Since the creation of CEGEPs, from time to time, we question both the form and the content of general education. When the criticism does not come from the leaders of the network, it emanates from other actors who see it as a source of major problems to be corrected (Didier Delsart, “Le cégep en state de mort morte”, The duty, December 29, 2022). We are particularly targeting French-literature and philosophy courses. Before accusing and rushing into the solution box, let’s take the time to examine the situation.
The great difficulty many have in expressing themselves correctly in writing is indeed an obvious fact. Spelling errors and syntactical and grammatical errors are almost all violations of elementary rules which should have been assimilated to primary and secondary education.
Literacy problems are also evident. There is not even a question here of difficulties in grasping the meaning of an extract from the Discourse on Method, but to simply understand a newspaper article. Should we therefore review the formula of French-literature and philosophy courses in order to remedy these shortcomings?
First, it would lead to the belief that writing and text comprehension problems are exclusive to these courses. However, this is a cross-cutting problem, noted both by teachers in general education and by those in specific education.
Students struggle just as much, or almost, to read scientific texts and write technical specifications as they do to read a novel and write a dissertation. If it is necessary, for the sake of fairness and academic success, to lighten the requirements in general education for a good part of the students, then it would be necessary, to be consistent, to do the same in the other subjects, which would amount to leveling from the bottom.
Then, it would be tackling the problem by the end rather than by the beginning. When a person enters CEGEP for the first time, he has already spent twelve years of his life on the school benches. Normally, she should have sufficient command of French to tackle more advanced content, whether philosophical, scientific or technical.
Core mission
Would reviewing the content taught, the teaching and assessment methods and, even, separating the students according to their mastery of the language and their cultural background, solve the problem? We can doubt it, if only because it is probably too late to react. Unless, of course, succeeding is simply synonymous with passing the course at all costs.
Moreover, adapting philosophy and French-literature courses according to linguistic skills and the level of general knowledge, or even according to the study program, is a more than dubious proposition. First, it would reproduce the deplorable reality of the multi-speed education system, since there would be stimulating and enriched classes (and most likely more motivated teachers) for the lucky ones who have previously gone to the private sector or who have followed a program specific to the public; for the others, watered down content and simplified requirements, and consequently, a devalued diploma.
Remember that here, luck often rhymes with better off and more educated parents. Compartmentalizing and hierarchizing students would thus run counter to a fundamental mission of general education, which is to train in a spirit of solidarity and equality.
beyond the walls
Second, to limit the more in-depth courses to students in restricted programs, such as the natural sciences, would be to consider that students in other programs are less interested and less apt to think. However, the experience of any teacher shows that there are serious and curious students in many other fields, and that the best students on paper, some of whom only have their R rating, are not necessarily the best students in class, those who feed the lessons with their thoughts and questions.
What can we say, finally, about this eternal reproach addressed to the sequence of courses and authors, which is based on the very history of thought, which characterizes general education in French-speaking colleges? Would it be too restrictive for teachers and too unattractive for students? Nothing could be further from the truth, since given the large number of themes and authors likely to be covered for each of the major periods visited and the professionalism of the teaching staff, everyone can give a particular and interesting flavor to their course.
In recent years, the pandemic has amplified phenomena that have already been present for a long time and which increasingly go beyond the various actors in the school environment. To suggest that French-literature and philosophy courses in their current format are the source of motivation, success and even justice problems at college is to find ideal scapegoats for deep-seated problems whose the causes sometimes lie beyond the walls of the schools.