Psychology society president says Ascot Primary graduation split harmed children

The head of the Jamaican Psychological Society, Dr Paul Smith, has urged the public to view the Ascot Primary School graduation dispute as more than a routine institutional mistake. He characterised the reported treatment of some pupils as a kind of public sanction that may have harmed children during one of the defining moments of their early years.

Smith told THE STAR that the reported move to divide certain Grade Six learners at graduation according to how they performed in the Primary Exit Profile (PEP) amounted to discrimination and could produce enduring psychological harm. "Children internalise things differently from adults," he said.

Ascot Primary, based in Portmore, St Catherine, has drawn widespread scrutiny amid claims that some Grade Six students who fell short of particular academic benchmarks in the 2026 PEP tests were barred from wearing caps and gowns at the school's graduation. Reports indicate that classmates with stronger results took part in full ceremonial dress, while parents said the other children walked behind the gown-wearing group and were placed at the rear of the graduating cohort.

The Ministry of Education has since condemned the reported conduct, stating that graduation events ought to mark the close of an important phase in a pupil's schooling and must not serve as a stage for public ranking, stigma or punishment.

Smith dismissed the idea that academic standing or behaviour could warrant barring students from equal participation in graduation. "If the students have matriculated to graduation, they should be afforded the opportunity to," he said. He labelled the reported conduct as discriminatory. "What happened is a form of discrimination, prejudice, isolation and segregation. That is what it boils down to because they were allowed not to be as well dressed or affirmed or a full part of what was happening at the graduation exercise because of their performance," he said.

He warned that the emotional toll could be especially heavy for children already facing academic, emotional or social difficulties. Schools, he added, must not mistake discipline for humiliation. "If there are behavioural issues, there are other ways of dealing with it. Once you do damage emotionally to a child, the child may never get over it," Smith said.

In his view, any worries about conduct or achievement should have prompted action well ahead of graduation. "What intervention was employed from the time it was noticed that these students had behavioural issues? Were they brought to the guidance counsellor? Were the parents brought in? Did the school have particular measures? Was there a reward system? It can't be just that you are sending a message on graduation day," he added.

Smith said he grasped the long-term weight of such exclusion from personal experience, having once been blocked from graduating high school over an unfinished project. "I had all the matriculation requirements, subjects and everything, and because of that I didn't graduate. It affected me for years, and that was high school for me, not primary school," he said.

Graduation, he stressed, ranks among the major landmarks in a child's life and should never become a source of shame. He argued the furore should prompt schools to ask whether their disciplinary approaches guide pupils or merely disgrace them. "Whatever it is, it must still be in the best interest of the child," he said.