I have spent a great deal of time recently searching for a fair and objective analysis that unpacks the dimensions of the crisis surrounding Arabic language exams and identity-related subjects in international schools, and that captures the scope of the controversy surrounding them, but in the public sphere I found nothing but superficial squabbles, preconceived biases, and petty score-settling—and the matter has even escalated to strange class-based accusations and challenges that have nothing to do with the essence of the educational process.
No one has had the courage to hold everyone accountable for their true responsibilities and to assess the reality of the situation as it is.
Out of a sense of national and professional responsibility, I am writing today what my conscience dictates regarding sudden decisions—decisions that, by political and educational logic, require deliberation, an examination of their underlying motives, and an assessment of their societal implications before being implemented, no matter how glamorous or “appealing” they may seem to the decision-maker. This discussion is not merely an observation of the crisis, but a serious call for calm, rational reflection.
- The “Educational Justice” Dilemma in Imposing Identity
To begin with, we must emphasize certain non-negotiable principles: Teaching the Arabic language and subjects related to national identity is an inherent sovereign right of the state to protect the sensibilities of its citizens. However, the real crisis lies not in the “principle,” but in the “mechanism”—how do we implement this right? And how do we implement it in accordance with the concept of comprehensive “educational justice”? This is the strategic question that should have been the subject of careful study, rather than the adoption of measures that have caused widespread tension and public outrage throughout the entire system.
The lack of coordination presents us with a strange paradox: administratively and operationally, the Ministry of Education is supposed to exercise strict oversight over the teaching and implementation of these subjects starting in the first grade of elementary school.
However, for some reason—dating back decades—this role has been absent; and due to the nature and differences among international educational systems, these subjects have been sidelined and have not been given their rightful place in the curriculum. The Ministry has been and remains aware of this gap but has failed to implement radical solutions or hold those responsible accountable over the course of many years.
- The Mystery of Certification Exams and “Retroactive” Passing
This institutional laxity has naturally led to a decline in international school students’ enthusiasm for these subjects—students who are already under pressure from exams and strict international requirements imposed by foreign accrediting bodies.
Nevertheless, the Ministry has annually been responsible for setting and grading the certification exams (for middle and high school) on its own. This raises a legitimate question: How did thousands of students pass these subjects in previous years?
The answer presents us with two and only two hypotheses: Either international school students—with the help of their families and teachers—were making an extraordinary, superhuman effort to bridge the gap of past years in a single academic term—an effort that deserves gratitude and support, not punishment and prosecution (while acknowledging that certain failure rates and the need for a second semester are normal).
Or, there are other practices and abuses that we are all aware of but choose to remain silent about.
Instead of using its regulatory tools to standardize and regulate class schedules within those schools and require them to adhere to the legally mandated number of hours from the outset, the ministry chose the easiest and most drastic solution: It suddenly pitted students and parents directly against it, using the students’ crisis as leverage to force school administrations to comply in the future.
Is this the best approach to managing educational crises?
The “Saw Knot” Philosophy and the Absence of Community Partnership
Families’ turn to international education was not a luxury, but rather a legitimate escape from the arbitrariness of local educational systems that are still searching for a clear identity amid an endless series of experiments; where every minister arrives waving the banner of “Pro Max” development, only to leave and be succeeded by another touting “Pro Max,” while reality shows that we are still struggling merely to keep up with the bare minimum of global standards.
When international schools succeed in establishing their own independent systems and creating a stable educational environment, why do we insist on “putting a knot in the saw” every now and then? Wisdom dictates that the Ministry fulfill its supervisory and guiding role based on scientific research, taking gradual and fair steps that ensure the community is on its side—not turning it into an adversary in a pointless battle.
This is a flawed administrative policy that has recently begun to recur in several institutions, without any recognition of the danger posed by the lack of community partnership in implementing reform plans.
To illustrate this disparity, imagine if we took a student from a public or private school who had studied English as a “second language,” and then suddenly surprised him by requiring him to take an exam in English according to international standards—and demanded that he excel! This glaring contradiction is exactly what students at international schools have faced: children who were not properly grounded in the subject, and no one held accountable for this failure—yet we suddenly demand that they conform to our methods and succeed according to our complex standards.
This approach lacks the most basic principles of wisdom and equal opportunity; those who seek accountability must first standardize and level the playing field.
Losing Battles and a Price Paid by the Innocent
We certainly appreciate the recent action taken by the Ministry in exposing the misconduct of 12 international schools that were manipulating and falsifying answer sheets to benefit their students, but this action raises deeper questions: Was this action the result of comprehensive and fair institutional oversight, or was it merely an isolated incident uncovered by chance? And what strategic safeguards are in place to prevent the recurrence of such practices without destroying students’ futures?
At a sensitive and tense time like the high school graduation exams, when no voice is louder than that of our anxious families, choosing the timing of controversial decisions and resorting to sudden, “retroactive” oversight and accountability is a misguided administrative choice that requires a radical review.
It is a losing battle par excellence for the educational system, and forcing students to take second-round exams will not alter the fact that it is a loss, no matter how much it is presented as a “illusory victory.”
In short, the crisis boils down to the fact that the ministry suddenly decided to address the legacy of decades of administrative negligence and lax oversight, but instead of holding itself accountable and reforming its operational environment, it chose to make students and parents—the most vulnerable group—pay the full price.
By Dr. Samuel Essam Ammanoeeil
Professor of Management and Strategic Planning – At Egyptian Universities