Yaw Dabo, a prominent figure in the Kumawood film industry, has voiced strong disapproval regarding the deployment of military personnel to oversee the administration of the West African Senior School Certificate Examination (WASSCE). His concerns, captured in a video that quickly gained traction on social media platforms, stem from the belief that the presence of armed forces within examination centers creates an atmosphere of intimidation and anxiety, ultimately hindering students’ ability to perform at their best. Dabo vividly portrays the disruptive nature of this military presence by describing a soldier pacing back and forth, scrutinizing students’ work, an action he argues instills fear and panic, thus disrupting the students’ concentration and impeding their ability to think clearly during the crucial examination period.
Dabo’s critique extends beyond the immediate impact on students’ psychological well-being. He contests the rationale behind such stringent measures, arguing that examination malpractice is not a phenomenon exclusive to students. He boldly asserts that cheating has occurred across various professions, even within the ranks of law enforcement agencies like the police and fire service. This statement, while potentially controversial, underscores his belief that the focus on students is disproportionate and unfair. He implies a systemic issue, suggesting that cheating, in some form, is a pervasive human behavior and not solely a problem attributable to students. Dabo advocates for a more compassionate and understanding approach, urging the Ghana Education Service (GES) to alleviate the pressure placed on these young examinees.
Furthermore, Dabo draws a comparison with educational systems abroad, highlighting the absence of such intense security measures in other countries. This comparison serves to emphasize his point that the Ghanaian approach might be unduly harsh and potentially counterproductive. He questions the long-term benefits of such stringent invigilation tactics, particularly in a context where passing the WASSCE does not guarantee future employment for many students. This pragmatic observation adds another layer to his argument, suggesting that the intense pressure placed on students during these examinations might not be justified given the uncertain career prospects that lie ahead.
Dabo’s argument resonates with broader concerns about the effectiveness and ethical implications of high-stakes testing environments. His observations raise questions about the psychological impact of heightened security measures on students’ performance. The pressure to succeed in these examinations, coupled with the intimidating presence of military personnel, can create a highly stressful environment that may negatively affect students’ ability to recall information and apply critical thinking skills. The potential for increased anxiety and panic could lead to underperformance, even for students who are well-prepared academically. This raises the question of whether the current approach truly serves the purpose of accurately assessing students’ knowledge and abilities.
Moreover, Dabo’s assertion that cheating is not exclusive to students but exists across various sectors of society prompts a broader discussion about the prevalence and acceptance of such behavior. While his claim might be difficult to substantiate fully, it nevertheless challenges the prevailing narrative that paints students as the primary perpetrators of academic dishonesty. It invites reflection on the societal factors that might contribute to such behavior, including the pressure to achieve success, the fear of failure, and the perception that bending the rules is sometimes necessary to get ahead. Dabo’s comments, though potentially provocative, encourage a critical examination of the systemic issues that might underlie academic malpractice.
Finally, his observation regarding the uncertain job market adds a crucial dimension to the discussion. If passing the WASSCE does not guarantee employment, then the immense pressure placed on students to excel in these examinations might be misplaced. This raises questions about the overall effectiveness and relevance of the current educational system in preparing students for the realities of the job market. Dabo’s commentary, therefore, transcends the immediate issue of military presence in examination halls and touches upon broader concerns about the purpose and efficacy of the educational system in Ghana. His remarks call for a more holistic approach to education, one that not only emphasizes academic achievement but also considers the psychological well-being of students and their future prospects in an increasingly competitive job market.
