Image caption: One of the faculty’s laboratories in Ogbomoso to be abandoned, whereas no replica in Iseyin
LAUTECH’s agric faculty: It’s failed project, abort, 1000 students already dropped out
Femi OGUNLANA
For anyone to state the relocation of the faculty of agriculture of the Ladoke Akintola University of Technology (LAUTECH), from its permanent site in Ogbomoso to Iseyin is turning out good is only living in fool’s paradise. It’s a monumental failed project that needs to be aborted forthwith in the interest of students and their parents and more importantly for the sake of posterity. Government may be a stockpile of immense power but the effectiveness of such power is as far as the people it exercises over cooperate.
This no doubt is what is playing out in the “game” that is relocation of faculty of agriculture of LAUTECH from Ogbomoso to Iseyin. The designers believed it could be decreed into existence, brought about by fiat but reality has dawned that great successes are never “orchestrated” that way by force. What becomes of its buildings, facilities, farms and other practical facilities to be abandoned! To be reconfigured for new uses? What is the economic cost of that?
It is not out-of-place turning an institution into a multi-campus one but when it’s borne out of conspiracy or evil agenda its success rate is limited. It still beats reasoning why a thriving faculty as that of agriculture in the university with well cast and solidly set facilities will be targeted for excision in that manner moreover when plans are afoot to launch new faculties. That’s what is out of place in my opinion. Furthermore, you are not starting from the scratch but you just excised a whole level boasting 1533 students when you can start with new admissions.
Advertisement
It is no wonder then that the proposal has been dogged by deviant occurrences such as fierce protests from students, parents and the host community culminating in a court case by the students and parents. It’s also instructive that its eliciting such stiff opposition from the students to the extent that 67 or so percent of them will not care a hoot forfeiting their admission status and deciding to drop out when they should be head-over-heels transiting to 300 level. Of the 1533 students that should have assumed academic activities at Iseyin since October, only about 500 of them complied, with over 1000 audaciously shunning the directive. They have missed a whole semester! Such is the fierce determination provoked by the proposal. The plan is ill-advised, and so ill-fated. Government that ought to continually encourage expansion of educational horizon is the one constraining it with unpopular policies and recalcitrance.
Many more among the 500 are one leg in one leg out, from findings, with several even considering rewriting UTME. An audio message by one of the students obtained, contains lamentations of the Iseyin experience – unsolvable accommodation palaver, unsurmountable transportation problem, acute lecturers’ absenteeism, zero practical experience, inadequate lecture rooms, inadequate personnel that university’s security agents have to invigilate exams and so on. This is not to mention the embarrassing drop in the number of admission seekers to the faculty occasioned obviously by the relocation uncertainties..
Advertisement
Everything about the Iseyin project is negative, smacking of abhorrence. It is like wilfully and whimsically truncating the academic pursuit of a whole generation of young ones. One wonders if the proponents of the proposal faced such incertitude during their time in higher institutions or if their own children are in such vagaries.
It’s also embarrassing such young children will be imbued with the temerity of taking government and some “elders” to court on a matter as that. It is indeed disgraceful. It is bad precedent. It is unfavourable history being written.
A more pragmatic approach should be adopted to locate a new institution in Iseyin. No one is against such prospect but it shouldn’t be achieved while hurting and harming others. Many options have been put forward to achieve this without the unnecessary rancour and ruckuses associated with the option taken. These options include starting an institute of agriculture, starting with fresh admission commensurate with available facilities, locating one of the envisaged new faculties in the face of conversion of the university into a conventional one, starting new agricultural programmes etc. There is also a suggestion by an analyst that the Technical University, Ibadan, which presently lacks a faculty of agriculture can start with one at the Iseyin campus.
Any of the above options will have produced greater results or benefits – new employments with beneficiaries knowing they are starting new life at Iseyin and not this kind of sharing workers between two diametrically located campuses capable of causing disjointed families and disruption of family lives and harmony; opportunity for paced and planned growth within the orbit of available resources and not the kind of disproportionate one being foisted; guaranteeing of popular reception – but as it is now many are silent for political and selfish reasons, deep down they are opposed to it and see it as ill-thought out etc.
However, as it is, everything is muddled up, disorganized, in disarray all conspiring to disable the students’ educational advancement. It is appalling.
The governor of the state, Engr. Seyi Makinde, needs to deign to reconsider before bad history is further scribbled. Remember the launch of the school sometimes last year also was signposted by ridiculing of the Obas in attendance with the “E dide, e koko” saga. This further jinxed it.
Isn’t it obvious the Iseyin project is a fiasco?
