Connect with us

Opinion

Ìjọba 

Published

on

Dele Jegede In Conversation With Prince Yemisi Shyllon
Prof. Toyin Falola

             Òṣèlú (1)

       By Toyin Falola

Attempting to translate many African words into English wastes time, as in the silly translation of a Yorùbá Oba to His Imperial Majesty. Why not retain the inherited titles: Alaafin, Ooni, Ewi, Awujale, and stop the nonsense of translation and equivalences? What imperial? Where is the imperialism? Africans had been modest in history; they never developed the idea of kings who would go to Europe or Asia to conquer and impose imperial rule. How many empires did the modern Imperial Majesty conquer and create? Can someone who presides over a land that you can traverse its length and breadth within fifteen minutes, like some villages which they call towns, call himself “Imperial”? The city of Ibadan now has over a dozen “Imperial Majesties,” one within a distance of three miles!

Oh, someone just said it’s a way of attaching so much importance to them to fit the oversized agbádá they often wear. How funny?Very funny! And what “Majesty?” What is the meaning of “Imperial Majesty” in Yoruba? Majesty in the imperial court of women? (Are the wives enough to populate an empire?). How do you convert “His Royal Highness” back into Yorùbá or Igbo language? And is there “His Royal Lowness?” Yes, when you walk along with seven wives and stand in the middle, three to your left and four to your right, creating an imbalance that means you must marry the eighth. After the number eighth wife, we can test whether you are indeed an Imperial Majesty if you can do the private rounds with all the eight at one round per person. Don’t faint; it’s just a test, after all!

Dr.Nnamdi Azikiwe

I laughed loud when one Kábíyèsí told me a story, in his palace (not more prominent than the BQ that the wealthy man who I know but whose name I cannot mention has ), about an armed robber who invaded him sat on his throne, and asked the King to put his crown on his head. His Imperial Majesty, without a police force, spies, archers, horses and cavalry, was trembling. How can an Imperial Majesty not have security detail and a command structure? No General! Kábíyèsí obliged. The armed robber asked the King to salute him. Why won’t you salute your master, facing AK47? So, the juju that His Royal Highness claimed to have is a myth. Not at all; he only forgot the long incantation lines! 

The King promptly prostrated to the armed robber, shouting Kábíyèsí, Aláyélúwà, Igbákejì Orìṣà. May your reign be long! The armed robber protested: Call me Kábíyèsí, the King of Boys, the Boss of Robbers! Wait o, is it not a taboo again for the King to prostrate before any other man? Well, maybe since my stroke, I have stopped drinking and can no longer think straight! Where is the ase that the King has? Ase, a word that commands. I would have sympathised if the King had called himself an Oba and not an Imperial Majesty.

Let us demolish circumlocution so that we can arrive at the circumstances. There is no need to put a comma after a period! For a non-Yorùbá speaking person, you might want to look further for the meaning of Ìjọba but do not go to the palace. Ìjọba means “government” in a literary translation. The essence of the usage is drawn from the emphatic use of the word itself from the crust of Yorùbá socio-linguistic intentions. It was difficult to label the British colonial government; thus, they called it Ìjọba-Geesi—the government of Britons! After that, they simply put the name of a leader in front of Ìjọba, as in saying Ìjọba Tinubu. It is a complicated translation which masks the complexities of a label. You will surely understand when you read all the parts I am offering.

Government and leadership in any society are core to the development of such society and all parts forming the social structure. It is essential in the determination of contemporary phenomena, the preservation and usage of the past, and the trajectory of the future. Where a nation grows, there is a need for an ideologically motivated government and practically engaged one for it to coast towards that lane; however, if it falls, the government has always been core to it. We may not agree on using the word Ìjọba, but everyone would agree on the existence of government and societal roles.

Dr. Kwame Nkrumah

Having agreed on the significance of the role of the government in the determination of the projection of every society, the Nigerian society has become a specimen for evaluating what a good leadership or government should be. The perspectival examination of the government depends on the general feelings and reinforcements coming from the people over the years. Although distrust in government and its institutions that form Ìjọba is a widespread phenomenon in Africa and a problem making waves, especially among countries facing different shades of challenges, Nigeria is a particular case study. To adequately finalise the question of the various impressions, this topic will be divided into four in this series: Òṣèlú, Ọjẹlú, Ọtàlú, and Ìjọbami, that is, privatised individuals who govern themselves. The four cover different political perspectives of the country’s different politicians. This part will be addressing Òṣèlú.

