Opinion
Prof. Olu Obafemi On Nigerian University Education In Constant Transition (4)
Published
1 year agoon
By Tony Afejuku
This delicacy is continued from last Friday.
The Internet of Things
Talk about the Internet of Things (loT) and you would not be mistaken as well. This is for its ability to abridge things, reduce exertions and eliminate the drives of yesterday. We may argue that loT is suitable for learning, bringing about a seemly or conducive environment, solving intricate problems and for a greater experience. Outside learning, it is superb for remote working, for automation and for good time management, amongst other things.
Bruce Schneier describes it as “a web that we connect to. It is a computerized, networked, and interconnected world.” He stressed that it is the future of living, which we refer to as the Internet of Things (loT). It is truly the future where the things we could know by other means are harvested by devices and presented to us in quicker, smarter paces and places.
It is a future where humans may not be able to compete with them. Common to all is that they are still evolving. Whilst we might find them awesome, we are assured of higher surprises because the competition and innovations are continuing. Important in the matrix is the confusion of learning, or the changing narrative of pedagogy. It tends to minimize research, as we find what we research on already available in Al.
In simplifying processes and procedures, the technologies are fast diminishing scholarship as we know it, and challenging the sequence of imbibing or internalizing. These sequences were once owned by humanity, through a systematic process. It involves stages of listening, reading, experiencing, trying and failing, and trying again. It encompasses structures and institutions and a painstaking governance process, emplaced by the state, in agreement with the citizenry.
While these bodies remain, the intervention of technology has become disruptive; and likely forcing us to review things many times over. This is because of the merging of truth and falsehood and the linking of hate with love. It is so because of the obfuscation of the real and the fake, or what is and what is not. While humanity is at once somewhat celebratory, they are also jittery about declining values and virtues. The good and the bad are now being muddled.
Learning is dignifying, confidence building and exposing what needs to be positively exposed. It grows the individual as much as it benefits society. It is gratifying to human resource development for the enhancement of society, and the future of mankind. But this is the case when learning is original, natural and is scientifically and technologically procedural and follows a process. It is the case when learning is easily identifiable, reflected in the change it will bring to the individual.
With the new technologies, regardless, we are in the world of assisted learning, a world of machine learning, a kind of scholarship where originality is threatened, obliterated and un-definable. Learners are in a new world where the temptation to outsource to technologies is high. This temptation is innate and unconscious for its fast pace over huge spaces, and in the manner where perfection is likely.
Resulting therefrom is the reduction of dynamism that would have helped internalization, processes that would have assisted memories and institutions that would have been useful for monitoring and governance. ChatGPT is a quick case to reference. Its capacities are thrilling, for being able to process things, probably as close as the man would have done, or even better in some cases.
Upon instructions, it responds with appreciable precision, leaving the learner to do little or nothing, depending on the quality of the question. Here then lies the question of what more the learner should do. How do we then contextualize the losses in the important process of engaging texts, pictures and images, which could be didactic? Deepfake is another case for its capacity to mimic and parrot a real.
Despite the frill around it, the uninitiated could get swayed, deceived or confused. He might be carried away by a confusing reality, leading to a wrong action, or at the least, the formation of wrong notions. Don’t get us wrong. The inventions are groundbreaking, pointing at the new world of growth in thinking capacities and creations. In these learning transitions, machines and robots MUST NEVER replace human activities, reasoning, rationality, values and feelings.
After all, Mark Zuckerberg is quoted to have said “Whenever I hear people saying Al is going to hurt people in the future I think, yeah, technology can generally always be used for good and bad and you need to be careful about how you build it. If you are arguing against Al then you’re arguing against safer cars that aren’t going to have accidents, and you are arguing against being able to better diagnose people when they are sick.”
Regardless, the attendant downsides, especially for learning are an invitation to more critical evaluation. We are surely at another crossroads between a past and a present, which has hallmarked inventions. The aero-plane came and eased long-distance travel, but crashes also came with it. The motorcar similarly came with accidents. The coming of electricity came with sparks and shocks that could lead to deaths (and actually led to deaths). So does the invention of dynamite, leading to misuse, terrorism, wars and deaths. With particular reference to dynamites, Alfred Nobel, its chief inventor and commercialist, had to establish the Nobel Prizes in Literature, Peace, Economics, Medicine, and Science to rescue his name and legacy from being tagged (and being remembered) as a merchant of death.
