Netherlands Antilles: a bold journey.

The Netherlands Antilles consists of a group of five islands in the Caribbean Sea. Two, Curacao and Bonaire, are situated near the coast of Venezuela, and the other three, St. Maarten, St. Eustatius, and Saba, are situated near the United States Virgin Islands. Together with Aruba and the Netherlands, they form the Dutch Kingdom. The Netherlands Antilles was a former colony, and the traditional Antillean culture is based on acculturation of African and European elements. Now, the parliamentary democracy is fully autonomous in internal affairs, operating at two governmental levels: the central government and the island governments.

The Netherlands Antilles has a small economy based on tourism, petroleum trans-shipment, and off-shore finance. Different levels of financial well-being have always been a part of the island's social and economic system. One will see characteristics of a modern well-to-do country as well as a poor one in terms of development.

The Former Education System

For several decades, the Netherlands Antilles education structure has been a traditional system that was organized in the same manner as the Dutch system. Unfortunately, this system was not meeting the needs of the majority: the Papiamentu-speaking population. It was geared toward the most talented students and not based on the cultural background of the Antillean society (Panneflek, 2001). Panneflek notes, "One basic priority was to reform the various levels of the present education system, especially primary education, in order for children to get a better foundation in their early years of schooling" (p. 12).

In the former system, children enrolled in kindergarten at age 4 and stayed for two years. After two years of kindergarten, the 6-year-olds would--unless they manifested problems regarding school readiness--start their primary education. Primary schools were graded systems starting at grade I and continuing through grade 6. After completing more or less eight years of basic education, the children would enter, for two years, the so-called basic secondary education, which was comparable with the middle school concept. The educational objective of this period was to provide pupils a broad-based program, after which students were directed into one of two secondary streams: a vocational one or an academic one. Both streams had several levels and ultimate goals.

Reasons for Change

Many studies over the past decades have typified the education system of the Netherlands Antilles as a non-democratic one, which means that it provided social chances only for those children with a solid social background. Too many children of the primary classes did not benefit in a clear manner from their years in schools. The main problems were:

* A relatively high rate of retention in the primary schools, which is non-conducive to the enhancement of achievement

* A very high referral rate to special needs education

* A very high dropout rate in secondary education

* A relatively small percentage of students in secondary education reaching the academic stream

* Approximately only 40 percent of a cohort leaves the system with a diploma

* There is a shortage of qualified and skilled people

* Education (especially higher education) does not contribute to social and cultural development

* All kinds of expertise and knowledge have to be imported from abroad.

Furthermore, it is known that a great part of the population, with a history of having been colonized for more than two centuries, has yet to cope with issues regarding their own norms, values, and self-identity.

Another issue was the language of instruction in the schools. Papiamentu is the native language in the Leeward Islands, Bonaire, and Curacao, while English predominates on the Windward Islands, St. Maarten, St. Eustatius, and Saba. However, since the Netherlands Antilles is part of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, Dutch is the official language. Academic achievement has long been dependent on speaking Dutch proficiently, but the education system has not met the needs of the majority Papiamentu-speaking population (Panneflek, 2001). The majority of Antillean children were being taught in a language that was foreign to them. Lamp (1999) suggests that the process of teaching a foreign language works best when it is based in the native language in which the students are proficient. Research identified language of instruction as one of the key problems and the root of the poor performance of children in the Antillean school system (Departement van Onderwijs, 1989).

Overall, researchers have concluded that the former education system contributed very little in providing a good and effective labor force for the Netherlands Antilles. The education system was failing children, as too many children left school without a diploma, and thus the region lags behind modern and global societies.

Therefore, in 1998, the government designed an extensive and integrated education plan. The main objective of this plan was to provide the citizens of each island of the Netherlands Antilles with some important values, namely: competency, self-respect, responsibility, and self-regulation. Foundation-based education was the realization of the first part of this education plan.