It seems the epistemological standing of the Yorùbá has given more trust and respect to the political elites far more than the current public evaluation of them. This is because the description of a politician in Yoruba is Olóṣèlú. Òṣèlú means the act of developing society and putting things in order. And Olóṣèlú is the person who does it. That should be the etymological conceptualisation of politicians, meaning those who make policies and decisions do so to improve the people’s affairs. However, the socio-linguistic understanding of politicians and Olóṣèlú in Nigeria has moved beyond the positive ascriptions the ordinary words mean. Olóṣèlú, in its original intended meaning, is optimistic: someone who uses power for the public good.

There is a repose of an expectation of corrupt practices, embezzlement, and low expectation of moral standing and good conscience of politicians in the country. When you hear one say, “he is a politician” or “he is Olóṣèlú“, it would not be surprising to people if you say, “God forbid,” or deny the description profusely in the country. Today, an Olóṣèlú has become a piece of thrash. The reason behind the notion is that the words of a politician are often supposed to be checked and rechecked over and over in contemporary society. It means you are a cunny, manipulative, and deceptive individual whose statements should be taken like a pinch of salt. You are a pathetic and consistent liar. You are a politician; You are Olóṣèlú. 

You dey trust politicians? Dey Play!

The essence of this first part in my series of four is not to align with the contemporary socio-linguistic understandings that “politics and politicians,” Òṣèlú or Olóṣèlú, have taken but to reiterate the historical expectation of a politician and let them know that they have not changed. The Yorùbá culture and philosophies give high regard to the leaders and prepare the people to have similar expectations. It is the understanding of why it reposes all rights in the Supreme, including the right to the lives of its people. Ọba lónilẹ. The King is alásẹ èkejì òrìṣà, second only to the gods. He is titled Kábíyèsí, meaning he is unquestionable. There was the expectation of justice and fairness associated with an Oba and Olóṣèlú.

The Yorùbá leaders are given such respect because they are supposed to be a reservoir of the law, justice, and shared trust of the people. They hold in trust the collective values and heritage of the people. Orderliness, communal and collective development, customs, and justice are phenomena the Yorùbá society holds in great esteem. Hence, if the leader is an emblem of the totality of what the society stands for, they are expected to act in all senses of respect and responsibilities and ultimately fulfil the welfare of the people. It only means fulfilling the sociological concept that the “welfare of the people is the greatest good.”

    Several attempts have been made to understand the duty of a politician. Aristotle believes that the primary responsibility of an Olóṣèlú is to promote the common good of the polis, the community. John Locke emphasises the duty to protect individuals’ natural rights through applying social contract theory. Immanuel Kant believed that their commitment must align with universal moral principles. John Stuart Mill posited that a politician is expected to maximise society’s overall happiness or well-being. Niccolò Machiavelli addressed the idea that politicians should ensure to maintain and consolidate power, although the perspective, if not carefully interpreted, may make dictatorship out of a leader. These various ideologies of politics and the roles of politicians further put the Yorùbá perspectives in the context of the contemporary standards and views of what an ideal politician should be. It may make this a utopic ecstasy, but they are standards that a politician should aim at.

    Having understood the concept of what an ideal Olóṣèlú should be, one must wonder how these concepts seem impracticable in Nigeria. From the formal amalgamation in 1914, Nigeria needed to grow in the same direction. The vision of those who took power from the colonial authorities must have been to raise the nation from what was left of it or what the colonial powers made of it. This is because the leadership problem had been evident even in the colonial period, as there were no close historical and sympathetical similarities between the persons in government and the governed. In 1958, Smythe, in his “The Problem of National Leadership in Nigeria,” captured the leadership challenge the country was facing and the need for better development in that area. However, the nation has been in different challenges up to contemporary days, making it look like the primary meaning ascribable to the word Òṣèlú is mere utopic euphoria. Òṣèlú includes the act of building a nation, and Olóṣèlú is supposed to take the position of the builders. It is the barest minimum expected from an average Nigerian politician.

