 |
| Critics Put To Shame |
| |
| Posted on: 2007-Jan-10 GNA |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
Another New Year School has come to an end and its participants have acknowledged its huge benefits.
According to them, it had added something to their stock of knowledge, and this would remain their properties for the rest of their lives.
It is therefore surprising that after 58 years of the school’s existence and its immense contribution to the society, some critics are now describing it as a ‘Talking Shop’, in an effort to down-grade it, for reasons best known to themselves.
Participants, especially the first-time attendants, were unanimous in their confessions that they had gained better insight into many national issues which hitherto were unknown to them.
These confessions have put the critics and others who think like them, to shame.
This must prove to those critics that such criticisms are not always a mark of enlightenment. Such criticisms, at times, expose the critics themselves to public ridicule, contempt and hatred.
The democratic governance the country has chosen, allows criticisms.
It is out of criticisms that the system could be fine-tuned, but criticisms must be constructive, and where necessary, alternatives or suggestions offered.
The country does not need hollow criticisms at this stage of its development.
Certainly, the school, as a human institution, needs to be improved from time to time, to be abreast with changing times.
The first participants of the school which began in 1949, would be the earliest to agree that there have been dramatic changes in the attendance, organisation and running of the school since its inception 58 years ago.
That change does not however take away the quality of the school. If anything at all, it has rather improved its quality to benefit the participants more, as has been attested to by this year’s beneficiaries.
A one-week forum which drew 500 participants from all parts of the country and from all segments of the society who brainstormed over important issues like education, agriculture and culture, among others, could hardly be described as a mere talk-shop.
In as much as a few of the participants might not be high-profiled scholars, their lecturers were people whose academic achievements have been recognised locally and internationally.
The fact that the school was held at no other campus than that of the country’s premier university, the University of Ghana, Legon, is an added value to the prestige of the forum.
Ghanaians must now discard the negative notion that if they did not have a hand in the planning and execution of a particular programme, they must do everything possible to run that event down. We must learn to give credit, where it is due.
Since the just-ended school has generated so much interest, and far-reaching decisions were arrived at, we would suggest that future participations be spread throughout the country.
One invitation could be extended to each district assembly for a member to participate; but if that would be asking too much, then the invitation could alternate between two nearby assemblies.
At the end of the session, the participant must go back to brief his colleague assembly members on what transpired at the school. By that, the message from the school could spread to all parts of the country.
It is a fact that without the implementation of recommendations that were submitted to the Government, those laudable suggestions would remain within the Great Hall of the University of Ghana.
Daily Guide therefore suggests Government creates a desk at the Ministry of Education or any other relevant ministry to deal with those recommendations.
The paper observes that if such serious attention would be given to these recommendations, it would take the country very far.
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
| |
|
| |
| |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Bookmark with: