Technical University-Government Impasse: The Leverage

One frustrating aspect of industrial action is that any union member who does not support the call is generally considered dissenting. However, it can be unjust to succumb to such pressure and echo union’s call for strike, especially, when crucial ethical, professional issues are completely sidelined in the quest for better staff remuneration. The full-blown industrial action by technical universities (TU) ought to be analysed, not only from employee-employer point of view, but also from the perspectives of the customer i.e. the learner or  other primary stakeholder – and by association the parents, tax-payer, industry, community. No one is averse to some extra money, yet the ground for demanding such money should align with classroom reality and currency of body of knowledge being imparted to the 21^st Century vocational learner.

The most worrying part of industrial action by learning institutions remains that it is almost always motivated by staff needs. The harsh silencing of the customer – the taught – lends an ironic dimension to industrial actions. In business ethics, the customer is always right, yet each time, learning institutions and governments flesh out monetary issues – the former seeking more, the latter seeking less payment, the taught is not consulted. Unfair! We are dealing with the millennial generation, which is very distrustful of authority due to such dubiousness and neglect. That generation considers authority selfish; within the educational context, both teacher and administrator constitute part of the authority that the millennial generation distrusts.

And they have several reasons for suspicion within the context of this layered industrial action: The Technical Education Workers Union (TEWU) is agitating that it has not been part of the negotiation. Administrators also have their own dimension. Meanwhile, the negotiation has gotten to the stage where Government feels it has made overly concessions to the TUs, who in turn are not satisfied with the offer on the table. This could have been the stage where the strike could have been halted, so that Government’s offer could be referred to TU constituents. They could have discussed the offer at length for an informed consensus on acceptance or otherwise. By this rejection, the representatives have, in a way, disenfranchised constituents.

Ironically, all the major stakeholders but the taught are speaking; who speaks for the silenced learner? Since there has been no reference to the actual working environment, pertinent questions need to be asked in order to place the industrial action in the appropriate professional context: What type of curricula are being run by the TUs? Are learners being taught what they need to survive in the 21^st Century workplace? How are learners being taught? Are TU classrooms experiential learning spaces where competent knowledge is created and shared between the teacher and the taught? Are TU curricula based on the global Knowledge Economy? How has 21^st Information Technology impacted both theoretical and practical instruction in the TU classroom? What is industry opinion of the skills TU graduates present to the workforce? It is time the learner spoke.

If these questions drove the negotiations, it would imply a simultaneous consideration of the needs of both teacher and taught, which would be the ethical approach. The educational system has continued to be teacher-centred, so learners constantly get shortchanged. The unassertive nature of the average Ghanaian means that the marginalized youth might not muster the courage to question the status quo. Therefore, the grown-ups must do the ethical thing by making students’ learning interests premium in the negotiation for better staff remuneration.

Currently, the TU classroom is bogged down by a poor research culture, though technical universities elsewhere are known by high-powered research which continues to improve quality existence across the globe. Universities in other communities are championing the Knowledge Economy in their classrooms, directing learners to quality researched information on the World Wide Web. In the Ghanaian TU classroom, a cross-section of teachers rather limit learners to scanty information in local books, emaciated material labelled handouts, which learners must procure. Even though students pay ICT fee, the TUs do not invest significantly in ICT to enable teaching/learning to be immersed in technology. Furthermore, many teachers blissfully operate in the traditional classroom only, technologically disempowering learners across human endeavours.

The World Bank has emphasized that jobs anchor economic growth, so nations must invest in quality education and training, backgrounded by the digital economy. Ghanaian universities are failing in that direction – NABCO is a living proof. The teeming mass unemployment is another constant reminder. Clearly, there is an urgent need for a holistic approach to TU issues, and special emphasis must be placed on training and curricula.

One wonders why the TUs did not fight the NCTE academic audit, a bizarre activity which precipitated this migration. Apart from the sad fact that it did not use industrial parameters, in some cases, some auditors lied blatantly about teacher’s qualifications. The TU community did not fight the disservice. Moreover, the technician career is being rapidly extinguished, which implies an eventual extinction of hands-on training. Indeed, Stakeholders are collaborating to kill the job creation potential of the TUs. Consequently, disillusioned youth receive dubious divine calls, become scammers and other high-tech fraudulent elements, and we are collective victims. If we nurture the TU system, we protect ourselves, our children, and our property.

This is no time to drag issues that benefit TU staff only; address all issues that could compel the TUs to invest in the learning human capital. Invest in 21^st Technological education. They say the only language government understands is strike. Conversely, the only language the people understand is money; therefore, migrate the entire TU system. Government has its part, TU administrative machineries have their role, teachers have the key responsibility, and students have a duty. Let all play their roles simultaneously for a balanced well-being. Our collective call!