Chief Obafemi Awolowo

To have real Olóṣèlú that would herald developments and progress in Nigeria, the nation needs to be more particular about ideological leadership, above mere political calculations that enthrone those with the means of getting to power over those with the ideological means required to wheel the nation forward. Figures like Haile Selassie of Ethiopia will always be referenced in the definition of reformative leadership, despite his shortcomings and identifiable imperfections in his years of ruling his country. Selassie heralded the need for modernisation across Ethiopia, encouraged the prioritisation of education to secure the future of his nation, and laid the foundation for democratic government. Selassie describes a politician, or Olóṣèlú, thus:

…throughout history, it has been the inaction of those who could have acted, the indifference of those who should have known better, the silence of the voice of justice when it mattered most, that has made it possible for evil to triumph.

In the same vein was Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana, who was a revolutionary and exercised his theories of political convictions towards a better standard of living for his people. Julius Nyerere of Tanzania, Nelson Mandela of South Africa, Jomo Kenyatta of Kenya, and other remarkable African leaders, including the celebrated champions of Nigerian democracy. Today, several politicians in Nigeria, especially from South Western Nigeria, claim to have subscribed to the political ideologies of Awoism, from the political conviction of the legendary Obafemi Awolowo, who canvassed for socialism and collective development of the people in general.

    Ideological and reformative leadership  are not phenomena of the past; neither are they mere descriptions or referential compensations for those who have fought for independence or democracy. It is a political state of things and does not need to elude a particular age but is sustained through the inherited customs of excellence. Nigeria’s lack of ideological leaders, without some philosophical chains of wants for the nation’s development, has only allowed chaotic missions by Nigerian politicians, shown by their usual excuses of underestimating the nation’s state, confusion, or utter irresponsibility.

    The continuous reoccurrence of leadership challenges in the country, coupled with the high rate of corruption, embezzlement, and misappropriation of resources, has painted the word Òṣèlú in a bad light. Good leadership does not necessarily need to be a testimony of the past; it should be the state of mind of every politician and leader. However, the solution lies on the shoulders of the ìlú, the society, or the people. Nigerians must be conscious of who they vote for and desist from momentary hypes occasioned by deceits, sharing of garri, and as low as N1000 naira. Can we even get to that point where the garri is thrown back at their faces to mean that ìlú are no more gullible? How long do we compromise our rights and voices for things that will not help our generation? The solution must first go from the bottom before it gets to the top. By being conscious of these, we agree to know that all of us are Olóṣèlú, whether in the excellent reference of the word or bad contemporary ascriptions. See you in the next part.

Acknowledgement: Professor Duro Adeleke, a scholar of Yorùbá Studies at the University of Ibadan, a character of indomitable spirit, an incurable homiletician, and my herbalist with a frightening beard, made the inspiration to write this series possible.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Opinion

Fear Of Witchcraft And Politics In Zambia

Published

on

Witch Burning, Impunity And Abuses Linked to Witchcraft Beliefs In Benue State
Dr Leo Igwe

By Leo Igwe

The Advocacy for Alleged Witches (AfAW) is concerned over the reported arrest of two men accused of being ‘witchdoctors’ in Zambia. The arrest underscores the potency of witchcraft fears and the connection between occult anxieties and the country’s politics. These individuals were accused of trying to bewitch the Zambian president, Hakainde Hichilema. The police claimed that they had charms. They planned to use the charms to harm the president. The report says the two persons have been charged under Zambia’s Witchcraft Act. The Act criminalizes “possession of charms”, “professing knowledge of witchcraft”, and “cruelty to wild animals”. The police found the two with assorted charms, including a live chameleon.

This development is utterly embarrassing and shows that the Zambian government is slowly losing its focus and bearing.The country has many socio-economic challenges. Suspicion of bewitchment or possession of charms should be the least of its worries at this time. There should be no place for witchcraft and possession of charms in modern politics because there is no evidence for these beliefs and practices. Zambian authorities should not weaponize the Witchcraft Act or use it to justify this incident. Zambian law does not recognize witchcraft. Zambia’s Witchcraft Act criminalizes naming or imputing witchcraft. It prohibits accusing or threatening to accuse any person of being a witch or a wizard. In this case, it is the police who are breaking the law.

Otherwise, how did they know the two individuals were ‘witchdoctors’? Did these persons identify as witch doctors? If not, the police are liable because they named and imputed witchcraft and have to prove that these individuals have witch-doctoring powers. The police claimed to have charged these individuals for possessing “assorted charms”, including a chameleon. Really?

