HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"id": 95125,
"url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/95125/?format=api",
"text_counter": 198,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Mr. Namwamba",
"speaker_title": "",
"speaker": {
"id": 108,
"legal_name": "Ababu Tawfiq Pius Namwamba",
"slug": "ababu-namwamba"
},
"content": "Thank you, Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir. The greatest tragedy that has ever happened to higher education in this country, in my very humble opinion, is the very introduction of this so-called parallel programme. Even the very terminology, the lexicon âparallelâ in itself gives me a problem. I believe that this is an excellent opportunity for this House â it is actually a shame that on an afternoon like this one when we are discussing a matter as critical as this one, this House is not as full as one would have expected. What this programme has done is to institutionalize double standards in the education system. In my humble opinion, we should not even be talking about balancing between regular and parallel programmes. We should be talking of getting rid of the very notion of the parallel programme. If, indeed, the idea is to enable students who have scored well in high school, we should give them a platform where education will be more affordable for them. The best way is not to introduce a parallel programme that you place in the so-called students who have not performed so well in high school and then have the so-called regular arrangement for those who have performed well. Many countries in the world have introduced the idea of merit scholarships; merit arrangements where students with exceptional abilities are provided opportunities to benefit either through scholarships, reduced fees or whatever arrangement. I wish that the Mover of this Motion would, in fact, be arguing that we need to standardize higher education; have a single system and let the Government be very clear that if the minimum entry point is a C+, then there is absolutely no reason why any student who has scored a C+ and above should be in any system different from other students because it means that the moment a student scores a C+ that student has achieved the minimum requirement to access university education in this country. All those students who have scored C+--- We are now proving that we have the capacity to admit as many students as are seeking to join universities. Initially, when this programme started, there was an argument that public universities did not have sufficient facilities and teachers. So you needed a parallel process to enable a higher number of students to access higher education. But miraculously, now any student who seeks to join the parallel programme is allowed to join because they can afford it. Then the question one must put to the Government is: If we can admit any student who is seeking university education on attainment of C+, what the Government should be doing is not to run a parallel system. The Government should have a single system but then innovatively introduce measures that can favour those who have scored higher academic standards such that if a student scores an A, for instance, in the KCSE, that student should be afforded a merit scholarship that takes into account the studentâs higher academic achievement. But that student should not be deemed to be operating in a system separate from another one who has scored a C+, for instance. So, we must admit that this whole parallel arrangement has even introduced some kind of inferiority complex amongst students where the so-called regular students see themselves as being better than the so-called parallel students when in essence the teaching staff in our public universities seem to be more interested in running the parallel programme because of the financial benefits that are associated with this programme. So, Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, we have unwittingly or perhaps even wittingly commercialized higher education to unacceptable levels. We have compromised the standard of education to unacceptable levels. I have had occasion to sit in my law firm to interview freshly graduated law students and I have had the shock of discovering that some applicants â some freshly graduated students of law â cannot even write a proper application letter to seek employment in an ordinary law firm which raises serious questions as to whether such a lawyer can draft pleadings. So, while I support this Motion, I want to plead with the Mover to consider amending it in a manner that would urge the Government to get rid of the very notion of parallel programme; have one common programme but one that takes due cognizance of the fact that the Government will support those students who have performed well, purely on merit. We need a programme that recognizes that if C+ (plus) is our cut-off grade, then every student who scores a C+ (plus) is entitled to access university education. At the same time as scholarships work in every place in the world, we should take on these benefits that we imagine accrue to the so-called regular students and mainstream them through a programme that will provide definite benefits to students of a greater academic ability. Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, I believe that universities in this country still run merit scholarship programmes under which they provide support to exceptional students. We must be the only country in the world â forgive my ignorance if I am wrong on this â that is running a higher education system through two different streams. When these students graduate - I would be glad to hear this from the Minister for Higher Education, Science and Technology, who is here â I would want to know whether we also categorise the degrees. Does the parallel student attain the same degree as a regular student? Is it the same degree? If it is the same degree, what is the rationale for these students to swim in two different streams? Why not put them in the same stream and provide benefits to those that you imagine have done better in high school? This is a good opportunity for us to grapple with these issues. Dr. Khalwale said that we run the risk of compromising standards. We are not running the risk of compromising standards, we have already compromised standards to horrible levels. Unless we call this spade a spade and not an impressive big spoon, we will compromise the standards of higher education in this country even further. We have commercialized education to worrying levels, where today everybody wants to be part of the parallel teaching arrangement because they know there are additional benefits. I support this Motion because it is an opportunity for us to grapple with these issues. I really want to urge the Ministry for Higher Education Science and Technology, to consider coming up with a better arrangement. I believe this parallel programme was a knee jerk reaction to a crisis. We have been able to test this programme. It is now time for us to evaluate it and give this country a better programme that can ensure that we stop the slide of standards and the commercialization of higher education that has reached worrying levels. With that, I do support the Motion."
}