Dear Editor,
We are surprised at Mr Sherwood Lowe’s comments advocating a different system for lecturers and researchers at the University of Guyana.
Others have long realized that UG has become mainly a teaching institution with very little or no research. Many who have written extensively on this subject are in agreement that no serious research is done at UG. Mr Sherwood Lowe is already living with the reality that UG has long become a teaching institution, all he has to do is talk to his colleagues and look around. In addition, he has ignored the views of ably qualified Guyanese and non-Guyanese nationals. Unfortunately, these observations and views have eluded Mr Lowe. A brief review of UG shows that even the bare minimum research facilities and funds are not provided. Physics, Chemistry and Engineering (under Mr Sankies) were bare bones. Mr Lowe therefore has nothing no complain about, and does not seem to realize that the situation he is advocating is already in place.
This postulation of focusing on teaching did arise several times (2001-03) at UG and there were different reasons for this by the then deputy Vice-Chancellor on the Academic Board.
If Mr Lowe as he claims truly wants “problem-solvers, creative and critical thinkers, and agents of positive change” then the only method is to present students with everyday problems to go from theory (which is mainly teaching) to practice (which is only research). Ably qualified university personnel have consistently advocated that university research will produce problem-solvers, creative, critical thinkers and independent minds that can foster development.
Mr Lowe must know by now that a teaching institution is a high school, where theory is learned and practical applications are very rarely pursued; whereas, an institution of higher learning is where practice is highlighted to give credence to theory and groom students to solve current problems with their analytical skills of theory and experience from practice. The question must be posed to Mr Lowe, do we want to make UG into a glorified high school?
I might add a university with research capability is the difference between a university capable of involving the next generation of Guyanese in national development, rather than the current status which has only fostered an under-development process and migration (human resources) to foreign shores which provide economic hope.
Mr Lowe’s reasoning to relegate UG to a teaching institution is in line with the views of the current PPP government. This same government has consistently and dictatorially imposed people in the administration at UG. Currently, we have an imposed Pro-Chancellor attached to the Office of the President whose main purpose appears to be to advocate and impose the views that would cause the government the least problems. In the process this approach is hindering personal and national development. Mr Lowe’s views are in line with those of the current PPP government.
Mr Lowe should know by now the PPP vision is to confiscate the hope and national development interest and aspirations of the next generation. It is geared to fully impose the type of control at the only university in the country as seen in countries such as Cuba and Egypt. Dictatorial governments know that critical thinkers usually come from university students and personnel.
We are all well aware of the constraints and the working of a university. The government should not be sacrificing the hopes of the next generation because of some obstructed view presented by the dictatorial mindset of some in the current PPP.
Teaching, researching and development are inter-related. Mr Lowe and others of his view should come to the conclusion that this is the reason why Guyana has not progressed. We must ask why our bright young people leave and never return. They leave because we have no research, no development and therefore no progress. How long will we dither why our children and country suffer?
Yours faithfully,
Anand Daljeet