The police in Zambia have questions to answer: What are charms? How did they know that what was in their possession were charms, not pets? Is a chameleon a form of charm? What makes possession of a chameleon possession of a charm? When and how does a chameleon become a charm? The police need to answer these questions and more before one takes them seriously.

Again, did the individuals describe what was in possession as ‘charms’? If they did, does confessing or designating something as a charm make it a charm? And if they did not, the police are liable because they need to prove how those possessions translated into charms.

In addition, the police claimed that the duo wanted to bewitch the president. What does that mean? How did they know? Are the police not contravening a provision under the Witchcraft Act by professing knowledge of witchcraft? Can one harm another person using a chameleon? They claimed that the two persons wanted to use the charms in their possession, including the chameleon to harm the president. How did they know that? What is the evidence for that?

The Advocacy for Alleged Witches calls for an end to this state-sponsored witch hunt. There is no evidence of harm through witchcraft or charms. The Zambian government should desist from witchcraft- related infractions and violations including arbitrary arrest, and detention of innocent citizens. These allegations are baseless and absurd. The arrest was politically motivated. This development demonstrates that Zambian authorities are out of sync with their duty and obligation to uphold the rule of law and protect accused persons.

Zambian authorities need to act in compliance with the 2021 UN resolution, which urged states to take measures to combat abuses linked to witchcraft beliefs and ritual attacks. End witchcraft allegations in Zambia. End witch hunts in Africa now!

Dr Igwe directs the Advocacy for Alleged Witches.

Continue Reading

Opinion

Burning Issues: (FCT Minister And Paulosa) (2)

Published

on

Readers’ Showers Of Encouragement
Prof. Tony Afejuku

By Tony Afejuku

The other burning issue, apart from Farotimi and Babalola’s, which I wish to take a look at – and which I am taking a look at now – relates to what is happening in our capital territory. What is this burning issue – which our human rightists and civil society organisations and personages are surprisingly and un-satisfactorily not inclined to focus attention on and examine as they should? I may be wrong, but it surely seems to me that this issue, this burning issue, which is of more importance than Farotimi and Babalola’s – which has been given undue adulation – is deliberately being neglected and depreciated by proclaimers and heroes and heroines of human rights, justice, equity and equality of rights in your country my country our country. Why, why, why and why, why, why? Anyone who has any iota of patriotic sensibility, feeling and judgment well watered and buttressed by a very great influence upon his or her critical judgment will keep on asking the question I am asking.

Mr. Nyesom Wike, as almost everybody who can read and write a little knows, is the current minister of your, my and our Federal Capital Territory. His post or office is akin to that of a governor of a state. As the immediate past governor of Rivers State who was drafted, after his two terms there expired, to continue in the FCT as its new minister-governor or governor-minister under the auspices of a party he is not a true member of, Mr. Wike cannot but be seen as a lucky man. He is in every possible and impossible way. Minister-Governor Wike is a lucky man and a very fortunate one indeed. No former governor of Rivers State (or of any Nigerian state), as far as I know, has achieved what the famed political rouser of rabbles has achieved in one short gubernatorial life-time, and at a relatively young and fertile age. His dual achievement with and in two different political parties at this delicate point of Nigerian politics indicates to our politicians and us all that there is always time for a reminder that there are ready-made high rewards for arch-angels of betrayals. And Mr. Wike may go down in Rivers and Nigerian history as both an arch-angel and an emperor of betrayal of us all if we attempt to indicate what I have defined here as his dual achievement.

We can roughly divide, briefly, Wike’s political development into two periods. During the first, excluding his lower political positions before he became the governor of Rivers State, he quickly adapted his style to that of an emperor who became a rabble-rouser of rabble-rousers whose gubernatorial efficiency moved from stiffness to stiffness. He did not at any time feel that he needed suppleness to govern Rivers State. “Let the heavens fall if they must fall!” We are not there yet in this attempted analysis of the stiff-hearted and stiff-minded one. True? But he is already demonstrating this characteristic in Abuja. False? Judge and give the answer yourself.

