GIMPA defends PhD rigour amid student complaints

Read Comments Comments (7)

• Sam 1 month ago

  It’s refreshing to hear that the school is committed to providing quality education and upholding high standards. The institution should ensure that students are aligned with its vision, which requires intentional and consi ...
  read full comment

  It’s refreshing to hear that the school is committed to providing quality education and upholding high standards. The institution should ensure that students are aligned with its vision, which requires intentional and consistent communication from the heads of departments to the students to prevent any misunderstanding.

  reply
• Heike Miller 1 month ago

  With all due respect, this framing is part of the problem. To suggest this is a simple 'misunderstanding' is to ignore the documented evidence of halted defenses, legal petitions, and a public statement from the Rector himsel ...
  read full comment

  With all due respect, this framing is part of the problem. To suggest this is a simple 'misunderstanding' is to ignore the documented evidence of halted defenses, legal petitions, and a public statement from the Rector himself admitting to the new 'layer' of bureaucracy.
  
  This is not a communication issue. It is an issue of administrative overreach and the unilateral changing of PhD requirements years into students' programs. Let's not reframe a crisis of leadership as a minor breakdown in messaging. The students understand the 'vision' perfectly; the problem is that the vision keeps changing.

  reply
• Heike Miller 1 month ago

  4. Manipulative Statistics
  Boasting about graduating "35 students since 2015" is a desperate attempt to look productive. The real story is in the students they don't talk about: the dozens, if not hundreds, trapped in a syst ...
  read full comment

  4. Manipulative Statistics
  Boasting about graduating "35 students since 2015" is a desperate attempt to look productive. The real story is in the students they don't talk about: the dozens, if not hundreds, trapped in a system that keeps inventing new hoops to jump through. Where is the data on current enrollment versus graduations? Where is the data on the average time-to-completion? They hide the scale of the crisis behind a cherry-picked number.
  
  5. Dividing and Conquering
  By stating that "all other Schools" have accepted the process, they attempt to isolate and vilify the SPSG students. This is a classic tactic to make the victims look like the problem. The truth is, these students are courageously standing against an unjust and unstable system that is failing everyone.
  
  Conclusion:
  
  GIMPA's statement is not a clarification; it is a weaponization of academic language. The Rector is not a guardian of standards; he is the head of a collapsed graduate school that is sacrificing its students to cover up its own internal chaos and mismanagement. The demand is simple: Stop the retroactive changes, provide a stable and transparent process, and let the students who have fulfilled their original requirements graduate. This is not about lowering standards; it is about ending administrative tyranny.

  reply
• Heike Miller 1 month ago

  The Truth Behind GIMPA's Statement: A Masterclass in Deception
  GIMPA's press release is a textbook example of an institution using lofty language about "quality" to hide catastrophic administrative failure and the abuse of i ...
  read full comment

  The Truth Behind GIMPA's Statement: A Masterclass in Deception
  GIMPA's press release is a textbook example of an institution using lofty language about "quality" to hide catastrophic administrative failure and the abuse of its students. Let's expose the lies.
  
  1. The "Quality" Smokescreen
  They speak of "international benchmarks," but the real benchmark of a reputable institution is procedural integrity. You cannot retroactively change the rules of a PhD program years into a student's research. This is not rigor; it is academic malpractice.
  
  2. The Hidden Crisis: A Collapsed Graduate School
  The statement conveniently ignores the elephant in the room: the complete collapse of the graduate school's leadership and structure. This isn't about one person being sacked; it's about a system in chaos. The sudden creation of "ad hoc committees" and "new guidelines" is a direct result of this internal breakdown. Students are being punished for management's failure to maintain a stable, functional academic environment.
  
  3. The Central Lie: "Nothing Has Changed"
  Claiming that "the only thing that changed was the additional layer" is an outright lie. Introducing a powerful, unaccountable committee that can veto a student's progress is a fundamental change to the program structure. This new hurdle was not in the original program outline—the contract students signed with the institute. Moving the goalpost after 7 years is not quality assurance; it is institutional betrayal.
  
  4. Manipulative Statistics
  Boasting about graduating "35 students since 2015" is a desperate attempt to look productive. The real story is in the students they don't talk about: the dozens, if not hundreds, trapped in a system that keeps inventing new hoops to jump through. Where is the data on current enrollment versus graduations? Where is the data on the average time-to-completion? They hide the scale of the crisis behind a cherry-picked number.
  
  5. Dividing and Conquering
  By stating that "all other Schools" have accepted the process, they attempt to isolate and vilify the SPSG students. This is a classic tactic to make the victims look like the problem. The truth is, these students are courageously standing against an unjust and unstable system that is failing everyone.
  
  Conclusion:
  
  GIMPA's statement is not a clarification; it is a weaponization of academic language. The Rector is not a guardian of standards; he is the head of a collapsed graduate school that is sacrificing its students to cover up its own internal chaos and mismanagement. The demand is simple: Stop the retroactive changes, provide a stable and transparent process, and let the students who have fulfilled their original requirements graduate. This is not about lowering standards; it is about ending administrative tyranny.

  reply
• Albert 1 month ago

  Inasmuch as quality is the hallmark for a great academic journey, let's not ridicule the issues of the concerned students. This response only shows that the institute is not fit for purpose, given the statistics and the durat ...
  read full comment

  Inasmuch as quality is the hallmark for a great academic journey, let's not ridicule the issues of the concerned students. This response only shows that the institute is not fit for purpose, given the statistics and the duration... 10 years of enrollment and you still struggle with quality? In your quest to save yourself, you've shown serious cracks in your leadership and a system of educational commoditization rather than the claim of upholding quality
  standards.

  reply
• Truth 1 month ago

  How, when not all GIMPA Deans calling themselves "Dr." have even STARTED a doctoral program yet?

  How, when not all GIMPA Deans calling themselves "Dr." have even STARTED a doctoral program yet?

  reply
• Heike Miller 1 month ago

  Public Comment for Maximum Impact & Safety
  "The Rector's own press release confirms a deep-seated crisis within GIMPA's PhD programme. He admits to the existence of an 'Ad Hoc Committee' that has caused significant friction ...
  read full comment

  Public Comment for Maximum Impact & Safety
  "The Rector's own press release confirms a deep-seated crisis within GIMPA's PhD programme. He admits to the existence of an 'Ad Hoc Committee' that has caused significant friction with students. What he frames as 'quality assurance,' the students experience as a moving of goalposts and an alteration of their original programme structure.
  
  If, as the Rector claims, this committee has 'already submitted its final report,' then why does the impasse persist? If the system is working, why are there public petitions and media reports alleging students are being 'prevented from graduating'?
  
  This is no longer an internal matter. The public nature of this dispute and the fundamental questions it raises about administrative fairness and the integrity of academic contracts demand an independent, external review.
  
  We therefore call upon the Ministry of Education (@EduMinGh), the Ghana Tertiary Education Commission (GTEC), and CHRAJ to publicly look into the administration of GIMPA's PhD programmes. Let there be a transparent investigation to either validate the Rector's claims of 'rigour' or expose the 'tyranny' the students decry. The future of Ghana's academic excellence depends on it.
  #InvestigateGIMPA #GTECMustAct #TransparencyInEducation"

  reply