Unsuited for the backlash: How Ghanaians have demonize our university education

In fact, I am about to reflect on what I consider the saddest story in a university’s history. I have taken the time to listen to Mr. Senyo Hosi’s contribution to the conventional conversation around our educational system generally and how he mirrored his way into the University of Ghana’s fiber at an event believed to be the 70th anniversary of the University of Ghana, Legon.

As someone who has held a similar position on our University education for which reason I advocated that parliament include a representative of the Ghana Association of Industry in constituting the AAMUSTED Council, I should’ve applauded Mr. Hosi for being a great advocate, however, I was worried when I watched the confidence with which he discounted the incredible curriculum at the University of Ghana.

If I were a student seated at that event, I would have been disappointed so badly that a school I fought hard to enter would end up making me unemployable after all the years and mental efforts I invested into my training. If I were a parent, I wouldn’t have allowed my ward to study for a day in that university after these revelations from an old student.

Insofar as both the students and parents have shown themselves susceptible to these notions, no matter how good the school’s curriculum is, they will neither have confidence in the certificate nor the abilities of its graduates. It worries me badly that, right from the beginning, Mr. Senyo has succeeded at sowing seeds of inferiority and mistrust in these young minds. However, I will not make him the subject to blame but those who, for their lack of understanding of what an education should do to an individual, have furthered their opinions on what a school’s curriculum should teach over the educational system.

More acutely, the question that I kept asking myself as I listened to his half-sized speech is, why would these professors who have invested years of research into the development of these curricula sit and watch someone who has little to zero knowledge about curriculum development ruin their work without defense? Was their silence a testament to the facts of his opinion? Since I believe any retort would have marred the program, I do not think their silence was intellectually appropriate either.

One would’ve thought that with the level of confidence you have in your content, you would have suggested or pointed out what the problems are with Legon’s curriculum but like many others of your sort, you couldn’t but rather played by the popular wayside argument which mentions that the products of the university system are not innovative. I have a few questions for you Mr, Hosi, what do you mean by innovative human resource,? How does that get measured? What metric is an innovative resource measured against? and for what outcomes?

As someone who has schooled in Ghana, Asia, and America, I can confidently say our school system is doing just as well as others elsewhere. Without exception, no school system is perfect. Just as ours is not perfect, it’s doing exactly what schools are established to do. John Holt, the ardent critic of the American school system agrees that no school system can be perfect hence challenges for growth must be addressed pro rata. It’s therefore, not a grounded argument to suggest that the outcomes of a University education are to satisfy your understanding of what a well-rounded human resource might look like.

It’s worth mentioning that the university is a research institution committed solely to providing students with knowledge/information on concepts and exposing students to theoretical foundations/principles that underlie operational knowledge in the industry, etc. It’s therefore not the duty of the university to give students industry-specific skills as Mr. Senyo is leading the public to believe.

Let me be quick to mention that what he thinks is the sole contribution of the school system to an all-encompassing employable graduate in most advanced countries is just a combined effort of industry and the school system. In advanced countries, students are allowed to do internships; most companies pay interns as they introduce them to practical industry-specific skills. Internship gives meaning to classroom instruction and prepares the student for the industry and a thriving private sector makes it easier to access opportunities without having to worry.

However, both internship and classroom instruction don’t fully prepare the student for their specialty in the industry. Therefore, most companies, no matter the intellectual acumen of graduates, offer training opportunities to new graduates before placing them in specified positions. If not for popular culture, I believe Mr. Hosi should’ve known this basic practice and not misled the students to think that the university must single-handedly create specific-industry-ready-to-work graduates. It’s not true!

I have these questions in furtherance of your questioning mind: Which country in the world has an educational system where students graduate and, without industry training, get to work directly? Which school system offers students all the benefits of an academic experience and focused job training that makes them directly employable in the industry? I will be candid with you, not a single one exists. The standard practice is what I explained above.

Moreover, mention any invention in history that wasn’t made by lecturers and or students working in companies or students who, for systems set up by societies, set up their companies to promote their ideas. Nikola Tesla, Gary Kildall, and Isaac Newton, in many instances, these personalities are university professors or affiliates. Take time and read. Many if not all, inventions came out of university labs or from students who understood the concepts from college and decided to set up companies to further their ideas. So, it’s not entirely true that the Ghana school system is an exception.

Look, Mr. Hosi, today if students of UG approach you on a research project they are embarking on, and talk you into funding it, you may not be able to. This is to tell you why in advanced countries many students drop out, set up companies, list these companies, and make money so they can fund their research. For instance, no single university could have been able to fund Nikola Tesla’s research on electricity.

Therefore, what I think must be the focus of any discussion on our university education should be how to ensure seamless learning between the university and industry. Companies must be able to offer students the opportunity for internships to prepare them. Looking at the Ghanaian environment, the only opportunity for graduates to go through internships is the National Service program. That’s why I think the focus should be on making the NSS perform its role. It’s the case that our personnel are always misplaced by the scheme.

It’s only under this scheme that a graduate who studied B.Ed RME or Social Studies is placed at Ghana Gas Company for National Service while the graduate who read Oil and Gas is placed at Beposo-Boatengkrom M/A Primary as a teacher due to “who knows you”. In situations like this, when you interview the latter for an oil and gas position he will do exceptionally well, but when he comes to the site, he would be found wanting because the opportunity to get exposed to the oil and gas industry wasn’t given to him but to an RME graduate and vice versa.

It’s on the strength of this that I also think any politician like Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia, who seeks to make the scheme optional, must be resisted because it’s the only layer that if explored can resolve all these bottlenecks we have between our graduates and employers.