Healthy competition

It is commonly believed that competition is beneficial for growth. This perspective is supported by the notion that competition serves as a driving force for continuous improvement of one’s standards, as the desire to maintain a superior position over rivals motivates individuals to strive for excellence.

There was a significant commotion surrounding the introduction of the local television channel ‘Kana’ during its initial transmission. There have been significant complaints expressed by members of the Ethiopian film industry regarding their inability to compete with Turkish films that are being broadcast on Kana TV with Amharic dubbing. Individuals within the film industry asserted that Turkish films pose a significant threat to the viability of Ethiopian cinema.

We now know this was never the case, as I don’t believe that Kana films are as well-liked as they once were, back when the channel first launched. It appears that Ethiopian viewers maintain a preference for domestic films, as Turkish movies seem to have lost their appeal among the local population. However, it is imperative to substantiate this assertion through empirical investigation.

At the time of Kana’s inception, I did not fully comprehend the commotion surrounding its launch. What strategies can be implemented to foster the growth of the Ethiopian film industry in the absence of competition? In my opinion, refraining from engaging in competition would merely maintain the existing state of affairs, which I consider to be relatively feeble.

The presence of competition is deemed essential for fostering growth. However, is the entirety of this competition conducive to overall well-being? Competition inherently involves the desire to diminish the standing of one’s opponent and amplify one’s own achievements. It is my belief that competition can be deemed detrimental when a participant engages in actions that are deliberately intended to harm their competition. While acknowledging the importance of healthy competition in fostering growth and development, I say that there are certain domains where it may be more prudent to eschew such rivalry. Education is one of these areas.

With the exception of international schools and potentially select private institutions, the utilization of a ranking system is prevalent within Ethiopian schools. This assertion holds particularly true in public educational institutions.

The system of assigning each student a rank of first place, second place, third place, and so on has never been something I’ve found appealing. In my perspective, a system that fosters a sense of competition among students has the potential to be detrimental to their well-being. The negative impact is primarily directed towards students who do not attain the highest ranking, particularly those who fall significantly below the top-performing students. Given the tendency of certain students to engage in comparative self-evaluation with their high-achieving peers, coupled with the absence of prior opportunities to attain such status, it is not uncommon for these students to experience demoralization and a sense of inadequacy with respect to their academic accomplishments.

In my view, engaging in a comparative analysis between students is not a constructive approach towards fostering healthy competition. It is imperative to ensure that every student receives a grade that reflects their progress, mastery, or similar achievements, regardless of their position in the class structure. Secondly, it is essential that students evaluate their academic progress based on their individual abilities rather than comparing themselves to their peers, given that each student possesses unique levels of academic aptitude.

The ranking systems can potentially generate negative emotions such as resentment, which can have detrimental effects on the well-being of the student body. Additionally, it is possible that this could engender a sense of envy. Regarding education, my view is that the incorporation of competitive attitudes in academic settings through ranking mechanisms may not yield the intended outcome of robust academic performance.