Technical University: Make Pedagogy Effective, and Attractive

In 2010, I was disappointed when the then Minister of Education, Mr. Teteh-Enyo, directed the military to prepare tents for possible accommodation of secondary school students. It was one of the consequences of the late President Mills’ decision to prematurely reverse the four-year secondary school policy to three years, swelling the intake for that year. Many Ghanaians had cautioned Government against the reversal, because the nation needed time to determine the effectiveness or otherwise of the four-year system. Backed by the National Association of Graduate Teachers, the Government, true to its campaign promise, reversed the policy. That decision did not augur well for Ghanaian education.

In 2019, I am apprehensive that the Government is negotiating with the Technical Universities to migrate the latter’s  salary to university level, which migration is leaving out effective pedagogy, hands-on training, learner competency, despite efforts to centralize Technical/Vocational Education. Currently, TUs largely operate dated curricula, so most graduates do not meet industrial standards. TUs compete with traditional universities in developing programmes, when they should be tailoring programmes to specific industrial needs. Even industry is wary of the porous skills TU graduates present to the workplace.

Subsequently, it is imperative to upgrade, not only TU salaries but the entire learning system, if this nation has even the slightest hope of getting that hollow conversion from polytechnic to TU fleshed out to competency-based training (CBT). That goal is effectively hampered by the current high numbers in the classrooms, the marginal input of industry in curriculum design and implementation, poor classroom methodologies, poor investment in teaching/learning resources, to name these. Consequently, competent hands-on training is currently endangered.

Quality has rapidly disappeared from the system, paving the way for commercialization of information.  Elsewhere, institutions design curriculum to meet changing times, leaner and industrial needs. Classroom knowledge is geared toward resource-based learning, current turbulence of climate change, migration, polarization of wealth and abject poverty, youth unemployment, population increase, gender inequality, international relations, extremism, to mention these. Other nations ensure that learners are prepared for the Knowledge Economy, accessible through the Internet. Information Communication Technology enables teachers/learners to positively navigate the turbulent global tides for competent skills and knowledge. Yet, the initiators of the conversion failed to invest in the TUs, the dynamism required to accentuate competent knowledge in the prevailing socio-cultural, geo-political and economic reality.

Driven by individual, community, national, and global demands, education elsewhere is learner-centred, not teacher-centred; neither is it exploited for political power. Learning institutions package pragmatic knowledge which might render graduates assets to community, rather than reduce the human agency of learners.  In certain communities, governments rely on learning institutions to drive development by adapting school curricula to generational, industrial, global needs and aspirations. That dynamism is missing from Ghanaian vocational education.

Logically, the teeming unemployed numbers of both lay and educated youth, the rapid increase in crime rate across the country should compel the TUs to design innovative long- and short-term programmes that endow various categories of learners with sustainable marketable skills. There must be a shift from the old, boring dry classroom method where teachers talk and students listen. Contemporary youth are labelled digital natives, hence, professional programmes run by the TUs should be oriented by information technology, which requires strategic investment, which investment is manageable due to annual IT fees paid by students.

Additionally, TUs have also received a big helping hand through the national digitization programme; the institutions should tap the digital database for classroom simulation. It is time that Ghanaian TUs replicated the technological transformation of the blackboard which has resulted in appreciable flexibility in higher education. Furthermore, Google has brought virtual reality to the institutional doorstep; the Google classroom is a super space for synchronous and asynchronous interaction. There are numerous other technological interventions currently being explored by dynamic educational institutions for effective teaching/learning approaches, even as industry offers glimpses into new, adaptable technological openings.

Yet, many TU classrooms are not spaces which effectively utilize technology to provide life-long learning skills to learners. Many teachers fail to take advantage of learning materials and communities, available online, which continue to inject so much currency into classroom approaches. Worst of all, a cross-section of teachers limit learners to scanty, poorly-packaged information, instead of directing learners to the vast quality information available online. To a large extent, information is dumped on learners, who simply memorize and reproduce such for marks. In the Vocational/Technical classroom, that approach is a rich recipe for dysfunctional graduates; that is our current location.

Amidst this regressive reality, TU salaries are being migrated in isolation. Unacceptable! There is a cliché among Ghanaian Trade Unions that the only language government understands is strike. Conversely, the only language unions understand is money. Therefore, why is the Government not driving a very hard bargain to compel the TUs to transform their classrooms into learner-centred spaces where teachers impart 21^st Century knowledge? 

The oversight bodies are just as culpable; the academic audit conducted by the NCTE, which catapulted the migration process was as baffling as it was sad. It neither focused on instructional nor industrial parameters. Institutions elsewhere treasure instructors who possess knowledge across disciplines; the auditors slighted a cross-section of such teachers. Consequently, the audit has actually deepened the theoretical trend of the TUs at a time when they desperately need to enrich hands-on training.  

Technical/Vocational Education has been labelled a disadvantaged relative of grammar education. No country lives that statement better than Ghana, the only losers being the youth, supposedly being prepared for the mantle of future leadership. It is improper to systematically focus on the well-being of teachers to the neglect of learners. The migration should simultaneously benefit teachers and the taught. If the nation genuinely believes that Technical/Vocation Education can snatch the youth from the doldrums that make them highly susceptible to anti-social behaviour, let effective pedagogy be Government’s bargaining tool in the current TU salary migration negotiation.