Abstract
Government schools in Abu Dhabi, as part of wide-scale educational reforms undertaken in the whole of the United Arab Emirates, have undergone massive school improvement developments over the past seven years. Over the course of these years, the reality of student life for those in government schools has been widely altered. This research explores Abu Dhabi government secondary school students’ perceptions of the school improvements, and whether these are influencing their ideas about what it means to be a teacher today. Perceptions of Emirati students were compared to those of non-Emirati students. A total of 471 students were surveyed in order to answer the questions: what are their perceptions of the educational reform in Abu Dhabi and what are the implications of these to teacher recruitment?
A brief background to the educational reform in Abu Dhabi
The UAE is still a relatively ‘young’ country which has developed rapidly since the discovery of oil reserves in the 1960s. Educational expertise was provided by Kuwait and Egypt in the 1950s and 1960s, in the form of educational salaries for teachers, school supplies, curricula and indeed teachers (Davidson, 2008).
Five decades later, in 2006, implementation of an ambitious reform agenda began in Abu Dhabi, the largest emirate in the UAE (Macpherson, Kachelhoffer, & El Nemr, 2007). A Public Private Partnership (PPP) began, which involved school improvement via in-school advising beginning in some primary schools in 2006, middle schools in 2007 and secondary schools from 2008. The remit of these educational advisers was to provide professional development to schools with a view to improving pedagogy and encouraging best practices in the classroom such as student-centred learning. This was in contrast to the ‘teacher dominated, heavily transmitted teaching styles which were commonplace in schools until that time’ (Shaw, Badri, & Hukul, 1995, p. 12). In 2009, Abu Dhabi Educational Council (ADEC) rolled out a 10-year strategic plan, which included, amongst other things, students performing above international averages in public schools, and plans to ‘standardise curriculum, pedagogy, resources and support across all ADEC school types’, ‘develop Arabic and English language abilities, critical thinking skills, and cultural and national identity through the consistent use of rigorous learning outcomes and pedagogy’ (ADEC New School Model Documentation, 2009, p. 2). The curriculum was adopted and adapted from that used in New South Wales, Australia. So, by 2009, the educational world which secondary school students were a part of was one consisting of a completely new curriculum for Maths and English, with English being taught by mainly Western English Medium Teachers (EMTs). Science teachers, although still adhering to the ministry curriculum, were being encouraged by PPP advisers to try out new pedagogies and strategies. In 2010, for example, a new science inquiry skills assessment was introduced in Grades 10 and 11.
It is critical that in this rapid period of educational development in the UAE, the perceptions and experiences of potential teachers (e.g. secondary school students) are examined and taken into account, particularly Emirati students in the current climate of prioritizing Emiratization. Abu Dhabi Educational Council often publicly reiterate their commitment and prioritizing of recruitment of Emirati teachers, emphasizing that Emirati staff members are the best to understand the local environment and culture and hence the presence of national teachers is key to developing the emirate’s educational system.
To fulfil this, the perceptions of Emirati students making career decisions have to be seriously considered. Appreciating the scale of the educational reform and the significance of the resulting influx of Western educators has to be placed within the context of a country in which only around 10 percent of the population are nationals (UAE National Bureau of Statistics, 2010), who often struggle to maintain their culture and heritage in the midst of their 90 percent expatriate nation. Crabtree (2010) recorded comments from university students about cultural influences in the UAE such as ‘I don’t want to enforce one culture over the others like what’s happening now! You can clearly see the American way of living is spreading and taking over other cultures’ and ‘our new generation is very westernized and the elderly hate it . . . if this keeps on going we will forget our past and culture’ (pp. 91–92). With this in mind, we approach some of the students’ responses with the dual lens of the reform’s effect on potential teacher-training candidates, and its perceived effect on their culture.
The speed with which the reforms took place meant that communication about the school improvements may have been less than ideal between ADEC and schools, between school administration and teachers, and between teachers, students and their parents. Yet, communication in any organization, as indicated by DuBrin (2004) is essential as it makes people feel they are recognized. DuBrin noted that ‘changes are mostly rejected by people if they are not made to understand the benefits of this change’ (p. 26). This research looks at the students’ perceptions of the school improvements, their sources of information about the reform and whether these factors have had an influence on their perceptions of the teaching profession and consideration of taking up the profession themselves.
