By WILLIAM OCHIENG'
Posted Tuesday, July 12 2011 at 17:52
Posted Tuesday, July 12 2011 at 17:52
In a recent letter that Mr William Ruto, the former minister for Higher Education wrote to the President, he indicated, among other things, university development projects which he had earmarked, but now lie dormant because of his absence.
Among these projects are the Universities Bill, the Science and Technology Innovation Bill, the restructuring of the Joint Universities Admissions Board, and the creation of an Open University.
We at universities cannot wait for some of these changes. In the past, Education ministers concentrated on their salaries as universities stagnated.
The management of universities was in the hands of vice-chancellors, who had plenty of good ideas, but who could not go far without government authority.
With the radical expansion of universities in past decades, the management of the institutions requires close government participation.
It is, for example, time Kenyan universities formed an association, complete with a council to coordinate common interests and activities.
Under the council could be placed the Joint Admissions Board, a committee to coordinate research projects, another to run games and other competitive activities, a newsletter, and other interests.
Take the area of research. There is a lot of duplication of topics as nobody at Maseno, for example, knows what topics are under research at Kenyatta University.
For a poor country we cannot afford this wastage of funds. A joint universities research committee could also help to link scholars with common research interests.
Having said this, let us get back to Mr Ruto’s reforms. What channels does a minister of Education use to formulate a policy?
In the past changes were formulated at the ministry and sent directly to universities to implement, without any consultation with the recipients.
For example, the past “double-intakes” were not discussed with the universities. They were simply ordered to double their intakes.
But this did not work well because of lack of facilities. So the universities simply began to stagger their programmes.
Therefore, for a class of 1,000 students, half of them would be at home while the other half was in class for a semester.
When those outside came back, these would remain out for the next semester. In the end, double-intakes did not solve any problem and students spent eight years or more at university instead of four.
The point I am trying to make is simple. Let the minister and the ministry’s officials suggest areas of reform to university senates and councils for deliberation.
The resulting ideas can be used to formulate reform policies. Alternatively, a common universities association would be the right forum for discussing joint policies.
The problem with most university reforms is that they target students. The welfare and opinions of staff always come last. Kenyan professors are some of the most patient professionals.
Many of them have no offices, or at best share dingy rooms. You cannot bring or leave your professional tools in such crowded rooms.
This means that they work at home. This is not appropriate for academic sharing or discourse. It also means that consultation with students is done along corridors.
As staff, we wish to build fountains of knowledge, but nobody up there listens to us. If he intends to carry out his reforms in the right way, Mr Ruto could be our saviour.
Prof Ochieng’ teaches history at Maseno University
No comments:
Post a Comment