Technical University Issues: Focus on Academic & Intellectual Development

The Ghana National Union of Polytechnic Students (GNUPS) has given the Government an ultimatum – constitute governing councils for the technical universities or students will boycott lectures. The Minority in parliament has also jumped on Government’s case regarding same. It is true that the absence of councils puts the institutions in operational disadvantage to a certain extent, but all stakeholders must focus on academic and intellectual development only, and as far as those issues affect the preparedness of the polytechnic/technical university student for industry.

When he was launching the technical university programme in September 2016 in Takoradi, the former president. Mr. John Mahamah, rightly explained that grammar education had helped the Ghanaian learner up to an extent, but the dynamics of society required that we focused on competency-based education, which would equip the contemporary Ghanaian student for industry. As such, all stakeholders must consider the issues of technical universities vis-à-vis that objective:

The fact that GNUPS is bargaining with lectures indicates that the absence of the councils has not halted the main business of the institutions, teaching and learning. Academic Boards are the ultimate bodies on the campuses; they have a high level of autonomy, though some decisions must be ratified by the councils. Additionally, the interim status of the various administrative machineries offers them mandate to operate to a large extent. The legitimacy of the academic boards and their management is evidenced by the fact that activities for the 2017/2018 Academic Year have begun, even without the governing councils’ ratification. Therefore, we must focus on the obstacles to the smooth running of the Academic Calendar.

A year into the conversion, both Minority and GNUPS must question our preparedness for the competency-based curriculum, the ultimate goal of the conversion. Elsewhere, institutions are investing in learners through small class numbers, ideally, a teacher:student ratio of 1:15 up to 1:25, which allows a generous room for one-on-one teacher-student interaction and student nurturing. The small numbers enable teachers to give appreciable attention to students, in and out of the classroom. In our polytechnic and technical university campuses, large class numbers have been a major obstacle to competency-based education; hitherto, it was impossible for one teacher to interact frequently with 60, 70, 80 100 or even 120 students within the semester. Even systematic tutorials were hardly possible in such situations. Most teachers tried to work through group activities, which do not completely augur well for competency training.

A year after the conversion, has the situation changed? The minority and GNUPS should pursue that question. Are current ratio ideal for competency-based training? Whilst doing that, they should impress upon the institutions to commence tracer studies in order to determine what percentage of polytechnic graduates are unemployed or are employed in areas completely irrelevant to their study areas. Opinions of industry should be sought regarding the quality of materials polytechnic institutions have been turning out over the years.

One reason for GNUPS’ appreciation for the change in status is that they become university graduates, instead of polytechnic graduates. However, to a very large extent, the Ghanaian employer has a very unsophisticated perception of the polytechnic student, largely through ignorance. To what extent has that perception been reversed by the conversion? Is it the conversion, or competency which comes through acquisition and application of dynamic knowledge, which will change societal and industrial perception?

Globally, even traditional universities are forging for industrial experience for teachers and learners in order to address the challenge of employment mismatch. What is the trend on our polytechnic and technical university campuses? How often do teachers get exposed to the realities of industry through attachment? What is the currency of the knowledge imparted by teachers who hardly get industrial exposure?  What is the ratio of theory:practice in the classrooms? Does GNUPS even know? Currently, hands-on-training is on downward trend, and that is a major concern.

What is the situation with monitoring and evaluation of the various training activities engaged in by the institutions? How effectively does quality assurance feature in the teaching and learning processes? What effective Guidance and Counselling systems are featured to nurture students’ potential, address their fears and complexes and make them assertive individuals? What premium do the institutions place on real knowledge acquisition? These are some of the pertinent questions that make or break tertiary institutions. Has technical university status helped to address some of these issues for the institutions? GNUPS and the Minority should be interested.

Merely constituting governing councils will not automatically address all the impediments. Indeed, it is not just a matter of constituting governing council; they must be real savvy about the global technical university concept, and how the nation can localise the existing ones to address community and national needs? We do not need rubber stamp councils; we need proactive agencies that can offer current dynamic academic and professional suggestions to enhance competency-based training. Above all, the governing councils must have the knowledge to identify current unprofessional/unacademic practices, possess the guts to change such for best practices. So come again, Minority in Parliament, GNUPS. It is not time for ultimatum; it is time to strive for quality competency-based education and training. Let us collaborate with the Government to champion the cause of quality.