Methodology
Participants
The research was conducted by means of a survey administered to Grade 12 (final year) students in government secondary schools in Abu Dhabi. The schools were selected due in part to their geographical proximity to one another, and to the researcher. They are all dedicated Grade 10–12 schools. The number of participants was 471 students in total, all female students. All Grade 12 students who were present in class on the day of the survey were asked to take part. Government schools in the UAE are gender-segregated and both Emirati and non-Emirati Arab students may attend. It was decided for this particular study to focus on female secondary schools because of the lens through which the perceptions are being viewed, that is, on how school improvement may impact upon students becoming teachers later on, and since it is widely observed in the UAE that very few, if any, males graduate from secondary school and enter teacher-training programs (Dickson & Le Roux, 2012). Their views on educational reform are of course important and will be explored in a separate article.
Data collection tool
The research adopted a mixed methods approach, using a survey questionnaire to gather both quantitative and qualitative data. The survey questions were designed to generate quantitative data about the students’ career plans, their opinions on the reform in general, the sources of their information about the reform, and specific questions regarding teaching as a possible career choice. The opinion item was built upon a two point dichotomous scale, selected to generate very broad comparisons (Newby, 2010). Additionally, each section of the survey gave opportunity for further explanation or elaboration in the form of qualitative statements too. Since the Emirati students’ responses were of particular interest as potential candidates for teacher-training courses in federal universities, their responses are separated, but the experience of both Emirati and non-Emirati students as ’expert witnesses’ (Rudduck & Flutter, 2000) of the school improvements are very important.
The survey questions themselves were piloted to two Emirati first-year college students who checked and advised on the clarity of the questions. It was rationalized that these students, only a year older than the Grade 12 participants, and only recently graduated from high school themselves, were a good choice of candidate to do this. The survey was also shared with two other pre-viewers, both of whom were academics with interest and experience in the area. Their feedback was gathered on the relevance and suitability of the questions. Adjustments were made on the basis of this feedback to increase the reliability of the survey and ensure that we were gathering appropriate data for address of the research question. Survey administrators were requested to mark the number of students present in the class at the time of administration; only some did so. However, of those who did, a survey return rate of between 96 and 100 percent was recorded (number of completed surveys from those students present divided by the number of students present).
The qualitative data which arose from the questionnaires was organized at the first level according to the original framework set up in the questions; participants having given consideration to teaching as a career path, or not. Within these categories, main codes were identified which were then modified and revised based on additional re-reading. The responses of those who would not consider teaching were coded according to emerging themes, antipathy towards the teaching profession being one of these. Perceptions of the educational reform were in-vivo codes which arose as a result of this analysis, and a second level of sub-coding took place then as a result of emergent in-vivo codes. Although the author was working alone in this research, the coding underwent a process of blind inter-coder reliability checking in consultation with an academic colleague who shared an interest in this field.
The specific research questions were as follows:
What are the students’ career plans, and what percentage of both Emirati and non-Emirati student groups plan to pursue a career in teaching upon graduation? What reasons do they give for doing, or not doing, so?
What are the main sources of the students’ information about school improvement developments?
What part, if any, do these developments play in their perceptions of teaching a career choice?
Findings
As seen in Table 1, the most popular specified career choices for both Emirati and non-Emirati student groups were engineering and medicine. Eight percent of Emirati students said that they planned to go on to higher education, but were not specific about which subjects they would study. Non-Emirati students chose a far greater diversity of careers and were less likely to give no response. Thirty percent of the Emirati students and 14 percent gave no response to this question, which was a little surprising, especially given the availability of the ‘don’t know’ response. One possible explanation for this may be that the student did not at that time have plans for further study or work. The UAE is a fairly traditional society which still holds family and women’s role in the home in very high esteem, as numerous authors have attested to (e.g. Al-Mutawah, 2005; Bristol-Rhys, 2010; Joseph, 2002). It may be that the students who gave no response have no plans to work due to pressure from their family, or due to plans for marriage and children: 17 or 18, the approximate age of girls leaving high school, is not considered an excessively young age to be married in the UAE.