The New Plan: Foundation-Based Education

In 1999, despite all the economic problems and financial constraints, the minister of education proposed some major changes to the education system, which concerned primary education and lower secondary education. One of the proposed reforms involved implementing an innovative program, called foundation-based education (FBE), at the primary level. FBE constitutes a total restructuring of the primary level, characterized by:

* Integration of kindergarten, primary education, and the first two years of secondary education into one structure of three cycles: Cycle 1 for children 4 to 7, Cycle 2 for children 8 to 11, and Cycle 3 for children 12 to 14

* An uninterrupted learning track, based on developmental learning theories

* Application of developmentally appropriate practices, like mixed-age groupings, integrated curriculum, and authentic assessment 

* Flexible progression, including the elimination of a curriculum-based approach, as well as retention

* Introduction of the native languages of the majority of the population, namely English and Papiamentu.

When designing FBE, the Antillean policymakers did not have one particular education reform in mind. They deliberately wanted to combine all the best practices of innovative schools and assimilate these with the specific needs of the Antillean communities. In addition, in order to ensure uninterrupted development for all children throughout their school career, reformers abolished the 6th-grade school-leaving examination, a component of the former system (Panneflek, 2001).

The objective of FBE was to lay a foundation for the Antillean students, through education, training, and attitude building, that would equip them for participation in the modern Antillean, Caribbean, and global societies. The national education policy aimed at providing all children access to a qualitatively sound education in an equitable and efficient manner. In this way, every Antillean citizen would have equal opportunity to develop fully and to contribute to the economic and social development of society (Student Care Framework, 2004).

The first step was to seek understanding of and support for the new plan. To facilitate the process, an extensive information campaign was implemented. Second, all social partners came together to decide major themes and topics that the FBE curriculum would use as a framework. This effort resulted in a nationwide curriculum of eight educational areas:

* Language, literacy, and communication (native and foreign)

* Mathematics

* Social studies

* Integrated science and technology 

* Health and physical education

* Philosophy of life

* Social-emotional development

* Cultural and artistic development.

For each educational area, work groups, consisting of experts and teachers, formulated standards and goals. Notwithstanding the fact that these standards are mandatory, schools have a great deal of freedom in how and what they teach; the standards were designed to be used as guidelines to ensure that schools will deal with some important issues. Also, the standards were formulated within a child-centered, mixed-age approach rather than a curriculum-centered approach.

Changing Laws

When the design of FBE was "finished," an enormous effort then went into creating the policies necessary for implementation. A very important issue was ensuring that FBE would be supported by legislation. The first draft of a new law, which would change the requirements for primary education, was finished in 2003 and has been submitted to all partners for comments. Now the second draft is almost ready, and this will go to parliament for a vote in the near future. In the meantime, FBE began implementation in August 2002, advancing the approbation in parliament. FBE has to be fully introduced into the schools by 2013.

The Implementation

Extensive planning is critical to implementing the different steps of FBE, including seeking funding and searching for external support for concrete classroom practice--the ultimate goal of FBE. Different contacts with educators abroad had been made and one of these contacts--a visit to the annual summer course for multiage education by Sandra Stone (the first author)--resulted in a long-term trajectory of support for the Ministry of Education of the Antilles. Since 2002, Stone and the National Multiage Institute (located at Northern Arizona University) have been very committed to implementing FBE on all five islands of the Netherlands Antilles.

The first important step undertaken by the National Multiage Institute was to design a framework for the FBE curriculum. This framework is a customized child-centered curriculum that provides guidelines for teachers on how to embed the standards and goals of all the educational areas into developmentally appropriate classroom practices. A second major step was establishing a nationwide "Train-the-Trainer" two-year program, which would generate skilled trainers for FBE practices. With these trainers identified, it was possible to start a teacher-training program on all the islands during 2002-03. Presently, Stone is also involved in monitoring the results of this training in the different classrooms.

Discarding the Old System

Historically, education in the Netherlands Antilles had been very traditional, stemming from a graded, curriculum-centered approach. It had its seeds planted in the late 1700s and early 1800s during the advent of the industrial revolution in Europe and North America, as the world changed from a rural and agricultural society to an urban and industrialized one. As governments everywhere became more involved in education, the manufacturing model (graded system, assembly-line education) was heralded as an "efficient" way to educate children.