Technical Universities in Retrospect

Recently, two voices of concern have been raised about the yet to be constituted council for recently converted technical universities. Whilst the first voice, belonging to one Mr. Foster Owusu, took the alarmist route, crying that the Government was hedging in order to revert the statuses of the universities to polytechnics, that of the former Ghana Association of Polytechnic Administrators (GAPA) was conciliatory, stating that the absence of council was hampering the smooth administration of the institutions. It also pleaded with Government to equip the technical universities with the appropriate teaching/learning infrastructure. Despite the differences, both voices struck deep chords.

GAPA’s plea is also a strong indicator that in the conversion process, the cart was placed before the horse. In other words, the change was not motivated by intellectual and human resource development for nation, as it ought to have been in an academic exercise. It was rather political-oriented. The Committee that was set up to draw the roadmap and recommend timelines highlighted the weaknesses of the polytechnic system, the biggest of which was poor investment. When it compared Technical/Vocational Education in Germany to that of Ghana, it was revealed that the latter hardly invested in learners, which was evident from the poor infrastructure and generally weak educational system and outcomes. 

In view of the constraints, the committee recommended gradual conversion, beginning from September 2016. In reality, it ought to have recommended a 5-10 year roadmap through which the nation could have prioritised technical/vocational education, equip technical institutions with current teaching /learning infrastructure in order to attract academic elements into the polytechnics. Above all, the institutions could have used the time to strengthen its intellectual activities and be equipped for the high-powered level research which is the hallmark of technical universities. Since the polytechnics were prematurely converted to technical universities, they assumed the new status with all bag and baggage.

The fact is that the polytechnic system was never really understood by a greater majority of its stakeholders in Ghana. A small minority of real technical elements like the retired Mr. Kofi Kumah-Aidoo, who superbly nurtured three Ghanaian polytechnics, did justice to the concept of hands-on training. The others just contributed to watering down practical training. Worse of all, the polytechnics are generally placed a step below the universities by those who do not know the difference, with the consequence that secondary school graduates generally opt for the polytechnic as a second choice, rather than consider it a legitimate career path. The conversion occurred amidst such severe challenges, though the nation could have committed to addressing them effectively before the change.

The conversion itself occurred under bizarre circumstances, with some polytechnics even agitating their way into technical university status. In the end, instead of the recommended gradual conversion, eight polytechnics were snowballed into technical universities. Meanwhile, the status quo remained basically polytechnic. Even though the objective was to move towards competency-based education, the large class numbers make that impossible. With government subvention always late or sometimes not coming at all, the institutions are forced to depend on internally-generated funds, which is realised through tuition, therefore, funds motivate enrolment, not academic performance or experience. Consequently, students who are not equipped for the tertiary classroom are admitted into the system, and technical university status has not changed that.  

Considering the numerous handicaps of the technical universities, should there be an inkling of truth in Mr. Owusu’s claim, the Government will not be acting in bad faith at all, even if the move might not be politically rewarding. The question is: do we really need ten technical universities in Ghana? One desires a technical university which pursues the Dresden concept or which operates on the concept of utilising natural resources for quality existence, like MIT. The excellence of such institutions stems from the fact that they constantly develop knowledge and expertise through high-powered level applied research. For example, MIT has taken language beyond human interaction; with the aid of computers, it is now exploring how the brain actually makes language. Over here, we consider research, largely for promotion, not for improving knowledge and quality existence. That stance ought to change.

The stark reality is that constituting the councils would not automatically rectify such systemic handicaps. We need to strive for the quality that has consistently eluded the Technical/Vocational Educational System. For that to happen, the nation must genuinely invest in the System. We need to combat the wrong notion that Technical/Vocational Education is for the dim-witted or academic non-performers; the right elements — the teacher and the taught — must be placed in the system. We need to convince the average Ghanaian youth that the Technical/Vocational System offers a legitimate career path. Above all, the institutions must research and design innovative approaches to offer alternative, dignified livelihood to the teeming Ghanaian unemployed youth who are daily exploited or resort to nefarious activities against law-abiding citizens. If we achieved that, then Technical/Vocational Education would be championing national and human resource development, and that should be our prime focus.