The curriculum and syllabi operational in Rwandan schools today were conceived and developed in keeping with the national obligation to introduce competency-based education as stipulated in the EDPRS II document. Competency-based education is an instructional system in which a performance-based learning process is used and the learner demonstrates their level of skills attainment in any subject-area even beyond vocational and science subjects that normally require practical skills. The new subject syllabuses based on this system involves a pedagogical paradigm shift towards developing skills in the teaching-learning process where the approach is through activities that include, but not limited to, oral questioning, quizzes, discussions, debates, role play, presentations, projects, practical work, assignments and field visits. This approach builds in learners new knowledge through discovery and some research-based learning. They acquire soft and transferable skills like critical thinking, creativity and innovation, research and problem-solving, and communication, and so on. The review process took two-years and was set in motion by the Minister of Education on November 11, 2013. On April 23, 2015 the Minister of Education then officially launched both the new curriculum and all accompanying subject syllabuses. Such a comprehensive review of the curriculum would not have been possible if it had not been blessed and sanctioned by the country’s top leadership and supported fully by the ministry of education. Indeed, it benefitted from advice and input from policy makers including the Office of the President, the Prime Minister’s Office and Ministers of Education. It was also supported by a wide range of views from a cross section of local and overseas educationists and experienced professional consultants under the guidance of high level policy makers. The consultation passed through a bottom-up approach process. Views of parents, teachers, and a large sample of students from most of the schools were collected. They were also gathered from local administration and opinion leaders, the private sector and from national institutions such as Unity and Reconciliation Commission, National Itorero Commission and the labour market as well as from stakeholders in local and international organizations. National subject syllabuses that resulted from the review were developed through collaboration between regional and international best practices and innovations from credible institutions and from some syllabuses from countries in the region and beyond. The review and curriculum that developed from it were therefore the product of a shared responsibility and ownership, and represent the collective achievement of all those involved, which practically means most Rwandans. One can, of course, take issue with the slow pace of implementation of the competency-based curriculum. But that would be to ignore certain realities that inevitably had a slowing-down effect and other inefficiencies in the delivery of the curriculum. For instance, teachers had to be trained in the new pedagogical approach. Class sizes had to be reduced to create time and space for teachers to assess learners, give them individual attention and enable activity-based and collaborative learning. It was also necessary to give time to learners to reflect on knowledge and skills developed at the end of each unit of learning and to do research Reduction of class size meant the construction of new classrooms and hiring of more teachers. Also required was building and equipping science laboratories, setting up libraries and stocking them with books, and digitising the essential components of the different subject content. The inspectorate should have been retrained so that monitoring and evaluation, and advice to schools should be done according to the competency based approach. Curricula do get reviewed and changed as we noted in the previous article but only for very compelling reasons. The practice in most parts of the world is to undertake this exercise only after the existing curriculum has been in operation for at least ten years. We have gone just over halfway. Any review now should take into account several factors. First, it should bear in mind that it took considerable professional input from reputable individuals and organisations to arrive at the number of subjects and appropriateness of their content and the balance of subjects and the number of instructional hours or periods. Second, and very important, it should take into account the serious implications such a change could have on Rwandan education, including likely decline in standards. One negative implication in increasing the number of subjects and teaching hours is overload. In the article referred to above we noted its effect on learners. It also affects teachers and impacts negatively on their levels of satisfaction in the profession and deprives them of their sense of agency by leaving no room for their own creativity. They feel pressured to teach everything in an overloaded curriculum, which may lead them to teach a shallow version of the curriculum or to leave out what cannot be covered in school instruction time (Bray, 2011[69]). Let us illustrate overload on Rwandan learners and teachers by comparing the three main systems operating in Rwanda: the national curriculum, Cambridge and International Baccalaureate (IB), and other countries in the region In the Rwanda national system, the proposed changes would have a student take nine principal subjects at A-Level, which translates into 1350 hours. There would be an additional five subjects of compulsory co-curricular activities. In comparison, the number of teaching hours for three A- Level principal subjects for those offering the Cambridge syllabus is 360 hours or 540 periods for the two years. For the International Baccalaureate the number is 360 hours for high level subjects and 150 hours for standard level which makes it 390 hours or 585 periods of 40 minutes. At lower secondary level in Rwanda, the subjects will be 16 or 1365 hours. This does not include three compulsory co-curricular subjects and four remedial lessons. These subjects are very many compared to standards elsewhere where they do not exceed eight subjects per learner. For example, the International General Certificate of Secondary Education (IGCSE) offered by Cambridge requires six subjects. The International Baccalaureate offered at this level also requires six subjects. Three East African Community countries require eight subjects. However, the East African Community’s proposal for a new curriculum had recommended 13 core subjects and one elective or optional subject because of Rwanda with four compulsory language subjects and other compulsory subjects like entrepreneurship, computer science and religion. The time and subject allocation in these other systems provides time and space for learners and teachers to fulfil all other obligations required by the school system. In contrast what is proposed in Rwanda creates a heavy burden on both learners and teachers, and on the system as a whole. Another negative implication is wasteful investment in terms of teaching and learning materials like syllabuses, teachers’ manuals and textbooks distributed in all schools at all levels that would have to be withdrawn and replaced because they are no longer appropriate. That would cost a huge amount of money. Already, translation of textbooks for lower primary school resulting from the change of the medium of instruction from Kinyarwanda to English is being classified as wasteful expenditure. A third one is that teachers would lack mastery of content and appropriate teaching approach as it keeps changing. It takes time for the teachers to adapt. The abrupt change of the curriculum creates instability in the learning and teaching processes such that the standard of education becomes retrogressive rather than progressive. It is therefore necessary to approach any such changes with extreme caution.
