{UAH} Uganda’s universities are not designed to train intellectuals

Uganda's universities are not designed to train intellectuals

• March 1, 2019
• Written by DEO SSELWANGA

Robert Jensen defines an intellectual as that person who collects and analyses information with a view of understanding how the world works and the patterns that can help the community to make better judgements.

Supposedly, an intellectual is the eye, ear and voice of a free society and their job is set a society's course by speaking to all groups of people. To begin with, the quality of university students is hugely determined by their pre-university training.

A majority – if not all - university students have had a secondary school experience similar to the banking model of education as articulated by Paul Freire - the kind of system that treats students as though they do not know anything, cannot process, add or subtract from what they are taught, but are simply capable of consuming and regurgitating what they are taught.

Related Stories

• 2019-02-20 - Seven universities research on children issues
• 2019-02-20 - Brac scholarship rescued Naalya's brightest student
• 2019-02-20 - Mamdani's endless insults to colleagues at Makerere
• 2019-02-20 - Our entire education system needs an overhaul
• 2019-02-20 - Janet order on 'backdoor' admissions brings change
• 2019-02-19 - 46 pupils survive dormitory fire in Sembabule

When such students finally make it to the university, they expect to be taught in a manner they are accustomed to. Subsequently, any lecturer who teaches differently by encouraging them to read widely and create their own notes from the musings of the class discussions, multimedia and textbooks is usually viewed as "uncooperative" "difficult" to deal with, very strict and deserving of ejection from the university.

It is very common to hear such students making complaints like: "The lecturer doesn't give us enough notes!" Although universities cannot be directly blamed for the wrong models of teaching in secondary schools, they share the blame because ideally universities are perceived or at least perceive themselves as the cardinal towers of knowledge generation and dissemination.

To expect large numbers of intellectuals from a largely inept secondary and university education system equates to placing so much belief in miracle.

 Secondly, the fear of losing a job affects the rigour of some lecturers. Upon realizing that the quality of the students is poor, lecturers readjust the course content, modes of instruction and assessments so as to make studying "easier" for the students.

Otherwise, the lecturer ends up being poorly assessed by the students. Therefore, as a survival strategy, those who are too afraid of losing jobs opt for a harmonious coexistence with the students at the expense of rigorous teaching and assessment. It is little wonder then that the several years of upsurge in graduates have not necessarily translated into high numbers of intellectuals.

Similarly, engagement in intellectual work at a university requires some kind of certainty over tenure and commitment to the institution.

The insufficient funds to cater for fulltime staffing implies that universities find it financially-efficient to employ a few key staffs (usually faculty deans and administrators) on a regular contract, and employ most of the teaching staff as and when needed.

No lecturer can be expected to put in maximum effort in a place where they are uncertain if they will be given a chance to teach the following semester or quarter.

The poor meager payments coupled with job uncertainty implies that lecturers find themselves in a scenario where they have to have another unrelated job, run a side business or teach in multiple universities so as to make ends meet. Such are not the kind of lecturers one expects to deal in ideas as well as inspiring students to become intellectuals.

Lastly, the incompetence of some lecturers is to blame for the critically low numbers of intellectuals. The high level of academic inflation (several academic qualifications with little or no benefit to the holders) leads many to teaching as long as they possess the very minimum qualifications (usually a master's degree or a PhD).

There is hardly any attention to one's specific areas of interest and proficiency. Eventually, the unfitness by some lecturers to teach certain subjects manifests itself in two ways: A lecturer might confess to their students and beg for "cooperation" or the students notice the incompetence as they see their lecturer fidgeting to incoherently explain materials downloaded from Google a few minutes before going to class.

With all due respect, not even a "mad" person would expect an intellectual to emerge from such a learning environment. In conclusion, there are many impediments to the universities' role as crucial formation centers for intellectuals in Uganda. Exceptional hard work, a touch of genius, luck and obtaining education from abroad have ensured that there are traces of intellectual work in Uganda.

However, there is need for deliberate efforts to increase the number of university-made intellectuals so as to reduce the intellectual gap which has largely been filled by pseudo-intellectuals, socialites, propagandists and fake men and women of "Gaaad."

The writer is social critic, former lecturer and currently a social worker in Canada.

--
Disclaimer:Everyone posting to this Forum bears the sole responsibility for any legal consequences of his or her postings, and hence statements and facts must be presented responsibly. Your continued membership signifies that you agree to this disclaimer and pledge to abide by our Rules and Guidelines.To unsubscribe from this group, send email to: ugandans-at-heart+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com