The relevance of maritime education and training at
\nthe secondary level
\nSimone Britanna Cunningham<\/p>\n
Table of Contents
\nDeclaration………………………………………………………………………………………………………….ii
\nAcknowledgement ………………………………………………………………………………………………iii
\nAbstract……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..iv
\nTable of Contents…………………………………………………………………………………………………v
\nList of Tables……………………………………………………………………………………………………viii
\nList of Figures…………………………………………………………………………………………………..viii
\nList of Abbreviations…………………………………………………………………………………………..ix
\n1 Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………………………….1
\n1.1 Background ……………………………………………………………………………………………3
\n1.2 Problem Statement ………………………………………………………………………………….8
\n1.3 Purpose of the study………………………………………………………………………………10
\n1.4 Objectives…………………………………………………………………………………………….10
\n1.5 Research Questions:………………………………………………………………………………11
\n1.6 Limitation…………………………………………………………………………………………….11
\n1.7 Scope\/Delimitation:……………………………………………………………………………….12
\n2 Literature Review ………………………………………………………………………………………..13
\n2.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………….13
\n2.2 Historical Background of Secondary Education ………………………………………..13
\n2.3 Definition of Secondary Education………………………………………………………….15
\n2.4 Psychology of Introducing MET at the Secondary Level……………………………15
\n2.5 Framework of Secondary Schools …………………………………………………………..17
\n2.6 Purpose of Secondary Education …………………………………………………………….18
\n2.6.1 Education for Civic, Political Aims…………………………………………………..19
\n2.6.2 Education for economic and work-related aims………………………………….21
\n2.7 Assessment of the Purpose of Secondary Education ………………………………….25
\n2.8 The Secondary Curriculum …………………………………………………………………….27
\n2.8.1 Curriculum Reform…………………………………………………………………………30
\n2.8.2 Paradigm Shift ……………………………………………………………………………….31
\n2.9 MET at the Secondary Level…………………………………………………………………..33
\nvi
\n2.9.1 Training the Human Element……………………………………………………………33
\n2.9.2 Mitigating the Imbalance between the Supply and Demand of Seafarers.35
\n2.9.3 Increased Maritime Awareness…………………………………………………………38
\n2.10 Summary ……………………………………………………………………………………………..41
\n3 Methodology……………………………………………………………………………………………….43
\n3.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………….43
\n3.2 Selection of Participants…………………………………………………………………………43
\n3.3 Instrumentation …………………………………………………………………………………….44
\n3.4 Research Ethics…………………………………………………………………………………….44
\n3.5 Questionnaire Instrument……………………………………………………………………….44
\n3.6 Interview Instrument ……………………………………………………………………………..45
\n3.7 Data Collection……………………………………………………………………………………..45
\n3.7.1 Quantitative Method ……………………………………………………………………….45
\n3.7.2 Qualitative Method …………………………………………………………………………46
\n3.8 Data Analyses……………………………………………………………………………………….47
\n3.8.1 Quantitative Analyses……………………………………………………………………..47
\n3.8.2 Qualitative Analyses……………………………………………………………………….47
\n3.9 Summary ……………………………………………………………………………………………..47
\n4 Presentation and Analyses of Data …………………………………………………………………49
\n4.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………….49
\n4.2 Qualitative Data Analyses………………………………………………………………………50
\n4.2.1 Awareness……………………………………………………………………………………..50
\n4.2.1.1 Level of awareness …………………………………………………………………..50
\n4.2.1.2 Geography ………………………………………………………………………………51
\n4.3 Secondary Education System………………………………………………………………….52
\n4.3.1 Structure of Secondary Education and Curriculum ……………………………..52
\n4.3.2 Human Resource…………………………………………………………………………….54
\n4.3.3 Sustainability …………………………………………………………………………………55
\n4.4 Stakeholders…………………………………………………………………………………………56
\n4.4.1 Policy ……………………………………………………………………………………………56
\n4.4.2 Interest of the country……………………………………………………………………..58
\n4.5 Benefits ……………………………………………………………………………………………….60
\n4.5.1 Career Opportunities……………………………………………………………………….61
\n4.5.2 Making Global Citizens…………………………………………………………………..62
\n4.5.3 Agent of Change …………………………………………………………………………….62
\nvii
\n4.6 Challenges……………………………………………………………………………………………63
\n4.7 Strategies……………………………………………………………………………………………..64
\n4.8 Quantitative Analyses ……………………………………………………………………………66
\n4.9 Summary ……………………………………………………………………………………………..69
\n5 Discussion of Findings …………………………………………………………………………………70
\n5.1 Summary of the Study……………………………………………………………………………70
\n5.2 Discussion of the Findings……………………………………………………………………..72
\n5.2.1 Research Question 1 ……………………………………………………………………….72
\n5.2.2 Research Question 2 ……………………………………………………………………….73
\n5.2.3 Research Question 3 ……………………………………………………………………….75
\n5.2.4 Research Question 4 ……………………………………………………………………….76
\n5.2.5 Research Question 5 ……………………………………………………………………….77
\n5.3 Implication of the Findings…………………………………………………………………….78
\n5.4 Recommendations…………………………………………………………………………………80
\n5.5 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………………81
\n6 References ………………………………………………………………………………………………….83
\n7 Appendix 1 …………………………………………………………………………………………………90
\n8 Appendix 2 …………………………………………………………………………………………………92
\n9 Appendix 3 …………………………………………………………………………………………………94
\n10 Appendix 4………………………………………………………………………………………………99
\nviii
\nList of Tables
\nTable 1: Demographic Information……………………………………………………………………………… 67
\nList of Figures
\nFigure 1: Officer supply and demand ……………………………………………………………………37
\nFigure 2 Response to Secondary School with MET………………………………………………..68
\nFigure 3: Response by Position ……………………………………………………………………………75
\nFigure 4: Response by Gender……………………………………………………………………………..99
\nFigure 5: Response by Age Group………………………………………………………………………..99
\nFigure 6: Response by Level of Education…………………………………………………………..100
\nFigure 7: Response by Region ……………………………………………………………………………100
\nFigure 8: Response by Category…………………………………………………………………………100
\nFigure 9: Response by Maritime Affiliation…………………………………………………………101
\nFigure 10: Response by Maritime Awareness………………………………………………………101
\nFigure 11: Response by Interest in Maritime Careers ……………………………………………101
\nFigure 12: Response to what motivates your interest in the maritime industry …………102
\nFigure 13: Participants with Maritime Training ……………………………………………………102
\nFigure 14: Response to would basic knowledge of MET helped at higher level of
\neducation…………………………………………………………………………………………………………102
\nFigure 15: Response to MET at secondary level influences maritime careers…………..103
\nFigure 16: MET at the secondary level impacts sustainability of the maritime industry
\n………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………103
\nFigure 17: Response to should government implement MET at the secondary level …103
\nFigure 18: Response to government initiative to increase maritime awareness…………104
\nFigure 19: Response to maritime awareness in your country………………………………….104
\nix
\nList of Abbreviations
\nCMI: Caribbean Maritime Institute
\nIMO: International Maritime Organization
\nMET: Maritime Education and Training
\nWMU: World Maritime University
\n1
\n1 Introduction
\nThe Maritime Industry in recent times has become extremely concerned about the
\nhuman element. Importantly, the training and education of the human element is
\nparamount for an effective and efficient global Maritime Industry. Provided that the
\nconcern of the human element is effectively approached with practical strategies, the end
\nresult will see a sustainable industry. Maritime education and training at the secondary
\nlevel is one of the pragmatic approaches worth examining. Furthermore, education by all
\nmeans and at all levels, is the most potent weapon to mitigate challenges related to the
\ncompetence and commitment of the human element. Against that background the
\nInternational Maritime Organization (IMO) has given careful attention to the need of
\nattracting, retaining and training of qualified seafarers (IMO, 2013). To underpin a
\nsuccessful, influential and impactful industry that attracts the calibre of people capable
\nto take the industry to the next level, early education and training is most crucial.
\nMaritime education and training at the secondary level has been deemed by some in the
\nmaritime circles, as a positive and potentially game changing strategy to resolve a
\nnumber of present and possible challenges of the industry. Moreover, education and
\ntraining in the wide context provides enhancement for growth, expansion and positive
\nchange. It provides knowledge and awareness as well as divergent choice to individuals
\nfor the industry. Furthermore, like most industries there is the need for qualified and
\ncompetent human resources for continuity and sustainability. Targeting the youth at the
\nsecondary level facilitates a dynamic force for sustained positive change. However, in
\nmany jurisdictions maritime education and training at the secondary Level is yet to be a
\nreality, or a concept to generate discussion at the policy level (Haun, 2014).
\nAccording to Haun (2014) secondary schools that provide maritime education teach
\nsubjects related to the training and skills required to work in the maritime sector,
\n2
\nwhether it be as a crew member at sea or shore side such as in a marine shipyard or port
\nfacility. Maritime education and training provides knowledge and skill about the
\nshipping industry, which can be appreciated at the secondary level once the pedagogical
\napproach is applied in the appropriate context at the appropriate level.
\nThe concept \u201cmaritime\u201d is often used interchangeably with the term \u201cmarine\u201d. This can
\nbe confusing as it relates to the type of training being referenced to in this research. For
\nthe purpose of clarity, it is important that the concept \u2018maritime\u2019 is understood.
\nAccording to Hildebrand and Schr\u00f6der-Hinrichs (2014) an understanding of maritime in
\nthe context of research, aims at finding technology and innovative solutions for better
\nuse of the sea and ocean resources related to human activity. Haun (2014) states that
\nmaritime education caters for the sea and shore side resources related activities. Against
\nthis background, the term maritime will be used in view of the human related activities.
\nAmong these are: vessels operations, training, technological aspects associated with
\nnaval architecture, navigation, port facilities as well as sea and ashore resources. In lieu
\nof the definitions above the researcher has coined a definition of maritime education.
\nMaritime education and training is the acquisition of the knowledge and skills related to
\nsubjects in the maritime field that enhance competence in the maritime context.
\nAdditionally, the lack of maritime training and awareness during the secondary stage of
\neducation is one shadowed factors that may have contributed to incompetence as well as
\nseafarer dropout. There is an acute deficit in the basic knowledge that is required to
\nmake a more practical and committed transition to a higher level of learning.
\nFurthermore, citizens of the globe need an awareness of the global maritime industry. As
\nsuch, there is a need for knowledge related to the maritime environment, career
\nopportunities, and importantly the mutual benefit of engaging with the industry. The
\nmedium of accomplishing these targets successfully is through purposeful targeting the
\nyouth at the secondary Level.
\n3
\nFormerly, a number of maritime academies have been training mariners to man vessels
\nat sea. However, this training has become more inclusive due to the expansion of the
\nmaritime industry. Commendably, the industry has reached far beyond just the need for
\nmariners; hence, training has been extended to meet the emerging needs of the different
\nspheres of the industry both ship and shore-based employment (IMO, 2013 & European
\nUnion Commission Report, 2008). The maritime industry is defined in general terms as
\n\u201call enterprises engaged in the business of designing, constructing, manufacturing,
\nacquiring, operating, supplying, repairing and\/or maintaining vessels, or component
\nparts thereof: of managing and\/or operating shipping lines, and customs brokerage
\nservices, shipyards, dry docks\u201d (\u201cMaritime Industries\u201d, n.d). Since the inception of
\nmaritime education and training, it has been predominantly offered mostly at the
\nuniversity and college level. Only a few known countries worldwide are offering the
\ntraining at the secondary level according to the researcher\u2019s informal inquiry. The
\nexpansion of the industry has given rise to new services and careers. This can be seen
\nthrough the increasing growth of the seaborne trade that has resulted in the shortage of
\ncompetent seafarers, the lack of maritime awareness, concerns of safety due to human
\nelement, coupled with technological innovation, are evidence for the need of new
\nthinking and strategies in education and training to meet the demands of the industry.
\nThis research aims at exploring the relevance of maritime education at the secondary
\nlevel, examining and assessing its possible effects on the future of the industry.
\n1.1 Background
\nThe BIMCO\/ ISF Manpower 2005 update showed a 10,000 shortage of marine officers
\nfor the global workforce. This represents a 2% shortfall since 2005 (BIMCO\/ISF, 2005).
\nDuring 2010 another short fall of 13,000 marine officers was reported (BIMCO\/ISF,
\n2010). Drewry (2014) cited an alarming shortfall of 19,000 officers. Additionally, a
\nfurther shortfall of 21,700 officers was foreseen by 2018. The continued reduction of
\n4
\nseafarer\u2019s number over time has portended potential detrimental effects on the shipping
\nindustry. Such statistics undoubtedly have raised the genuine concerns of all the actors
\nin the industry. As such, a solution to the pending crisis is most desired. Baylon and
\nSantos (2011) have found that a career in shipping requires committing oneself to a life
\nat sea. This has discouraged many young people from considering shipping as a
\nprofession. In light of that, mental preparation and awareness is a simple but an effective
\nremedy to start with. As such, the secondary level of education is the platform for such
\npreparation. In addition to the general education it facilitates foundational knowledge of
\nvaried career options. Furthermore, it is open in allowing for the presentation of the
\nchallenges and benefits of careers. It can also be an effective sifting tool for suitable
\ncandidates for the industry.
\nSubsequently, the Center of Advanced Maritime Studies seeks to motivate young people
\ntowards a career in shipping as well as improving seafarers\u2019 welfare, this was a project ( help with nursing paper writing from experts with MSN & DNP degrees)
\nof the Maritime Academy of Asia and the Pacific (Paiso, 2011). An important question
\nat this juncture is: how will they motive young people? A study done to ascertain
\nstudent\u2019s motivation and expectation of studying maritime undergraduate programme in
\nthe three countries of Greece, Hong Kong, and China revealed that most of the students
\nenrolled in the undergraduate programme came straight from the secondary school.
\n\u201cStudents who have enrolled for an undergraduate programme in maritime studies have
\ntypically completed secondary level education in the previous academic year\u201d
\n(Athanasios & Adolf, 2011, p.373). The authors declared that the subject of student
\nstudy of maritime programme is under-researched, and as such, the real motivation is
\nunknown. However, most of the students they interviewed stated that the presence of a
\nmaritime history in their family and home town was what motivated them. This was
\nfurther supported by M\u2019Pherson, (2009) when he states, \u201cexcept a young person comes
\nfrom a family living near the sea or has a nautical tradition then the sea has no interest to
\nhim\u201d (p. 237). Farthing, Brownrigg & Mukherjee, (2013) also allude to this cultural
\n5
\ntrend in families that have careers or business in shipping for the younger generation to
\npursue a similar career. One possible question that must be answered is: should the
\nfuture of the maritime industry be left to family or to community traditions?
\nResearchers in the field of maritime education so far have yet to zero in explicitly on the
\nimpact of maritime education and training at the secondary level. As such the aim of this
\nresearch is to examine the possible benefits the industry may experience from
\nimplementing MET at the secondary level.
\nIn assessing the United Kingdom as a maritime country, M\u2019Pherson (2009) argued that
\n\u201cthe school sector has no serious sustained study of ships or the sea. When investigated,
\nstudents from the secondary schools that were taught navigation indicated that
\nnavigation was treated mainly as a \u201cfun subject\u201d (p. 237). The formal introduction of
\nmaritime training at the secondary level serves to strengthen existing systems, as well as,
\nprovide a platform for advanced level training in the maritime field. To illustrate the
\nrelevance of maritime education at the secondary level, attention should be given to
\nwhat is commonly known in the industry that ninety percent of world trade is carried by
\nships and that \u201c75% of the world\u2019s surface is covered by vast oceans\u201d (Farthing,
\nBrownrigg, & Mukherjee, 2013, p. 1). Shipping when compared to trucks, rail and
\nplanes is the most environmentally friendly and cheapest form of commercial transport.
\nAdditionally, it is one of the oldest industries in the world that is revenue robust when
\ncompared to other industries, (Shipping Facts, (n.d)). Furthermore, the industry is
\ncompetence driven; it requires special technical skills on the part of the seafarer. It has a
\nunique vocabulary, technical terms, and phrases often referred to as club language by
\nMaritime English Lecturers because it is only spoken and understood within the walls of
\nthe industry. It is operated under international laws, with a consideration for its own
\ncode of conduct and regulations. Most humans everywhere are dependent on it in one
\n6
\nway or another. As such, a level of priority is worth giving to the maritime domain at the
\nsecondary level in any jurisdiction.
\nAccording to Gregory and Shanahan (2010) “education is aimed at widening and
\nextending people\u2019s horizons, its goals are to increase the number of future possibilities
\nfor the individual, and to increase the number of potential ways that the individual can
\napproach each of those possibilities\u201d(p. 62). Implementing maritime education within
\nthe secondary curriculum increases the possibilities of more choices towards a maritime
\ncareer, as well as, creating a maritime consciousness of the industry. Notwithstanding
\nthis, many may not choose the industry. Nevertheless, the industry should not be passive
\nin providing an opportunity to increase maritime awareness to the younger generation.
\nMany youth have not chosen a career in science. However, they have been made aware
\nof the importance of the sciences to man\u2019s existence. Therefore, the same principle can
\nbe applied to maritime education, not only for career endeavours but for an awareness of
\nthe maritime environment and how to protect and preserve it. Opening the industry to all
\nlevels of learners was a highpoint of the International Maritime Organization (IMO)
\nSecretary General\u2019s opening remarks on February 2, 2015 during the HTW subcommittee plenary. This, he communicate will create an awareness, as well as the
\npromotion of the industry and its seafarers to school children, who may become
\nmotivated to be IMO ambassadors in member states. This can be highlighted as an idea
\nor a new vision by well thinking stakeholders, of innovative ways of expanding, sharing
\nand bringing awareness of what the industry has to offer to other levels of learners
\noutside of colleges and universities.
\nHaun (2014) provides great insight on the benefits and purpose of MET at an early
\nstage within the academic system.<\/p>\n
7
\nPrimary and secondary maritime schools are sprouting up across the US,
\ninspiring K-121
\nstudents to learn about the exciting, yet sometimes obscured
\ndomestic waterfront. The goals of these maritime school programs are many and
\nmultifaceted, but at the core they motivate and engage students by bringing
\nsomething new and exciting to the classroom while giving teachers an effective
\nmeans for capturing the attention of their classes. And as new student audiences
\nare being exposed \u2014 earlier, rather than later \u2014 to the maritime industry and
\npotential career paths that could lie ahead, it\u2019s not only students and educators
\nwho stand to reap the rewards of these programs. The domestic maritime
\nindustry, spanning blue and brown water mariners, dock workers, operations, oil
\nand gas and a dozen other sectors is starving for fresh, young talent to meet a
\nshortage of qualified workers. What better way to work toward filling these gaps
\nthan to educate the nations\u2019 youth on the importance of its culture-rich maritime
\nheritage (Haun, 2014).
\nIn the case of Haun (2014) the US society stands to benefit from this implementation,
\nthe various classes of maritime workers, the environment, the communities, as well as
\nthe country. Moreover, this beneficial experience is not restricted to the US nor barred
\nfrom other jurisdictions. It simply demands administrative and political will. Examining
\nthe importance of secondary education and what is included within the curriculum has to
\ndo with the needs of society and the role of the youth within the context of that need
\n(Mitz, 2002). It therefore explains the constant revising of the curriculum in different
\njurisdictions and institutions to address a societal or an organizational need that may
\narise. In Canada, fisheries were added to the grade nine civics curricula after the
\nEducation Ministry saw the need for students to learn about the fishing industry
\n(McLeod, 1989). Similarly, Wyner and Desalle, (2010) state that “if a conservation<\/p>\n
1 The K to 12 Program covers (six years of primary education, four years of Junior High School, and two years of Senior High
\nSchool [SHS]). (See: http:\/\/www.gov.ph\/k-12\/)
\n8
\nperspective were taught in secondary schools, students who are not interested in biology
\ncould be influenced to pursue careers or live lifestyles that would reduce the negative
\nimpact of humans on the world\u201d (p. 649). In like manner, a number of young people
\nwould gravitate towards the safe keeping of the harbours to preserve their beautiful
\nbeaches, and parks. Also an increased interest in maritime as well as marine-related
\nresearch would be the key component in maritime governance. In addition, fewer people
\nwould become enticed to build their homes on river banks, as well as, in the coastal area.