Students’ career plans upon leaving school.
Only 3 percent of Emirati and 3 percent of non-Emirati students said they planned to become a teacher. This seems a remarkably low figure, given that the same number of Emirati students said they wanted to become tour-guides (in Table 1 under ‘Other’). The students were then asked whether or not they had given serious consideration to teaching as a career option (data not presented in the table): 10 percent of Emirati (15 students) and 9 percent of non-Emirati students (29 students) said that they had. This provided a useful framework for the categorical separation of the students’ responses, in other words, a separate examination of the responses from those students who gave consideration to the teaching profession, to those who did not. For those who had considered the profession, what was their motivation for this? For those who had not considered the profession, why not?
Students who had given consideration to, or had chosen a career in, teaching
The additional qualitative statements from students who expressed an interest in becoming a teacher focused mainly on themes such as:
- Teaching as a noble profession which shapes young learners, and raises new generations, such as ‘Yes, because I think that education is the basis for the development of society the learner and the teacher’ and ‘I want to raise a new generation characterized by moral and virtues, then I will be proud.’
- The importance of developing their country and playing a part in the changes in the education system, such as ‘I want to be a teacher to help develop the country’ and ‘my teachers are role-models as Emiratis’ (note that these comments were only observed in the Emirati students’ responses). The response of the Emirati students concerning ‘developing their country’ reflect a patriotism and desire to contribute to their country and possibly to their developing education system.
- That teaching is an intrinsically ‘good’ career choice from a moral and religious point of view, one which teaches ‘patience and good deeds’, and one ‘which was sanctioned by our Prophet Mohammed, peace be upon him’.
Students who had not given any consideration to a career in teaching
The responses of the students who answered that no, they had no interest in becoming a teacher, explained their reasons, which broadly followed two themes, the first being that teaching is a difficult and unappreciated job. A perception shared by both Emirati and non-Emirati students was that teaching is a tiring, difficult job, with little appreciation or reward, making comments such as: ‘Hard job, which needs a lot of effort!’, ‘it gives you a headache and we see how teachers suffer’, and ‘I see that the teachers are under pressure and they don’t have time to live their personal and social life but before I knew that I wanted to be a teacher’. They lamented over what they perceived as a lack of appreciation about the job: ‘Teaching is a hard job, not appreciated, not socially nor financially’, and ‘The teacher is not being appreciated in his society.’ Certainly, seasoned teachers would probably agree that teaching is indeed hard work, but there is no sense of balance of the equally present rewards in the students’ comments here.
The second broad theme concerns a perception that recent developments in education as part of the reform have discouraged them. The students’ personal experience of the reform had begun in 2007, when advisers entered middle schools. Although the advisors were mainly involved mentoring and training their teachers, as opposed to being directly involved with the students, no doubt their influence was felt as the teachers began to try out new methodologies and teaching styles. By the time the students reached secondary school, which in the UAE usually goes from Grades 10–12, they were taught by English Medium teachers in English language classes, and their science and maths teachers were very likely to have been advised on pedagogy and curriculum implementation by in-school advisory personnel.
The responses fell into six main sub-themes, as follows:
- Many students felt that the change of curriculum was too quick and hurried: ‘It’s too hard to finish the curriculum in the assigned time and because of the sudden changes too much pressure is put on the teacher and the student to finish a certain material that needs more time’, ‘they should start changes with the grade 1 and gradually, not suddenly’ and ‘the changes were surprising!’
- Some directly critiqued the presence of the PPP companies in the schools: ‘Teaching is no longer good with the company partnerships’, ‘This partnership should stop!’ and ‘The companies are overwhelming the teachers with a lot of tasks in order to change their teaching styles’. Note the use of the word ‘overwhelming’. There was a sense that some of the students were perceiving the school reforms as an interference, an external takeover with comments such as: ‘No more PPP – get rid of all the PPP and only Arabs should teach English’ and ‘the companies are controlling the teachers completely. I don’t like to be a teacher because these days they are not respected!’, ‘It’s a hard job especially when other countries interfere in the education system, and the education system is now unstable and hectic.’ The vehemence towards the PPP companies was interesting, particularly since their involvement with the students would have been indirect, and may be an indication of students’ frustration at being challenged by new teaching strategies, which they perceived (probably correctly) as being as a result of the company advisers’ influence on their teachers.
