By James Tamba Lebbie
Inquiry Commissions and task forces have not been in short supply in Sierra Leone since the National Provisional Ruling Council (NPRC) toppled the All Peoples’ Congress’ (APC) one-party government in 1992. Interestingly, the trend took a particularly ubiquitous nature when the APC returned to power in 2007. Commissions of Inquiry and task forces have been set up for everything and for anything. And the reasons range from investigating political disturbances to looking into the poor performances of state institutions and/or the social sector. Of particular interest to me and some educationists is the so-called Gbamanja Commission of Inquiry. September 2012 is approaching and there is no sign on the horizon that the recommendations, made by that body, and which were endorsed in a government White Paper would be implemented. In retrospect, the Gbamanja Commission of Inquiry was set up in 2009 by the President “to investigate and identify the poor performance of pupils in the 2008 Basic Education Certificate Examination (BECE) and West African Senior School Certificate Examination (WASSCE) in Sierra Leone, taking into account the role played by the school and home environments, the curriculum, teachers’ motivation, their attitudes and methodologies; pupils’ preparedness, and class sizes among other things; to ascertain the impact of the 6-3-3-4 education system on the performance of the pupils and how that compares with the experience of other countries that have adopted the same system; to investigate the reasons for indiscipline in secondary schools; to recommend immediate, short, medium and long-term measures to improve and sustain pupils’ performance in the BECE and WASSC Examinations. In March 2010, the commission submitted its report to the President, in which as expected, the teachers were the scapegoats. The report, which has recommendations for “immediate” implementation while others are classified under the short and medium term calls for, among other things, the phasing out of the two-shift format, a recommendation made “with the proviso that additional classrooms will be built to accommodate all pupils in one shift,” and the modification of 6-3-3-4 system of education “to include a compulsory early child component,” and the extension by one year of the duration of senior secondary school. This means the system now becomes the “6-3-4-4”. In July 2010, the government came out with a White Paper approving almost all the recommendations made by the Commission. Interestingly, the government rejected the recommendation that calls for the “discontinuation of payment of BECE and WASSC examination fees for pupils by Government.” Call it political expedience? Well, you tell me. And this is March 2012, almost two years since government endorsed the recommendations that required immediate implementation. And with barely five months more to go for the commencement of the 6-3-4-4- system, the question and issues that keep bothering many educationists, concerned parents and right-thinking observers are the implications and feasibility of such a radical enterprise. Consider for instance, the myriad social and financial implications of the extension from three to four years of the duration of senior secondary school. First there is the burden on parents to meet the extra cost of covering the fourth academic year of their kids. And the situation becomes even more precarious for the girl child for whom there are multiple risks because of their vulnerability. For the girl child whose parents cannot meet that extra cost for a fourth year in senior secondary school, she could be confronted with the ugly options of early marriage or dropping out of school and/or could be a victim of teenage pregnancy if she is unlucky. And not to mention the psychological anguish in all students who had earlier thought they would accomplish their university undergraduate education within 16 years. But if that does not sound challenging to you, then consider also the academic and administrative implications of the new system. The current senior secondary school syllabi are meant for three years. Any modification of the old system is also bound to affect the syllabi; otherwise the rationale for extending the years of senior secondary school from three to four years would be ridiculous. The point I’m making is that a new syllabus to suit the new education system should have been introduced by now to address the inadequacies of the old system. But as we go to press, there is no syllabus for the recommended system according to a principal of a renowned senior secondary school in Freetown. Moreover, the commencement of the 6-3-4-4- system in the 2012/2013 academic year means there could be no WASSCE examination next year. Consequently, it is not clear where the colleges and universities would get applicants for admission in the subsequent academic year. The introduction of this system also has far reaching ramifications for the West African Examinations Council in Sierra Leone. The WASSCE examination is not only meant for pupils in Sierra Leone. It is an assessment system for some five West African countries including Gambia, Ghana and Nigeria. It is therefore not clear how the WAEC office in Sierra Leone would demonstrate its relevance within the one year period in which there would be no WASSCE examinations. And while pondering over the socio-economic, administrative, and academic challenges of the new system to be implemented in September, compound the confusion in your head, if any, by taking into consideration the other recommendation that calls for the eradication of the two-shift system, which the government also endorsed. Commonsense will tell us that the key reason for the double shift system in schools is the lack of basic infrastructure to accommodate pupils. In other words, enrollment in schools has far surpassed the available paltry facilities. So when a Commission recommends the end, with immediate effect, of such a system and is endorse by the government, one would have thought the conditions that created the prevailing double shift system in schools would have been addressed by now in the first place. But you undertake a snap visit of schools running double shifts in Freetown and you will be appalled by the dramatic increase in the number of enrollment. Therefore, eliminating the double shift system without creating an adequate infrastructure to absorb the surplus pupils could pose a challenge that could be difficult to contend with. There is no gainsay that members of the Gbamanja Commission have the best interest of Sierra Leone’s education system at heart; hence their hard work to address the deficiencies in our school system. However, one is also inclined to say that the Commission addressed more of the symptoms than the causes of the malaise plaguing our secondary schools. For instance, it does not take a rocket scientist to know that the conditions of service for teachers across the board are appalling, the consequence of which is having a demotivated workforce. In addition, the absence of the most basic teaching and learning materials in our schools coupled with a ridiculously high pupil-teachers ration means the best we can expect from our schools is under-performance. If the government was really serious about enhancing quality education in our secondary schools, it should address these and other vexed underlying problems and put in place structures based on competence and not patronage. Otherwise setting up a Commission of Inquiry that would come up with a recommendation that includes the extension of the school year is like the President asking the people to extend its tenure because he could not execute all his programmes within the constitutionally allocated time frame.