\nFurthermore, a number of other sectors may become influenced to participate in funding
\nproject ( help with nursing paper writing from experts with MSN & DNP degrees)s of the industry because they have learnt to appreciate the industry. The
\nappearance of new studies, jobs creation, and new technology may emerge to resolve a
\nnumber of the challenges faced by the industry.
\nThe vision of developing maritime high schools in Eastern Cape in South Africa by the
\ndepartment of education, gave an insight behind this move. The envisaged Maritime
\nHigh School is intended to provide knowledge about the maritime industry, the career
\nopportunities available to examine the industry, with the prospect of pursuing further
\nstudies or higher maritime education, (The Development of High School in Eastern
\nCape, 2010). One Cognitive Psychologist advises that \u201cduring the early school years
\nstudents develop what is referred to as a sense of industry\u201d (Woolfolk, 1990, p. 84). The
\ndecision making process for any student or individual requires knowledge, and as such
\nthe department of education in the Eastern Cape was facilitating that process by
\nproviding knowledge to the students about the industry. An early awareness of a subject
\nimpacts the student and its effect will trickle down into the society.
\n1.2 Problem Statement
\nThe lack of emphasis on maritime training within high schools is rather a dismal
\nreflection on the industry (M\u2019Pherson, 2009). According to Pilyugin (2012) the majority
\nof prospective students cannot understand the disciplines because they have problems in
\n9
\nthe formative stage. The challenges experienced by the maritime industry are worthy of
\na pragmatic approach. Among those challenges that requires a focused approach are the
\nshortage of competent seafarers, capacity building, accidents due to human element,
\nsafety and security at sea, pollution, as well as the implementation of Conventions. The
\nfact that the factors mentioned above are all human related supports that education and
\ntraining is an important element for consideration in any amelioration efforts.
\nCurrent challenges may suggest that higher education could adequately resolve the
\nchallenges experienced by the industry. However, the challenges are yet to be resolved.
\nMoreover, the implementation of MET at the secondary level is a possible solution that
\nhas remarkable potential. Furthermore, outside of the existing problems is the lack of
\nawareness of the industry and the career opportunities available. As such, the limited or
\nnonexistence of a maritime curriculum at the secondary level to create an awareness or
\nconsciousness of the industry, to provide knowledge of the various professions and to
\ninfluence decision towards a career in shipping, necessitates maritime education at the
\nsecondary level. These, among other challenges, may eventually cripple or put the
\nindustry in a static mode, due to the lack of succession and sustainable planning for the
\nfuture of the industry as well as the MET institutions. Additionally, awareness of
\nmaritime knowledge at an early stage is critical for the future development of the
\nshipping industry. According to French (2013) training is required because of changes
\nthat have occurred and changes that will occur. With respect to the fact that the maritime
\nindustry has experienced a number of changes globally, education and training should
\nappropriately reflect such changes. Among those changes is the evidence of
\nglobalisation in the industries, climate change, new services and careers, innovation in
\ntechnology, smart communication, multi-national crewing, and changing trends in
\ntrading. The introduction of maritime education and training at the secondary level will
\ninform new policy and decisions within the MET sectors at different levels to
\nappropriately train the population to meet the changes reflected in the industry. As such
\n10
\nMET at the secondary level is a pragmatic approach to influence and motivate new
\nideas, talents and insight for the industry.
\n1.3 Purpose of the study
\nThe purpose of this study is to contribute valuable insight into the relevance of maritime
\neducation and training at the secondary level. Against that background the research
\nseeks to identify the potential impact that MET at the secondary level may have on the
\nfuture of the industry. The challenges and changes experienced by the maritime industry
\nglobally since the 21st century are factors influencing this study. As a result, the
\nresearcher believes that the introduction of MET at the secondary level is worth
\nexamining. The result of this study may be useful in influencing discussion towards
\nimplementation as well as policy making within jurisdictions.
\n1.4 Objectives
\nThe objectives of this research are to:
\n\uf0b7 Analyse the possible effects of maritime education and training at the secondary
\nlevel on the maritime sector.
\n\uf0b7 Explore the policies and practices in different jurisdictions regarding delivery of
\nmaritime education and training at the secondary level
\n\uf0b7 Examine current trends and challenges of the maritime industry in relation to
\nhow they may be addressed through implementing maritime education and
\ntraining at the secondary level.
\n\uf0b7 Explore how maritime education and training at the secondary level could
\ninfluence sustainable development of the maritime industry.
\n\uf0b7 Assess the role of stakeholders in the implementation of maritime education and
\ntraining at the secondary level.
\n11
\n1.5 Research Questions:
\nThe research seeks to answer the following questions:
\n1. What are the merits and demerits of maritime education and training at the
\nsecondary level?
\n2. What are the national practices and underlying policies that inform the delivery
\nof maritime education and training at the secondary level?
\n3. What are the current trends and challenges within the maritime industry that may
\nwarrant maritime education and training at the secondary level?
\n4. How can maritime education and training at the secondary level translate to
\nsustainable development within the maritime industry?
\n5. What is the role of stakeholders in implementing maritime education and training
\nat the secondary level?
\n1.6 Limitation
\nAs mentioned by Athanasios and Adolf, (2011), not much research has been done on
\nthis particular topic (sample nursing essay examples by the best nursing assignment writing service). Therefore a number of challenges were encountered. In this regard
\neasy access and sourcing of relevant information about MET at the secondary level have
\nbeen a challenge. As such the research examines literature about secondary level
\neducation in general. Another limitation was that most of the literature interrogated
\nsecondary education based on Western philosophies, not much literature was found that
\ninterrogates secondary education from other cultures. Another challenge was the
\nconstraint of traveling to countries for collecting primary information. Consequently, the
\nresearcher uses the purposive sampling and random survey method which allows
\nparticipants from different countries who serve in the maritime industries to participate.
\nAs such the size and scope of the sample that affects the reliability of the data was a
\nchallenge. The identification of key personnel from countries or educational institutions
\nto provide crucial information was an initial setback in getting data. As a result, the
\nresearcher sought to address these challenges by taking a pragmatic approach in the
\n12
\nmethodology. General inquiry through internet search, as well as web-based
\nquestionnaires and online interviews have been employed for collecting data from the
\ndifferent countries. These measures Helped in addressing a number of the limitations
\nexperienced during the course of the research.
\n1.7 Scope\/Delimitation:
\nThe scope that has been utilized in this research aims at getting a wide cross section of
\nperspectives on the relevance of Maritime Education and Training at the secondary
\nlevel. It is understood that limiting the scope to a few countries may not have provided
\nsufficient evidence. As such numerous developed and developing countries were
\nexamined. The researcher believes that countries with very strong maritime actives are
\ndeemed as a priority because of the impact the findings may have on the future of their
\nmaritime economy. Therefore, education system as well as the governmental policy of
\ntargeted countries was analysed for relevance to the research topic (sample nursing essay examples by the best nursing assignment writing service).
\n13
\n2 Literature Review
\n2.1 Introduction
\nThis chapter examines literature in the context of the secondary education system and
\nthe relevance of implementing maritime education and training at that level. The
\ndiscussion examines the historical background of secondary education, the definition of
\nsecondary education; the psychology of MET at the secondary level, the framework of
\nsecondary education; the purpose of secondary education, the curriculum and MET at
\nthe secondary level. The chapter ends with a summary.
\n2.2 Historical Background of Secondary Education
\nThe historical background of secondary education is relevant for deciding on an
\nappropriate analytical framework. Kamens, Meyer, & Benavot (1996) have found that
\nthe influence of historical forces continues to shape secondary educational models,
\ninstitutional structures, and curricula. Initially, the philosophical orientation of
\nsecondary education can be traced back to historical factors. According to Hadley
\n(1902), in earlier centuries secondary education was driven by the status-quo of society.
\nIt was noted that in 1635 US secondary education was to prepare young men for college
\nat Harvard, service in government, and the church (US department of education).
\nFurthermore, \u201chistorically, secondary education was subsidiary to higher education, and
\nthis relationship has influenced policy, choice of providers, curriculum decisions,
\nteacher recruitment and training, Assessment, accreditation, and certification\u201d (Kamens,
\nMeyer, & Benavot, 1996, p.2).
\nAccording to Holsinger & Cowell (2000), secondary education in Europe during the
\nfifteenth century began with training in religion and philosophy but only to males. The
\nunstructured curriculum was non-negotiable as priests gave strict instruction for the
\n14
\ncurriculum content. By the eighteenth century significant changes were seen
\nintellectualism became the new phenomenon. Bishop (2007), McFarlane (2003) and
\nKant (n.d) have found that the prevailing motto for the period provoked man to use his
\nreasoning and mental capacity. This influenced the secondary education system; as a
\nresult, emphasis was placed on natural sciences, technology and experimental studies.
\nGovernment interest and involvement in secondary curriculum increased progressively
\nduring this period.
\nIt was not until the nineteenth century that secondary education took on a more
\ntechnical-based approach to learning. Dewey (1934) and Johnson & Clark (2007) found
\nthat secondary education during the nineteenth century was deemed as progressive;
\nlearning was meaningful, active, involving and applicable to the learner. Holsinger &
\nCowell (2000) noted that curriculum emphasis was centered on practicality and social
\nusefulness of learning by doing. Vocational subjects were introduced to the curriculum
\nsuch as driving, family life, consumer economics, and mathematics for everyday living,
\ngraphic design, hair care, styling, automotive repair, carpentry, machine shop, and home
\neconomics. The launching of the sputnik satellite by the Soviet Union in 1957 increased
\nthe number of scientific topic (sample nursing essay examples by the best nursing assignment writing service)s that were taught. In the American context however,
\ndespite the addition of practical subjects many believed that the aim and purpose of
\nsecondary education was not meeting the demands of the society. The education
\nstructure was criticized by the business sector and affluent clergymen that the American
\nyouths were not appropriately trained to compete with the global landscape. According
\nto Gary (2012) many believed that secondary schools were short changing the youth, the
\nindustry and the American society. Many argued that secondary education must be fit
\nfor purpose. The concerns raised by citizens influenced the addition of another set of
\nsubjects to the curriculum. Johnson and Clark (2007) mentioned that the threat of the
\nSoviet Union propelled the United States in 1958 to fund secondary education for the
\npurpose of including foreign language, mathematics, and increased science in the
\n15
\ncurriculum. He continued to say that this was one of the strategies the country saw as an
\nappropriate response to fortified security.
\n2.3 Definition of Secondary Education
\nAccording to Siegel (2014) \u201csecondary education is the second stage traditionally found
\nin formal education beginning at about age 11 to 13 and ending usually at age 15 to 18\u201d.
\nHadley (1902) stated that it is a public education compulsory to all citizens not
\nsufficiently specialised in their purpose but as a means of preparation for several callings
\nin life. It is the second stage of education fitting the student to be a better person rather
\nthan an expert. Kamens, Meyer, & Benavot (1996) mentioned that a broad definition of
\nsecondary education includes lower and upper secondary levels and vocational
\neducation. At the upper level opportunities are provided for specialization; on the other
\nhand subjects at the lower levels are general.
\nThe focus of this research is centered on that category of learners according to the
\nabove definitions, in the context of age group and the level of education. It is those
\npersons who are at the second level of formal education between the ages 11 and 18. The
\nage group may differ from country to country depending on the education policy and
\nstructural framework. Nonetheless, the youth within that particular age demographic will
\nbe the focus of this research.
\n2.4 Psychology of Introducing MET at the Secondary Level
\nAccording to Salyers and Mckee (2005), \u201cyoung people between 10-15 years are at a
\npeak of forming values and making decisions that will impact them for the rest of their
\nlives\u201d (p.1). At this stage education that is meaningful will remain important for a
\nlifetime as articulated in the following:
\n16
\nIn recent research it has been shown that the early adolescent brain goes through
\na growth spurt just before puberty and then a period of pruning. The growth
\nspurt and pruning are most noticeable in the prefrontal cortex, which is the part
\nof the brain where information synthesis takes place. It is also the part of the
\nbrain that controls planning, working memory, organization, and mood
\nmodulation. This area of the brain does not mature until about 18 years of age.
\nThe process of \u201chardwiring,\u201d which continues throughout adolescence, means
\nthat the intellectual activities given the most time, the most opportunity to
\nstrengthen the connections in the brain, will influence learning for the rest of the
\nstudent\u2019s life. (Horch & Irvin, 2002, p58)
\nPiaget\u2019s theory of child development indicates that the operational stage ages 11-15 are
\ncharacterized by increased abstract thoughts and hypothetical thinking. Such thinking
\nconcretized information in a more realistic sense. As a result, these schemata of
\ncognitive thought process ultimately develop into lifelong learning. (Rust, 2008, and
\nSwanson, Edwards, & Spencer, 2010). Slavin (2003) concludes that the learner during
\nthe early years process information more easily and increases their knowledge after
\nlearning new information.
\nExperts agree that cognitive skills are developing during the adolescence years; ideas are
\ntested, while critical and analytical skills are developed. Since learning results in
\nchanged behavior through experience (Surgenor, 2010), the introduction of MET will
\nresult in change in awareness and more responses to career opportunities among other
\nprospects. The youth during this period are open to new concepts, ideas and
\ninformation. As such, engaging maritime concepts will concretize meaningful education
\nas far as the sector is concerned. As articulated, the importance given to subjects during
\nthis stage stays with the youth for a lifetime. Scientific as well as psychological evidence
\n17
\ndemonstrates a positive and lasting mental effect on the young learner. Therefore, the
\nopportunities to strengthening maritime knowledge are best engaged during these years.
\n2.5 Framework of Secondary Schools
\nThe expansion and diversity of the global landscape provides valuable insight into
\nthe applicability of maritime education and training at the secondary level. The
\nbuilding blocks that support the educational framework at the secondary level are a
\nnecessary element to discuss. On this point the philosophy that informs policy
\nserves as an influencing factor of what is taught at the secondary level. According
\nUNESCO Report (1970), the youth are entering a world which is changing in all
\nspheres: scientifically, technologically, politically, economically and socioculturally. On the back of that, there is need for policy, commitment and resources
\nto prepare the youth for change. Knight (2014) has found that an education policy
\nframework provides guidance for the development and implementation of national
\neducation plans.
\nThe common threads that appear to inform the framework of secondary education
\nand its offerings are entrenched in changes experienced in society. For example, the
\nCanadian Council examining the statistics of those educated at the secondary and
\npost-secondary schools concluded that the youth were not prepared for college
\nentrance or the global market. Hence the question was raised; is our secondary
\neducation meeting the needs of society? As a result the education policy was
\nreassessed. Following that discussion a number of changes were made among
\nwhich was the adding of fisheries to the grade 9 civics curriculum (Kirby, 2009;
\nMcLeod, 1989). The 2013\/2014 UNESCO report highlighted \u201cbasic education as a
\nfundamental effect in resolving economic, health, social and political issues.
\nHowever, the international community and national governments have so far failed
\nto sufficiently recognize and exploit education\u2019s considerable power as a catalyst
\n18
\nfor development and change\u201d (p.4). Fiqueredo and Anzalone (2003) found that the
\nnature and scope of development in the context of secondary education is channeled
\nthrough governmental policy.
\nWhen comparison is made with the shipping industry against the points articulated,
\nthere appears to be very low or non-responsive action in creating policies within the
\neducation sector to as proactive solution to challenges. Fundamentally, for the
\nindustry to influence youth at the secondary level, education policy is crucial.
\nEducation policy development in the maritime context is the responsibility of
\njurisdictions in identifying the relevance of adding that knowledge to the youth\u2019s
\nzone of proximal development.
\n2.6 Purpose of Secondary Education
\nMany authors in recent times have written extensively on education in general.
\nHowever, not as much published work has been done on the purpose of secondary
\neducation. During the course of the research only a few articles were found with
\nsubstantive information on MET at the secondary level and can be concluded that there
\nis a severe lack in literature on the subject. Examining the purpose of secondary
\neducation underpins the aim for which youth are educated at this level. Mcculloch
\n(2012) indicated that from 1972 to 2011, over 120 articles have been published on
\nsecondary education. Kamens, Meyer, & Benavot (1996) noted that secondary
\neducation models aimed at the creation of massive systems that emphasized open access
\nand the universal coverage of education\u201d (p. 2). According to Paquette & Fallon (2014)
\n\u201csecondary education that purports to be meaningful must be grounded in relevance to
\nsociety and culture; it must consist of multiple and divergent knowledge. It must provide
\na reasonable degree of equal opportunity of content and quality of knowledge.\u201d
\n19
\nFurther to the discussion, Hadley (1902) articulated that the purpose of secondary
\neducation is to educate boys and girls for their calling in life. Hill & Rury (2012) found
\nthat in the 1800s one of the needs of society was to train domestic helpers as well as
\nfarmers; as a result the second level of education was targeted. On the other hand, Danns
\nand Span (2008) stated that secondary education was seen by many as the medium of
\npreserving the way of life through teaching and training the future generations of
\nchildren in their ideals. According to Cohen (2006), in the early 20th century the
\nAmerica secondary education charter was to provide skilled labor associated with the
\nindustrial revolution. Additionally, Siegel (2009) found that high school education
\nconnects the youth to their current interests and stimulates the growth of new ones. A
\nbroader view was articulated by Ku (2013) that education at the secondary level was to
\nliberalize and train for democracy.
\nUpon critical examination of the thoughts articulated by the authors on the purpose of
\nsecondary education, two main categorises can be extracted. Firstly, education for
\npolitical and civic duty followed by education for economic and work-related aims. A
\nnumber of other factors can be drawn since an extensive coverage of almost all the
\nfacets of life is sprinkled within the perception of each author. Nevertheless, the two
\nthemes were mostly talked about. Furthermore, the themes are applicable to the
\nobjectives of this research. Against that background the categories are examined in the
\ncontext of their effect and influence on the maritime sector when the learner is exposed
\nto maritime education and training at the secondary level.
\n2.6.1 Education for Civic, Political Aims
\nEducation\u2019s main role in society is to inspire citizens to be actively engaged in the public
\nsphere and in their communities (Siegel, 2009). Human beings need awareness of their
\noriginal culture, heritage, political systems, rights and responsibilities (Ministry of
\nEducation Jamaica, 2010). Civic knowledge informs learners about national views while
\n20
\nat the same time expanding global perspectives. Additionally, cultural studies afford
\nstudents at the secondary level opportunities to develop national pride. They are able to
\ndevelop distinct attitudinal as well as affective skills, such as patriotism, identity,
\nappreciation and respect. Such skills contribute to the societal core value system which
\nis engraved in the sociological and philosophical orientation of society. As a result
\neducation policies and curriculum are designed to reflect such ideals.
\nIt was Fiqueredo & Anzalone (2003) who stated that for democracy to survive citizens
\nmust understand difficult issues and make informed decisions as well as holding
\nofficials accountable for their actions. Cohen (2006) has found that students at this level,
\nhaving been introduced to subjects related to history and heritage develop the capacity to
\nthink critically about society and the world. Additionally, they develop ideas about
\ntransforming the world through active participation; thus governance, policy and
\nleadership are influenced. In a similar context leadership in maritime matters can also be
\nenhanced if maritime concepts are introduced. Kahne & Middaugh (2012) have found
\nthat \u201cknowledge in civics increases support for future engagement among the youth\u201d (p.