- A large number of students voiced opinions about what they perceived as the negative effects of increased use, and prioritizing of English language in schools on their culture and heritage, such as: ‘Using English language is a problem and making it more important than other subjects especially Arabic’, ‘We started forgetting our Arabic language and we are depending more on the English language’. Some felt very strongly that this was in conflict with their religion, such as ‘now, teaching is directed towards English language while the prophet is an Arab, and advised we should learn in Arabic and not English’.
- Many responses related to a fear of losing their culture, or of possible influences from Western staff brought in as a result of the reforms, such as: ‘Westerners who were brought to schools, some of them are not suitable and should not be here because of their culture and mentality which totally differs from ours, we only benefitted from some of them by learning English’ and ‘We are against Westerners because the girls started behaving like them’. Some articulated a perceived discrepancy between the way that Western and Arab staff were being treated: ‘It doesn’t encourage us [to be teachers], because we see that you are unfair in dealing with the Arabs compared with the Westerners, in spite of the fact that they are in the same role’. An Emirati student made a plea: ‘Please take care of the Emiratis more than the Westerners and give them priorities!’ Only Emirati students made comments such as the latter, on what they perceived to be a favoured treatment of Western staff over Emirati staff. Non-Emirati students, on the other hand, did not complain about having Western staff in schools, possibly because they do not perceive the same threat to their national heritage and culture.
- The students were vocal about disliking the new school timings which had lengthened the day by approximately one hour, such as ‘teaching now has long hours and this is not suitable – our academic achievement will not be up to standard’, ‘long working hours are putting pressure on the students and teachers – please we don’t want them’. In 2009 the UAE had taken part in (and performed relatively poorly in) the international testing system PISA (Programme for International Students Assessment) (Walker, 2011). The working day in secondary schools was lengthened by approximately an hour in 2009, in order to bring them more in line with countries who performed better in PISA. The recently introduced trimester system was also perceived negatively by the students.
- Specific responses were made concerning science in particular and new teaching strategies such as inquiry-based learning, for example: ‘They should get rid of the POGIL and investigating and develop the scientific curriculum in Arabic and prepare the students very well in physics and chemistry.’
The references to POGIL in science, which is an acronym for Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning, are significant, partly because the responses are so negative. It is a strategy which is used to allow students to self-guide independently through science inquiry, in a process-oriented manner. It is a new strategy for secondary schools in the UAE, as is science inquiry in general, and one which is a very definite move away from a teacher-centred, instructivist approach to teaching, and towards the student-centred learning which ADEC favours and promotes. Some success in the use of strategies such as POGIL in Abu Dhabi has been observed (e.g. Al Awadh, 2012), however it seems that for some students, the move has been too much of a challenge, as they perceive it. It may have been seen as being a little too abstract and removed from textbook learning. These are also strategies which are known to push students into higher-level critical thinking or thinking ‘outside of the box’ for which there may be no fixed answer, which makes some students, particularly those who were performing extremely well under the previous system, uncomfortable. The new focus on an interactive, constructivist approach to teaching is met with scepticism by some, for example, ‘The new system is not good – more pressure on the students, teachers are asking students to do more tasks, we are wasting our time with activities and games which are not beneficial. The teachers made things rosy, but when we go home to study we realize we know nothing about what is in the book.’ ‘Activities and games’ aside, this student still relies on her book for definitive learning.
The multiple references to the perception of changes being hurried are worth discussing briefly. While ADEC’s New School Model was being implemented starting from Grade 1, and each grade per year thereafter, there was a simultaneous development in the high school taking place without the same progression. By 2009, Grade 12 students were being taught by English Medium teachers from mainly Western countries, which was later was to spread to the lower grades too. Prior to this, their experience of the reform had been indirect, via their teachers’ adaptations (if they made them) based on their advisers’ training and suggestions. It may have come as a surprise then, to return after a summer and find themselves in a class with a teacher from a radically different culture to their own without much warning. This may have exacerbated the feelings we have seen expressed earlier – that their culture is being adversely affected by the presence of Western staff recruited as a result of the educational reforms.
