Every year the date for the reopening of schools is known well in advance. The long July-August holiday is also fixed. There should therefore be no surprise when thousands of children turn up at school at the beginning of September. Yet, year after year, some schools reopen with leaking roofs, unfinished repairs, inadequate furniture and classrooms that are not fit to receive children.
This is an indictment of the Ministry of Education. It is not a failure which can be laid only at the feet of the present minister, Sonia Parag. Her predecessors must also accept responsibility because this problem has persisted under successive ministers and governments. The names at the top have changed, but the excuses and disruption have remained much the same.
Ahead of this year’s reopening, the Ministry said that detailed checks were being carried out to ensure that schools were fully prepared. Minister Parag chaired a meeting with other ministers, senior education officials, Regional Executive Officers and Regional Education Officers. The gathering reviewed what the Ministry described as a detailed “facility checklist”. Parent-teacher associations were also supposed to have been consulted.
Despite all of those meetings and checklists, the first day of school brought familiar complaints. At North West Secondary, some classrooms reportedly had no basic furniture and others leaked. At Port Kaituma Secondary, approximately 200 Grade Seven students were reportedly without classrooms and were temporarily accommodated at the Fitzburg ball field. At Santa Rosa Primary, two Grade Three classes reportedly lacked desks or tables for the children, as well as other essential furniture.
Construction was still taking place at Airy Hall Nursery, forcing arrangements to relocate pupils temporarily. Work was also continuing at Mackenzie High School and another facility in Linden. The Minister said approximately 98 per cent of schools had reopened and that there was “nothing to be alarmed about”.
At Zeeburg Secondary, the eastern wing—comprising approximately ten classrooms—had to be evacuated over safety concerns, forcing students, including those in Grades Seven and Eight, into a shift system while the Ministry awaited an inspection by a structural engineer.
That response is not good enough. A school can be officially counted as open while its children have no desks, sit under a leaking roof or are placed in a space never intended to be a classroom. The percentage of schools with open gates tells only part of the story. The real test is whether every child has entered a safe, clean and properly furnished place in which teaching can begin.
For some children, particularly those entering nursery, primary or secondary school for the first time, the opening day is already difficult. They are leaving familiar surroundings, meeting new teachers and classmates and trying to adjust to a different routine. An unfinished, crowded or poorly furnished building adds anxiety to that transition. It may affect their ability to settle down, pay attention and learn. It also sends them an unfortunate message about the value the state places on their education.
The Ministry has said that maintenance must continue throughout the year because toilets break, roofs leak and door handles become damaged. That is plainly true. No reasonable person expects every building to remain in perfect condition at all times. But routine maintenance is different from allowing a new term to begin without classrooms, desks, chairs or completed repairs. The former is unavoidable; the latter points to poor planning, weak supervision or contractors who are not being held to their deadlines.
In January 2025, the reopening of several Linden schools was again delayed by unfinished repairs.
After so many years, the Ministry cannot continue to present the same problems as unexpected “hiccups”. It should by now have a dependable system for inspecting schools early, identifying the work required, awarding contracts in time and ensuring completion well before reopening. Regional officials must be required to certify the condition of every school, and those reports should be checked rather than accepted without question.
Guyanese are well known for leaving preparations until the last minute. It cannot be accepted as the operating culture of the Ministry of Education. Schools are not private homes being prepared for a holiday. They are public institutions responsible for the safety and development of the nation’s children.
The education sector received $183.6 billion this year. With that level of spending, there is no defensible reason for children to begin the term without the most basic facilities. The Ministry must publish a full list of schools where work was incomplete at reopening, explain why deadlines were missed and state when each problem will be corrected. Contractors who fail without good reason should face penalties, while officials who falsely certify schools as ready must be held accountable.
The first day of school should mark an orderly beginning, not the start of another scramble to finish work that should already have been done. Guyana’s children deserve better than annual apologies, temporary arrangements and requests for patience. Their education is too important for last-minute preparation.
Discussion