A graded system, with its curriculum-centered approach, is defined as a pre-determined curriculum for each grade level. The curriculum is sequenced from grade to grade, so that the tasks become more difficult. The teacher is given the books and curriculum for the grade level he or she will teach.

In an effort to homogenize the group, the old system redirected or retooled the children who were under-performing. This was done through retention, treatment plans, remedial teaching, or testing and making referrals to special education schools. The system also ignored children who already knew what was being taught in a particular grade level. Thus, this pre-determined curriculum only fit some of the children.

In order to implement the new system of a child-centered, mixed-age approach, a distinct and dramatic change in the philosophy of education was necessary--a new belief system. Many educators in the Netherlands Antilles called this a "mind shift." The Netherlands Antilles was getting off of the curriculum-centered "conveyor belt" to implement a child-centered educational approach. In the process, they were becoming artisans, instead of manufacturers, who would attend to the needs of children by respecting their individuality and handling them with personal care.

FBE--A Child-Centered Approach

In the new child-centered system, every Antillean citizen will have an equal opportunity to develop fully. A simple definition of a child-centered approach means that the teacher's approach to instruction is determined by the child's level of development and his corresponding needs. Instead of "fitting the children to the school" and its predetermined curriculum, the school changes its approach and begins "fitting the school to the children," thereby matching the curriculum to the child's needs and giving every child the opportunity to develop fully (Stone, 2004).

The foundation of a child-centered approach is based on current research about how children learn, including developmentally appropriate practices; constructivism, which promotes a process approach to learning (Piaget & Inhelder, 1969); and social learning theory (Bandura, 1977; Vygotsky, 1978), which supports the benefits of mixed-age learning. FBE is not meant to homogenize or make everyone the same so that we can give them the same instruction. We recognize that all children, even children of the same age, are different. In organizing a new education system around mixed ages, we capitalize on the diversity of learners. Social learning theory acknowledges how the diversity of learners provides the richest learning environment in which children can construct their knowledge of the world.

When operating under the FBE system, we can provide rich learning environments by selecting mixed-age and mixed-ability classrooms for each cycle of classes. For example, within the mixed ages of children in Cycle 1 classes (4 years to 7 years) and Cycle 2 classes (8 years to 11 years), there will be a range of special needs children to gifted children. In the traditional graded system, children with special needs were removed from the system through testing. If the tests demonstrated that the children were unable to keep pace with the curriculum needs, the children were removed from the conveyor belt of education, which limited their opportunities for engaging in everyday society.

In the new system, the focus has changed. Adherents to FBE do not focus primarily on the curriculum, but rather consider the child's needs. The teacher is now changing his practices and the daily life of the classroom to fit the needs of all children--even special needs children.

Changing Practices, Changing Schooling

As FBE is implemented, continuous training in how to set up the environment, use the process strategies, and implement portfolio assessment is necessary. The following gives an overview of the knowledge and skills in which foundation-based teachers are being trained in order to implement the new approach.

Learning Environment. The environment in FBE is designed for movement, hands-on learning experiences, cooperative social interaction, choice, autonomous learning, and enjoyment. This environment is carefully planned by the teacher to facilitate children's learning experiences at their own developmental level while increasing opportunities for cross-age learning. Designed around centers, projects, inquiry study, and learning experiences that are open-ended and of children's own choosing, the environment allows children to practice their skills for real reasons and at their own level of understanding. Free choice allows children autonomy and gives them responsibility for their own learning. Children are able to interact cognitively, socially, and emotionally in the rich, mixed-age environment.

Teachers also are learning to establish and manage a pro-social environment, which attends to children's social-emotional and moral needs. One way to contribute to social-emotional and moral development is to allow the child to experience social relationships in meaningful contexts in the environment. Teachers also take time to teach and facilitate social learning and responsibility. Teachers understand that just as children are developing their literacy and math skills, they are also developing socially and morally. Instead of removing a child to a time out, the teacher takes the time to help the child learn how to show empathy and make restitution and experience restoration, thus facilitating the child's development of self-control and interpersonal skills.

Learning Strategies: Whole Group. Learning strategies for whole-group instruction include the following: Shared Reading (Book/Poem), Read Aloud, Modeled Writing, Writers Workshop, Shared Math, and Whole-Group Experiences (e.g., process science and social studies). During whole-group learning strategies, skills are taught in the meaningful context of the process of reading, writing, problem solving, or during whole-group learning experiences in the sciences, social studies, etc.

The teacher opens up an integrated curriculum through whole-group strategies, whereby he embeds broad-based skills. Broad-based skills are ones that vary from simple to complex, and are taught all year long so the children may come into the instruction at precisely their own level and time of understanding. These strategies allow opportunities for children to review as well as accelerate their learning. Children naturally construct greater understanding throughout each year. Because the curriculum is opened up, every child can continue learning and there is no limit to any child's learning. Every child can go as far as he or she can go. Whole-group, broad-based learning strategies allow teachers to meet a wide range of needs.

Learning Strategies: Small Group. Small-group strategies are used to meet the specific needs and interests of children. Such strategies include: Guided Reading, Literature circles, Guided Math, and Guided Experiences (e.g., science, social studies, art).

During small-group or individual instruction, the teacher focuses on the skills individual children need to advance on their own personal continua or bases a grouping on children's interests. Groupings usually include children of mixed ages and are flexible. Children may move from group to group, depending on their needs or interests. Teachers never attach such labels to groups as "high," "medium," or "low" ability, and groups are never formed by age or grade. Each group disbands when its need or interest is met, and then new ones are formed.

Assessment. The teacher uses authentic assessment tools to guide his strategies in order to support each child's continued development. The teacher documents each child's successful growth and places this information in the child's portfolio. The child is not compared with other children or compared to grade-level criteria. The child is never labeled. The goal is not to have every child at the same place at the same time; rather, the goal is for every child to continue learning.

The teacher uses the information he gathers about each child to deliberately help them. Assessments are daily and ongoing and reflect the strengths of each child and help identify the next area of growth. The teacher reports what the child can do through a narrative report card. In a narrative report card, the teacher uses the information gathered in support of the child's growth from the assessment tools in each curricular area to summarize the things a child can do well and then suggests the next step in the child's growth. The next step is viewed as a goal or set of goals. Through the narrative report card, the child is not labeled by a grade or compared to other children. Instead, the child is respected as an individual on his or her own learning continuum.

No Remediation or Retention in FBE

In the former, curriculum-centered, approach, the "remedial teacher" played a key role. If the child did not fit the school curriculum, then the remedial teacher's job was to help the child "catch up," to get the child on grade level, or to "fix the problem." The attitude behind remediation, that of curing or fixing something that is wrong, meant that children were pulled out of classes; consequently, this approach dealt a crushing blow to a child's emotional well-being and discouraged further learning. Neither retention, nor promotion, is part of the FBE structure.

In the new child-centered system, the conveyor belt is removed. FBE now focuses on each child's own learning continuum and helping each child grow and develop on his or her own timetable. There is no need to help a child "catch up" with curriculum. The teacher is now focused on helping every child find success--in this new model, every child does move forward successfully. Thus, the goal of the FBE is to support learning without isolating or labeling any child, and to respect the variance of learning and treat the differences as natural and normal.

FBE Becomes a Reality

By March 2005, many teachers from the Netherlands Antilles could be observed using the new FBE system. For several years, the FBE trainers organized workshops on their respective islands, worked one-on-one with teachers, and provided continual feedback to teachers about the FBE environment, strategies, and assessment tools. The trainers encouraged the teachers, giving them time and support to take the steps to adapt to the new system. Many teachers expressed how the new system changed who they were as teachers and how FBE represented a positive change for the children.

Teachers not only knew how to implement the new system, they also embraced and understood the theory behind FBE. One teacher, proudly explaining a learning strategy, said, "Let me tell you the theory about this. The strategy is scaffolding the children to their next levels of development." Another teacher said, "The theory is that children are on their own level of development." Children were not being compared to other children or to benchmarks or grade levels any more.