These responses were in explanation of why they did not want to become teachers, and some students made the explicit link between their feelings about the school improvements and their feelings about teaching, such as: ‘from what I see now, I hate teaching’, ‘the new curriculum does not encourage us to be teachers!’ and ‘I wouldn’t be a teacher, because of the pressure on the teachers, and the decisions which make us hate teaching.’ Only two of the responses were partly positive: ‘I like the changes but they are hectic and tiring’ and ‘The ideas for the changes might be good, but you should start with the students in 1st grade, otherwise the changes will be negative.’ One of the student responded in an apparently protective manner: ‘Don’t overwhelm the teachers!’
The students were asked simply to agree or disagree with the statements shown in Table 2, with a score of 2 assigned to ‘agree’, and 1 assigned to ‘disagree’. So, the closer the mean score is to 2, the higher their agreement with the statement. The top two scores of means of answers, for both Emirati and non-Emirati students, were for the statements ‘teachers are under a lot of pressure these days’ and ‘I dislike the current climate of constant change in education’. It may be that both of these can be linked to the low numbers of students choosing teaching as a profession. The lowest of the means relates to happiness about the developments from ADEC, which would support this theory. There was a fairly high agreement (1.71) that maths and science should be taught in Arabic and this triangulates the qualitative responses. The responses of the Emirati versus non-Emirati students were analysed for likeness using the student’s t-test (two-tailed, unpaired) for each statement regarding students’ perceptions of the reform (also Table 2). This was carried out based on a hypothesis that the Emirati students may have stronger convictions about the reform, since one might imagine they have more investment in the education system of their own country, and it would be interesting to ascertain this, particularly for the culture-related statements. In fact, there were no statistically significant differences between Emirati and non-Emirati students’ responses, though the means of questions concerned teaching addressing Emirati culture and traditions enough, and valuing Emirati teachers were lower for non-Emiratis than for Emirati students. It is not clear why this would be when one might expect the opposite to be true, but can perhaps be explained by the fact that many non-Emirati students have resided with their parents in the UAE since birth and feel a large allegiance to the country.
Students’ perceptions of the educational reform.
The students were asked quantitatively whether they and other young people felt encouraged, discouraged, or unaffected by the events of the educational reform to become a teacher. Only 7 percent of students said they and other young people felt encouraged to teach by the events of the educational reform, 26 percent said it was making no difference, and 67 percent said they were being discouraged from being a teacher by what they saw of the reform. These figures should be placed within the context of the low considerations for teaching as a career (10% Emirati, 9% non-Emirati). Obviously, regardless of claiming to feel discouraged by the reforms, many of these students would not have entered teaching for other reasons, such as a lack of interest in the profession and an interest in another. The question is hypothetical, however, and gives an indication of the students’ sentiments. Even in a country not undergoing dramatic educational reform, some amount of negativity or comments such as teaching being tiring, hard work, like the ones which we have seen, would be found – but as many of the additional comments were related to educational reform, it seems fair to say that some students are vocal about this because they are dissatisfied, and perhaps from that we can extrapolate that some (even if only a small number) of them have indeed been discouraged from teaching by what they see of the reforms.
The percentages presented in Table 3 gives us a picture of the communication channels the students’ information about the educational reforms is coming from. The students were asked to select any of the five given means of communication, and they were able to select more than one option, since obviously they may have experienced multiple means of communications. The percentage figures are based on the ratio of those who selected that option, to the total number of respondents to the question overall. Most information comes from their own experience (80%), therefore within their own school level (secondary). Sixty-eight percent of the students said that they had found out about the reform by overhearing their teachers’ conversations at school. This is almost the same percentage as those who learned through media such as newspapers or the internet, which suggests that the manner in which students are learning about the reform are less than ideal.
The communication means by which Grade 12 students are learning about the educational reform.
This also tells us that teachers themselves are having a large influence on students’ perceptions about the reform in a way which may not necessarily be healthy or constructive. This idea may link with some of the earlier qualitative responses, such as ‘we see from teachers what a headache it [teaching] is’, and the references to their teachers being under pressure and overwhelmed by school improvements. Might it be that students are not only seeing, but hearing from teachers ‘what a headache it is’?
