Allow me space in your newspaper to pen an article regarding my thoughts on altering our Namibian secondary curriculum. A curriculum that lacks all of the necessary components is a tremendous load on those who must complete it, in this case, the pupils. In terms of academics, each academic phase has its preparation, and for students to succeed, they must be theoretically and practically prepared to be ideal future scientists or whatever they like to pursue. 

Secondary education is a significant section that can contribute to empowerment, economic standing and analytical experience. The gap between secondary education and higher institutional education should be bridged by modifying a secondary curriculum when necessary. 

If pupils are unable to succeed in academic secondary education, the question should be asked if they are capable of surviving life without intellectual support.

The size of the population, the availability and cost of materials, the labour market and the standard of institutional courses should all be considered when changing a curriculum. 

Do we see a future in which we can accommodate the pupils we are teaching through a new curriculum, or have we solved the problem of graduates from previous curricula? Are we keeping up with the changes in curriculum in the academic world, or are we altering it because the last one failed? Are we aware that curriculum changes entail both qualitative and quantitative changes? Is the effect primarily favourable or negative? These are questions that I am unable to answer in my position, but from an academic standpoint, I believe that with our new curriculum, we have entered a phase that will provide us with a one-way ticket to academic load. 

When we consider that Namibia is underpopulated, the market is small, and most graduates are compelled to work odd jobs to make ends meet, we wonder where we went wrong. 

Then I’d suggest that while updating a curriculum is a good idea, refreshing marks aren’t in line with our academic standards or the gap between universities and industry.

The majority of individuals are gravitating towards education and the nursing fields because they are more accommodating, but is this the vision 2030 we are overseeing? What effect does this have on these young people’s professional preferences and decisions? Take a look at the schools in rural locations. Are they being improved to meet the new curriculum’s standards, or are we training pupils to become village champions because they are unable to adjust to the new curriculum?

I pity my brothers and sisters who are struggling academically because they have no idea what their future holds. They would be motivated to study not by a common aim of knowing, but by the dread of failing grade 11 and being denied admission to institutions. Alternatively, if pupils complete grade 11 and decide not to proceed to grade 12, they can apply to any institution that accepts grade 11, rather than risking going to the final part of secondary school to attend the university of their choice. 

In conclusion, I would like to note that changing our curriculum would have a significant impact on our economy, and based on this fact, I do not question the assessment performed prior to the adoption of the curriculum, but we needed more research. Because of our small population, our scientific sector has been neglected or underdeveloped, but I believe that more research is required to connect true statistics and factors with their negative and positive effects.