Even after he left Rivers State a short while ago as governor, he is still trying to control happenings there to the political discomfiture of his hand-picked successor, his erstwhile “boy” and “son” – with whom he has fallen out. As the minister-governor or governor-minister of the FCT, Wike is occupied with the other taste of the emperor-juggernaut formulator – doing the work of two key political masters in one room and desk of political jugglery. Since his appearance in the FCT, minister-governor or governor-minister Wike has allegedly attempted to recover or transform for Abuja what is not traditionally or socially Abuja’s, for example, the city’s social idiom and landscape and terrain as well as its environs. In doing this he sometimes over-steps his bounds and mark of human/inhuman decency/indecency and psychological understanding of human nature, if you follow well what I am saying; he has so far become at best not really better than a typical pedestrian Nigerian lawyer and officer of political power: in his explorations so far in the Federal Capital Territory we have come to the realization, as T. S. Eliot would say, that “it is so often true that only by going too far can we find out how far we can go.” But one has to be a very negatively obstinate and self-serving emperor and a thorough-bred arch-angel of betrayal of the people and masses to justify such perilous and perfidious expeditions and adventures.

Last week, I saw on Arise Television “The Morning Show” Chief Rita Lori-Ogbebor, the dutiful widow of the late Nigerian supreme patriot and soldier, Colonel Ogbebor (of Benin stock) battling, so to say, to wrest the legacy of her late husband from the tight grip of the adventurous FCT minister-governor who has registered his name and signature in the hearts and consciousness of the people as the depriver of their possessions. The three anchors of “The Morning Show” were in their respective ways splendid in their structures of remarks and questions to Chief (Mrs.) Rita Lori-Ogbebor whom I have had occasions in times past to call patriotically Rita A-K 47 on account of her natural right to fire her beautiful tongue at any person, usually an enemy, of just actions. When she made the case she made to protect the estate of Paulosa Nigeria Limited, her late husband’s aforesaid legacy in the FCT, she was in her natural territory, habitat and element where even at age eighty-four, she never ever loses her stability – although she unusually restrained herself in the Arise Television appearance. Dr. Reuben Abati, Rufai Oseni, and Ayo Mairo-Ese clearly explored seriously but delightfully the mind of the mother-hen of Warri – my other coinage and appellation I gave her in my poetry. Her “The Morning Show” appearance enabled me to see the poignant cry de profundis of the FCT inhabitants whose property and residences in different guises have been demolished. She did not say anything that was out of joint. She spoke and came out as a mother, protector and symbol of the people who have suffered – and are suffering – from the state of affliction and anguish Wike’s demolitions have placed – and are placing – the people.

Ojy Okpe in her delicious and delectable “What is Trending” slot on the same show, showed without exaggeration but with further elaboration what people in and outside Abuja/FCT think of the mighty Wike’s demolitions, a burning issue that the Senate has asked “Let Heaven Fall” minister-governor Wike to halt as the committee the Senate set up on the issue starts its work. Of course, we cannot but assume that Chief Rita Lori-Ogbebor, Mrs. Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan as well as Mrs. Ireti Kingigbe, the senator representing the FCT in the Senate and other patriotic senators diligently did what they did on the floor of the Senate when the burning issue was tabled for debate with the gracious understanding and authorization of the Senate President.

I need to state further that the “The Morning Show” anchors did well and extremely so by giving the minister-governor the opportunity to air his anti-Paulosa story. His senior special assistant on public communication and social media, Mr. Olalere Olayinka, stood in for him. After he gave the reasons for the clamp-down, his responses to the questions the anchors put to him followed the usual pattern of denials by artificial men in power – denials that they always use to intimidate and betray the people. In fact, Mr. Olayinka’s ploy to ride easily over our dear Rufai Oseni, a wholesome representative of the deprived, that the chap (or is it guy?) and his boss always employ their colloquial speeches and remarks to dishonor, failed. Yes, the ploy failed woefully. In stanza after stanza of the exchanges between Mr. Olayinka and the Arise anchors, he deteriorated – and his deterioration was hall-marked when he unwittingly revealed that the Paulosa land had been acquired by his minister-governor’s close cohort, an act that was nothing short of gross abuse of power and authority.

Because the Senate is already using its authority, power and privilege to resolve the burning issue, hopefully, in a way that the late Colonel Ogbebor’s legacy and family will not be subjected to any kind of degradation, I will utter no more words for now. I trust, however, that the liberties the Senate is taking – or has taken – are for the sake of order to favour the down-trodden.

As for the minister-governor, the PDP emperor at large, here is an immortal quote from Marcus Aurelius, the magnificent and authentic Roman Emperor and philosopher (A.D. 121-180): “If it is not right, do not do it; if it is not true, do not say it.” You lose nothing by giving us a slice of your humanity by your right acts and correct words. Everything changes and passes. Be humane as a human being.