Discussion
It would appear that much work needs to be done in order to improve students’ perceptions of the teaching profession, and of the educational reforms taking place. That maths and science are taught in English seemed to be a contentious topic for students, with numerous qualitative comments relating to this. They voiced fears about loss of the Arabic language and culture as part of the reforms too. ADEC is a relatively new organization, only established in earnest at the onset of the reform, meaning that there may not yet be a full trust in the decision-makers, so a natural first reaction may be to resist (Lunenburg, 2010).
Easterby-Smith, Thorpe, and Rowe (2003, p. 19) discuss how ‘leaders and managers of change may allow people who oppose change to express their views on the proposed change indicating potential problems and giving suggestions on their modifications’. The resistance to change that we see verbalized in this study, though, is not one which the students (or even school teachers at the time, for that matter) were at liberty to express their views on or give suggestions for modifications; they do not have a formal outlet for these views, which may be why the uptake of this survey was so high and the number of additional optional responses so high too. The fact that the survey return rate, where it was able to be recorded, was between 96 and 100 percent, is a indication that these students wanted their voices to be heard and were passionate about sharing their view on the reforms. There are other possible explanations, too, such as the students having been educated within a traditional hierarchical system with significant power imbalances, suggesting that compliance may be a factor, for completion of the quantitative questions. However, given the richness of the qualitative responses, and the passion in the voices of the students in some of these responses, it seems unlikely that this was a major contributing factor.
Greater empowerment through involvement may be a future direction for ADEC to move towards to ensure greater harmony and reduced reform resistance, thus indirectly maybe recruiting more Emirati students into teacher-training institutions. Godwin (2006) postulates that the UAE government has a responsibility to ensure Emiratis, as a minority cultural group, are given opportunities to participate in the economic endeavours. Education plays a large part in these endeavours, and students need to feel part of the educational developments if they are to participate in the prosperity and see the reforms in a more positive light.
The importance of involving the ‘expert witnesses’
It is important to give students a voice when evaluating initiatives because ‘engaging students in improvement initiatives through a partnership approach may encourage students to ‘‘buy into’’ initiatives and cooperate more fully in achieving the proposal outcomes’ (Scanlon, 2012, p. 186). Scanlon also writes that ‘to enhance the chances of successful introduction and implementation of school improvement measures which have [school] culture implications it is necessary to include all stakeholders’, however, ‘students as key stakeholders are frequently excluded from consultative process’ (p. 188). In this Australian study, all of the students commented on the lack of prior consultation of the student body, and their resulting alienation or dissatisfaction, making comments such as: ‘why didn’t they ask me?’ and to the effect that the change managers had not canvassed their opinions.
Comparison of these Australian students’ responses with those of the students in our UAE study brings up a critical point. As seen earlier, both Emirati and non-Emirati students voiced their dissatisfaction over aspects of the reform, sometimes in a heated, passionate and even aggressive manner. However, not one of the 471 students surveyed gave a qualitative response to the effect that they personally should have been consulted before the reform began, or that their views should have been canvassed by the body making the changes (in this case, ADEC). Why would that be? Why would the students voice their dissatisfaction so differently from the Australian students? The answer may lie in powerful cultural and sociological heritage reasons. In the 1960s the famous sociologist Geert Hofstede developed the ‘Power Distance Index’ (PDI), a measure which characterizes the extent to which people are concerned with attitudes towards hierarchy, and how much a particular culture values and respects authority (Hofstede, 1980). The higher this index is, the more emphasis is placed on the social or power differential between people or body members, and the more subordinate one is expected to be towards their superior. Australia has a medium–low PDI of 38, suggesting that in theory, an Australian ‘subordinate’ such as a school student would have little trouble in questioning or challenging their manager or decision-making body. However, the UAE, and other Arab countries, some of where the other non-Emirati expatriate students in this study originate (e.g. Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iraq, Libya and Lebanon), at 80 have more than double the PDI of Australia and are prime examples of countries with high power-distance cultures. This may explain why the idea that the students should have been consulted does not seem to occur to them, coupled by the fact that there is no history in the UAE educational system of such a consultation process occurring. However, this does not mean it should not have taken place – students can, and should, be consulted and involved in the reform initiative even if they have not thought of this by themselves and even if they might need to be gently led towards that empowered step.
