Debra Li

debra_lidan@163.com

IN an official response to address local parents’ concerns that the cancellation of “after-school study sessions” at public schools may negatively impact their children’s academic performance, Shenzhen’s education authorities said at the end of December that such sessions are contrary to the national guidelines of the “double reduction” policy aimed at alleviating the learning burden on first- to ninth-grade students and therefore should not continue.

Nevertheless, discussions with my neighbor’s eighth-grade daughter shed light on a perspective that challenges the assumption that canceling these sessions reduces the burden of learning. Instead, the cancellation may exacerbate the education gap between social classes. For students like my neighbor’s daughter, who have a quiet space at home, educated parents to assist with learning, and access to online resources, the absence of after-school sessions does not significantly burden their study routines, although sitting among diligently working peers might have gotten them better motivated and helped them concentrate. However, for less privileged students, studying at home becomes a challenge, often within crowded or noisy environments where obtaining help or focusing becomes arduous. These kids may indeed take a hit from the deprivation of a classroom setting in the evening, where they could have studied in peace and asked better-performing classmates for help.

While some argue that junior high school students could benefit from more leisure time in the context of “double reduction,” the reality is that these students face a substantial academic workload with the looming specter of highly competitive senior high school entrance exams. The cancellation of after-school sessions does not necessarily liberate these students from at-home study; rather, it potentially deprives them of a conducive learning environment.

In fact, the after-school study sessions at most schools had previously been voluntarily organized by parents, with students attending out of their own will. Not every class in the public school in our neighborhood had such a session, where parents took turns to look after the kids. If less than 20 students were willing to participate, there would be no such arrangements, according to my neighbor’s kid. Some parents chose to let their kids sit in the sessions because they were very busy and couldn’t return home early, and thought of the school setting with other parents as overseers as a safe environment.

Although the ideal vision of “double reduction” aims to provide students with more time for physical activity and pursuing individual interests, senior high school entrance exams continue to heavily emphasize book knowledge. Thus, the current assessment criteria for student admission remain rooted in traditional academics rather than holistic development.

In education, prioritizing the wellbeing and equal opportunities for all children remains paramount. Tailoring teaching programs to accommodate different student needs, fostering fairness and preventing schools from becoming restrictive environments for students of varying abilities and from varying backgrounds, should be central to education policies.

Therefore, it’s better to let students themselves decide whether an after-school study session is what they want, than to ban them across all public schools. In the meantime, we have to keep in mind the bigger picture: Success should not be solely measured by academic achievement. Nurturing a child’s character, physical wellbeing, resilience in the face of challenges, and the courage to confront setbacks are the true markers of an effective education.

(The author is a Features editor of Shenzhen Daily.)