Afejuku can be reached via 08055213059.

Continue Reading

Opinion

Questionstorm As A Method Of Teaching

Published

on

Witch Burning, Impunity And Abuses Linked to Witchcraft Beliefs In Benue State

By Leo Igwe

Recently, I facilitated a critical thinking workshop at the Bay Wreath Schools in Lagos. The theme was critical thinking and teacher development. As the theme stated, the workshop was on teaching, about teaching, and for teachers. It highlighted the pedagogical value of critical and reflective inquiry. The workshop exposed teachers to critical mental habits and skills. It emphasized how critical thinking would enhance expertise in the learning and delivery of subjects in classrooms.

I used the opportunity to discuss questionstorm as a method of teaching and learning. Questionstorm is a way that I operationalized critical thinking for primary and elementary schools. Questionstorm is the ability to interrogate all objects and materials. It is a habit of questioning ideas and experiences in all areas of human endeavor. Simply put, questionstorm is a question-driven inquiry. Children are naturally curious. They thirst for knowledge and understanding. Unfortunately, the school system kills children’s curiosity and dampens their interrogative appetite. The school system places much emphasis on rote learning and memorization. It makes the generation of answers not questions or problems the test of knowledge, and the determinant of intelligence. Teaching is largely a drudgery, a monotonous exercise, and a process of depositing knowledge on passive recipients, the students. Teaching entails dumping information on learners whose duty is to cram and reproduce during tests or examinations.

This teaching praxis has been criticized and blamed for the poor performance of students post-school (college and university) and their inability to think independently, creatively, and innovatively. Other teaching methods have tried to address these gaps and limitations. There have been suggestions to make teaching and instruction more active, and more student/learner/child-centered. One such method is the Montessori method. The Montessori method discourages grades and tests as ways of measuring achievement or determining intelligence and excellence. It emphasizes hands-on learning and the development of real-world skills. While the Montessori method stresses the practical approach to learning it says very little about the authoritarian teacher-to-student approach that is the mainstay of teaching and learning in classrooms. Teaching follows a pattern that leaves students and learners in the margins and unable to question and contribute to the learning process. Teachers present what is to be learned such as a text, and then generate questions that students respond or address to demonstrate knowledge of what has been taught. The student’s or learner’s main job is to answer questions, to look for or find answers or solutions. The teacher’s work is to get students to look for, and provide answers, and reproduce what they have been taught or told. But students are answer-depots. Students are not memory banks or reserves. They are active minds and thinking agents.

With questionstorm as a teaching method, the mode of instruction would change. Teaching becomes a cooperative endeavor that actively involves teachers and students. What is taught in the classroom is a collaborative note, not the teacher’s note, not a handout to students. Teachers present or generate texts or objects for learning, in response to intense questioning of the object or material by students, teachers provide information as required for that subject, topic, level, and time frame. No two instances of teaching – of the same topic or subject- are or should be the same because the input of students and teachers is not predetermined.
This is because of an overlooked principle in teaching and learning, that I call the “uncertainty principle”.

The uncertainty principle underlies questionstorm because knowledge is not fixed. Learning is a fluid process. All that is to be learned is uncertain, it is unknown and never determined. No teacher can say beforehand what is to be taught or learned because no one knows exactly the questions and answers or replies that would arise when a topic is presented or taught in a particular class. A topic or learning material elicits unique responses and exchanges that both teachers and students cannot exactly know or predict a priori, before the fact.

Teaching is a shared task and responsibility. Class notes are fluid materials. They are not texts cast on educational stones and delivered by teachers to students to copy, cut, and paste as is often the case. Class notes are not written or produced by teachers for students but by teachers with students. Teachers’ notes are incomplete and insufficient. They account only for a part, not a whole of the learning process and material. Students’ input completes and complements the teaching material and learning process. Thus every class note is unique because it is a product of a specific collaborative endeavor, a product of particular teaching and learning agents and circumstances that cannot be repeated or replicated.

Thus, as a teaching method, questionstorm is set to facilitate teacher development and improve the quality of instruction in schools. Questionstorm will help realize a paradigm shift in education and learning. I hope educators, teachers, and school managers will embrace this method of teaching and learning.

Dr  Igwe directs the Critical Thinking Social Empowerment Foundation.

 

Inline image

Continue Reading

Top Stories