\n10). While MET is not directly related to civics, the maritime environment is civicsrelated in nature. Therefore, an appreciation of the maritime infrastructure will arrest
\ntheir interest. Secondary education is progressive and futuristic; it is a preparation for
\nthe long-term goals and objectives of leadership and nation builders. The future leaders
\nare trained at this level, the future policy makers, presidents, prime ministers, doctors,
\nlawyers, maritime experts, principals, scientists, researchers and parents. Tomorrow\u2019s
\nworld is today\u2019s youth.
\nIt can also be said that an appreciation for country and citizenship arouses the obligation
\nto safe guard the resources of the land, sea, air, the natural habitat, and the people and by
\nextension the planet. The transferring of maritime knowledge will enhance the interest in
\nand care of the sea, and its environments. The youth cannot care for what they are not
\n21
\naware of. They will not be very willing to ratify and implement conventions for safer
\nand cleaner oceans when they are placed in positions of influence because maritime
\nmatters were not given importance at the stage that concretises lifelong learning.
\nAccording to \u0141opuski (2008) it was during the 19th century and the early part of the 20th
\ncentury that many national legal systems started to develop a legal domestic maritime
\ncommercial framework. On the back of this, there is a safe assumption that quickly
\ncreating a policy for MET at the secondary level may be a significant challenge.
\nJurisdictions are yet to find the appropriate place to integrate the maritime industry
\nwithin government ministries. This was also noted during lectures on the maritime legal
\nframework at the World Maritime University. In a similar fashion this was also observed
\namong maritime universities. While most universities are represented under the Ministry
\nof (Higher) Education, a number of maritime universities are under the Ministry of
\nTransport. Maritime universities like all other universities educate and train students.
\nHence, to grapple with the distinction of ministries that maritime universities are
\nrepresented under is admittedly ambiguous. Notwithstanding, it is assumed here that this
\nstate of affairs is certainly not by design. However, it is important that thought be given
\nto the possible underlining factors that may contribute to the appropriate designation of
\nMET universities, as well as the industry, in various jurisdictions.
\n2.6.2 Education for economic and work-related aims
\nNo form of education is more engaging to students and more important to the economy
\nthan career technical education since it connects students to the greatest range of career
\npossibilities (Siegel, 2009). It is an education strategy to provide young people with the
\nacademic and employability skills at the secondary level.
\n22
\nNearly two thirds of jobs created in the United States by the year 2018 will
\nrequire some form of postsecondary education. To meet these workforce needs,
\nPresident Obama has set a goal of ensuring that every American has access to at
\nleast one year of postsecondary training or higher education to gain the skills
\nneeded to rebuild the economy and meet workforce demands. As such, greater
\nfocus on academic rigor, career-focused programs of study articulation between
\nsecondary and postsecondary schools was promoted by federal law (Carnevale,
\nSmith, & Strohl, 2010 as cited by America Institutes for Research, 2010, p.1).
\nKelly (2012) found that the governments of Australia and New South Wales have added
\ncareer guidance to the secondary level curriculum as a measure of sustaining career
\nopportunities. Jamaica in the late 1990s added career guidance within its secondary
\nschools (Griffith, 2009). In 2001 the Organization for Economic Co-operation and
\nDevelopment (OECD) countries created a public policy of national career guidance to be
\ntaught in public schools. Countries involved in the process saw the move as a means to
\nimprove the efficiency of the labor market and education system within the OECD
\ncountries (Career Guidance Today, 2006).<\/p>\n
Secondary education is the platform for exposing students to career options. The
\nrelevance of technical education has been noted as a strategy to rebuild the economy.
\nFurthermore, MET at the secondary level creates awareness of the maritime sector as a
\nvaluable career option that is beneficial at the personal and national levels. It facilitates
\neconomic development, awareness, as well as psychomotor skills training. According to
\nthe America Institutes for Research, (2010) \u201c Career Technical Education is no longer
\njust about teaching students a narrow set of skills sufficient for entry-level jobs; it is
\nabout preparing students for careers\u201d (p. 2). The potential of MET at the secondary level
\nfits perfectly within these characteristics of the benefits of technical education.
\n23
\nIn Jamaica, career exposition is done yearly at the secondary schools. Ninety percent
\n(90%) of the students across the country are engaged in detailed discussions of career
\noptions. Through this medium, the Caribbean Maritime Institute gets the opportunity to
\nbring awareness of the maritime industry and its offerings. In most cases students had
\nminimal levels of awareness of the industry as well as the career opportunities. It was
\nwell observed that other institutions offering programs in medicine, business,
\ntechnology, teaching, agriculture, music, law, political science among others received far
\nmore responses. The Institute spent more time answering questions about the careers and
\nthe industry than collecting completed application forms. This case exemplifies the need
\nof exposure to maritime career opportunities. \u201cThe main thing is getting the maritime
\ntraining and careers out in front of younger folks early on so that they know that that\u2019s
\nan option that they have, especially when a lot of those skills can be developed outside
\nof a formal college education\u201d (Haun, 2014).
\nYang & Wang, (2013) examining the post junior high schools of migrant children in
\nBeijing, China found that \u201c74.6 percent chose computer\/internet technology and foreign
\nlanguage, while 13.5 percent chose blue-collar occupational areas such as repair
\ntechnician and hotel services; 11.8 percent of the students chose health care, finance,
\nsales, administrative\/personnel\/security, and beauty professions\u201d (p.86). It is important
\nto note that among the careers selected by the students maritime careers are absent.
\nFurthermore, in that particular country, maritime education and training is an available
\noption. The discussion here serves to justify how very few chose a maritime career as
\nthe first option.
\nMoreover, one of the troubling realities that have become a sore point in the discussion
\nwas articulated by Petersen (1983) when he iterated the needs for young workers in the
\nmerchant marine industry to take the place of the many men and women who are close
\n24
\nto retirement. He noted that many seafarers will be retiring by the time younger workers
\nare ready to go to sea, hence new workers are needed.
\nThe industry has been approaching crisis in seafarer shortage after examining statistics
\nsince 1995. Merchant marine by any definition is not exempted from making an
\nassertive presence in educating the youth for an illustrious career in the maritime
\nindustry. While it is commendable and hopeful that many would become attracted to the
\nuniform of a captain or an officer, in truth, that may not be the case. The uniqueness and
\ninterest of people makes the world an exciting place. As such, many youths may not
\nembrace a maritime career. Notwithstanding, the industry should take the opportunity to
\nintroduce the cruise industry to the young people who are fascinated by entertainment
\nand who are likely to pursue careers in bartending , beauticians, barbers, photographers,
\nchefs, musicians, masseuses\/masseurs, social director, youth activities coordinator,
\ncruise director, dining room waiters, and dancers (Petersen, 1983). These are just a few
\nexamples of the numerous career opportunities awaiting the youth. The industry has
\nbeen limiting its influence across the globe in settling in the populace\u2019s mind the
\nunlimited opportunities available to the public. By comparison the industry has the
\ncapacity to offer almost equal career opportunities similarly to land based opportunities.
\nIt is informative to mention a few careers on the marine side, even though the research is
\nparticularly examining maritime. Among them are atmospheric oceanographers,
\nbiological oceanographers, chemical oceanographers, geological oceanographers,
\nphysical oceanographers and oceanographic engineers (Heitzmann, 1988). These are not
\ncovered in this research paper. However, as it relates to the maritime side among the
\noptions is maritime law, naval architecture, maritime economist, seafarers, educators,
\nand researchers, those serving in academies as well as the public on matters relating to
\nthe sea. Administrators are those who coordinate, plan and design policy, portside
\nopportunities and those involved in foreign and domestic commerce. (Heitzmann, 1988).
\n25
\nIntroducing such subject content at the secondary level is somewhat impossible.
\nMoreover, the resource is inadequate. Nevertheless, the idea that is being researched is
\nthe possibility of creating such an influence through education to propel the youth at the
\nsecondary level to become engaged and aware of the industry. According to Heitzmann
\n(1988) there is a genuine concern that there will not be sufficient personnel available to
\nstaff the expansion of the industry. Capacity building in essence involves thinking ahead
\nof time, or preparing for the foreseen. The notion of who is to be trained as well as at
\nwhat stage the training should commence should be informed by statistical data and
\ninformation of the status quo of the industry of which information is abundantly
\navailable. Hence, there is no secret that the industry is suffering from personnel
\nshortage. Career guidance at the secondary level is not just a mere insight that has
\naccidentally pasted in the secondary curriculum. There was intelligence behind this
\nstrategic move that has enhanced capacity building for the global economy. Fittingly, it
\nis one of the noteworthy tools that jurisdictions may consider at the secondary level.
\n2.7 Assessment of the Purpose of Secondary Education
\nThe development of the secondary schools over the centuries demonstrated an
\nexpansion, inclusion and diversification of subject topic (sample nursing essay examples by the best nursing assignment writing service) for the existing needs of
\nsociety. Secondary education was indicative of the growing concern about the
\nlabor, security, leadership, economics, politics and socio-cultural factors. However,
\nthere has been a great lack of the maritime content at that level. Additionally it was
\nfound that
\nThe motivation of undergraduate students leaving the secondary level to
\npursue a maritime program are mostly inspired by practical considerations,
\ne.g., easiness in getting a job, better professional prospects, etc., rather than,
\nsay, self-interests and personal development (p.373). A very significant
\nfinding is the absence of any active role of the maritime industries, whether
\n26
\ncompanies or interest groups and associations representing them, in
\n\u2018pushing\u2019 young people to pursue higher education by introducing relevant
\ncourses to them. Maritime industries seem to passively rely on the higher
\neducation system to attract the best of the potential graduates, whereas the
\nhigher education system does not market itself to potential candidates by
\nany obvious means, at least from the perspective of students
\n(Athanasios & Adolf, 2011 p.381).
\nThe purpose of MET is to supply manpower to the shipping industry. It further aims
\nto establish the fundamentals of the seafarer\u2019s discipline in a multinational,
\nmulticultural and multifunctional environment. To facilitate working in such a highrisk environment, seafarers must be trained and if this training starts at the
\nsecondary education level it will have far-reaching results. The industry has
\nincreasingly become the focus of new environmental rules and regulations, and
\nmust now comply with a broad array of requirements in the areas of air and water
\nquality, hazardous waste disposal, and aquatic species protection. Safety in the
\nmaritime industry also requires standards to be set at an international level, and
\nmaritime education and training at all levels should play a key role in asserting the
\nneed for consistent, uniform education and awareness.
\nThe basic rationale behind secondary education policy is the belief that the
\nprovision of every child with a secondary education will enable each individual to
\nincrease their productive capacity and ultimately contribute to individual, societal,
\nand national growth and development. The absence of particular knowledge content
\nwill ultimately lead to a lack of response of the youth in that field. The maritime
\nindustry, as a major global player in the world\u2019s economic and the sociocultural
\nfacet of society is, therefore deserving of notable presence in the secondary
\neducation system. This area of maritime education and training at the secondary
\n27
\nlevel is yet to be examined. In recent times, Huan (2014) has written a detailed
\narticle on the subject looking specifically at one jurisdiction. However, there has
\nnot been any research on a general level of the benefit of implementing MET at the
\nsecondary level. The perspective is lacking within present literature and therefore
\nneeds wider scope of research. In light of the discovery, this study aims at looking
\nat the topic (sample nursing essay examples by the best nursing assignment writing service) with the aim of adding information to the field of study.
\n2.8 The Secondary Curriculum
\nIt is imperative that the subject of curriculum development comes into sharp focus as the
\nimportance of maritime education and training at the secondary level is discussed. The
\nunderlying factors that influence curriculum development are addressed under three
\nmain domains: philosophical orientation, psychological consideration and sociological
\ninfluences (Print, 1993). These principles are examined to analyse to what degree
\ncurriculum development is crucial in promulgating MET at the secondary level.
\nAccording to Print (1993) the philosophical orientation examines the aims and values of
\nsociety. It provides clarification of concepts that examine the epistemology and ontology
\nof the knowledge of the curriculum, for example, what particular knowledge is required
\nto address societal concerns. Within that framework relevant questions are asked such
\nas: On what grounds should the content be selected and taught? To what degree should
\nthe new reality of society be reflected in the curriculum? What is the status quo of the
\nsociety that requires such knowledge?
\nOn the other hand, the psychological consideration takes note of the pedagogical
\napproach, the kind of learners, the learning environment, teaching methods, instructors,
\nassessment and Assessment that may be employed to achieve the objectives of the
\ncurriculum. Another factor is the resources, financial and human as well as teaching
\n28
\nmaterial. Important in the discussion is who to teach, what is to be taught and at what
\nlevel should it be taught.
\nThe sociological orientation of the curriculum addresses the cultural influences, social
\nchanges, societal ideology and societal structure which include technological changes
\nand emerging trends. Altogether these factors encapsulate the scope of an integrated,
\nsystematic and systemic thinking that influences curriculum development.
\nBrady (2011) has found that the static state of many schools stems in large from a failure
\nto understand the process of curriculum development. This process he refers to as
\n\u201cinstitutionalization\u201d where the rubber meets the road. If it is poor, education will be
\npoor no matter the state or national standards, no matter the level of rigor, no matter the
\ntoughness of tests, teacher skill, school size, market forces imposed length of school day
\nor year, parental support, design or condition of buildings, generosity of budget, and
\nsophistication of technology, administrator wisdom, or enthusiasm of students. A school
\ncan be no better than its curriculum allows it to be. Tanner (1990) is of the view that the
\nheart of the school is the curriculum which greatly influences what is taught and what
\nstudents should learn. Against that background Kridel (2010) made an appeal for
\ncurricula to be reconstructed and revolutionized to fit the manner in which society is
\nprogressing.
\nAgainst that background a quick view of some global trends was noted by Core (2015)
\nCo-founder and chairman for investment management. Among them were
\n\uf0b7 Deepening income equality
\n\uf0b7 Persistent jobless growth
\n\uf0b7 Rising pollution in developing countries
\n\uf0b7 Increasing occurrence of severe weather events (Climate change)
\nIn summarising the points he stated the following:
\n29
\nThis year, two major concerns dominate this list, economic and environmental.
\nThese two areas of focus are inextricably linked. Long-term economic prosperity
\ndepends on environmental sustainability. Today, we see the consequences of
\nshort-term economic thinking and the reckless use of our planet\u2019s resources:
\nwater disputes between neighbouring nations, more frequent and powerful
\nextreme weather events brought on by our warming climate, an on-going global
\ndeforestation crisis, a rapidly acidifying ocean, eroding topsoil and agricultural
\ncapacity, and an alarming biodiversity crisis unparalleled in modern history
\n(Core, 2015).
\nCurriculum reform serves as the premier stage to enhance knowledge relevant for
\npresent and future generations. It is for most part the ultra-ultimate solution to educate
\non a global level of maritime awareness. Outside of awareness of the maritime industry
\nand career opportunities, climate change is an important trend that requires global
\nattention. It is a trend that has an implication on all members of society; fortunately, it is
\na trend that can be tackled at the secondary level through MET. However, it is the
\nresponsibility of the sovereign state to see the relevance of this education and mandate
\ncurriculum reform. The beginning of the process is to identify who informs and
\ninfluences the philosophical, psychological and sociological domains of the curriculum.
\nMany curriculum developers are of the view that curriculum design and development are
\nhighly politicised. Pinto (2012) stated that there is a highly unprecedented political
\ninvolvement in curriculum process and content. At times it becomes problematic for
\nimplementing because some schools do not always agree to the content. Chan (2012)
\nagrees with Pinto in raising the point that since the colonial period, governments have
\nstrongly influenced curriculum where many schools felt that if they are not in agreement
\nthey may lose adequate funding from their governments. On the other hand, Print (1993)
\nbrought a wider perspective to the discussion suggesting that curriculum development
\n30
\ninvolves a number of persons such as teachers, parents, government and the industries.
\nTherefore, curriculum development is not solely the responsibility of the government.
\nAt this juncture, it is recommendable for the maritime industry and the MET institutions
\nwithin jurisdictions to become involved in the secondary curriculum development
\nprocess. As stated by Print (1993) the curriculum should address change and the social
\nneeds of society. In this case, the best persons to understand the philosophical and
\nsociological changes in the industry and how secondary education may address these
\nconcerns are the industry practitioners. Additionally, the industry is best equipped to
\ntranslate the benefit in a curriculum developer\u2019s team.
\n2.8.1 Curriculum Reform
\nAn approach to the design and development of secondary education curriculum was put
\nforth by Higham and Yeomans (2015), where they strongly advocate for an increased
\nchoice, diversification and a more flexible curriculum. Additionally, the authors reiterate
\nthat such reform provides breath and balance which better meets the needs for the
\neconomy and the individual. The curriculum of the 1940s to the 1960s was referred to as
\nbureaucratic with traditional offering of compulsory subjects. Roques (1989) noted that
\n\u201cspecialism is a key problem of secondary curriculum. We can\u2019t live without it. We
\ncan\u2019t live with it. We inherited it. There is a steady pressure from university and
\ntradition to keep it; we haven\u2019t been able to market an alternative strong enough to get
\nparents (and governors and teachers) off the specialist drug\u201d (p.195).
\nIn recent times educators at the secondary schools in America who teach history and
\nsocial studies were required to have a passing knowledge of the holocaust. Most history
\ncurricula as a policy, added the subject (Pawlowicz & Grunden, 2015). It was noted that
\nthe vast availability of literature about the holocaust and the extent of media publicity
\nhave generated much interest in the subject. In contrast, many disagreed and questioned
\n31
\nthe relevance of the holocaust in the secondary curriculum. In the mind of the researcher
\none possible answer could be awareness. The rationale for such inclusion may not have
\nany significant economic benefit, perhaps none at all. However, the psychological
\norientation of the curriculum examines the affective domain. This domain teaches
\nelements of the curriculum which evokes compassion and is value-ridden. Educating the
\nyouth of the atrocities of the holocaust is strategic in preventing future reoccurrences of
\nsuch an act. Similarly at this juncture, it is worth noting that \u2013 though the depth of
\nmeaning a society links to the holocaust is certainly of much greater gravity than that
\ngiven to the maritime industry \u2013 an appropriate awareness of the maritime domain can
\ncreate an appreciation of the contribution of the industry both in cognitive and affective
\nterms.
\nIn a wider context there is no room for a static curriculum in a constantly changing
\nglobal space. Moreover, students are not homogenous; their experiences, cultures and
\nvalue systems are different. Therefore, curricula should offer choices that are fitting for
\nall types of learners. Accordingly curriculum development should adapt to the reality of
\nthe environment. Maritime education and training at the secondary level exposes the
\nyouth to broader choices, skills and knowledge of the maritime industry inclusive of
\nother subject matters. Not all benefits come out in dollars and cents. A society that
\nvalues trust, integrity, honesty, kindness cannot count the economic benefit of such acts
\nby the citizens. In 2007 the Caribbean Examination Council embarked on a Caribbean
\nwide curriculum reform program. The aim was to transform the secondary education
\ncurriculum to be more responsive to the needs of the global Caribbean nationals
\n(Griffith, 2009), and as a result more technical and vocational subjects were introduced.
\n2.8.2 Paradigm Shift
\nKen Robinson in agreement with Paquette & Fallon (2014) criticizes the education
\nsystem for its monolithic nature. Schools in their pursuit to educate sometimes kill
\n32
\ncreativity, talents and a noble desire for knowledge (Robinson, 2010). He continues to
\nelaborate that education is systematically structured on an economic utility philosophy.
