Invest in a thinking cricketer
by VANEISA BAKSHSay education, and people think school or university, formal sites of instruction. But several layers and forms of education exist outside of these structures.
Let's say that basically schools impart information on a range of topics. Ideally, this would be partnered by developing the mind's natural curiosity (sadly, an aspect still being quieted by admonition in our classrooms), and nurturing the process of analysing information. The information you provide is one element, but enabling people to think is the core. What is the use of data without the means to process it?
When you can take information and analyse it, understand it and put it into some context, it becomes useful knowledge, otherwise it is just trivia without meaning, cluttering mental space. Schools can provide the tools to transform data into knowledge, but too few do so, and too many think it is only within formal structures real learning happens.
I have always been fascinated by detail, was always mesmerised by stories of the individual. Perhaps it was the discovery that every single life, no matter how mundane its surface, contains all the elements of an epic, made me realise how much weaving goes into every little stitch in life's tapestry.
I would say it is my instinct to live in the moment, every one monumental for its potential, and I measure time with that minutely marked stick. It is not a good way to live, as it focuses too intensely on details without stepping back to see the big picture.
I had to learn to broaden my vision, and that came through reading but was refined in structured courses at the university. It changed my way of seeing.
I am saying this because I still cannot get over my dismay at seeing sports journalists creating this bizarre dichotomy between cricket and education. It is a classic case of not seeing the big picture.
Have we not had every indication that our cricketers have gathered bits and pieces of information but have not learned how to process them?
Journalists covering the sport regionally have themselves become practitioners of regurgitating data without analysis, and the result has been an inability to see past scoreboards. This, in turn, has transformed cricket coverage into either basic reportage or slogging commentaries without substance. They, too, need educating.
The worldwide concern over underperforming males is not simply linked to the growing out-performance by females. There are several factors, and one that cannot be ignored is the tacit notion that there is something terribly un-macho about being "educated". Though the bookish have always been subjected to that nerdy stereotype, there was a time when upward mobility could only be found by walking through school doors.
Far too many youths have found other doors more inviting, not reckoning that the good life beyond those portals is short and brutish, and if they survive, the quality of life does not.
Educating cricketers cannot be a bad thing; but we also have to understand that as a concept it is not confined to sending them off to universities.
Caribbean people never seem to grasp the extraordinary resources we have available in our former players, and the prevailing cultural dullness prevents us from even understanding what is meant by educating our cricketers.
I write without knowing the result of the final match which the Combined Colleges and Campuses team went into without defeat, but I am sure their performance will underscore the value of investing in the thinking cricketer, and thus the thinking citizen. Who would not support that?