Dear Editor
AS I read your editorial dated May 16, 2017, captioned ‘Ghost teachers,’, I concluded that the CoI’s visit in the Sub-Region Number Two in Region Number 10 was a bit too early to observe that there is also a ‘Ghost Education Officer’ in the area.
I was forced to laugh out loud when I read that the regional education officer says, “As soon as they are called, they have a hole in the heart…” In September 2016, we were told that an education officer has been assigned to this Sub-District, and as usual she would be a resident. To date, this officer visits the riverine areas occasionally and is always escorted by the regional education officer. We are unable to have face-to-face contact to discuss pertinent issues with her since she is here for a few hours. Telephone contact with this education officer in most cases proves futile and the few times always end with her shouting or embarrassing you.
We, the parents of children in the riverine areas, need the services of all those who are paid to deliver education to us. The other officers like welfare, probation and even the assistant regional executive officer are trying their best but this is not enough. “Bringing an end to an institutionalised scam” should include education officers not wishing to be posted to the riverine areas.
In short, there is no resident district education officer in the Sub-Region Number Two in Region Number 10, even though it may be on paper. This matter should not escape the attention of all the authorities whose concerns are about the need to do more to improve the quality of education delivery to our children in the riverine areas.
Concerned Parent