\nIt is evident in the curriculum with a hierarchy of subjects, those that are deemed useful,
\nfor example mathematics and others that are deemed useless like the arts. The current
\neducation systems in many jurisdictions were designed for the enlightened and industrial
\nrevolution periods and not for this present generation. There are concrete views as
\nexpressed by Robinson that secondary education needs a paradigm shift. It is slow in
\nchanging to meet the present dynamics of society. Creating a security fence around what
\nthe future is going to be, and trying to prepare students for it, may close the door on
\npotential discoveries. Perhaps an extreme position of indoctrinating students of what
\nthey must learn, and why other knowledge may not be appropriate at a certain level is a
\npossible position taken by jurisdictions stakeholders.
\nAdditionally, curriculum developers need to rethink what education is and what is the
\npurpose of education. The three domains that influence curriculum development are not
\nstatic elements; they are constantly affected by change. Therefore, the curriculum should
\nalso change overtime in parallel with the domains.
\nUnfortunately, conformance thinking is what the curriculum promotes at the lower level.
\nEducation at the secondary level must strive to advocate and promulgate change towards
\ndivergent and lateral thinking. Sustainable education is essential for knowledge beyond
\nthe present, it educates for all kinds of people, planet and economy. Facilitating that kind
\nof approach will result in a number of emerging solutions to tackle challenges. MET at
\nthe secondary level is a principal opportunity for technical career options and knowledge
\nto appreciate the maritime industry as a global industry. Nevertheless, the reform of the
\nsecondary curriculum in promoting multiple subjects is the ultimate platform to give
\nyouth access to such knowledge.
\n33
\n2.9 MET at the Secondary Level
\n2.9.1 Training the Human Element
\nThe human element (HE) is an important factor in merchant shipping. Milhar
\nFuazudeen, Head of the Maritime Training and Human Element Section at the IMO,
\nduring a lecture at WMU on July, 16, 2015 stated that the human element comprises all
\npersons involved in the maritime industry not just seafarers as popularly believed. The
\nhuman element has been misnamed he stated. Gregory & Shanahan (2010) share their
\nunderstanding of the human element, \u201cthe shipping industry is run by people, for people.
\nPeople design ships, build them, own them, crew them, maintain them, repair them and
\nsalvage them. People regulate them, survey them, underwrite them and investigate them
\nwhen things go wrong\u201d (p. 1). Therefore, humans are at the epicenter of shipping in all
\ndimensions. In shipping humans are like the weather that impacts the entire atmosphere
\nof the industry. Moreover, humans are the hub of the industry\u2019s success and\/or failure.
\nHumans are the anchor to the process from route planning to policy making. On the
\nwhole it can be concluded that the entire human race can be considered as the human
\nelement and therefore need an awareness of the industry. While that statement may be
\ndeemed too general, the fact is, everyone is a consumer of the industry and at some point
\nhas made an impact on the industry. Take for example the doctor who examines the
\nseafarer, the farmer who provides produces for consumption, the spouse\/family that
\ncontributes to the state of mind of the seafarer (positive\/negative), the instructor who
\ntrains for competence, the media that influences positive or negative ideas of the
\nindustry which influences potential applicants, and policy makers or governors who
\nratify and implement conventions for safer and cleaner oceans. Against that
\nbackground, the best place to capture all the categories of future players of the sector is
\nat the secondary level. The implication of the human element on safety and security are
\nfar reaching. Furthermore, statistics indicate that eighty percent of sea-related accidents
\nare caused by human error (Human Element, 2014). According to Sekimizu (2015) \u201c799
\n34
\nlives were lost or missing last year. If you look at the statistics over the last decade from
\n2004-2014, 4,784 lives were lost on passenger transport by sea. Obviously the human
\nelement must have played a part in those accidents\u201d.
\nTraining of the human element is crucial. Efanga & Oleforo (2012) and Wei (2007) have
\nfound that a country that neglects the training of an effective human resource formation
\nis doing so at its own peril; education is an investment in knowledge and skills which
\ncan yield economic and social benefits in the future. If such a necessity is neglected the
\neconomy in the long run may consequentially suffer greatly. A well-educated and
\ntrained workforce is necessary for a strong and successful maritime transportation
\nsystem.
\nAn important challenge facing the shipping industry today is how to attract and
\nretain a sufficient number of adequately trained and qualified seafarers and
\nqualified maritime industry professionals with the right motivation, knowledge
\nand skills for the professional application of evolving technologies and
\nprocedures. This challenge will increase as world trade continues to grow and
\nshipping activities increase accordingly (IMO, 2013).
\nThe human element is a maritime industry systemic challenge. It is a global concern.
\nRao (2010) postulates that a long-term strategic plan is needful to limit the negative
\noutcomes associated with the human element. A careful review of the purpose of
\nsecondary education could result in a relevant long-term strategic approach towards
\ndeveloping a committed professional workforce. In fact, the basic maritime concepts can
\nbe understood at this level as well as the pros and cons of the industry. As a result those
\nwho decide to take up a career in the future would have done so according to prior
\nknowledge, hence an informed decision that would decrease the number of seafarers
\nleaving the industry.
\n35
\nZheng (2014) highlights that correct training and personal development serves to
\ncultivate the right habits and attitude. An effective and competent seafarer is a
\n\u201cconcept\u201d. For instance, Usain Bolt, world champion 100 meter sprinter from Jamaica
\nstarted training for events at the secondary level, then college level, then regional, then
\nat the international level. The purpose of this example is to demonstrate that a competent
\nseafarer climaxes on the job, but it is a process of training and educating. Therefore, the
\nroad to competence should not be an abrupt intervention procedure at the university
\nlevel, instead, it should be deemed as a process across all levels in the education system.
\nEarly training will make a greater impact on competence as articulated by education
\npsychologists.
\nJournalists and news reporters all need an awareness to propel more positive discussion
\nin the media. Talk shows, parents and children need to start talking about the industry to
\nheighten interest and education. If there is no need for trade, then there is no need for
\nships because shipping is a derived demand (Lan, Lai, & Cheng, 2010). Since people
\nneed shipping, they also need an awareness of shipping.
\n2.9.2 Mitigating the Imbalance between the Supply and Demand of Seafarers
\nAnother contributing factor for MET at the secondary level is the imbalance between the
\nsupply and demand of seafarers. Firstly, the industry is facing shortages of well qualified
\nofficers primarily due to lack of interest in choosing a seafaring career. Secondly, many
\nare leaving the seafaring career for land-based job opportunities. Therefore, constant
\nrecruiting strategies need to be optimized. The demand for seafarers was articulated by
\nthe IMO Secretary General at the Sub-Committee on Human Element, Training and
\nWatchkeeping (HTW), 2nd session, 2-6 February 2015:
\n36
\nTake a look at 15 years ahead, 2030, what will the volume of trade be in 2030?
\nObviously nobody can tell, but amongst the approximately half million officers
\navailable today, probably 150,000 would have left by 2030 due to retirement.
\nJust to maintain the current workforce of officers, 10,000 new officers must be
\ntrained and provided every year to fill the gap created by retiring officers. If
\nseaborne trade expands by 70% by 2030 then we need to train and produce
\n40,000 officers every year. If seaborne trade expands just by 35% by 2030, we
\nwill still need to train and produce 25,000 new officers every year. Maritime
\ntraining is absolutely fundamental for sustainable shipping (Sekimizu, 2015).
\nConsidering the aging profile of the current seafarer, nearing an average of 45, require a
\nradical approach by all concerned in the maritime industry. On the grounds that the
\nshipping industry needs to be an industry of choice for the younger generation, shipping
\ncompanies need to be recognized as employers of choice, in order to attract and keep the
\nyoung generation in the industry (Cahoon and Haugstetter, 2008, as cited in Acar,
\nZiarati, & Ziarati, n.d.). The BIMCO\/ISF 2005 estimated a lack of 270,000 senior
\nofficers by 2015 worldwide. Drewry (2014) reported a shortfall of 19,000 officers and
\nproject ( help with nursing paper writing from experts with MSN & DNP degrees)ed an increased shortfall of 21,700 by 2018. Additionally, Drewry (2015) found
\nthat shipping will require an additional 42,500 officers by 2019. The graph below by
\nDrewry Maritime Research demonstrates that the challenge of imbalance between the
\ndemand and supply of officers can be traced back to 1995. Consequently, the problem
\nhas increased exponentially due to the growth of the industry. The shortfall may vary
\nfrom jurisdiction to jurisdiction nonetheless a global concern has been aroused because
\nshipping is a global industry.
\n37
\nFigure 1: Officer supply and demand
\nSource: Drewry, n.d.
\nIn line with the reported statistics the following was articulated:
\nEmployment of water transportation occupations is project ( help with nursing paper writing from experts with MSN & DNP degrees)ed to grow 13 percent
\nby 2022, as fast as the average for all occupations. As the economy recovers, the
\ndemand for waterway freight shipping will grow, increasing the need for these
\nworkers (Bureau of Labor Statistics, US Department of Labor, 2015).
\nAccording to the Bureau in 2012, 81,600 were employed in water transport. In 2022
\nthere will be a demand of 13% increased employment opportunities. Therefore, 10,900
\nnew employments will be available. Marine Engineers and Naval Architects employed
\n7,300 in 2012; following in 2022 there is a project ( help with nursing paper writing from experts with MSN & DNP degrees)ed 800 available employments for
\nmore marine engineers and naval architects. As such, there is a 10% project ( help with nursing paper writing from experts with MSN & DNP degrees)ed increase
\nof new employment in those specific fields. In summary, the employment of captains,
\nmates, and pilots of water vessels is project ( help with nursing paper writing from experts with MSN & DNP degrees)ed to grow by 14 %. The employment of ship
\nengineers is project ( help with nursing paper writing from experts with MSN & DNP degrees)ed to grow by 8 %. Employment of sailors and marine oilers is
\nproject ( help with nursing paper writing from experts with MSN & DNP degrees)ed to grow by 16 % in 2022. The outlook of employment appears prosperous for
\n38
\nthose who are considering a career in the shipping industry. It is important to note that
\nthe statistics presented are reflective of the American economy. In other words, there is
\nan enormous demand and career opportunity for new-comers to the industry.
\nIn an effort to promote a seafaring career to attract young people the IMO embarked on
\n\u2018Go to Sea\u2019 campaign in November 2008. During the discourse, statistics revealed that
\nonly 22.4% of seafarers purposefully wanted a seafaring career. 18.4% became seafarers
\njust to see the world 15.8% because they wanted better wages, while 7.6% became
\nseafarer because of family tradition (Life at Sea Survey, 2007\/8). Recruiting for the
\nseafaring career is not automatic; too many factors serve as a deterrent. Perhaps, if there
\nwas another career offering the same opportunities (to see the world) like that of the
\nseafaring career the industry would have hastily changed their approach in addressing a
\nnumber of its concerns. Nevertheless, the possibility of such a career may never exist in
\nthe near future; moreover, the need for transporting cargo will always be a demand. On
\nthe back of such assumption the supply and demand of seafarers is one of the major
\nchallenges that call for a creative and strategic long term approach in securing and
\nsustaining the shipping industry.
\n2.9.3 Increased Maritime Awareness
\nIn countries that do not produce essential commodities for example, ripe bananas,
\nmangoes, potatoes, avocados, watermelons, oil or gas for energy and electricity should
\nhave some knowledge of how those items reached their country. The child should have
\nan awareness of how the product gets to the store or market for it to be in the home.
\nAdditionally, they should know by what mode of transportation it arrived, as well as the
\nkey players involved in ensuring that there is always a banana or an orange on the
\nbreakfast table. The respect and appreciation for the committed and dedicated seafarers
\nwho submissively spent weeks and months away from their families and friends facing
\ndangerous working conditions on the high seas, piracy, cultural conflicts and limited
\n39
\nresources for a comfortable life onboard vessels, needs far more respect and appreciation
\nthan they receive. Furthermore, the aspiration of the youth to become a doctor, nurse,
\nlawyer, firefighter, teacher, police officer, carpenter and soldier are delicately wrapped
\naround the talks given during secondary and primary schools. Therefore, the youth
\nadmire and desire those professions because those were the careers they were introduced
\nto when the brain was making sense of what was important (Wilson, Horch, & Irvin,
\n2002). The parents in those professions are normally invited to speak about the
\nprofessions. Hence an appreciation and awareness of the professions developed.
\nIn 2009 a survey conducted in Sweden highlighted the lack of maritime knowledge
\namong the population. Public actors view the sector as merely a transportation sector. As
\nan intervention strategy in 2011 more effort was concentrated in increasing awareness.
\nAs a result, 1072 students were enrolled is one upper secondary school dealing with
\nbasic fishing education (Bressler & Legrand, 2012). Similarly, Kridel (2010) has found
\nthat authentic education must go beyond the \u2018upliftment\u2019 of children to promote an
\nunderstanding of the world. If secondary education adopts such a philosophy, then,
\nmaritime education at the secondary level would not be such a mountain to climb to
\nconvince stakeholders of its importance. Moreover, the education system should feel
\nresponsible to educate the youth for the progressive dynamics of society.
\nAn awareness of how shipping affects people, society and the ocean may result in better
\ngovernance. Hassellov, Turner, Lauer, & Corbett (2013) stated that the oceans have
\nbecome more acidic because the seas have absorbed 30-40% of manmade CO2. Shipping
\nemissions, a significant source of atmospheric pollution, annually release around 9.5
\nmillion metric tons of sulphur and 16.2 million metric tons of nitric oxides. Increasing
\nacidity poses a threat to marine ecosystems, harming species such as coral and algae,
\ncommercial aquaculture species, such as shellfish. Kolieb (2008) has mentioned that
\nemissions from ships can account for approximately 60,000 cardiopulmonary and lung
\n40
\ncancer deaths each year. The increase in carbon dioxide changes the very chemistry of
\nthe ocean, causing it to become more acidic, jeopardizing the future of coral reefs and
\nother organisms that produce calcium carbonate shells and skeletons which could result
\nin the breakdown of many important marine food webs including those upon which
\nhumans depend. Humans too will be directly affected by these changes as huge swaths
\nof coastline will be lost, weather patterns will change and food production methods will
\nbe altered.
\nCase studies in recent years indicate that the populations of whales in certain areas, up to
\none third, have been found dead due to vessel strikes. There have been many reported
\nsightings of whales and dolphins with deformed dorsal fins or flukes and\/or wounds
\nsuggestive of propeller strikes. Many have died from infections resulting from the
\nopening of previous ship strike wounds. (Dolman, Williams-Grey, Asmutis-Silvia, &
\nIsaac, 2014). Additionally, the spread of alien and invasive species, harmful algae,
\nblack-band disease, and red tides to some extent is attributed to shipping activities.
\nIt is necessary to mention that awareness at the secondary level does not serve as a
\nsolution to the death of whales and dolphins or the increase in acidity of the ocean.
\nHowever, awareness can contribute to an increase in protection and governance of
\nshipping activities through good governance and better shipping practices. Good
\ngovernance is defined as
\nThe sum of the many ways individuals and institutions, public and private,
\nmanage their common affairs. It is a continuing process through which
\nconflicting or diverse interests may be accommodated and co-operative action
\nmay be taken. It includes formal institutions and regimes empowered to enforce
\ncompliance, as well as informal arrangements, that people and institutions either
\n41
\nhave agreed to or perceive to be in their interest (Our Global Neighbourhood,
\n1995).
\nIn light of the definition, governance is not only the responsibility of policy makers and
\nstakeholders of the industry but in some respect the general public. Greater success in
\ngovernance can be achieved by involving the human element, which is everyone.
\nPresent and potential future players, route planners, policy makers, tourists, community
\nmembers and global citizens all have a part in maritime and ocean governance. The
\nthought that people are aware of possible negative effects associated with shipping leads
\nto conscious efforts to minimize risk. Secondary education is an open stage for
\nintroducing such awareness to the general populace in a formalized concentrated effort.
\nIt is arguably that the ocean will always have relevance to humanity, some may disagree.
\nNonetheless, maritime transport has been in existence for many decades. Therefore, an
\nabsence of notable recognition at the secondary level may be indicative of a general lack
\nof forward thinking. Many people living on the coastline have no idea of their
\nenvironment, many wear clothes and shoes and have not a basic idea of how they were
\ntransported and who are the special people in the process. As such maritime awareness is
\nnecessary in the 21st century.
\n2.10 Summary
\nIn summarizing, firstly, there are high expectations in secondary education. The
\ntraining of the human element for philosophical and sociological changes in society
\nis a part of the purpose of secondary education that is embedded in the secondary
\ncurriculum. Policy-making is the link to bridge the gap between a competent
\nworkforce and the global labor market. As such a significant interest in sustaining
\nthe industry demands a clear understanding of the implication of supply and
\n42
\ndemand, the human element as well as the lack of maritime awareness of the
\nindustry.
\nSecondly, career training has been a part of western education for decades, little
\nevidence of maritime career education can be found at the secondary level.
\nMoreover, education psychologists have articulated that the young learner is more
\nreceptive to concepts and if given valuable time and exposure will cultivate
\nattitudes, views, passions and action that will impact lifelong decisions.
\nConsequently, the under-representation of MET at the secondary level necessitates
\nnational and global intervention to mitigate the imbalance of supply and demand of
\nseafarers. As a result, the IMO has been intervening through project ( help with nursing paper writing from experts with MSN & DNP degrees)s such as the
\n\u201cgo to sea\u201d campaign. However, legal supremacy of sovereign states is the ultimate
\nsolution for reform and rethinking of the purpose of secondary education.
\nThirdly, it is important that measures be taken from a national standpoint to
\nestablish convincing arguments based on fundamental evidence of the relevance of
\nMET at the secondary level. Furthermore, curriculum reform is a paradigm shift
\nfrom the monolithic secondary education culture to strategize for a long-term
\nsustainable solution.
\n43
\n3 Methodology
\n3.1 Introduction
\nThe main goal of this research is to seek answers for questions related to the Relevance
\nof Maritime Education and Training at the Secondary Level. As such, the questions that
\nrequired answers are:
\n\uf0b7 What are the merits and demerits of MET at the secondary level?
\n\uf0b7 What are the policies and practices that influence MET at the secondary level?
\n\uf0b7 What are the trends and challenges that warrant MET at the secondary level?
\n\uf0b7 What is the role of stakeholders in the process? Then finally,
\n\uf0b7 How does MET at the secondary level translate to sustainability?
\nThe mixed method approach was used in answering the research questions. \u201cMixedmethods research helps in complementing one method with another even where these
\nmethods are derived from different methodological positions\u201d (Manuel, 2011 p. 75). The
\nchapter will be examined in four sections firstly, the selection of participants, secondly,
\nthe instrumentation, thirdly, the data collection, fourthly, the data analyses. Then, the
\nchapter ends with a summary.
\n3.2 Selection of Participants
\nThe researcher used the purposive sampling and random survey method in selecting
\nparticipants (Lunenburg & Irby, 2008). As such, no geographical area was exempted
\nfrom the study. The researcher in seeking a wide cross section of views has targeted
\nmaritime professionals, and persons who have studied and affiliated with the sector such
\nas educators, seafarers, administrators and policy makers who were willing to
\nparticipate. The target starting age group was twelve years, male and female students
\nfrom the secondary school level.
\n44
\nAgainst that background students from the World Maritime University were selected, as
\nwell as other respondents from many other jurisdictions. Individuals were also selected
\nusing the criterion sample method on the basis that they had some knowledge of the
\nmaritime industry, for example individuals employed in maritime related fields such as
\nthe maritime administration of the different jurisdictions. Further, snowball sampling
\nwas another of the strategy selected where a few persons were asked to identify other
\npersons within their jurisdiction to participate in the research.
\n3.3 Instrumentation
\nThe research instrument describes the particular tool the researcher used to measure the
\nvariables specified in the research questions (Rudestam & Newton, 2007). This research
\nhas utilised the mixed method approach using both qualitative and quantitative methods.