The literature is full of examples of the positive and far-reaching consequences of taking up such a step. Mitra (2003) reports that ‘through increasing ‘‘student voice’’ in schools, students have the potential for contributing their opinions on a variety of levels, including sharing their views on problems and potential solutions in their schools’ (p. 289). Increasing student voice has been found to improve student attainment, especially when the voices are involved or consulted on changes concerning pedagogy or curriculum (Rudduck & Flutter, 2000). These ideas suggest that our students, given the plethora of comments regarding instructional medium change to English language, possibly, with greater consultation and input, may have accepted the changes more readily. Their collective tone in their comments regarding the length of the school day, for example, appears to be one of disillusionment and disbelief. Again, perhaps this could have been alleviated with consultation which also explained the reasons behind initiatives. Given the poor means of communication discussed earlier, perhaps the reasons are not well understood by the students. Obviously, if people have not been made aware of the reasons (and indeed, as described in the literature review, the necessity) of changes to a system, they are going to be much less likely to embrace the changes. This may have improved the receptiveness of the students.
Even for those who made the most negative comments, there may be hope. A school improvement program in Canada found that ‘students who had been sullen and unreachable became some of the most passionate participants in the school reform process once they became involved’ (Earl & Lee, 2000, in Mitra, 2003, p. 290). Referring once more to Mitra’s study (2003), she reports that the students who were members of the school’s forum, a student body who had been given considerable consulting power, were able to serve as 1) classroom experts offering feedback to teachers about new pedagogical strategies and materials, 2) gap-bridgers between student and teacher perspective by offering the students’ viewpoint during teacher professional development training and meetings, and 3) provide a means to keep teachers focused on who they are making changes for – the students themselves. Mitra closes her article by reminding us that ‘change does not happen in a vacuum. Rather, organizational context can enable or hamper change efforts’ (p. 302).
These are findings which ADEC cannot afford to overlook. Student involvement could take place in schools at a microcosmic level, and as part of student forum represented in ADEC at a macrocosmic level. In order to overturn the apparent student dissatisfaction, a new culture of involving and consulting students must be effected. Outside of schools, it would be feasible to set up working parties of students representing the main student bodies of schools in Abu Dhabi, who could meet at council level once a month, say, be briefed by members as to impending developments (including the reasons behind them), and be given opportunity to offer their opinions and suggestions. These student representatives, in turn, would return to their schools and debrief on what they have learned. This whole cycle would increase the level of involvement and empowerment of students, possibly improving student satisfaction and co-operation with the reforms.
Conclusion
This study illuminates some real issues concerning secondary students’ disillusionment with the reform taking place in Abu Dhabi in the UAE. In some cases, they expressed anger at the presence of Western staff in schools, at the curriculum and pedagogy changes, and with other logistical changes such as the lengthened hours of the school day. There may a link between this dissatisfaction, which was very direct at times, and the assertion that the reforms themselves have discouraged young people from considering or choosing teaching as a profession. No statistically significant difference in the answers to survey questions relating to perceptions of the reform between Emirati and non-Emirati students were observed. It seemed that both student groups were equally vocal about their feelings of frustration and what some perceived as being a ‘takeover’. Only 3 percent of the 471 students whom we surveyed said that they planned to become teachers upon graduation from high school. Much work needs to be done to communicate more effectively with the students, since apparently they receive almost as much of their information about the reform from overhearing teachers’ conversations at schools, as from newspapers and other media forms. We have suggested that consulting and involving students, who are after all the key stakeholders and ‘expert witnesses’ in the educational reform taking place, may go a long way towards overturning some of these views.
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Abu Dhabi Educational Council for granting permission to survey the students in this study. I’m grateful to the principals of the schools, the management advisers of those schools who facilitated the administration of the surveys, and of course to the students who took the time to complete the survey questionnaires. I am indebted to Ms Hanadi Kadbey for her reading of drafts of this article and critique of the survey questions, and equally indebted to her, Mr Ayman Al Zadjali and Ms Dilnaz Fattah for their support with translation and administration. Finally, I am very thankful to the anonymous reviewers of this article for their thoughtful and helpful feedback.