Ndafetwa N. Haimbodi
The education curriculum of today continues to teach learners about drawing locusts, and not teaching them how to mine and run business. Have anyone asked these questions; Why does unemployment continue to escalate? Why have most universities become qualification’s factories? This article seeks to answer the question on “What is on the ground?”
Why are learners not taught key drives to reducing poverty and how to develop themselves socially after basic education? The content delivered to our learners is less encouraging, hence the high rate of unemployment after tertiary education, because learners then have plenty of days using almost nothing they have learnt in school.
Why are learners who are interested in fashion and design not trained on the art of applying design and clothing construction instead of labeling parts of a microscope while they do not even see themselves in laboratories.
Why are learners not taught based on their goals and reality, at least from grade 8? Would it not be best if learners are to be schooled on things they will use outside school instead of what “We fought for this country…” thinks is right?
This is to say, many of our graduates and unemployed youth do not have any practical benefit from what they have been taught in school. No knowledge is intrinsically without value yes, but how about giving quality education to help the youth better their livelihood opportunities after tertiary or basic education to say? Why don’t we have Computer as a compulsory subject with the rate of technological advancement, and embrace more technology in the classroom especially for those that may want to take the path of technicality? Is the “Mention 4 types of soil” not only essential for those that want to pave their ways towards agriculture and not administrators
The 1900s’ curriculum must face out and prepare learners with the necessary skills as they face reality. Is the Namibian education system not failing the future with too high entry requirements for institutions (specifically English)? Is B+ not supposed to be required for orators, writers, journalists and English related courses, or why is a sketcher denied entry if they have the basics of writing and speaking English, other than being competent enough for what they want to study? English is essential for communication in all dimensions of study, but should it really be a reason why someone is rejected by a university?
Will practical experience not award learners who want to teach the courtesy to learn how to handle various types of learners in basic education, instead of only having a chance to stand in front of learners during tertiary years? If learners are to be taught realistic things, they will confidently be able to make significant contributions to our economy and to increase accessibility to employment which is as scarce as hen’s teeth.
It would be void not to admit that the curriculum in use is such a failure which does not allow learners to set priorities and establish grounds that expose what really matters.