\nAn electronic questionnaire and a semi-structured interview instrument were
\nconstructed. The instruments are discussed independently.
\n3.4 Research Ethics
\nIt is important to note that the research instruments were approved by the University\u2019s
\nResearch Ethics Committee. All participants gave approval for the content of the
\ninterviews to be used in the research. In keeping with the assurance of confidentially
\nfictitious names are used for the reporting of data.
\n3.5 Questionnaire Instrument
\nThe electronic questionnaire (see appendix 3) consisted of twenty-five (25) items,
\ntwenty (20) mandatory questions and five (5) open-ended. In testing the validity and
\nreliability of the instrument a pilot test was done using eight (8) participants from the
\nMaritime Education and Training (MET) specialisation group at the World Maritime
\nUniversity (WMU) and the Caribbean Maritime Institute (CMI) in Jamaica. As a result
\nitems eleven (11) and sixteen (16) were amended.
\n45
\n3.6 Interview Instrument
\nThe semi-structured interviews (see appendix 2) used open-ended questions to allow
\nparticipants freedom in responding to the questions (Sowell & Casey, 1982 as cited by
\nLunenburg & Irby, 2008). The instrument consisted of eleven (11) items directly related
\nto the research questions. Six participants were selected and interviewed from six
\ndifferent jurisdictions according to the following three categories; countries that have
\nimplemented MET at the secondary level, countries that have not implemented MET at
\nthe secondary level and countries that had implemented MET at the secondary level but
\nhad discontinued. Questions were designed to give participants an opportunity to assess
\nthe merits and demerits of implementing MET at the secondary level as well as the
\npolicies and practices to enact implementation.
\n3.7 Data Collection
\n3.7.1 Quantitative Method
\nIn seeking samples for the research a number of contacts were made during field studies
\nto IMO in London, the Philippines, the Netherlands, Portugal and Norway. Additional
\ncontacts were made during the MET symposium held at WMU in May 2015. Thirtyfive (35) business cards were collected from delegates representing seventeen countries.
\nFollowing the approval of the instruments steps were taken to email copies of the
\nquestionnaire to over 50 participants of the Caribbean Maritime Institute. After two days
\n6 responses were received. Another group of participants from the MET specialization
\nwere sent copies of the questionnaire however only two responses were received. Those
\neight responses were used as the pilot sample. In addition to the previous groups, the
\nthirty-five delegates were also sent electronic copies of the questionnaire. In two weeks
\n(60) responses were received on the Google spread sheet. Furthermore, the researcher
\nwas given a master list of all the heads of the maritime administrators within the
\nCaribbean region and all sixty administrators were sent electronic copies. Participants
\n46
\nwere advised to forward copies to relevant personnel within their departments or
\nministries, however only a few responded. Further strategies were employed where the
\n107 students of WMU were also sent copies of the questionnaire. The researcher deemed
\nthe sample appropriate since all students were aware of the maritime industry and were
\npursuing a Master\u2019s Degree in maritime related fields from over forty (40) countries.
\nOnce again only a little over 20% responded. Copies of the questionnaire were sent to
\nthree of the maritime academies in the United States but no response was received.
\nParticipants were given adequate time to respond as well as timely reminders. Due to
\ntime constraints the instrument was closed on August 10, 2015 at 3:26 pm.
\n3.7.2 Qualitative Method
\nThe qualitative method of data collection strategy incorporated making contacts.
\nApproximately sixteen participants were contacted for interview, consequently only six
\nresponded. Firstly, the interview consent form was sent through electronic mail to
\nparticipants. Secondly, all six were interviewed. The countries the participants
\nrepresented were: Norway, the Netherlands, the UK, Egypt, Guatemala, and the US.
\nTwo were interviewed during the Norway field studies. Two were interviewed at the
\nWMU while the other two were interviewed using the ZOOM meetings online platform.
\nInterviews were recorded with participant\u2019s permission. Thirdly, all interviews were
\nthen transcribed. The selected sample is consisted of three males and three females.
\nMoreover, interviews were scheduled according to the interviewee\u2019s availability.
\nHowever, those on the field studies were not scheduled in advance. The interviewees
\nwere professors at maritime universities, Helpant Dean for Libraries at the University
\nin South California who had started researching on maritime careers and the shortage of
\nlibrary material in maritime education, the Head of Maritime Training and Human
\nElement section at the IMO and the final participant was a student specializing in MET
\nat WMU. The interviews lasted within an hour. The participants were encouraged to
\nshare their institutional as well as personal view on the subject of MET at the secondary
\n47
\nlevel. One of the benefits of the semi-structured interview was that questions are formed
\nto get thorough responses as well as to allow probing of answers for more depth.
\n3.8 Data Analyses
\n3.8.1 Quantitative Analyses
\nQuantitative analyses of the data from questionnaire responses were analysed by
\nexamining the demographic information of participants using comparative analyses of
\nmale-female responses, age group responses, responses as per jurisdiction as well as
\nregion. Pie charts, tables and graphs were capitalised on to display descriptive statistics.
\nThe Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 19 (SSPS) was used for data
\nanalysis, specifically for Chi-square analysis for association and relationship between
\ncategorical variables (Dewberry, 2005). Further, graphics for descriptive statistics were
\ngenerated from Google Spreadsheet.
\n3.8.2 Qualitative Analyses
\nThe Atlas.ti2
\nqualitative analyses software was used to analyse the transcribed
\ninterviews. After that, responses were coded in themes according to repetition of
\nparticular sayings. Then, interviews were analysed on a comparative basis in terms of
\ngeographical location and experiences of participants as well as the involvement or
\ninfluence of the participant at a national level.
\n3.9 Summary
\nThe purpose of the methods chosen was to validate answers to the relevance of MET at
\nthe secondary level, through purposive and random survey sample selection. The mixedmethod was deemed suitable for employing qualitative and quantitative instruments of
\nquestionnaire and interview. Concerted efforts were made in data collection to ensure<\/p>\n
2 http:\/\/atlasti.com\/
\n48
\nwide cross sections of jurisdictions were represented in the study. Finally, data was
\nanalysed using Atlas.ti, and SPSS (version 19). The findings and results of the data are
\npresented in chapter 4.
\n49
\n4 Presentation and Analyses of Data
\n4.1 Introduction
\nThis chapter presents the results and analyses of the study examining the Relevance of
\nMET at the Secondary school Level. The specific questions guiding the study are:
\n\uf0b7 What are the merits and demerits of MET at the secondary level?
\n\uf0b7 What are the national practices and underlying policies that inform the delivery
\nof MET at the secondary level?
\n\uf0b7 What are the current trends and challenges within the maritime industry that may
\nwarrant MET at the secondary level?
\n\uf0b7 How can MET at the secondary level translate to sustainable development within
\nthe maritime industry?
\n\uf0b7 What is the role of stakeholders in implementing MET at the secondary level?
\nWith reference to the tools described in chapter 3 particularly Atlas.ti (qualitative data
\nanalyses software) a number of codes (20) were initially generated. Upon reviewing the
\ncodes some were combined forming sub-code groups; some were deleted, while others
\nwere renamed. As a result, the end product of the coding process led to six (6) main
\nthemes namely: awareness, secondary education system, stakeholders, benefits,
\nchallenges, and strategies. The main codes were support by ten (10) sub-codes. Results
\nof the qualitative data analyses are presented first using the five main themes followed
\nby the quantitative results using descriptive and inferential statistics.
\n50
\n4.2 Qualitative Data Analyses
\n4.2.1 Awareness
\n4.2.1.1 Level of awareness
\nThe relevance of MET at the secondary level within any jurisdiction lies in how much is
\nknown about the industry. Awareness is to know about something, whether through
\nprimary or secondary experiences (Collins, 1995). One of the buzzwords articulated
\nfrequently by participants was \u2018awareness\u2019. The level of maritime knowledge depended
\non various factors such as geography and the jurisdiction\u2019s interest in the industry.
\nTherefore MET at the secondary level is motivated by the jurisdictions\u2019 interest in the
\nindustry and geographical proximity to key places. Awareness appears to be one of the
\nmain initiating factors in the process of recognising the relevance for implementing
\nMET at the secondary level. The following was articulated by participants. All
\nstatements were transcribed and are shown below verbatim.
\nJean, Female, Helpant Dean at Southern California University in the US
\nI do not think maritime education is exposed to our kids as a viable career option
\nin the US. This sparked my interest because worldwide it is a huge employer so
\nhaving such a big industry that is not going away. With job security low,
\nespecially when we are in a recession, it is very odd that this field is not being
\npromoted.
\nBob, Male, Senior Manager, International Organization
\nYounger people are unaware of this industry at that age. The only time they do
\nbecome aware is when they are looking for employment. They find this field as
\none of the ways to try and find employment but quite often the percentage of
\ndrop-out is quite high because they find that this is not what they wanted and that
\nis a loss of investment.
\n51
\nDrop-out is an important point mentioned by Bob. There is a need for discussion in
\nregards to factors leading to the drop-out of seafarers. A number of possibilities are
\nworth examining, however providing pros and cons of the industry at an early stage is
\nfitting for youths making an informed decision for their career path.
\nSillia, Female, Professor at Maritime University in Egypt
\nMaritime education at the secondary level is under-represented [as regards to
\ncurriculum at the secondary level].
\nKelvin, Male, Professor, the Netherlands
\nThe long history of this domain where everybody knows what ships are is not
\nautomatic anymore. In Netherlands our generation said if your uncle,
\ngrandfather, cousin brother and you have been in the business there is no need of
\nintroducing this education at the lower level.
\n4.2.1.2 Geography
\nIn a number of jurisdictions\u2019 awareness seems to be linked to geographical factors. The
\nlocation of ports and MET institutions within communities contributes to the citizen\u2019s
\ninterest and understanding of the industry. The knowledge of maritime domains signifies
\nthe possibilities of being employed in the port or studying at the institution(s).
\nFurthermore, the youth are targeted as possible candidates for matriculation within
\nprogrammes as well as for employment; hence the level of awareness in those
\ncommunities appears to be relatively higher.
\nTania, Female, Professor at Norwegian Maritime University
\nIt depends on where you are from. If you are from the coast of Norway, you will
\nhave a very high degree of knowledge because it is very important to that coast.
\nIf you are from the inland or capital areas, then you don\u2019t know much. A lot of
\n52
\npersons know that there are ship owners, but not so much of the Maritime
\nIndustry (maritime industry) so there is a knowledge gap of the industry.
\nAndre, Male, MET Student at WMU from Guatemala
\nWe started maybe 5 years ago with a local campaign but we did not have enough
\nresources to cover all the national territories. The ministry of national defense
\ndesignated some quantity of money to create local campaigns around our ports
\nbecause these persons are connected with this kind of environment.
\nJean, Female, Helpant Dean at Southern California University in the US
\nThe US has just a handful of university level of maritime training so I\u2019m trying
\nto figure out who in those schools are in charge of the outreach so we can get
\nfirst hand as to what it is that they do and how broad it is. I suspect that it is very
\nnarrow and aimed at schools that are geographically close to the universities.
\nThe recognition of the low level of maritime awareness on a global scale has propelled
\nthe IMO to create strategies to mitigate this knowledge gap. One of the initiatives was to
\nappoint \u2018IMO Ambassadors\u2019 in member states.
\nWe are also considering the idea of \u2018\u2019IMO Ambassadors\u2019\u2019 to be appointed in
\nIMO Member States to carry out a serious campaign for the promotion of
\ninternational shipping and the maritime industry, for example an open day at
\nIMO for school children and a symposium in September on maritime education
\nand training (Sekimizu, 2015).
\n4.3 Secondary Education System
\n4.3.1 Structure of Secondary Education and Curriculum
\nThe influence of the philosophical, sociological and psychological domains that defines
\nthe fundamental infrastructure and development of secondary education is rooted in the
\n53
\nheart of the curriculum. (Tanner, 1990) These are the factors that may mandate a
\nparadigm shift in the structure of secondary education. Participants agreed with
\narguments made by Kridel, (2010), Pinto (2012) Chan (2012 and Print (1993) for the
\nSecondary school curriculum to be reformed.
\nBetty, 50-year-old Female, manager – Belize
\nThe Education sector is too traditional bound. There is a lack of understanding
\nthat education need to be more relevant to the opportunities.
\nSillia, Female, Professor at Maritime University in Egypt
\nTechnical education is one of the branches of education that need improvement
\nover the years. First of all, we need to look at the secondary level schools, the
\ntrainers as well as the curriculum. Another problem is getting qualified maritime
\ntrainers, if there are qualified trainers and a good curriculum then there will be
\nqualified students.
\n42-year-old Female, advisor \u2013Australia
\nThe Australian curriculum has lost focus on delivering vocational training, rather
\nfocusing on subjects that schedule people for universities than trade and
\nprofessional careers.
\nKelvin, Male, Professor, the Netherlands
\nThe curriculum in the secondary school is not highly defined by the government
\nsuch as history, geography and other subjects. It has evolved, and now there is
\ninformation computer training (ICT). This is as far as the government used to go,
\nbut it is now up to the educators to make the curriculum. They would now
\ninclude maritime aspects if they considered it important.
\n54
\nA situational analysis of the secondary education curriculum in fulfilling the civic,
\ndemocratic and job-related objectives of society is indicative of an intervention. In
\nillustrating this point a number of the participants expressed that the design of the
\nsecondary curriculum must fit the purpose of society. As such curriculum reform is
\nneeded for an increased maritime awareness at the secondary education.
\n4.3.2 Human Resource
\nIn a more realistic context the lack of maritime awareness at the secondary level shows,
\nfirstly, that human resource is important for capacity building as well as to train the
\nstudents. Participants shared that having qualified human resource informs the decision
\nmaking process of implementing MET at the secondary level. Secondly, it informs if the
\nrequired resources (instructors) are available to undertake the implementation. The
\nparticipants articulated the following:
\nBob, Male, Senior Manager, Doctoral dissertation writing service Canada International Organization
\nEvery country should encourage the maritime education frame work. Part of the
\nteachers training or career development could also look at the option of maritime
\ntrainers. You cannot take an ex seafarer and turn them into a trainer overnight.
\nYou need to get that training aspect within the teacher framework and blend that
\nwith the maritime expertise. If you don\u2019t take an initiative to create an awareness
\nof this industry then this industry cannot have a sustained [supply of] competent
\nhuman resource. That is the importance of creating the awareness. Like in any
\nother industry, you create the advantage. You don\u2019t expect a 100% bargain. If
\nyou can get 50%, where you did not have 50% before, you are expected to win.
\nThe problem globally is that, those that leave are not replaced by persons that are
\nequipped fully to carry out the work. One of the primary reasons is that industries
\ndon\u2019t have people to run the industry. People are hesitant to dialogue mainly
\nbecause of money. This needs a sustainable solution. This starts from the lowest
\n55
\nlevel, secondary school. This is a long-term plan and solution that needs
\ncommitted people
\nKelvin, Male, Professor, the Netherlands
\nGetting the teachers to understand the maritime industry is important. The
\nteachers of geography should understand what the maritime profession is all
\nabout. The mathematics teacher should know how mathematics is applicable to
\nthe navigation field. In this way the maritime concept and awareness can increase
\nnot only to the students but to parents, society, and teachers within secondary
\nschools.
\nAndre, Male, MET Student at WMU from Guatemala
\nThe increase in the number of ship means that we need more seafarers. We need
\nmore officers, more managers more operators and more people to work in the
\nactivities of these vessels. For example cruise; the cruise business is trying to
\nopen new areas to explore for the tourist industry such as the polar region. That
\nis why IMO is developing the Polar Code because there is an increase in the
\nnumber of vessels that are visiting this area. Therefore there is going to be a
\nnecessity for people.
\n4.3.3 Sustainability
\nFor the continuity and preservation of the maritime industry the concept of a sustained
\nindustry was voiced by a number of the participants. Importantly, the rates of change
\nthat has been experienced in the industry globally, as well as unpredictable changes,
\nwere concerns expressed by the participants. As a result, secondary education was
\nhighlighted as one of the lasting strategies that jurisdictions could use as a mitigating
\n56
\napproach to enhanced sustainability for resilience, maintenance, improving and adapting
\nto changes within the industry.
\nBob, Male, Senior Manager, International Organization
\nI think it is an investment for the future than a profit in the shorter, quicker term.
\nWe are talking about a resource here for the long term sustenance; for this
\nindustry\u2019s sustainability. And to have that sustainability, companies or the
\nindustries need to invest in people and that investment should begin at a younger
\nage and the return from that investment is not tomorrow but in the long run.
\nJean, Female, Helpant Dean at Southern California University in the US
\nIn teaching the 13 and 15 years old children, the future of the industry is
\nguaranteed. One may not see the need now but it is necessary for the future. So,
\nit\u2019s better to educate the population for what is coming in the future. I\u2019m sure all
\nthe stakeholders want to be in business the next 20 years.
\n4.4 Stakeholders
\n4.4.1 Policy
\nCrucial to the implementation of MET at the secondary level as expressed by
\nparticipants, is the role of the stakeholders. They are the core and epicentre for
\npropagating the need for awareness, for curriculum reform and for creating MET policy
\nframework. \u0141opuski (2008) as found that domestic commercial legal framework of
\nmaritime policy was more evident in the nineteen century. Participants also shared
\nsimilar arguments. Much mention was made of the lack of policy in stirring the
\nimplementation of MET at the secondary level and the general development of the local
\nindustry. Furthermore, stakeholder\u2019s interest in the maritime industry appears to be
\nstifled by lack of knowledge. Meanwhile, political will in some jurisdictions were
\n57
\nmuzzled by the definition of who were the stakeholders and who had authority to
\ndetermine the actions to be taken in the interest of the industry.
\nKelvin, Male, Professor, the Netherlands
\nWho are the ship-owners nowadays? In the old days it was the seafarer\u2019s family.
\nThey had a feel for the profession. Nowadays the ship-owners are the banks, the
\nmedical surgeons who have a lot of spare money. They purchase a few ships and
\nlet the crew agent manage the ships. Part of the problem in the industry is to
\nidentify who the ship-owners are. Sometimes they are not knowledgeable of the
\nshipping industry. In the past, shipping was a family business and they wanted to
\nmaintain the fleet for the future. But now it is quick money and then the money is
\ngone which today is an interesting mechanism.
\nAndre, Male, MET Student at WMU from Guatemala
\nThe country has to learn how other countries develop this kind of policy,
\ncountries such as Japan, UK, and Denmark. Each country is different and each
\nculture is different so we need to learn what they are doing and try to implement
\nthis in our society if we can implement it. Hopefully, we will have to do some
\nchanges but I think that is the first step in order for us to know what we can do.
\nAlso I think we can ask international experts in education to come to our country
\nand to find out what we have to do. My country has only developed a maritime
\npolicy in 2014.
\n58
\n50 years old, Female, Manager, \u2013 Belize
\nThe lack of understanding of the policy makers as to the opportunities available
\nin the Maritime Sector is a barrier in promoting the industry to cultivate an
\ninterest. Perhaps those in the field want to keep the industry exclusive.
\nTony, 49-year-old, Male, Supervisor- South Africa<\/p>\n
The main area of the maritime industry is not run by the governing political party
\nand they don’t want to Help this province for political reasons. Politics!!!!!!! Got
\nto love it!
\nSillia, Female, Professor at Maritime University in Egypt
\nWhat is needed is for the national authority to look into the policy and
\ndeficiencies of the technical schools and the secondary schools. Also the policy
\nmakers do not have any national policy over the years to encourage a set of
\nstrategies towards students joining the maritime field at the secondary level.
\nBob, Male, Senior Manager, International Organization
\nIt comes down to the national policy makers of the country to show how widely
\nimportant shipping is and for the maritime industry to enhance for the next
\ngeneration.
