Nip Tree Teaching in the Bud

When I was in high school, the class and I would often beg Mrs Shikongo (not her real name, I cannot afford to be sued in this economy) to take our geography lesson outside. The shade constructed by the large acacia tree was our desired spot and after months and months of begging-

 

We never got it.

 

We never got the outside lessons. We never got the acacia tree shade. We never got the tranquil learning environment.

 

Looking back, I realise what a blessing it is to have a conventional classroom as the default. With the President of the Republic of Namibia coming under fire for hisunawareness of what we will call “tree-teaching”, the involvement of government officials in rural primary and secondary education has been called into question as of early February.

 

What is “tree-teaching,” you ask? Well, it is exactly what it sounds like.

 

Learners being taught under the shade of a tree, usually without the resources one would find in a standard classroom. These learners are more susceptible to the natural elements and disasters that may occur, due to a lack of physical barriers. 

 

Issues of tree-teaching and traditional classrooms (constructed of sticks and mud) are academically documented as far back as over a decade ago. In a thesis by Mr Onesmus Hailombe, the statistics establish that over 49 000 Namibian primary school children have been taught in a traditional classroom or under a tree, dating as far back to 2010.  

So when the Namibian public shows outrage for tree-teaching, it is not a sudden sprouting of wrath. It is not just a seasonal change in temperament. It is not bratty, private school kids pleading for an acacia tree teaching environment, but rather a “felling” of complacency.  

 

Now in defence of the government, I believe Namibia has made several strides in formalising and standardising nation-wide education. The Geingob administration has delivered on an initiative to provide free meals to over 270 000 learners.

 

Three schools acrossthe Kunene region and Kavango West region have also been the beneficiaries of sponsored infrastructure. The new classrooms were constructed in November 2020, the peak year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Trivial issues such as confronting the natural elements no longer became problematic for these learners, as the government has positively intervened.

 

So with all of this conflicting information about the failures of the government, which one is it? Are Namibian youth being dismally failed or is the public too critical of civil servants?

 

Unpopular opinion?

 

There is no right way to answer this question.  

 

Development can have several different faces. It can look like children receiving free meals so that they can focus solely on their education. It can look like moving from “tree-teaching” to a regular classroom environment. It could even look like the President of the nation being unaware of academic injustices.

 

Losing awareness of rural affairs, by default, means that children in urban areas are becoming less and less disadvantaged. This is why initiatives such as “tree-teaching” can be shocking to urban inhabitants. Thus, this indicates that education as a sector is continuing to stabilise, however numerous, rural participants are suffering more than their urban counterparts.

 

Calling the government to action in a democratic society is the constitutional right of citizens, especially when holding officials to their promises. However, we need to be aware of the realistic rate of progress. A politician promises first and delivers second, so the reliability of their assurances, by nature, should be taken with a grain of salt.

 

I believe that with persistence and dedication to the cause, rural Namibia can persevere in the face of adversity and gain the resources they need. Not only because they want more for themselves, but because they deserve more.