Despite the ages and flipsides of these inventions, humanity has never ceased to ask questions about them. They are still trying, year in and year out to perfect them, or encourage appropriate use. The coming of the Internet, the rise of Artificial Intelligence, The Internet of Things (loT) and Hypertext Documents may not also be different in revealing its downsides, one of which is the redefinition of learning.
Elon Musk, one of the key actors amongst the big techs recently warned at MIT’s AeroAstro Centennial Symposium that he is “increasingly inclined to think that there should be some regulatory oversight, maybe at the national and international level, just to make sure that we do not do something very foolish. I mean with artificial intelligence, we are summoning the demon.” We are in the age of technological advancement without a human face or humane attribution—an age which beckons to the end of humanity, the end of the world, at the irrational, distempered moment of pressing the lethal button of the hydrogen bomb.
It may not be demonic, but the outsourcing of reasoning (surrendering the power of reasoning to machines, and robots) is some kind of wizardry requiring our continuous examination, just so that reading or learning will not die. This is the point that Klaus Schwab made when he opined that “We must address, individually and collectively, moral and ethical issues raised by cutting-edge research in artificial intelligence and biotechnology, which will enable significant life extension, designer babies, and memory extraction.” We cannot agree more.
Again, do we need an educational system patterned after foreign cultures and experiences or a system that evolved from our original needs? Do we have a true understanding of our peculiar histories and environments such that our curriculum, theories and notions are instructed by these shared values? How much effort do we invest into reviews, just so that we are not parroting models that are foreign to us and are likely to be irrelevant to our practical realities?
Are we also sure we are not carried away by fancies and fantasies that are distant from our industries and production lines, in what would have boosted our economy for the common good? Abigail Adams told us that “Learning is not attained by chance; it must be sought for with ardour and attended to with diligence.” Interesting in this quotation is the element of diligence, which envisages the need to be painstaking.
Doing this will open our minds to our common desires, regarding whether or not we need more agriculturists, more technologists and technicians, and more statisticians, humanists and storytellers than space scientists, astronauts, or similar others. Being diligent will permit us to locate our needs for a system in transition, just so we would not only have to look elsewhere for the real manpower we need because we have either over-trained or under-trained ourselves.
Let us remember also that global education funds are available in billions of dollars. An estimate puts it at over $100,000 billion, accessible in grants and aids, if we get our arts and research concepts right. Corporations and philanthropists are also ever ready to support ideas that can lead to innovations, change, and new paths of profits.
We cannot overstate the fact that research is a driver of development. Development is the centerpiece of social progress. The university should be the leader in this narrative, especially in linking the peculiarities of communities with knowledge production, partnerships, and collaborations, in addition to the execution of the policy outlines of government. These are triggers of competition, necessarily leading to quality and efficiency.
“A man’s mind, stretched by new ideas, may never return to its original dimension” and state. Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. once told us of the alteration of the mind through education. In making alterations, however, we are asking that it should have a root, or relevance, for substance, and for the proper benefit of a society in transition.
To be terminated next Friday.
Afejuku can be reached via 08055213059.
You may like
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.
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.
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
NEW TIMES CULTURE
Fear Of Witchcraft And Politics In Zambia
Black Saturday As 10 Confirmed Dead, Others Injured In Abuja Church Stampede
Tinubu Congratulates Civil Service Commission Chair Olaopa As He Turns 65
Top Stories
-
Latest News1 day ago
Black Saturday As 10 Confirmed Dead, Others Injured In Abuja Church Stampede
-
Opinion22 hours ago
Fear Of Witchcraft And Politics In Zambia
-
Opinion3 days ago
Burning Issues: (FCT Minister And Paulosa) (2)
-
Metro3 days ago
AfAW Decries Court Acquittal Of Suspected Murderer Of Alleged Witch In Enugu
-
Latest News5 days ago
Why We Set Up Kojola Dry Port – Abiodun