Wednesday, September 23, 2015

Shortcuts that put engineers board at odds with varsities

Corporate News
Technical University of Mombasa students leave for home following unrest over accreditation of engineering courses in September last year. PHOTO | FILE
Technical University of Mombasa students leave for home following unrest over accreditation of engineering courses in September last year. PHOTO | FILE  
By HERBLING DAVID, hdavid@ke.nationmedia.com
In Summary
  • The Engineers Board of Kenya (EBK) identifies qualification of lecturers and shortage of facilities as the weak points.

Shocking revelations have emerged about the poor state of teaching in public universities where a combination of staff incompetence and professional laxity is taking its toll on the quality of learning.
Kakamega-based Masinde Muliro University of Science and Technology tops the list of institutions where incessant laxity led to gross management decisions that are now costing its graduates the very qualifications they went to pursue in the college.
Masinde Muliro hired a home science graduate to teach public health engineering — one of the degree courses that the Engineers Board of Kenya (EBK) has refused to recognise.
The institution also hired seven ‘quacks’ masquerading as engineers to work as lecturers in the faculty.
“A home science graduate was assigned to teach a public health engineering unit at Masinde Muliro University while a geologist was engaged to teach geotechnical engineering at the same university,” EBK said.
The agency made the revelations in documents it filed in court in response to a suit filed by engineering graduates it has refused to grant practising certificates.
The EBK also claims it found agricultural engineers teaching other engineering disciplines at Egerton University, putting to doubt the quality of teaching.
Seven lecturers proposed to teach four programmes in the university’s engineering department were also found not registered engineers as required by the regulator.
Besides, the EBK says, Egerton has been using workshops meant to train diploma and certificate courses to teach undergraduate students.
The glaring deficiencies helped the EBK to successfully reverse a High Court ruling that had compelled the board to register engineering graduates from programmes it had not accredited.
It paints a picture of a mechanical breakdown in Kenya’s engineering faculties, and raises questions over the Commission for University Education’s role in quality assurance.
“The learned judge erred in finding that the appellant (EBK) did not require to go behind the degree certificates issued by Egerton and Masinde Muliro universities,” said the three-judge bench consisting of David Maraga, Roselyn Nambuye and George Kariuki.
The EBK had moved to the Court of Appeal arguing that it had powers to ‘approve’ and ‘accredit’ all engineering programmes at tertiary institutions. The board told the three-judge bench that it could not license engineers from courses it had not accredited.
It is an offence to admit learners, train, and award certificates in engineering programmes without the approval of EBK, according to the Engineers Act (2011).

About 9,000 graduates trained as engineers in local universities but have since been denied accreditation moved to court seeking orders to have EBK compelled to award them practising licences.
High Court judge David Majanja, in a judgment delivered in October 2012, gave the EBK two weeks to register the affected engineering students and ordered the board to pay each of graduates Sh200,000 as compensation for general damages.
The EBK has rejected some engineering courses and graduates from Kenyatta University, Masinde Muliro and the Technical University of Mombasa on the grounds of quality.
The board last week allowed KU to offer civil, mechanical as well as electrical and electronic engineering degree courses.
The agency gave a blow-by-blow account of how it had on multiple occasions advised public universities to address the challenges facing their courses but the advisories fell on deaf ears.
For instance, Moi University and Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology recalled their engineering graduates to cover gaps in their programmes that the EBK audit had pointed out, the court was told.
“Egerton and Masinde Muliro universities promised to do that but did not,” the board told the judges.
Besides, the EBK had fired a letter to Masinde Muliro, informing the institution that its engineering programmes could only be approved if it “employed qualified staff and provided proper infrastructure.”
The board said: “The University had to provide proper laboratories for high voltage power systems; electrical machines; telecommunications; control engineering; electronics; and microwaves.”
In another letter dated September 27, 2011, EBK warned Masinde Muliro that its programmes were not accredited. “The graduates of the said programmes are not registrable,” the board cautioned the university.
In another letter dated June 26, 2009, the board informed Egerton that its engineering department lacked qualified staff and teaching facilities.
“The university lacked adequate staff and some of the lecturers it had employed were unqualified,” the EBK said in the letter filed in court.
“Most of the staff are trained in agricultural engineering and related disciplines and are therefore not qualified to teach the proposed degree programmes.”
Egerton had designated agricultural engineering lecturers to teach disciplines such as telecommunications; industrial technology; manufacturing engineering and technology; civil engineering and technology; civil engineering; electrical and control engineering; instrumentation and control engineering; mechanical engineering; and water and environmental engineering.
The three-judge bench wondered why university administrators did little to comply with the board’s accreditation requirements, yet blamed EBK for their woes.  “So the respondents were aware of and acknowledged the appellant’s concerns but ignored them.  They cannot, therefore, blame the appellant for their plight,” the Court of Appeal judges said

No comments :

Post a Comment