The bouts of indecision, incompetence, lack of assertiveness, incoherent reasoning, poor management, lack of confidence and poor negotiation skills at the national front are symptoms of a broken educational system.

Over the years, the nation has churned out unadventurous, run-of-the-mill workers and professionals, or (if one is cynical) good clerks and bureaucrats, but not people who have fire in their belly to change the country. It is true that we have in the past touted ourselves as having one of the best human resources in the world, but I shudder to say, we are trailing now.

The adoption of technology in most parts has made us less intelligent, less sociable and reduced our attention span. The biggest challenge the country face is not political rule, rather a citizenry who have become short sighted; corrupt and uninspiring even in their view of the country.

Shaking the fundamentals Back in school at both the secondary and tertiary levels, we were encouraged to just consume and reproduce what the lecturer taught us. A deviation from your notes to infuse new ideas or research material was heavily frowned upon by supervisors. So during examinations, we will basically cram our test books and hope to remember the contents and pour them out.

We were hardly compelled to introduce foreign material or literally brainstorm or critique notions, assumptions, theories, ideas or hypothesis, suffice to say all the authors we studied were hardly Ghanaian. The simple transmission of information to a passive audience in lectures is largely a wasteful, ineffective and corrupting activity.

It is wasteful because it does not exploit the precious opportunity for the teacher and the students to be engaged in active, multi-tasking, reciprocal learning while they are together; it’s ineffective because lectures are boring as often as not, and collecting, reviewing and learning information is, in any case, best done individually from original sources; it is corrupting for lecturers, because they can evade the true challenges of engaged and interactive teaching by superficial discharge of their duties according to tradition; and it’s corrupting for students because it deludes them into thinking that education is a passive and wearisome process with success requiring simply the adsorption and regurgitation of information.

What possible justification can there be for lecturers to be conveying material verbally which is available in print or on websites and to which they add no value in the delivery? Teaching is about engagement and debate, processing and criticising information, tackling and solving problems to lead to true understanding and competence.

The passivity of education is especially absurd in this modern age when social relationships, learning, gaming and networking are in a state of constant innovation and revolution so much that it makes traditional educational practice look positively fossilised.

The idea Develop critical minds and thinking citizenry through a re-organisation of the teacher – student relationship. Brief Respect and deference are not necessarily the same. They are important social values and do contribute to social order and cohesion, but they are, in some aspects of their manifestation, hostile to education, to growth and to change. If we cannot criticise or challenge those who are older or senior we cannot develop our mental muscles and capacities; innovation and new thinking are stifled and error remains undiscovered. If truth is the goal of science and philosophy, how can it ever be pursued when only one perspective is authorised and imposed, especially in institutions with the unique and imperative duty of staying at the cutting edge of thinking and research? We can respect our elders and seniors for their age or achievement, but that does not, absolutely does not, mean we should believe in or consent to everything they say, nor believe that they are free from error, nor follow them without question in any direction at all, whether they are teachers or colleagues.

Elders and seniors who demand an unhealthy degree of intellectual or academic conformity are showing a deep lack of respect for their students’ and colleagues’ integrity ad autonomy and for the basic principles of academic life.

Deference and submission have the effect of infantilising students. Lively, interactive and effective teaching is a very demanding vocation, not for the lazy or uncommitted, and it is one for which few teachers and lecturers are truly well prepared. It is morally and intellectually demanding, and physically demanding too.

Boredom or indifference among students in the classroom is a direct result of defective teaching, and though there may be some few students who are beyond easy reach, the great majority should be, generally, in a state of happy anticipation at the prospect of learning with any passably competent and committed teacher.

The greatest act of respect towards our teachers is for us to take their maturity and knowledge seriously and put it to the test through challenge and debate; the greatest demonstration of the genius of teaching is the encouragement of skepticism, the questioning of everything and the taking of risk.

Producing critical minds The development of critical minds is central to the business of education – and to the future of the nations and the human race. Only the discipline of trained intellect and sound judgment can help us discover the most fruitful pursuits and protect us from going astray in a chaotic modern world.

At Oxford and Cambridge universities, the tutorial model of learning has always been at the heart of academic life. This entails a one-hour weekly meeting between one or two students or a very small group and their subject tutor, at which their research, writing or thinking from individual work is subject to intense scrutiny, challenge and discussion; problems are addressed, understanding consolidated and new assignments given for the week ahead.

Students are largely responsible for their own learning along with guidance, supervision and, of course, examination, but, fundamentally, you can do as much or as little work as you wish as long as you meet the weekly tutorial requirements and pass examinations.

The common motivation that should be sold to students is not the fact that after school they should work, make money and live a free life. At an early stage, we need to make students responsible, have enquiring minds and a spirit of service.

A service which transcends selfish needs to being positive change agents for society and the common good. Life can easily get boring and worthless on achieving material goals; it takes a bold mission to affect other people’s lives, to make life worthwhile.

Conclusion We have built an entitlement society; one which we fail to take responsibility and play the blame game. Education, instead of being a change agent has become a business with most churches and individual businessmen entering into the fray to amass wealth.

They hold lectures for over 100 students at a sitting and mass-produce graduates who cannot think by themselves and have a parochial mindset to schooling, work and life; education is not equal to wealth creation, rather the improvement of mankind’s existence, money is ONLY a byproduct.

To produce excellent institutions, we need to produce students who are not only budding experts in their field but who also have sharp, effective, critical minds which can be applied to a whole range of issues and problems.

They emerge from their years of active and positive development as enthusiasts for life and change and progress; among them are the ones who will make their mark on this country’s development and reputation and maybe on the survival and success of the human race too. If teachers cannot be ambitious for their students, there’s little hope for anything else. GB

This article was written by Yaw Asamoah of African SME Summit (www.africansme.org) and Bruce Hugman, a graduate of Oxford and Nottingham universities (UK)