Why We Need A Reboot in Tertiary Education
Recent appointments and recruitment to the new regime have sparked controversies in public spaces, especially in the leading social media avenues. I’ve keenly scrutinized arguments on both ends of the extreme, from those supporting the government in its decisions to those vehemently critiquing it, to finally come up with an objective and bias-free discussion. The two most notable cases are the appointment of Ms.Aisha Jumwa as the cabinet secretary for Public Service, Gender, and Affirmative Action and the hiring of Ivy Chelimo by the deputy president Rigathi Gachagua, a law graduate from Catholic University who coined the DP’s popular nickname “Riggy G“.
Questions on whether Aisha Jumwa’s academic excellence qualifies her to hold such a senior and important post are being floated, with one faction arguing that her D- in KCSE should not be the metric used to define her expected performance on the CS docket President Ruto placed her on. And maybe, beauty is only skin deep. Those critiquing Jumwa’s nomination have constantly doubted her attainment of any form of tertiary education, which has been alleged to lack proper chronology and therefore leaves them with no option but to jump to the conclusion that she lacks the academic qualifications to hold the ministerial post.
…beauty is only skin deep.
After Ivy Chelimo landed a job at the DP’s Harambee House Annex office for nicknaming him Riggy G, intense controversy has gone ablaze among netizens on the grounds of the criteria used to award her such a position in a lucrative and high-profile office. Although she holds a bachelor’s degree in law, mockery has been that her university qualification was not used to match her with the post she now holds. Apologists of this hiring have defended it claiming that her creativity and luck were reasons enough to appease the DP’s generosity. But is there any objectivity in luck?
These controversies come at a time when the country is grappling with alarming rates of unemployed graduates and a dearth of opportunities to explore. The cases above are just but recent examples of controversies that have caught the public’s attention in regard to qualification on the basis of attainment of tertiary education.
On to my take…
The government has massively invested in tertiary education to enable its youth to access it and match up with the growing demand for professionals and skilled manpower around the globe. However, my thoughts are that this investment is only eating up the public fund and no gains are realized in return. If we were to calculate the cost the government incurs to support a single medical student through a public university, the sum could go to more than 80% of the total school fees a student is supposed to pay. The crux of the matter is that most of these graduates, with whatever degree they earn, do not end up in the careers they pursued. This has left me questioning whether tertiary education has real value in the job market at all.
When government spends thousands and millions to educate a medical student who turns out to be an entrepreneur, we ought to believe that there is a major hitch in the higher education system. This hitch is further worsened by the fact that underqualified, incompetent, and undeserving individuals take up jobs they’re barely adept at, culminating in a huge gap between tertiary education and the probability to match an equivalent job.
If we’re to permanently bridge this gap, we need to relook at the policies, criteria, and laws that govern employability in regard to academic qualifications. We also have to question the merit and at least use an objective yardstick for employment, whether in the civil service or in the private sector. An objective yardstick in this case boils down to a relevant qualification in tertiary education.
On the other hand, placing unqualified individuals in public or private posts puts performance at risk and undermines the essence of our tertiary education. We, therefore, have the mandate to reboot the tertiary education system to be able to provide maximum output to the nation in equal measure as the government invests in it.
This view should not be in any way misconstrued as alluding that academic excellence is equal to performance on the job or vice versa. It’s a post with the intent to question social justice and equity in regard to offering the deserved reverence to our tertiary education system. This among other options serves as a button to reboot it to what the initial intent was when developing higher education.
The discussion is open to constructive critiquing and any form of objective disregard.