\n4.4.2 Interest of the country
\nIt has been found that the stakeholder\u2019s interest in the industry was motivated by their
\ndependency and benefits from the industry. Jurisdictions that depend on the industry
\neconomically appeared to be more committed in developing policies to educate at the
\nsecondary level e.g. Norway as indicated by Tania below. On the other hand, those that
\ndo not see much economic benefit were less likely to promulgate MET at the secondary
\n59
\nlevel for e.g. Kelvin. The following are articulated in context of countries that
\nimplement MET at the secondary level, countries that had implemented but discontinued
\nand countries that had not implemented MET at the secondary level.
\n\uf0b7 Country that Implemented MET at Secondary Level
\nTania \u2013 Female, Professor at Norwegian Maritime University
\nThe maritime authorities in Norway tell us how they want MET to be
\nimplemented. They are the ones that approve the study plans. The national
\nmaritime policy was developed in 2006. However, it is the ministry of education
\nthat governs the schools. We are basically governed by two laws. If you do not
\nchoose as students, at the secondary level, to be taught the maritime education,
\nthen you will not be introduced to that area. The maritime industry is our second
\nlargest exporter after gas so it creates large revenue for the country. The industry
\nemploys about 120,000 people so it is extremely visible. We are also one of the
\nworld\u2019s only complete maritime clusters. We also have another track in Norway
\nto raise awareness to the young people; it is called ocean talent camp. We also
\nhave something called ocean space race but those are for secondary education
\nstudents who haven\u2019t chosen maritime courses. So, we have several things that
\nwe do in Norway to raise awareness.
\n\uf0b7 Countries that have not Implemented MET at Secondary Level
\nMark, 51 year-old male, Marine Surveyor – India
\nCurrently the major focus in India is [more] on the information technology sector
\nthan on the maritime sector; more publicity at the secondary level may pave the
\nway for students who are trying to pursue an education in maritime training.
\n60
\nPeter, 44 year-old Manager, male – Guatemala
\nThe Guatemala government is not interested in creating and developing maritime
\npolicy or laws in favor of MET or the sea. “Fish do not give votes during the
\npresidential elections.”
\n\uf0b7 Country that had Implemented MET at Secondary Level but had discontinued
\nEconomics was a dominant factor for the starting and the continuation of MET at the
\nsecondary level. A participant from one of the jurisdictions that have implemented MET
\nat the secondary level but had subsequently stopped articulated the following.
\nKelvin, Male, Professor, the Netherlands
\nNetherlands had stopped offering MET at the secondary level because there was
\nhardly any interest of the youths for that. The ratings from Philippines were more
\neconomical than from Netherlands so they were not employing Netherlands
\nratings anymore. And so the interest for rating type training went down. So there
\nwas hardly any interest there in making the system to educate them.
\nIt is noteworthy to mention that the Netherlands did not implement MET at the
\nsecondary level as a means to introduce a maritime career option but as a certification
\nfor ratings. Also, there were a number of other countries that had not implemented Met
\nat the secondary level. However, India and Guatemala were used as examples.
\n4.5 Benefits
\nEvidently, the presence of a basic maritime background at the secondary level serves as
\na promising professional career. Jurisdictions predominantly and profoundly embraced
\nthe relevance of such a choice having expressed the numerous benefits that may be
\nexperienced from implementing MET at the secondary level. It is noteworthy that the
\n61
\npurpose of secondary education to prepare youths for job-related duties was one of the
\nforceful factors that were articulated by participants.
\n4.5.1 Career Opportunities
\nBob, Male, Senior Manager, International Organization
\nThe merit of an introduction to MET at the secondary level is for the overall
\nadvancement of this industry itself and the potential for younger people to
\nchoose this as an avenue for future employment. The positive impact also is that
\nthose that choose to enroll in this program would be the beneficiaries that serve
\nthe mature part of the industry in the later stages of their lives. The benefit will
\nbe as a result of the initial initiation and that message will stay with them.
\nKelvin, Male, Professor, the Netherlands
\nChildren at that level are still making up their minds of what they want to do.
\nIntroducing it will give the awareness so that they can decide if they want such a
\ncareer. This is the system that we had for many years where we go to high
\nschools to bring this kind of awareness. For example, the students were able to
\nhear from the shipping companies and students that were enrolled in the
\nmaritime programme as well as lecturers. The parents who were there at the
\nschool are able to hear about what the maritime business is all about.
\nThe point made by Kelvin is a perspective shared by Athanasios & Adolf, (2011) of
\nthe lack of push by the industry and relevant actors in getting young people to
\npursue maritime careers. It is at the secondary level that career education is
\nintroduced to the youth. At this level career exposition is done where schools
\nintroduce options (Haun, 2014). Therefore, there is a platform where the maritime
\n62
\nindustry can be considered as a viable career option. Parents are more involved in
\ntheir children\u2019s lives during this stage; as such education outreach can expand itself
\nbeyond the classroom into the homes.
\n4.5.2 Making Global Citizens
\nJean, Female, Helpant Dean at Southern California University in the US
\nMy dissertation was on global citizenship and education. I believe education is
\nan equalizer. We are becoming a globalized world. Any industry that is global
\nhas an inherent value because people going in the field are going to be global
\ncitizens. You cannot be in maritime field and not understand the cultural
\ndifferences of the people on the boat with you. This field will breed better global
\ncitizens.
\nThe key points of \u2018Global Citizen\u2019 and \u2018Education is an Equalizer\u2019 made by Jean are
\ngood examples of providing equal opportunity to the youth in career choices across all
\nprofessions and industries. In a global industry such as the maritime industry, cultural
\nawareness is an important element in developing tolerance as well as an appreciation for
\nother cultures. This was also articulated by Danns and Span, (2008) as one of the
\nstrategies used by the USA at the secondary level in mitigating cultural differences
\nduring the peak of influx of nationals from different countries.
\n4.5.3 Agent of Change
\nAndre, Male, MET Student at WMU from Guatemala
\nThese young people will be the agents of change in the society to open
\nour eyes to the sea and see what we are losing with the resource that we
\nhave. They are going to spread this information to the society. I think that
\nwould be one of the main points for us to show how important the sea is.
\nThese young people can be this change in our society.
\n63
\n4.6 Challenges
\nA number of challenges were foreseen as barriers in implementing MET at the
\nsecondary level. The following were expressed.<\/p>\n
Jean, Female, Helpant Dean at Southern California University in the US
\nThe biggest challenge is presenting this in an economically easy way for our
\nschools to adopt it. I think we should use means that are free to overcome our
\nchallenge. The second challenge is showing that there are jobs available in this
\nfield. The Bureau of Labour Statistics in the US provides this information. These
\nclusters may not all agree on how work should be done. They may not agree on
\nwhat part of the industry should be shown in the outreach program. There also
\nmight be some conflicting interest among the stakeholders that have to be dealt
\nwith delicately. How do we get both the stakeholders to be happy and buy in? In
\norder to solve any problem we have to ask the persons having the problem how
\ndo they believe it can be solved. We are then able to develop solutions around
\nthat.
\nMarcus, Male, Mariner -South Africa
\nFew realize the importance of the maritime industry\/shipping to the country’s
\neconomy. While its importance is recognized in some quarters, the
\nimplementation of maritime education is poorly planned, and those with
\nexperience are largely ignored in favour of quick-fix “grand” schemes that do not
\nwork. Little attention is given to the proper and thorough training of teachers in
\nthe maritime field. This is such a complex industry with its own ethos, jargon
\n64
\nand work ethic – and teacher training is of paramount importance. Sadly, that has
\nbeen neglected.
\nBob, Male, Senior Manager, International Organization
\nThe biggest challenge – which has been a challenge before – is to engage with the
\nmanagers. Everyone needs to talk to each other. Administrations have the
\nresponsibilities for putting in regulations and rules. Companies have the duty to
\nimplement and adhere to rules. One cannot work without the other; if the rules
\naren\u2019t there then no one has any rules to follow. These rules govern how
\noperations should be taken out. Without making and implementing them
\ncompanies will have nothing to follow or even know of anything to follow. This
\nmay cause chaos when the roles are questioned. Therefore communication with
\nall factions is an important and key.
\n4.7 Strategies
\nAs highlighted, the strategic approach in implementing MET at the secondary level
\nvaries from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. There is no single policy to fit all. However, the
\nbottom line as expressed by participants after examining the shortfall of policy and
\npolitical will comes down to networking\/collaboration and an understanding of the
\nimportance of the industry. The IMO, in a view that validates the proposed strategies
\nexpressed by participants states \u201cthere will be a distinct role for governments, for
\nindustry, for international organizations and for all actors to collaborate with the aim of
\nachieving the three dimensions of sustainable development across the Maritime
\nTransportation System – the economic, social, and environmental dimensions\u201d (IMO,
\n2013, p. 10). The following points were voiced by participants.
\n65
\nKelvin, Male, Professor, the Netherlands
\nTo get this into policy for countries that see the need, the educators in this
\nrespect play a very vital role [together with other stakeholders]. [For example]
\nthe move from mono training to dual training in the Willem Barentsz Maritiem
\nInstituut (Dutch spelling) in Netherlands was a collaborative effort from the
\nMinistry of Transport, the education sector, the shipping associations and the
\nseafarers\u2019 association. All these four together were at the table and they all
\nagreed to alter the traditional seafaring education system from mono to dual
\npurpose.
\nBob, Male, Senior Manager, International Organization
\nA part of the national policy is to send the message out. It should be part of the
\nadministration\u2019s duty to roll out some kind of national program of awareness and
\nsupported by MET individuals. The providers are the experts in this subject. e.g.,
\nmanaging directors as well as the trainers should have knowledge of the
\nfunctioning of the MET and the importance of the MET.
\nTania \u2013 Female, Professor at Norwegian Maritime University
\nIf we ought to raise awareness we cannot leave this to the secondary students or
\ninstitutions. We have to give it to someone who has the outreach of people;
\nSocial media and going into lower levels and talking about the industry. It must
\nnot be the education system responsibility only. I don\u2019t think they have all the
\nresources to do that. The awareness that we are doing is getting persons to know
\nthat we have a maritime industry. Many persons still don\u2019t know how valuable
\nthis industry is. So, we are promoting the values and importance of the industry.
\n66
\nJean, Female, Helpant Dean at Southern California University in the US
\nWe would probably not be successful at the federal level because we would be
\nsaying that the federal government has to provide this outreach service. We
\nshould start around the cities that have major ports and maritime universities
\nbecause those cities would most likely want to work with us. We could use
\napplication to universities; we would work with some important school districts,
\nassembly, and career day. This would spread naturally by outreach programs.
\nSillia, Female, Professor at Maritime University in Egypt
\nThe work of the ministry and the head of state are to do their best to propagate
\nthe industry. I have organized conferences and workshop as a part of my role in
\nbringing awareness. This too can be done through conferences and national
\nmedia to bring awareness of the implementation of the maritime industry at the
\nsecondary level. They have a role to play in the optimization of the maritime
\nindustry.
\nAwareness is one of the benefits of MET at the secondary level. While there are other
\nstrategies that can be utilized to bring awareness, the secondary level is where a farreaching impact can be made.
\n4.8 Quantitative Analyses
\nIn administering the survey instrument a total of 98 participants answered the
\nquestionnaire. Of the 98 respondents 8 were used as a pilot test and are not included in
\nthe analyses. As a result, the final data count for analyses is N= 90. The data was coded
\nfor inferential analyses (Chi-square analysis of categorical variables) using the Statistical
\nPackage for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software (v.19) (Dewberry, 2005).
\n67
\nThe average age of 42.4 of the sample\u2019s demographics for age, gender ratio, region and
\nlevel of education is shown in figure 1. The percentage indicates rate of participation.
\nTable 1: Demographic Information
\nAnalysing the quantitative data from survey it was found that 76% of the sample were
\nemployees. From the 76%, 33% were mangers 19% were supervisors and 10% were
\ndirectors. 73% of participants were aware of the maritime industry in comparison with
\n81% who were affiliated with the maritime industry. Majority of the participant\u2019s
\ninterest in the industry was motivated by economic benefit at 43% while 36% were
\nmotivated to pursue maritime careers and 33% wanted to travel the world. It should be
\nnoted that the related motives were found in the literature (life at Sea Survey 2007\/8).
\nAn important finding was that only 34% said that MET was offered at the secondary
\nlevel while 54% said there was no MET exposure at the secondary level in their
\njurisdiction while 13% did not know. 78 % of participants who had MET at a higher
\nlevel stated that having MET at the secondary level would have helped.
\n68
\nFigure 2 Response to Secondary School with MET
\nA number of dependent and independent variables were tested for association using Chisquare. However there were no indications of substantial relationship among those
\ntested. One could intuitively assume that variables would have mapped for statistical
\nsignificance however results were unexpected. For example: chi-square was used to
\nexamine the age of participants with those that had maritime awareness. The relationship
\nbetween age group and awareness was not statistically significant, chi-square (8, N=86)
\n=8.094, p = 0.424. In spite of an absence of statistical significance a different view can
\nbe interrogated from the finding. It should not be assumed that those who are older are
\nmore aware of the maritime industry; age seemed not to be a factor in how much people
\nknow about the industry. Therefore intervention to increase maritime awareness should
\ntarget all age groups. Secondly, it was found that the participant\u2019s position in the
\norganisation was not related to their awareness of the industry. As this relationship was
\nalso found to have no statistical significance, it appears that position in the organisation
\nis not an indication of maritime awareness. Hence as it related to stakeholder and policy
\nmakers they should not be overlooked as a target group for awareness creation. It would
\nalso imply that the lack of maritime policy could be related to lack of awareness by
\nthose in authority to create policy. Chi-square also showed that 27.7 % of the African
\nand Caribbean regions agreed that MET at the secondary level would sustain the
\nmaritime industry, compared with 23% Asian region, 14% European region and 6.4%
\n69
\nof the North and South America region agreed that MET at the secondary level could
\nsustain the maritime sector (see appendix for 4 graphs).
\n4.9 Summary
\nChapter 4 have shown that
\n\uf0b7 Participants articulated the need for awareness in the context of the jurisdiction\u2019s
\ninterest.
\n\uf0b7 Numerous benefits for MET at the secondary level were indicated.
\n\uf0b7 However, there is a need for collaboration and the creation of policy for the
\nimplementation of MET at the secondary level.
\nThe discussion of the findings is done in chapter 5.
\n70
\n5 Discussion of Findings
\nThe presentation and analyses of the data were reported in chapter four. As such, the
\nstructure of this chapter consists of a summary of the study, discussion of the findings,
\nimplications for practice, recommendations for further study and a conclusion. Further,
\nan understanding of concepts and ideas that were studied will be expounded on in
\ncontext of the research questions and objectives on the relevance of MET at the
\nsecondary level. Discussion will be undertaken in respect of the literature, linking the
\nimpact of introducing maritime concepts to the learner during the early years. Data that
\nhas been reported will be examined to extract support as well as connection to ideas.
\n5.1 Summary of the Study
\nThe purpose of this study was to substantiate answers to the relevance of MET at the
\nsecondary level. The guided questions were: What are the merits and demerits of MET
\nat the secondary level? What are the national practices and underlying policies that
\ninform the delivery of MET at the secondary level? What are the current trends and
\nchallenges within the maritime industry that may warrant MET at the secondary level?
\nHow can MET at the secondary level translate to sustainable development within the
\nmaritime industry? What is the role of stakeholders in implementing MET at the
\nsecondary level?
\nMaritime education and training does not have a visible presence at the secondary level.
\nMoreover, literature in this domain is significantly lacking as such the effect of MET at
\nthe secondary level on the maritime industry is not known. As a global industry it is
\nimportant to educate the youth about the critical role of the industry on the global
\neconomy and society in general. As such, the theoretical framework of this study is to
\nlink the impact of early education on the maritime sector and in a general sense the
\nsociety at large. Additionally, the lack of awareness of the industry\u2019s existence limits the
\n71
\nviable option of increased entrance to the industry as well as the creation of a sustained
\nentry of high-calibre of human resource to the maritime workforce. Against that
\nbackground the study was employed to add information to the domain.
\nThe study included 102 participants. Of the 102, 98 participated in the survey, 6 were
\ninterviewed, and 2 of the 6 that were interviewed participated in the survey and were
\ncounted in the 98. Eight (8) of the 98 participants were used as a test which resulted in
\nN=90 as the final count for data analyses. Of the category of participants interviewed,
\nthree were professors of maritime colleges\/universities, one was a student at WMU,
\nanother was a Dean at the University of South California, and finally the sixth
\nparticipant was the Head of Training and Human Element Department at the IMO.
\nThe sample participants came from 34 countries and were selected on the basis that they
\nhad some knowledge of the maritime industry. However, those who were chosen on the
\nbasis of snowballing may not have fitted those criteria. 60% of the participants were
\nmale while 40% were female. The education background ranges from secondary to
\ndoctorate degree and the average age of participants was 42.4.
\nResearch questions were predominantly answered using qualitative data. Atlas.ti
\n(qualitative) and SPSS (chi-square \u2013quantitative) data analyses software were employed
\nin analysing the data by creating thematic codes as well as reporting on statistical
\nsignificance of categorical variables. The qualitative answers provided a wider range of
\nviews that are significant in addressing the research questions in practical and theoretical
\nways. The inferential statistical analysis provided possible views that are worth
\nexamining for further studies as well as possible policy intervention strategies. Further
\ndiscussion on findings is found in the next section.
\n72
\n5.2 Discussion of the Findings
\nResearchers Kamens, Meyer, & Benavot (1996), Paquette & Fallon (2014), Hadley
\n(1902), and Cohen (2006) among others have written on the purpose of secondary
\neducation. They have outlined substantive reasons why secondary education is
\nimportant. Experts in education psychology have demonstrated the effectiveness of
\neducating the youth for changed behaviour and lifelong learning. The goal of the
\ndiscussion is to provide the findings for the relevance of MET at the secondary level
\nfrom the data for each of the five research questions.
\n5.2.1 Research Question 1
\nWhat are the merits and demerits of maritime education and training at the secondary
\nlevel?
\nResults for research question 1 have found that the merits and demerits of MET at the
\nsecondary level can be categorised in three areas: jurisdiction\u2019s geography, economic
\nbenefits and the interest of the government.
\n\uf0b7 Geography
\nAs indicated by (Tania, Andre and Jean in their interviews) the proximity of ports and
\nMET institutions in communities are contributing factors to the relevance of having
\nMET in the secondary school in particular locations. In essence the awareness of the
\nindustry is informal. The hidden curriculum appears to be very active in providing
\nawareness, hence formal education is not deemed necessary. Another finding related to
\ngeography is that efforts in the structural plan to increase awareness are done in areas
\nwhere maritime activities are concentrated. As a result, less interest is displayed in
\neducating the youth in general especially if they are not within range of the area.
\n\uf0b7 Economics
\nIt was found economic benefit was a major player for implementing MET at the
\nsecondary level. It is worth noting that 43 or the 90 participants indicated that economic
\n73
\nbenefit was their motivation for joining the industry. Kelvin explains that training of
\nratings by his jurisdiction was not economically viable due to the affordability of ratings
\nin other jurisdictions. Additionally, one of the challenges was the affordability of
\nresources for implementing MET at the secondary level as indicated by Jean. On the
\nother hand, it was found that the training of more professionals for the workforce to
\nsustain the industry with the right calibre of people was also a notable economic factor.
\nThis was also stated by Carnevale, Smith, & Strohl (2010) and Siegel (2009), that
\nsecondary education is a strategy to provide young people with employable skills.
\n\uf0b7 Interest of the Country
\nAnother finding was the interest of jurisdictions in the industry. It was noted that
\ncountries that have no interest in the industry do not see the relevance of adding
\nmaritime content to the secondary level curriculum. The philosophical orientation of
\nsociety that influences curriculum development, as articulated by Print (1993), bears no
\nweight towards changing the curriculum.
