Dear Prof. Martin Oteng Ababio,

I trust this letter finds you well. I have read with keen interest your recent remarks regarding the Free SHS policy and its supposed detrimental impact on Ghana’s tertiary education system. As a student of the University of Ghana, I find your comments not only surprising but also quite disheartening, especially coming from a senior lecturer with years of experience and influence in shaping the minds of the younger generation. However, a closer examination of your statements reveals a number of politically induced inconsistencies and contradictions that must be pointed out.

First, you mention that the Free SHS policy, while increasing enrollment in universities, has led to severe infrastructural challenges that have compromised the quality of education. According to you, lecture halls are overcrowded, the student population has grown exponentially, and lecturers are now struggling to cope with the sheer number of students.

While there is some truth in acknowledging the need for infrastructural development to match rising enrollments, your argument seems to overlook a crucial point. The aim of the Free SHS policy is to ensure that every Ghanaian child, regardless of financial status, has access to secondary education, which is the foundation of lifelong learning.

As an academic, you should know better than most that access to education is not just a privilege but a right, and by criticizing the policy in this manner, one wonders if you fully appreciate the benefits that millions of underprivileged Ghanaian students are now enjoying.

More surprising, however, is your apparent expertise in gauging the academic performance of students in various fields. You claim that the quality of education is being sacrificed due to the increasing student numbers, even though students from this same Free SHS are making good names for themselves in foreign universities. Amoani of Kade is a classical example. I may not be a Geography student, but I am curious to know how a Geography lecturer could know they cannot answer simple algebra questions when algebra is not a field in geography.

It begs the question: if your focus is on Geography, why speak so authoritatively about the performance of students in entirely different disciplines? Your concerns seem misplaced, and it calls into question the basis of your critique.

Even more ironic is your failure to address an issue much closer to home. I am sure many Ghanaians are aware of the unfortunate collapse of your sister’s school, St. Margaret University. If you possess the insight and solutions to fix what you claim is wrong with Ghana’s education system, how is it that your expertise could not save your own family’s institution from going under?

One would think that before criticizing national policy and its effects on tertiary education, you might have ensured that your personal sphere of influence within the educational sector was thriving. Yet, that was not the case, and this inconsistency raises doubts about the credibility of your larger argument.

Moreover, you are on record to have heaped praises on the National Democratic Congress (NDC) for promising to review the Free SHS policy, stating that it is necessary to address the policy’s gaps.

A review is always welcome, provided it aims to improve the system. However, your complete disregard for the numerous advantages of the Free SHS policy is concerning. For many Ghanaian families like mine, Free SHS has been a lifeline—a chance to give their children the education they could never afford.

It is surprising that you would downplay such a transformative initiative, especially as a product of a system that afforded you similar privileges. Your remarks come off as dismissive of the real impact this policy has had on countless lives, and that, to me, is unfortunate.

But perhaps the most baffling part of your advocacy is your stance on the legalisation of okada (commercial motorbike transport), which you have publicly supported. It is astonishing that a university lecturer, someone expected to advocate for policies that safeguard the future of our youth, would rather support the legalisation of a mode of transport widely recognised as unsafe and dangerous.

This same lecturer then turns around to criticise a policy that gives those very same young people access to free education and opportunities for a better future. Do you not see the glaring contradiction? You seem to be advocating for an avenue that could potentially harm the youth, all the while dismissing a policy that seeks to elevate them through education. How can you, on one hand, promote okada, knowing full well the risks involved, and on the other hand, speak against a policy that is undeniably changing the future of millions of Ghanaian students?

Furthermore, your comments about large class sizes and difficulties in maintaining quality education, while valid to some extent, fail to acknowledge the responsibility of lecturers and academic institutions in adapting to changes. Yes, the infrastructure must be expanded, and more resources should be allocated, but is it not also incumbent on those within the educational system—like yourself—to be part of the solution?

How can we, as a nation, improve if the very educators charged with preparing students for the future only seek to criticize without offering tangible solutions? Lecturers, too, must innovate, adapt to new challenges, and work with the system to ensure that the benefits of Free SHS are maximized, rather than simply blaming the government for the infrastructural deficits.

In conclusion, Prof. Ababio, while it is your right to voice your concerns, I believe it is also important to recognise the benefits the Free SHS policy has brought to Ghana. There is no denying that challenges exist, but rather than casting the policy as a failure, we must work together to build on its successes and rectify its shortcomings.

Your position as a lecturer affords you the opportunity to contribute positively to this process. However, the contradictions in your arguments—ranging from your misplaced expertise on educational quality, to your inability to prevent your own family’s educational institution from collapsing, to your advocacy for okada—leave many of us questioning the sincerity of your critique.

We look forward to hearing more balanced and constructive contributions from you in the future. Dear Prof. Martin Oteng Ababio,

Martin Agbeko, Mensah Sarbah Hall, University of Ghana.