The teachers were excited and energized by the new approach and about what their children could do. They celebrated the children's successes on all levels. One teacher exclaimed, "I like the results!" Another teacher said, "The children like helping each other and they are proud of themselves." Other comments from teachers included: "The children come to school with pleasure," "They help each other," "They give you ideas and you go with their questions, so it is more interesting for them," and "They are very far in their thinking." A trainer commented, "The teachers believe in what they are doing."

On this visit, one could see mixed-age children (classes for 4- to 6-year-olds, and classes for 5- to 7-year olds) working at centers of their own choosing, independently engaged in open-ended learning experiences instead of tasks or assignments. One teacher remarked at how independent the children were becoming. She said, "If they can do it by themselves, why should I do it for them?"

Teachers developed themes for an integrated curriculum approach, using strategies with learning plans, such as Shared Book, Modeled Writing, and Guided Math, instead of lesson plans, and documenting growth and development through such authentic assessment tools as conferencing, anecdotal records, and running records. Individual portfolios were used in every classroom and displayed artifacts of each child's growth within the curriculum framework. Narrative report cards were utilized along with the portfolio. The teachers were excited to share the progress children were making in all areas, including social development.

One teacher commented on a recent portfolio conference with a parent and his child. She showed the father the growth his child had made and celebrated his successes. With tears streaming down his face, the father remarked, "This is the first time I have come to school and have heard anything good about my child!"

Another teacher enthusiastically demonstrated the Modeled Writing strategy; children clapped and supported each other as they participated. After the children wrote their own stories in their journals, the teacher conferenced with each child, noting the good things each child was doing and then scaffolding one or two appropriate teaching points. One child happily shared her own writing in the native language of Papiamentu!

Strong evidence existed of cross-age learning in the mixed-age groupings. For example, as a special needs child was working at a writing center, a girl who was playing at a nearby home center came over to help him. She demonstrated an attitude of helpfulness, not one of competition or an "I know more than you" attitude. Another older child worked with a younger child, putting together a very difficult puzzle. Both were proud of the results. Children were informally learning, while caring for and supporting each other.

The teachers created many materials, such as Big Books, in their native language. It was also quite clear that teachers were transforming themselves. Just as they were encouraging the children to take risks, they were taking risks and creating and inventing their own ideas based on the child-centered, mixed-age philosophy. The teachers were experiencing the freedom to be professional, making decisions and using their own strengths and interests. One of the trainers responded, "The teachers are doing their own thing because they understand it." Thanks to all of the hard work of all participants in FBE, the journey has begun!

A Bold Journey:

A Future of Promise and Challenge

FBE is a huge innovative effort for the schools in the Netherlands Antilles. For many reasons, it is a big step as teachers begin to understand the new philosophy of education innovation, and then to change to the new kinds of practices that FBE demands. Of course, the implementation of FBE in schools throughout the Netherlands Antilles will not proceed without problems and challenges. However, as Panneflek (2001) says, "The Netherlands Antilles is conscious of the fact that there is no turning back; it is do or die" (p. 12).

References

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Departement van Onderwijs. (1989). Ensenansa pa un i tur: Een visie op het toekomstige onderwijsbeleid: Vol. 1. Analyse en aanzet [Education for one and all: A vision on the future educational policy: Vol. 1. Analysis and onset]. Curacao, Netherlands Antilles: Author.

Lamp, S. (1999, 17 April). Geen dag meer wachten met Papiamentu--Interview. Napa: Amigoe Weekendbijlage, p. 1.

Panneflek, A. (2001). Antillean education: Quo vaddis? Willemstad, Curagao: Departement van Onderwijs, Netherlands Antilles.

Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1969). The psychology of the child. New York: Basic Books.

Stone, S.J. (2004). Creating the multiage classroom (2nd ed.). Tucson, AZ: Good Year Books.

Student Care Framework (2004). Willemstad, Curacao: Departement van Onderwijs, Netherlands Antilles.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Sandra J. Stone is Professor and Founder and Director of the National Multiage Institute at Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff. Richard Delfina is Project Manager, Federal Bureau of Innovation, Curacao, Netherlands Antilles.