\nThe findings could imply that for secondary education to be meaningful economic
\nbenefit must be attached. However, the literature highlights Paquette & Fallon, (2014),
\nKu, (2013) where they indicated that secondary education goes beyond mere economics,
\nfor example, it provides awareness of culture. As such, jurisdictions need to understand
\nthe purpose of secondary education. Additionally, the informal curriculum of the
\nproximity of the port and MET institutions is not targeting the youths, who may have no
\nbusiness in the port or MET schools; hence there is a need for purposeful education.
\n5.2.2 Research Question 2
\nWhat are the national practices and underlying policies that inform the delivery of
\nmaritime education and training at the secondary level?
\nNational policy is indicative for the implementation of MET at the secondary level.
\n74
\n\uf0b7 It was found that maritime policy was lacking in promulgating MET at the
\nsecondary level. As mentioned in the review of literature UNESCO Report
\n(1970) and \u0141opuski, (2008), education policy framework is lacking to effect
\nchange, while maritime domestic policy was late in its development.
\n\uf0b7 Policy for implementation requires multiple involvements across ministries or
\ndepartments within jurisdictions. Tania and Andre indicated that the Ministry of
\nEducation, Ministry of Transport and in some cases the Ministry of Security
\nwere involved in the process.
\n\uf0b7 It was found that one of the jurisdictions had developed its maritime policy in
\n2014, another in 2006 while another is yet to develop any policy as reported by
\nTania, Andre and Sillia in their interviews. It was observed that 33% of the
\nparticipants were managers, 10% were directors (see fig.3). As such it can be
\nassumed that a positive representation of policy makers was among the sample.
\n\uf0b7 Another important finding was that policy makers were not as knowledgeable as
\nthey should be about the industry. Inferential analyses showed no relationship
\nwith those in position and their awareness of the industry. Therefore, maritime
\npolicy is not necessarily informed by stakeholder\u2019s knowledge of the industry.
\n\uf0b7 Political instability, were noted as a barrier to create policy for implementing
\nMET at the secondary level. One jurisdiction mentioned that each time there is
\na change in government the process of creating policy starts all over.
\n\uf0b7 Another finding showed that collaboration between relevant stakeholders was
\nlacking for joint effort in developing policy. As such, policy was indicated as
\none of the underlining barriers for the implementation of MET at the secondary
\nlevel.
\n75
\nFigure 3: Response by Position
\n5.2.3 Research Question 3
\nWhat are the current trends and challenges within the maritime industry that may
\nwarrant maritime education and training at the secondary level?
\nThe study found the following as trends and challenges that warrant MET at the
\nsecondary level.
\n\uf0b7 The increased number of vessels and shipping activities in new found areas such as
\nthe polar region was found to be a new trend. As such, new business in the tourist
\nindustry will generate the need for an increased workforce. The IMO SecretaryGeneral mentioned the need for new officers and maritime professions each year due
\nto the project ( help with nursing paper writing from experts with MSN & DNP degrees)ed 35% increase in seaborne trade and shipping by 2030 (Sekimizu,
\n2015) as previously cited in the literature review. The Bureau of Labor Statistics, US
\nDepartment of Labor (2015) has noted the need for additional human resources,
\nfollowed by Dewery (2014) who indicated the project ( help with nursing paper writing from experts with MSN & DNP degrees)ed shortfall of officers.
\n\uf0b7 Another finding was the constant dropping out of seafarers to land-based
\nemployment as mentioned by Bob in his interview, which was viewed as a waste of
\ninvestment. As such there is a need for early education as a means of sifting those
\nwho are committed to work in the industry.
\n76
\n\uf0b7 The noticeable age of seafarers who are moving towards retirement has been found
\nas a trend that needs a long-term strategy (Bob and Kelvin interviews).
\n\uf0b7 Attracting younger people to the industry was found to be one of the challenges.
\nEvidence was seen in the literature where Athanasios & Adolf (2011) found that
\nthere was an absence of any active role of the maritime industries, companies or
\ninterest groups and associations in \u2018pushing\u2019 young people to pursue higher
\neducation in maritime careers by introducing relevant subjects to them. The response
\nof youth in accepting an idea earlier is deemed more positive than later hence the
\ntheoretical framework of the study for early awareness. It is worth noting that only
\n34% of participants had MET exposure at the secondary level. The IMO Youth
\nAmbassador program was cited as a strategy to attract youth to the industry
\n(Sekimizu, 2015).
\n5.2.4 Research Question 4
\nHow can maritime education and training at the secondary level translate to sustainable
\ndevelopment within the maritime industry?
\n\uf0b7 Descriptive statistics found that 47 of the 90 participants agreed that MET at the
\nsecondary level sustains the industry. However, inferential statistics (chi-square)
\nfound the African and Caribbean regions with 27.7% compared with the Asian
\nregion with 23% agreeing that MET at the secondary level sustains the maritime
\nindustry. However, the European region with 50% disagree that MET at the
\nsecondary level is a sustainable strategy.
\n\uf0b7 Additionally, it was found that investing in educating the youth was a long-term
\nsustainable plan. The following was articulated by Bob: \u201cThis needs a sustainable
\nsolution, and it starts from the lowest level, secondary school. This is a long term
\nplan and solution that needs committed people\u201d \u2013 a position reinforced by Kelly
\n(2012) who indicates that secondary curriculum reform is a measure of sustaining
\ncareer opportunities.
\n77
\n5.2.5 Research Question 5
\nWhat is the role of stakeholders in implementing maritime education and training at the
\nsecondary level?
\n\uf0b7 The role of stakeholders has been found to be the epicentre of implementing MET at
\nthe secondary level. It was noted that policy and curriculum reform rests with the
\nstakeholders within jurisdictions.
\n\uf0b7 It was found that one of the challenges of implementing MET was the conflicting
\ninterest that may arise among the stakeholders; conflicting interests that have to be
\ndealt with delicately. It was noted by \u2018Jean\u2019 that the stakeholders need to be happy in
\norder to buy into the process. This finding can be connected with the finding for
\nresearch question 1 where the implementation of MET at the secondary level is
\ninfluenced by economic factors.
\n\uf0b7 Another finding was the uncertainty of who the stakeholders were, as well as their
\nrole. Kelvin articulated that in his jurisdiction the understanding of stakeholders
\nwere not clear whether they were the ship owners or the government. The idea of
\nstakeholder was found to be well used but is not clearly understood. Additionally, in
\nanother jurisdiction the government was not deemed as the stakeholder as such; the
\nauthority to influence policy to promulgate MET at the secondary level did not rest
\nwith them. \u201cThe ship owners \u2018they call the shot\u201d, as articulated by Tony.
\n\uf0b7 A number of the respondents felt that, government ministries and heads of
\ngovernments could do more to propagate the industry (assuming they were
\nthemselves aware of the need to do so) and to organize conferences and workshops
\nas a part of their role in bringing awareness. It was found that educators as
\nstakeholders need to play a vital role by collaborating with the relevant parties in the
\nprocess to encourage implementation (Kelvin and Sillia interviews).
\n78
\n5.3 Implications of the Findings
\nMany findings have been reported indicating the relevance of MET at the
\nsecondary level. Similarly, many challenges and barriers were also reported. The
\nfindings of the study speak to the lack of maritime awareness by the youth and
\nperhaps surprisingly by stakeholders\/policy makers. It is crucial for those who
\ninform policy and make interventions to have an understanding of the industry. The
\nrelevance of MET at the secondary level must be informed by those who are
\nknowledgeable of current trends in the industry to influence curriculum reform and
\ndevelopment. As discussed in the literature review, an education policy framework
\nprovides a guide for the development and implementation of national education
\nplans (Knight, 2014). The implications of the findings have relevance to those
\npersons who are advocating for an increased awareness of the industry as well as
\nintroducing more youth to maritime career opportunities, such as the IMO. There is
\nalso relevance to stakeholders, policy makers, educators and publishers.
\nThe findings suggest that youth joining the industry is not automatic. Therefore,
\nstrategies of engaging the youth should not be left to extra-jurisdictional
\nefforts\/strategies alone, such as those of the IMO. While IMO has implemented a
\nstrategy (the \u201cGo to Sea Campaign\u201d3
\n) there is the need for member states to
\nunderpin this campaign with unique and national specific strategies for creating
\nawareness for their youth to attract them to the industry. The appointment of Youth
\nAmbassadors by the IMO to increase awareness should also target the general
\npublic including policy makers and stakeholders. Importantly, the findings noted
\nthat many policy makers are themselves unaware of the industry and need to be a<\/p>\n
3 The IMO\u2019s \u201dGo to Sea Campaign\u201d was initiated in 2008 (see
\nhttp:\/\/www.imo.org\/en\/OurWork\/HumanElement\/GoToSea\/Pages\/Default.aspx)
\n79
\npart of the intervention plan of the IMO Youth Ambassadors because they could
\nhelp develop policy to promulgate MET at the secondary level.
\nThere are also implications for companies that write magazines and journal articles
\nfor the industry. An assessment of the target audience needs to be re-examined,
\nthere is the need for literature at the lower level for the youth, for example,
\ncartoons, comics, videos, social media, advertisement in the media to attract the
\nyouth audience. It has been found in the data that strategies as mentioned above, are
\nneedful to target the youth in bringing awareness and can be used as learning
\nresource.
\nAdditionally, there is an implication for educators. One can also say that the
\nrelevance of MET at the secondary level is informed by qualified instructors to
\nimpart knowledge. On the back of that, there is a need to have workshops and
\nseminars to educate secondary level teachers. In addition to this (or perhaps for
\nsome time, in lieu of this) secondary teachers should be a target group established
\nby the Youth Ambassadors. It was found that MET at the secondary level is a longterm strategic plan, therefore educating the educators should be part of the longterm strategy.
\nFinally, the relationship between the level of education and the category of the
\nworker has no significance in terms of maritime awareness. It was also found that
\nthe level of education and place in organization (level\/rank\/authority) do not
\nnecessarily correlate with knowledge\/awareness of the industry and the need for
\nsecondary level MET exposure. This could therefore mean that all levels and
\ncategories of employee\/people need to gain awareness since the industry is not
\nparticularly influenced by position or the level of education. Therefore,
\nstakeholders may not always agree to the implementation of MET at the secondary
\nlevel. Nevertheless, this should not signal the end of laudable efforts in this
\n80
\ndirection. A rigorous strategy for jurisdictions to develop maritime policy to
\npromulgate secondary education in the domain is therefore necessary. There is a
\nneed for governments to collaborate and coordinate with the industry on how they
\ncan implement MET at the secondary level in an economical way. Additionally,
\neducating the public of the local industry, the stakeholders, and their roles should
\nbecome an urgent agenda.
\n5.4 Recommendations
\nGiven the scope and practical limitations, exhaustive statistical analyses were not
\nundertaken. It is recommended that future research (with greater time scopes and
\nsample sizes) seek to use more rigorous statistical approaches to establish more clearly
\ncorrelations between relevant variables such as sea-experience and views of MET at the
\nlower educational levels.
\nFuture research could further interrogate the role of stakeholders in promulgating
\nmaritime education and training at the secondary level. It was found that one of the
\nchallenges in implementing MET at the secondary level rests with stakeholders in their
\ncapacity as policy makers. Furthermore, it was also found that stakeholders sometimes
\nare not aware of the industry and their role in the process was not easily identified.
\nTherefore, this area of study would provide information on their role in the process and
\nthe extent that they affect the process. Another study could examine the impact of
\nmaritime awareness on the maritime industry. It was found that awareness of the
\nindustry was lacking even though it has the potential of increasing entrance to the
\nindustry. As such the study could inform whether awareness has any relationship to the
\ndevelopment of the industry and perhaps that may be a determinant for MET at the
\nsecondary level on a global scale for global awareness.
\n81
\n5.5 Conclusion
\nThe study has adequately demonstrated, through its findings that there is relevance for
\nMET at the secondary level. It has been shown that the merits and demerits are
\ninfluenced by the jurisdictions\u2019 interest, the economics as well as geographical factors.
\nEvidence in findings indicated the need for awareness to tackle the trends of seafarer
\nattrition, the aging population of seafarers, and to attract youth to the industry for career
\nopportunities. Another key element was the response of jurisdiction to the philosophical
\nand sociological changes of the society that warrants the relevance for MET at the
\nsecondary level. This therefore, influences curriculum reform and development.
\nHowever as was found, on the back of such need there is the requirement of a policy
\nframework. Consequently, a number of other factors as mentioned in the results chapter
\nfor example political will and collaboration as being crucial for developing policy.
\nIn addition, the study reveals that awareness has no hierarchical relationship with the
\ncategory of people, therefore the human element at all levels and categories should be
\ntargets of awareness campaigns\/strategies. This finding is underpinned by the
\nobservation that increased shipping activities connote the need for sustaining a qualified
\ncalibre of professionals who should be targeted at the secondary level as a long-term
\nstrategic objective.
\nThe literature has provided psychological evidence that the introduction of concepts
\nduring the youthful age 11-18 years concretises lifelong learning that influences changed
\nbehaviour and attitude about the maritime industry. It also outlines a clear understanding
\nof the purpose of secondary education, which emphasises an open access and universal
\ncoverage of education that is fit for purpose and has relevance to society and culture in
\npreparing boys and girls for civics, political and work related aims (Paquette & Fallon,
\n2014; Kamens, Meyer, & Benavot, 1996). In spite of the findings, Athanasios & Adolf
\n82
\n(2011) and Huan (2014) have found that the industry and relevant interest group are
\npassive in finding strategies to \u2018push\u2019 or attract young people to pursue maritime careers.
\nAs such, the researcher therefore concludes that maritime education and training at the
\nsecondary level is relevant and has been found as a needed paradigm shift befitting a
\nglobal industry to educate global citizens for a sustained calibre of professionals as well
\nas to increase awareness and importantly to mitigate the imbalance of supply and
\ndemand of competence seafarers. As such I end with this quote:
\n\u201cIt is the work of true education to develop this power, to train the youth to be thinkers,
\nand not mere reflectors of other men\u2019s thought\u201d (White, 1903).
\n83
\n6 References
\nAcar, U., Ziarati, M., & Ziarati, R. (n.d.). Harmonizing Maritime Education and
\nTraining at Sea and Ashore. doi:http:\/\/www.unimet.pro\/
\nAmerica Institutes for Research. (2010). how career and technical education can help
\nstudents be college and career ready: A primer. College and Career Ready
\nHelping All Students Succeed Beyond High School, 219-263. Retrieved
\nSeptember 3, 2015, from http:\/\/www.aypf.org\/wpAthanasios, P. A., & Adolf, Y. K. (2011). Pursuing Maritime Education: An empirical
\nstudy of students\u2019 profiles, motivations and expectations, Maritime Policy &
\nManagement. The flagship journal of international shipping and port research,
\n38:4, 369-393. doi:http:\/\/www.tandfonline.com\/
\nBaylon, A. M., & Santos, V. E. (2011). International Journal of Innovative
\nInterdisciplinary Research. The Challenges in Philippine Maritime Education
\nand Training, 34-36. Retrieved January 8, 2015, from www.auamii.com
\nBIMCO\/ISF. (2005). The world demand for and supply of seafarers. Bimco\/ISF
\nManpower 2005 Update. Retrieved August 21, 2015, from
\nhttp:\/\/www2.warwick.ac.uk\/
\nBIMCO\/ISF. (2010). Manpower 2010 update, the worldwide demand for and supply of
\nseafarers. Retrieved August 21, 2015, from https\/www.bimco.org\/news\/2010\/11
\nBishop, P. S. (2007). Three theories of individualism. Retrieved July 26, 2015, from
\nhttp:\/\/scholarcommons.usf.edu\/
\nBrady, M. (2011). What’s Worth Learning? Charlotte, N.C.: Information Age
\nPublishing. Retrieved July 31, 2015, from EBook Collection.
\nBressler, I., & Legrand, C. (2012, May). Foresight- Sweden (Sweden, Maritime Sector).
\nRetrieved April 6, 2015, from http:\/\/lnu.se\/polopoly_fs
\nBureau of Labor Statistics, U.S.Department of Labor. (2015, July). Occupational
\noutlook handbook, 2014-15 edition, water transportation occupations,. Retrieved
\nAugust 1, 2015, from http:\/\/www.bls.gov\/ooh\/transportation-and-materialmoving\/water-transportation-occupations.htm
\nCareer guidance today. (2006). Place of publication not identified: Stationery Office.
\ndoi:http:\/\/www.oecd.org\/edu\/innovation-education\/19975192.pdf
\nChan, J. K. (2012, January 01). Curriculum Policy Implementation: How Schools
\nRespond to Government’s “Soft” Policy in the Curriculum Reform. Curriculum
\nJournal, 23(3), 371-386. Retrieved June 22, 2015.
\nCollins cobuild english dictionary. (1995). London: HarperCollins Publisher.
\nCohen, J. E. (2006). Goals of Universal Basic and Secondary Education. Retrieved May
\n25, 2015, from http:\/\/www.rockefeller.edu\/
\nCore, A. (2015). Introduction-Top 10 trends of 2015. Retrieved September 4, 2015, from
\nhttp:\/\/reports.weforum.org\/outlook-global-agenda-2015\/top-10-trends-of2015\/1introduction
\n84
\nDanns, D., & Span, C. M. (2008). History of School. In 21st Century Education: A
\nReference Handbook (pp. 265-285). Sage Publications.
\nDewberry, C. (2005). Statistical method for organizational research: Theory and
\npractice. USA: Routledge.
\nDewey, J. (1934). Individual Psychology and Education, the Philosopher. Retrieved May
\n13, 2015, from http:\/\/www.ascd.org\/
\nDolman, S., Williams-Grey, V., Asmutis-Silvia, R., & Isaac, S. (2014). Vessel collisions
\nand cetaceans: What happens when they don\u2019t miss the boat? A Whale Dolphin
\nConservation Society Science Report. doi:http:\/\/uk.whales.org\/
\nDrewry. (2014, June 11). Looming Seafarer Shortage will Challenge Carrier
\nProfitability. Retrieved January 15, 2015, from http:\/\/www.drewry.co.uk\/
\nDrewry. (2015). Shortage of ship officer crew receding. Retrieved September 20, 2015,
\nfrom http:\/\/www.drewry.co.uk\/news.php?id=375
\nDrewry. (n.d.). Supply and demand of officer. Retrieved from www.drewry.co.uk
\nEfanga, S. I., & Oleforo, N. A. (2012, May). Economic impact of tertiary education on
\nmanpower resource development in nigeria. International Journal of Academic
\nResearch, 4(3), 105-108. Retrieved March 12, 2015.
\nEuropean Union Commission Report. (2008). Communication from the commission:
\nTowards a new maritime strategy.
\ndoi:http:\/\/ec.europa.eu\/transport\/modes\/maritime\/studies\/
\nFarthing, B., Brownrigg, M., & Mukherjee, P. (2013). Farthing on international
\nshipping. (4th ed., WMU Studies in Maritime Affairs: v.1). Springer Heidelber:
\nLondon.
\nFiqueredo, V., & Anzalone, S. (2003). Alternative models for secondary education in
\ndeveloping countries: Rationale and realities. American Institutes for Research.
\nRetrieved May 14, 2015, from http:\/\/www.eldis.org\/vfile\/upload\/1\/document\/
\nFrench, C. “. (2013, April). Training for Change: Saving Lives on the Front End. Fire
\nEngineering, 166(4), 135-138. Retrieved April 2, 2015.
\nGary, M. (2012). History of Secondary Education in history of education. ERIC, 41(1),
\n25-39. doi:http:\/\/www.tandfonline.com\/
\nGregory, D., & Shanahan, P. (2010). The human element: A guide to human behavior in
\nthe shipping industry. [London] : TSO for the Maritime and Coastguard Agency,
\nc2010.
