Today, the Ministry of Education and the Educational Center celebrate the general framework of the curriculum development project amidst widespread criticism among educators regarding the readiness of public schools, transparency in funding, and the distribution of roles within the higher committee, according to "Al-Akhbar." The Ministry and the Educational Center are preemptively marking the end of 2022 with a ceremony held today at the Grand Serail to announce the national framework for the educational curricula, set for revision after 25 years since their establishment in 1997.
This is not the first time a celebration has marked the launch of an educational curriculum development workshop in Lebanon with funds from the World Bank. The ministry, during the tenure of former Minister Akram Chehayeb, along with the center led by its former president Nada Awijan, announced in January 2020, in the presence of high-ranking officials and representatives from international funding organizations, the commencement of work on interactive curricula, which unfortunately did not materialize. This announcement came after the center, as the body in charge of curricula since 2016, had undergone intensive workshops in this field.
Every time a new minister takes office, the word "launch" for the development workshop is repeated, yet no serious steps have been taken to put things on the right track. Will this new document, in its fifth version, be a serious introduction for the development wheel to start turning, or will it meet the same fate as previous initiatives?
### Educational Confessionalism
The production of the framework is at least coinciding with a wave of wide-ranging criticism regarding its content among educators, coupled with complaints about the "secrecy" surrounding it and the exclusion of the Educational Center staff from its preparation. They learned about the final version by chance without any discussions with them about the details, yet they were all invited to the "Grand Serail celebration" to bless it. However, sources from within the center expressed surprise, considering that the academic authority was represented in the planning committee that worked on the four versions of the framework, and it coordinated the drafting committee when modifying the final version, providing reports and comments regarding all versions to the various committees.
Moreover, numerous questions surfaced on the eve of the celebration: Are we developing the curricula to utilize a loan from the World Bank, or based on actual needs? Are we truly ready for such a step that requires agreed-upon educational staff to complete the national educational project rather than a confessional one, which has manifested in the selection of members of the higher curricula committee that includes representatives from all political and sectarian parties? What kind of curricula are we dealing with for a "destroyed" public school that has lost 25% of its students who migrated to private schools, similar losses of teachers who have opted to emigrate, while the rest endure harsh conditions that prevent them from reaching classrooms? Is this environment suitable for producing quality education, or do we just want to reopen public schools at any cost and however it may be?
Sources from the center justify the diverse representation by stating that curricula are a national concern, and there should be careful representation of all components in the higher curricula committee, which the Minister of Education has dubbed “educational confessionalism.”
### Funding Issues
The funds spent on the "framework" have been a point of contention in the past period, especially since they fall under loans and grants, meaning debts upon the Lebanese people who are expected to care about the financial allocations for the curriculum development project. The total amount disbursed to date and the details of expenditures remain unclear. When we asked the head of the Educational Center, Hiam Isak, about the expenditures so far, she merely stated, “The project’s finances are tied to clear expenditure mechanisms under the oversight of funding entities and the ministry, based on the operational mechanisms of the center, which sends reports to the Ministry of Education, and funds are spent based on the needs and approved projects.”
In reality, no one knows what is being spent under the table; however, it is publicly announced that each of the nine planning committee members receives 75 US dollars "fresh" for each meeting held, with a limit of 10 meetings per month. The same applies to the curricula coordination team, which includes around 13 individuals, among them three employees from the educational center and three from the Ministry of Education. Interestingly, the project leaders state that these amounts are the minimum any expert would earn from any organization working with international institutions.
Efforts are underway to form ten new academic committees that will determine, according to Isak, “the criteria and conditions required for candidates working on the curriculum development project and their fees through a page that will be opened soon on the center's website, which will be accessible to everyone. Anyone who wants to work with us and has the qualifications and meets the criteria is welcome.” When asked if the funder imposes specific deadlines for completing the work, Isak responds: “We define work criteria for specialists, and there are no imposed deadlines, but the donations have been available for several years, and the delays we've encountered compel us to work at a rapid pace. It is natural for a project of this magnitude and importance to take time to produce in a country that hasn’t changed its curricula for 25 years, and it is expected to face resistance to this change.”
Is Lebanon ready for this step? Isak seems convinced that “we need curriculum development now more than ever, as we cannot maintain outdated curricula that have been scaled back multiple times due to circumstances, resulting in significant educational loss. We desperately need development, and the opportunity today is ripe. There is no better body than the Educational Center to undertake this work. If we stop this endeavor, we do not know in what year we will return to develop our curricula.”
### Key Components of the National Curriculum Framework
What does the national curriculum framework include? What are the main criticisms? What expectations lie ahead? The framework, as Isak states, serves as a basic reference for preparing curricula for pre-university education, outlining the vision of what kind of learner and teacher we aim for, while adopting a competency-based approach designed to build both transversal skills and specific competencies related to knowledge areas and essential knowledge for the 21st century.
Regarding the time taken to prepare the framework through its five drafts, Isak indicates that work began in January 2022 but faced delays due to various reasons. Criticisms and feedbacks were addressed, and she expressed the belief that a project of this size and significance will require time to produce in a country that hasn't amended its curricula for 25 years, and it is natural for such change to encounter resistance.
In reality, the framework has elicited mixed reactions; objecting educators found that the framework fails to address key questions that should be included in curricula, such as what subjects will be taught and how they will be taught. What knowledge areas are represented in the framework? Will the subjects remain independent, and what about transversal skills and how will they be translated into curricula? Will the number of subjects remain extensive (e.g., 16 subjects in the first secondary grade)? How will assessments and the nature of exams be structured? Is the intention for the framework to be loose enough to allow private schools to do as they please? Why has the legal aspect been overlooked when discussing the social image of women, without clearly mentioning equality and non-discrimination in laws? What about spiritual development competency? Do we need to re-legitimize alignments, after we had removed the religion subject from the curricula back in 1997?
According to sources from the center, the answers to these questions should be clarified in the ten academic papers to be drafted by the new committees, as it is not feasible to detail everything in the general framework, which functions as an umbrella for the curricula. On the other hand, other educators believe that what has been achieved is the best possible outcome given the politically and economically challenging circumstances, as transversal competencies were defined independent of the subjects, such as communication, cooperation, health, media, and digital literacy.
According to these advocates, the framework identifies the family as a fundamental point concerning the roles of men and women and their integration, with fairness and equity mentioned multiple times within the framework. Furthermore, they emphasize a basic national justification, as a complete and indisputable section focuses on the state’s role in ensuring citizenship, rather than sectarian and clientelist gateways. For them, state-sanctioned religious education on common ground is preferable to leaving it to the whims of private educational institutions, as it is undeniable that religious education exists currently.
