intention and address the critical lessons of the past.

The key to success in any process of education reform lies therefore in transforming the endeavour into a national project built on genuine consensus. This requires

1.  Moving from awareness briefings to meaningful, bottom-up consultation with teachers, administrators, and educationists to refine practical policies, like the new timetable, based on classroom realities.

2.  Earmarking and securing adequate public funding for infrastructure, technology, and—most critically—the professional development and empowerment of teachers.

3.  Prioritising equity by implementing measures that actively reduce the disparity between schools, ensuring the benefits of reform reach the most marginalised communities first.

If the reforms fail to secure national ownership and are perceived as another top-down mandate, they risk joining the long line of short-lived educational interventions. Sri Lanka’s future, depends on creating a generation of critical thinkers,not mere examinees. This will require both political will and a collectivesocietal effort.

(javidyusuf@gmail.com)