\nGriffith, S. (2009, June). The Caribbean Examinations Council: Leading and Facilitating
\nTransformation in Secondary Education. Journal of Eastern Caribbean Studies,
\n34(2), 40-55. Retrieved May 28, 2015.
\nHadley, R. T. (1902). The meaning and purpose of secondary education. The School
\nReview: The Journal of Secondary Education, 10. Retrieved May 24, 2015, from
\nhttp:\/\/www.jstor.org\/stable\/pdf\/1075462.pdf?acceptTC=true
\nHassellov, I. M., Turner, R. D., Lauer, A., & Corbett, J. (2013). New insights on ocean
\nacidification. Shipping Contributes to Ocean Acidification. Geophysical
\n85
\nResearch Letters. 40. DOI: 10.1002\/grl.50521.
\ndoi:http:\/\/ec.europa.eu\/environment\/integration\/research\/newsalert\/pdf\/
\nHaun, E. (2014, June 23). Grants Offered for Maritime History Projects. Retrieved
\nAugust 16, 2015, from http:\/\/www.marinelink.com\/news\/maritime-project ( help with nursing paper writing from experts with MSN & DNP degrees)shistory371659.aspx
\nHaun, E. (2014, June 26). The Rise of Primary and Secondary Maritime Schools.
\nRetrieved February 18, 2015, from http:\/\/www.marinelink.com\/
\nHeitzmann, W. R. (1988). Opportunities in marine and maritime careers. Lincolnwood,
\nIll. : VGM Career Horizons .
\nHigham, J., & Yeomans, D. (2015). Curriculum choice, flexibility and differentiation
\n14\u201319: The way forward or flawed prospectus? London Review of Education.
\nRetrieved July 7, 2015, from http:\/\/www.tandfonline.com\/loi\/clre20
\nHildebrand, L., & Schr\u00f6der-Hinrichs, J. (2014, October). Maritime and marine:
\nSynonyms, solitudes or schizophrenia? WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, p.
\n173.
\nHill, S., & Rury, J. L. (2012). The African American struggle for secondary schooling
\n1940-1980, closing the graduation gap. Amsterdam Avenue, New York: Teacher
\nCollege Press.
\nHolsinger, D. B., & Cowell, R. N. (2000, December). Positioning Secondary school
\neducation in developing countries (Rep.). Retrieved May 13, 2015, from
\nUNESCO website: http:\/\/www.unesco.org\/iiep\/spa\/publications\/recent\/rec14.htm
\nInternational Maritime Organization [IMO]. (n.d.). Retrieved from http:\/\/www.imo.org\/
\nIMO. (2013). Education and training in maritime professions, and support for seafarers.
\nIn World maritime day, a concept of a sustainable maritime transportation
\nsystem (p. 13).
\nIMO, (n.d). Maritime Ambassador Scheme The Multi-faceted Maritime World Offers.
\nRetrieved August 28, 2015.
\nIMO. (2013). World maritime day, a concept of a sustainable maritime transportation
\nsystem. A Concept of a Sustainable Maritime Transportation System.
\nIMO. (2014). Human element on board (Implementation Guidelines on part B of the
\nCode, the Voluntary Guidelines and the Safety Recommendations). Rome:
\nFAO,ILO,IMO.
\nJohnson, L. B., & Clark, C. (2007). Secondary education in the United States. The
\nUniversity of Texas at Austin. doi:http:\/\/www.utexas.edu\/
\nKahne, J., & Middaugh,, E. (2012). Democracy for some: The civic opportunity gap in
\nhigh school. The Phi Delta Kappan, 94(3), 52-56. Retrieved September 3, 2015,
\nfrom http:\/\/www.civicsurvey.org\/
\nKamens, D., Meyer, J., & Benavot A. (1996). Secondary education: from weakest link to
\ncornerstone. Retrieved September 1, 2015, from siteresources.worldbank.org
\nKelly, R. (2012). Sustaining the careers of New South Wales Department of Education
\nand Training secondary careers advisers A stakeholder perspective. International
\n86
\nEmployment Relations Review, 18(2). Retrieved July 31, 2015, from
\nhttps:\/\/www.dss.gov.au\/our-responsibilities\/disability-and-carers\/publicationsarticles\/international-review-of-future-planning-options
\nKirby, D. (2009, February 20). Post-secondary education in Canada: Meeting our need.
\nRetrieved May 14, 2015, from http:\/\/www.macleans.ca\/
\nKnight, V. (2014). The policy of universal secondary education: Its influence on
\nsecondary schooling in Grenada. Comparative & International Education.
\nRetrieved September 2, 2015, from http:\/\/rci.sagepub.com\/content\/9\/1\/16.full.pdf
\nhtml
\nKolieb, E. H. (2008). Shipping impacts on climate: A source with solution. Oceana
\nProtecting the World’s Ocean. doi:http:\/\/www.easybib.com\/journal-articlecitation\/from-pubonline
\nKridel, C. A. (2010). Encyclopedia of Curriculum Studies. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE
\nPublications. Retrieved June 19, 2015.
\nKu, H. (2013, September). Education for liberal democracy: Fred Clarke and the 1944
\nEducation Act. History of Education, 42(5), 578-597.
\ndoi:10.1080\/0046760X.2013.823627
\nLabour Supply and Recruitment. (2010). International Chamber of Shipping,
\nInternational Shipping Federation, 32.
\nLan, Y. H., Lai, K. H., & Cheng, T. (2010). Freight rate mechanism. In Shipping and
\nlogistics management. Springer. Retrieved September 6, 2015.
\nManuel, M. E. (2011). Maritime Risk and Organizational Learning. Farnham, U.K.:
\nAshgate.
\nMaritime Industries. (n.d.). Retrieved March 7, 2015, from
\nhttp:\/\/www.emergingindustries.eu\/
\nMcculloch, G. (2012, January). The history of secondary education in History of
\nEducation. History of Education, 41(1), 25-39.
\nMcFarlane, A. (2003). The origins of English individualism: Some surprises. JSTOR
\nJournals. Retrieved July 26, 2015, from
\nhttp:\/\/alanmacfarlane.cn\/TEXTS\/Origins_HI.pdf
\nMcLeod, K. A. (1989). Canada and Citizenship Education. Toronto, Ontario: Canada
\nEducation Association.
\nMinistry of Education Jamaica. (2010). Civics. In National youth service personal
\ndevelopment manual (pp. 292-393). Kingston Jamaica: Ministry of Education.
\nMintz, S. I. (2002). History of secondary education. Retrieved February 18, 2015, from
\nhttp:\/\/www.encyclopedia.com\/
\nM’Pherson, P. K. (2009, November 23). Education and the Sea. Retrieved January 15,
\n2015, from http:\/\/journals.cambridge.org\/
\n\u0141opuski, J. (2008). Maritime law in the second half of the 20th century: Selected articles
\n\/ Jan \u0141opuski. Toru\u0144 : Wydawnictwo Naukowe Uniwersytetu Miko\u0142aja
\nKopernika, 2008.
\n87
\nOur Global Neighbour hood. (1995). Report of the commission on global governance.
\nRetrieved September 6, 2015, from http:\/\/www.gdrc.org\/u-gov\/globalneighbourhood\/chap1.htm
\nPaiso, R. D. (2011). Maritime academy of Asia and the Pacific. Retrieved September 16,
\n2015, from http:\/\/www.maap.edu.ph\/cams\/cams_profile.html
\nPaquette, J. P., & Fallon, G. F. (2014). In quest of indigeneity, quality, and credibility in
\nAboriginal post-secondary education in Canada: Problematic, contexts and
\npotential ways forward. Journal Of Educational Administration And Policy,
\nIssue #165, October 29, 2014. doi:http:\/\/files.eric.ed.gov\/fulltext\/EJ1044706.pdf
\nPawlowicz, R., & Grunden, W. E. (2015, February). Teaching Atrocities: The Holocaust
\nand Unit 731 in the Secondary School Curriculum. History Teacher, 48(2), 271-
\n294. Retrieved June 19, 2015.
\nPetersen, G. B. (1983). Careers in the United States merchant marine. Newyork: E.P.
\nDutton.
\nPilyugin, A. G. (2012, July). Analyses of the problems existing in the higher maritime
\neducation in the light of modern demands for the quality of cadets’ maritime
\ntraining. Asia-Pacific Journal of Marine Science & Education, 2(2), 127-130.
\nRetrieved January 8, 2015.
\nPinto, L. E. (2012). Curriculum Reform in Ontario: ‘common Sense’ Policy Processes
\nand Democratic Possibilities. Toronto [Ont.]: University of Toronto Press.
\nRetrieved June 21, 2015.
\nPrint, M. (1993). Curriculum development and design. St. Leonards, NSW, Australia :
\nAllen & Unwin , 1993.
\nProvince of Easter Cape Education. (2010, August 10-12). The Development of
\nMaritime High School in Eastern Cape. Retrieved January 11, 2015, from
\nwww.foresightfordevelopment.org
\nRobinson, K. (2010, February 4). Sir Ken-Robinson “changing paradigms” Retrieved
\nSeptember 6, 2015, from https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=mCbdS4hSa0s
\nRoques, M. (1989). Curriculum unmasked: Towards a christian understanding of
\neducation. Monarch Publications Ltd., 195.
\nRust, F. O. (2008). Early childhood education. In 21st Century Education: A Reference
\nHandbook (Vol. 1, pp. 388-402). California: SAGE Publication.
\nSalyers, F., & Mckee, C. (2007). The young adolescent learner. 1-4. Retrieved May 28,
\n2015, from http:\/\/www.learner.org\/workshops\/
\nSekimizu, K. (2015, February). Sub-committee on human element, training and
\nwatchkeeping (HTW), 2nd session, 2-6 February 2015 (Secretary General
\nopening address). Retrieved August 28, 2015, from http:\/\/www.imo.org
\nShipping Facts. (n.d.). Retrieved from http:\/\/www.ics-shipping.org\/shippingfacts\/shipping-facts
\nSiegel, B. (2014, July 2). Philosophy of education. Retrieved September 2, 2015, from
\nhttp:\/\/global.britannica.com\/topic (sample nursing essay examples by the best nursing assignment writing service)\/philosophy-of-education
\n88
\nSiegel, S. (2009). A meaningful high school diploma: Phi Delta Kappan, (10), 740.
\nRetrieved September 2, 2015, from
\nhttp:\/\/pdk.sagepub.com\/content\/90\/10\/740.extract
\nSlavin, R. E. (2003). Educational psychology: Theory and practice. Boston: Allyn and
\nBacon.
\nSubba Rao, P. (201). Management and Organizational Behaviour. Himalaya Publishing
\nHouse.
\nSurgenor, P. (2010). How students learn 2. The Lecturer’s Toolkit. Retrieved September
\n3, 2015, from http:\/\/www.ucd.ie\/t4cms\/UCDTLT0017.pdf
\nSwanson, D. P., Edwards, M. C., & Spencer, ,. B. (2010). Adolescence: Development
\nduring a global era. Academic Press Elsevier. doi:books.google.se\/
\nSwift, P. (2015, September). Speech on appreciation for seafarers and respect for
\nprofessionalism. Retrieved September 6, 2015, from
\nhttp:\/\/dl.allfree.link\/play\/txHJa_9zzoU\/
\nTanner, D. (1990). History of the school curriculum. New York: Macmillan Publishing
\nCompany.
\nUnited Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization [UNESCO]. (1970).
\nTeachers and teaching in a changing world (World Education Report).
\nWashington: UNESCO Publishing. doi:http:\/\/www.unesco.org\/education\/
\nUNESCO. (2014). Teaching and Learning: Achieving Quality for All; EFA Global
\nMonitoring Report, 2013-2014; Gender Summary; 2014.
\ndoi:http:\/\/unesdoc.unesco.org\/
\nUS Department of Education. (n.d.). From there to here: The road to reform of America
\nHigh school: The high school leadership Summit. Retrieved September 1, 2015.
\nWei, H. (2007, September). Measuring Australia’s human capital development: The role
\nof post-school education and the impact of population ageing. Statistical Journal
\nof the IAOS, 24(3\/4), 183-191. Retrieved March 12, 2015.
\nWhite, E. G. (1903). Education: Biblical principle for christian education. Retrieved
\nSeptember 21, 2015, from http:\/\/www.ellenwhite.info\/books\/bk-ed-01.htm
\nWilson, L. M., Horch, H. W., & Irvin, J. L. (2002, September). Implication of Brain
\nResearch for Teaching Young Adolescents. Middle School Journal, 34(1), 57.
\nRetrieved May 28, 2015.
\nWoolfolk, A. (1990). Educational psychology. [4th Edition]. Englewood Cliffs, N.J. :
\nPrentice Hall.
\nWyner, Y., & Desalle, R. (2010). Taking the Conservation Biology Perspective to
\nSecondary School Classrooms. Conservation Biology, 24(3), 649-654.
\ndoi:10.1111\/j.1523-1739.2010.01478.x
\nYang, D., & Wang, Q. (2013, July). The Post-Junior High School Education of Migrant
\nChildren in Beijing. Chinese Education & Society, 46(4), 83-91.
\ndoi:10.2753\/CED1061-1932460408
\n89
\nZheng, T. (2014). Offshore Marine Crewing (Vol. 48, IHS Safety at Sea Magazine).
\nLondon: IHS Maritime Fairplay.
\n90
\n7 Appendix 1
\nInterview Consent Form
\nInformed Consent for Research Interview
\nI volunteer to participate in a research being conducted by Ms. Simone
\nCunningham from the World Maritime University. I understand that the
\ninterview is designed to gather information about the relevance of Maritime
\nEducation and Training (MET) at the secondary level. I will be one of the
\nparticipants being interviewed for this research.
\n1. My participation in this research is voluntary. I understand that I will
\nnot be paid for my participation. I may withdraw and discontinue
\nparticipation at any time without penalty.
\n2. If, however, I feel uncomfortable in any way during the interview
\nsession, I have the right to decline to answer any question or to end the
\ninterview.
\n3. I understand that the interview may be done personally or either by
\naudio, video conference or skype or by writing down answers to questions
\nsent to me. The oral interview will last approximately 30-45 minutes. Notes
\nwill be written during the interview. An audiovisual recording may also be
\nmade with my permission.
\n4. I am aware that the data will be used for a dissertation paper. I have the
\nright to review, comment on, and\/or withdraw information prior to the
\npaper\u2019s submission and presentation.
\n5. All data gathered in this study is confidential and anonymous with
\nrespect to my personal identity unless I specify\/indicate otherwise. I grant
\npermission for the use of this information for dissertation. I also grant
\npermission to use one of the following (please click one):
\n91
\n____ My full name ____ My first name only____ Just a pseudonym
\n6. I understand that if I desire, I will be given a copy of the (please click
\none):
\n___ paper ____ audiotape ____ videotape ___ transcribed interview
\n____ photograph(s)
\n7. I understand that this research study has been reviewed and approved by
\nthe Research Ethics Committee (REC) of the World Maritime University,
\nand that I may contact the research supervisor with any queries I may have.
\n8. I have read and understand the explanation provided to me. I have had all
\nmy questions answered to my satisfaction, and I voluntarily agree to
\nparticipate in this study.
\n9. I have been given a copy of this consent form.
\n____________________________ ________________________
\nMy Signature Date
\n____________________________ ________________________
\nMy Printed Name Signature of the Researcher
\n92
\n8 Appendix 2
\nSEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEW QUESTIONS
\nTOPIC: RELEVANCE OF MARITIME EDUCATION AND TRAINING (MET)
\nAT THE SECONDARY LEVEL
\n1. How aware do you think the population (of the respondent\u2019s country) is about the
\nmaritime industry?
\n2. Are there any secondary schools in your country that offer maritime education
\nand training?
\n3. How relevant is the implementation of maritime education and training at the
\nsecondary level to the development of the maritime industry (if it is already
\nbeing implemented\/ if not how relevant would it be)?
\n4. In your view what are the merits and demerits of maritime education and training
\nat the secondary level, nationally and globally?
\n5. What are the national practices and underlying policies that inform the delivery
\nof maritime education and training at the secondary level (if any)?
\n6. What are the current trends and challenges within the maritime industry that may
\nwarrant maritime education and training at the secondary level?
\n7. What do you think could be the inhibiting factors for implementing MET at the
\nsecondary level in a (your) country?
\n8. Who are the stakeholders when considering MET at the secondary level
\n9. What is the role of the stakeholders in implementing maritime education and
\ntraining at the secondary level?
\n93
\n10. What are some of the possible solutions and \/or strategies for overcoming the
\nbarriers indicated in implementing maritime education and training at the
\nsecondary level?
\n11. What is your input on the subject of maritime education at the secondary level to
\ntackle the challenges of the shortage of seafarer?
\n94
\n9 Appendix 3
\nQUESTIONNAIRE
\n95
\n96
\n97
\n98
\n99
\n10 Appendix 4
\nDescriptive Statistics
\nFigure 4: Response by Gender
\nFigure 5: Response by Age Group
\n100
\nFigure 6: Response by Level of Education
\nFigure 7: Response by Region
\nFigure 8: Response by Category
\n101
\nFigure 9: Response by Maritime Affiliation
\nFigure 10: Response by Maritime Awareness
\nFigure 11: Response by Interest in Maritime Careers
\n102
\nFigure 12: Response to what motivates your interest in the maritime industry
\nFigure 13: Participants with Maritime Training
\nFigure 14: Response to would basic knowledge of MET helped at higher level of education
\n103
\nFigure 15: Response to MET at secondary level influences maritime careers
\nFigure 16: MET at the secondary level impacts sustainability of the maritime industry
\nFigure 17: Response to should government implement MET at the secondary level
\n104
\nFigure 18: Response to government initiative to increase maritime awareness
\nFigure 19: Response to maritime awareness in your country<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The relevance of maritime education and training at the secondary level Simone Britanna Cunningham Table of Contents Declaration………………………………………………………………………………………………………….ii Acknowledgement ………………………………………………………………………………………………iii Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..iv Table of Contents…………………………………………………………………………………………………v List\u2026<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[10601,10596,10882,479,537,172,478,10597,10599,10595],"tags":[10524,10522,10890,10561,10883,10889,10515,10521,10696,10518,10888,10887,10886,10885,10884,10525],"class_list":["post-124710","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-assignment-help-by-uks-no-1-writing-service","category-assignment-writers-canada-university-cost","category-free-ai-english-assignment-writers-china","category-nursing-course-hero","category-nursing-essay-pro","category-nursing-study-bay","category-nursing-study-pool","category-professional-assignment-writers-usa","category-uae-1-cheap-assignment-writing-service","category-write-a-word-essay","tag-apa-citation-format-assignment","tag-assignment-writers-australia-college-student","tag-best-nursing-case-study-writing-services","tag-buy-essay-usa","tag-case-study-nursing-writing-services-for-care-plans","tag-free-nursing-case-study-writing-services","tag-help-write-a-page-assignment","tag-i-need-someone-to-do-my-assignment-within-hours","tag-need-assistance-completing-the-assignment","tag-need-to-write-an-essay","tag-nursing-case-studies-with-answers","tag-nursing-case-study-paper-example","tag-nursing-case-study-template-examples-of-case-studies-nursing","tag-pharmacology-case-study","tag-soap-note-case-study","tag-write-pages"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.studyproessays.com\/help\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/124710","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.studyproessays.com\/help\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.studyproessays.com\/help\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.studyproessays.com\/help\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.studyproessays.com\/help\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=124710"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.studyproessays.com\/help\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/124710\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.studyproessays.com\/help\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=124710"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.studyproessays.com\/help\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=124710"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.studyproessays.com\/help\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=124710"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}