In his inaugural speech address to the American nation on 20 January 1961, the young president-elect, John F. Kennedy, and the thirty-fifth president of the United States of America, ushered a usual quoted statement by many scholars and politicians alike.
He conveyed to the electorate a very touching, appealing and compelling message as follows: Ask not what your country can do for you, but ask what you can do for your country. Casually as the quotation may seem, it carries more weight and hope more than we think.
In answering to a different drumbeat and clarion call almost at the same time in the 1960s, many Namibians young and old, in all shapes and sizes used all means at their disposal in crossing borders to go and wage the liberation struggle. These heroes and heroines in reality took it upon themselves the task of doing something for the country instead of waiting for what the country would do for them.
Upon crossing the borders, of course, they valued their lives, but what was in their minds was to liberate Namibia. In this case, they had put the Namibian independence case first before anything. But alas it is disheartening to learn and see for ourselves that as we approach the thirty-second anniversary of the country’s nationhood, the reverse of Kennedy’s statement is true.
The once hailed heroes and heroines of the liberation struggle have somersaulted and resorted to enriching themselves at the expense of the toiling masses.
In all sectors, the education system could be singled out as having suffered greatly as a result of always asking the country to do everything for the people instead of turning events the other way around.
The whole problem started at the dawn of independence when the newly born nation had to rush to the United Kingdom to borrow and import the Cambridge education system.
Yes, it is education from a developed country, but before this wholesale borrowing, a feasibility study should have been conducted to assess the usefulness and relevance of that education to Namibia.
With independence euphoria, both the politicians and educators then, could not have their eyes piercing through the future to assess and evaluate the consequences of such a system.
Unfortunately and ironically, the very designers of that education system could no longer recommend it for the consumption of their children and other members of their families.
Instead, they resorted to sending their kinsfolk to South Africa, whose education they formally despised. Nobody supports the former Bantu education system, but what the new Ministry of Education, Arts and Culture should have done was to modify the system by removing all attributes and aspects of Bantu education.
Namibia could have opted for polishing the old education system, instead of Namibian leaders and elite sending their children to South Africa for better education.
Because of the blind and unselective borrowing, Namibia has become a prodigal educational child, moving from one education system to another without a clear vision.
Culminating from this mode of educational movement is the high failure rate, which breeds hopelessness for our learners. The education and examination systems of Namibia have been producing more failures than passers.
Of course, an education system which thrives on failing learners should be considered ‘intellectually disabled’. This calls for extensive research to try and dig out the very causes of this misfortune in the name of failures.
Nearly thirty-two years of Bantu education reversal and the introduction of people’s education and education for all, our spines shiver at the sight of poor examination results, cancellation of examinations, poor infrastructure, overcrowding and many ills in the classrooms, which have crippled the whole education system.
It is no secret therefore that the crafters of Bantu education are giggling and scoffing at Namibian educators for failing to improve and revamp the system. Namibian educators and other stakeholders should have learnt from the fact that developed nations have laid more emphasis on technical and vocational centres.
This is crucial for skills acquisition, which is turned into production and ushers in sectors of development.
After all three decades of freedom, the state and status of the trade centres in the country remain in a sorrowful condition in terms of trained personnel, equipment, tools and necessary machines. The morale among the trainees is at its lowest ebb, especially in a situation being exacerbated by the pandemic virus of corona 19.
Of course, the Ministry of Higher Education which is responsible for this sector should have done more groundwork in addressing the state and plight of the vocational centres.
The technical and vocational centres could have performed miracles in terms of developing the country had the Ministry of Higher Education and its stakeholders put their heads together and forged ahead in funding this sector.
What is the way forward in terms of asking ourselves what we can do for the country? The Ministry of Higher Education and its sectors and departments should call an educational indaba with the full purpose of addressing the education question.
It should not be business as usual when the education is tottering towards disaster and eventually becoming an education system which will totally fail to be sustained in all spheres.
If this is too costly, then other means should be sought which will lead to educational improvement and sustainability.
It is very difficult to keep on nursing a system which is bent on producing failures.