Studies suggest that designing an education system that classifies children at an age and on the basis of their success is unfair.

Germany’s 4+6+2 formula for compulsory education system was unfair. This is why they have been introducing a series of amendments to the system since 2000. Similarly, the 4+4+4 formula of Turkey will be unfair. The education system of a country should not condemn the children of poor parents to being poor as well. This is what Germany’s system did. Let’s say it out loud: studies suggest that designing an education system that classifies children at an early age and on the basis of their success is unfair. Besides, it harms the equal opportunity principle. This is how we must read the education reforms Germany has been introducing since 2000. I believe that the reform efforts of Germany are meaningful for Turkey as well. If you are wondering, please read on.

Three types of schools
For details on Germany’s education system, you can assess a study by TEPAV economist Ali Sökmen on TEPAV’s web site. Today, I want to stress some points to begin with.

First is that Germany has a twelve-year compulsory education system. Second is that the system is not uninterrupted, but gradual. The formula they use is not 4+4+4, but 4+6+2. Their system also separates children at early ages. There are three types of schools in Germany, for different levels of school performance. The lowest performing students are enrolled in the Hauptschule at an early age and from the very beginning lose the chance to go to university. The core principle of Germany’s education system is to ensure that unsuccessful students do not get in the way of the successful ones, not to support the least successful. Therefore, they are severely differentiating among children. This is what I see.

Third is that 35 percent of German students attend the Hauptschule, whereas the rate of Turkish Germans who go to this loser school is 75 percent. For the top-grade school Gymnasium, the ratios are 34 percent and 8 percent, respectively. Why? Turkish Germans come from poor households and they start primary school without sufficient knowledge of German because their native language is different.

Germany decided to reform the system following the shock that came with the PISA results in 2000. Having performed worse than the OECD average stirred Germany to action. What did they do? They designed a quality-control mechanism for schools, tried to prevent the classification of children at an early age, opened additional German courses for migrant students, expanded kindergarten opportunities and increased the length of education from half-day to full-day. As a result, the PISA reading scores among migrant students increased substantially in 2009.

Now, let me give some evidence to show why the German example is relevant for Turkey. First, the PISA scores of Turkish students who live in Germany were worse than the score of those who live in Turkey, which was an unexpected result for me. Those willing to learn how students whose native language is different from the education language  perform at school must scrutinize Germany’s PISA scores. It would be useful for Turkey to focus on the education language/native language issue with a non-political approach. This is the first point that must be discussed in Turkey. Second, child poverty in Turkey is two times the OECD average. In OECD countries, 12 percent of the total child population live in poor families. The ratio for Turkey is 24 percent. Those children are Turkey’s future. Turkey’s economy can be strong only if they are raised well. The failure of children at an early age should not be taken for granted. They must be given the chance to be more successful. The way to do this is to not to classify them in education at an early age. Germany having low PISA scores is evidence of that. The third point follows from the first two: If the native language of poor children is different from the education language, the trouble doubles for them. Turkey must not leave anyone behind. No one must start the race at a disadvantage.

The 4+4+4 formula needs to be considered with an open mind. When designing the education system, it is wisdom, not political rationales, that should be prioritized.

This commentary was published in Radikal daily on 09.03.2012.