|
Winstanley.R. Bankole. Johnson
With gratitude to God for their various contributions to society generally, I wish to react to a recent editorial piece in the Premier News captioned "Education Is A Right" and another piece captioned "Who Will Bring Change To FBC" in the Wednesday 21st October edition of "The Democrat" written by M/S James Williams and Ibrahim Labor Fofanah respectively.
undefined
And I am doing so both in the interest of the advancement of education in this country and for our safety and security in old age.
The fact remains here that by the way things are going, the lower the level of our social values, the greater will be the level of our overall insecurity in due course.
Here's a truism that might displease many: Education is a right!………But that right is not free!! Period!!!
Even if you are to enroll all the children and students nation wide into "free education programmes", the resources to complement such service delivery - Teachers' salaries, soft and hard furnishings, etc.. etc.. all have cost implications that will ultimately have to be paid for by someone somehow.
And that is a truism which every government since the early '80s have been hiding behind "ostrich-like", for fear of becoming unpopular.
I am reliably informed that apart from exchange of lecturers with the Bradford University in respect of Peace and Conflict Studies, external or Affiliate University funding for the FBC is non-existent.
Apart from the very low fees charged, the only major funding contributor to the university is government. Yet students threaten one kind of action or another each time an attempt is made to increase college fees to realistic levels that will enable the authorities run the business like a modern day university, to their mutual benefit.
And there would seem to be no definite plans to restructure the present unacceptable arrangements insofar as it relates to direct government funding for universities or payment of tuition and other fees for all students at the tertiary education levels into a win-win situation for both the students and governments.
As with quality living (in terms of food, clothing and shelter etc,) it is the quality of tuition, accommodation, library, sanitation and other campus facilities at ones disposal, or that one can afford to pay for in pursuit of education, that will determine the qualities of the learning environment and learning conveyed. If premium services are provided for, or you can afford to pay for them, then you should expect premium service delivery.
But if you paid sub-standard prices, you can only expect to receive substandard services, such as sub-standard lectureships, sub-standard systems of instructions, sub-standard libraries, toilets and other campus facilities. And this is what continued to affect learning at all our tertiary educational institutions. Even as you read this piece, and nearly two months after the opening of universities, continuing students at the FBC have still not received previous years' results.
If we believe that by pay ing additional or the correct taxes through the GST, our social (light, good roads, markets, drinkable water) and healthcare (hospitals and clinics) services will be much improved, then should we also not believe that by paying realistic fees for education at all levels, our graduates can match their counterpart globally too?
As an alumnus of the FBC, I can imagine Mr. Labor Fofanah's revulsion at the frankness of the authorities at the just concluded orientation for new FBC students. It should be noted that apart from matriculation periods, the orientation of freshmen is the second public official contact of university authorities and the new entrants.
The time when perceptions are actualized or when the imaginary ice between university wardens, registrars and a few faculty heads is broken. And from time immemorial one thing that will never be compromised during such meetings is "frankness or honesty of intentions".
It was that ancient tradition that Mrs. Barnadette Cole, Mr. Sorie Ndigi Dumbuya, Mr. Moravia, Prof. J.D.Allie and others tried to maintain when they "frankly" communicated the "unwritten sanitation code" of the FBC to the freshmen and women at the last orientation that there are cut- off times for bathing and using the loo.
What else do we expect in a campus of over 2,000 students sharing just one bowser of water daily?
Unlike some students who come and go, most lecturers and wardens have spent the better part of their lives on the same university campus and watched in utter bewilderment as facilities crumble without any hope of replacement.
Special complements therefore should go those who even after having tasted the luxuries of life as politicians (Dr. Wurie, Dr. Harding and Pascal Egbenda Esq) decided to go back to the university to help stabilize or turn things around.
And the FBC is not the only tertiary institution with facilities in advanced stages of dilapidation.
The scenario is the same all over, culminating in mass production of sub-standard graduates with.
Any wonder then why we are the only country with universities that can condescend to give students sub-standard "Allowed To Pass" certificates after four good years on campus?
The recently concluded Zain Africa Challenge Competition ought to have sent a warning mote to our authorities on the need to urgently and adequately fund our learning institutions, if we to expect any of them to be functionally successful.
The elites are very much aware of the deplorable states in our educational institutions, and the eventual impact of sub-standard service delivery on the future of their children, that is why, I am again given to understand that apart from those studying in the professions - Law, Engineering, Accountancy and Medicine, (who pay realistic college education fees and whom they know they can always use their connections for regular internships) they rarely allow their children to begin and end general academic degrees here.
No sooner would they have reached the second year than they are tran-scripted to overseas universities to continue in fresher and better climes, where education is taken much more seriously and adequately funded.
But what is the win-win situation that I am contemplating? Government is such a "kombra" that it wouldn't want to rock the boat. And even as college infrastructure are in advanced stages of dilapidation, we cannot, because of a few destitute poor who threaten fire and brimstone every time college fees increases are proposed, afford to continue compromising university education benchmarks to the detriment of a whole country.
I am reliably informed that in the immediate post independent years, virtually all (university) students were on government bursary.
It is not they were any cleverer (though the numbers were much smaller). It's just that the system was simply more accountable, wherein beneficiaries were liable to repay in full over a given period, what was expended on them throughout their university/college lives.
So how about re-introducing a robust students' loan package covering up to 75% of all college levies, and for which every beneficiary will be bonded until full clearance is achieved over a period of up to 10 years after graduation?
This among other things will also give government the benefit of a trained and qualified reservoir of HR base that can be easily accessed as and when the need arises for various sectors of middle-level manpower planning and development.
If such payments are made to the institutions timely, college administrations will be much empowered to function more efficiently than hitherto.
Ignore the costs. The right to national enlightenment and security in our old age comes at a price. So let's begin to plan how to pay for that right now. |
Editorials 
