CDM Calls Out Institutional Failures Over Controversial SHS Curriculum

Keywords: CDM, Ghana Education Service, NaCCA, Senior High School Curriculum, Gender Identification, Ghanaian Values, Ministry of Education, Curriculum Reform.

Introduction

The integrity of Ghana’s educational framework is currently under intense scrutiny following a formal critique by the Centre for Democratic Movement (CDM). The controversy centers on the introduction of redefined gender identification concepts into Senior High School (SHS) teaching materials. This development has sparked a significant public debate regarding cultural values, administrative oversight, and the transparency of curriculum development in Ghana.

The CDM has issued a strong rebuke directed at the Ministry of Education, the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (NaCCA), and the Ghana Education Service (GES). The core of the dispute lies not only in the content itself but in the alleged failure of these institutions to consult key stakeholders—parents, religious leaders, and traditional authorities—before disseminating the materials. This article provides a comprehensive analysis of the situation, exploring the institutional responsibilities, the specific allegations, and the broader implications for Ghanaian educational policy.

Key Points

Background

To understand the gravity of the current situation, it is necessary to examine the roles of the institutions involved and the regulatory framework governing Ghana’s educational curriculum.

The Role of NaCCA (Act 1023)

The National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (NaCCA) is the statutory body established under Act 1023 (Education Act, 2008). Its primary mandate is to develop and review curricula for pre-tertiary education in Ghana. NaCCA is tasked with ensuring that educational materials meet national standards and reflect the socio-cultural context of the country. The CDM’s criticism hinges on the interpretation of this mandate, suggesting that the introduction of controversial gender content may have exceeded or contradicted NaCCA’s statutory duty to safeguard curriculum integrity.

The Ghana Education Service (GES)

The Ghana Education Service is the implementing agency of the Ministry of Education. GES is responsible for the actual administration of all government schools, including the dissemination of teaching and learning materials. In this context, the CDM highlights that GES bears direct responsibility for the national distribution of the materials in question. Once a document enters the school system via GES, it carries the implicit endorsement of the state.

Evolution of SHS Curricula in Ghana

Ghana has undergone several curriculum reforms in recent years, aiming to modernize education and align it with global standards. However, curriculum changes often intersect with deeply held cultural and religious values. The current controversy is not the first time educational content has sparked public debate, but it is notable for the specific nature of the content and the allegations of administrative opacity surrounding its introduction.

Analysis

The CDM’s statement provides a multi-faceted critique of the current institutional handling of the SHS curriculum. This section breaks down the specific arguments and their implications.

Ministerial Responsibility and Accountability

The CDM emphasizes that the Ministry of Education cannot distance itself from materials circulated under its authority. The principle of ministerial responsibility dictates that the Minister of Education is ultimately accountable for the actions of the departments under their purview. The CDM argues that silence in the face of public outrage is tantamount to acquiescence. This suggests that a lack of public response from the Ministry is being interpreted as tacit approval of the content, further fueling public distrust.

The Signature Discrepancy: Hon. Haruna Iddrisu

One of the most pointed allegations involves the signature of Hon. Haruna Iddrisu on the foreword of the handbook. The CDM notes a discrepancy: while the content is claimed to have been introduced in 2024, the Minister’s signature appears on the document.

In administrative law and public policy, a ministerial signature on a policy document signifies official approval and ownership. The CDM’s assertion, “One cannot sign a national education policy document and later feign ignorance,” highlights the legal and ethical weight of such an endorsement. If the signature is authentic, it binds the minister to the content’s approval, regardless of the timeline of its introduction. This discrepancy raises questions about the authenticity of the document or the timeline of its approval process.

Administrative Evasion vs. Catastrophic Failure

The CDM presents a binary critique of NaCCA’s actions: either the body failed catastrophically in its mandate to safeguard curriculum integrity, or it is engaging in administrative evasion. Both scenarios are presented as unacceptable.

• Catastrophic Failure: This implies that NaCCA reviewed and approved content that contradicts national values or failed to conduct adequate due diligence.
• Administrative Evasion: This suggests that NaCCA may be attempting to avoid blame by claiming ignorance or shifting responsibility, despite their statutory mandate.

Regardless of which scenario applies, the CDM argues that the result is a breach of public trust.

The Clash with Ghanaian Values

The introduction of redefined gender identification content is described by the CDM as a failure to uphold Ghanaian values. In many Ghanaian cultural and religious contexts, gender is traditionally viewed through a binary lens. The introduction of non-binary concepts into SHS teaching materials is perceived by the CDM and other stakeholders as an imposition of foreign ideologies that conflict with local norms. The critique underscores the importance of aligning educational content with the socio-cultural fabric of the nation.

Practical Advice

For stakeholders—including parents, educators, and students—navigating the current controversy requires a proactive and informed approach. Below are practical steps to ensure transparency and adherence to educational standards.

For Parents and Guardians

• Review Materials Actively: Parents should request access to the specific SHS textbooks and teaching manuals in question. Understanding the exact content allows for informed dialogue with school administrators.
• Engage with School Management: Parents should utilize Parent-Teacher Associations (PTAs) to voice concerns and seek clarification on how specific topics are being taught.
• Document Concerns: If materials are found to be inconsistent with the values taught at home, parents should document these concerns formally and submit them to the school and district education offices.

For Educators and School Administrators

• Verify Source Material: Teachers should ensure they are using only officially approved and vetted curriculum materials from NaCCA and GES. Avoid supplementary materials that have not undergone official review.
• Focus on Critical Thinking: When discussing sensitive topics, educators should facilitate balanced discussions that respect diverse viewpoints while adhering to the official curriculum guidelines.
• Report Anomalies: If there are discrepancies in documents (such as signature or date issues), educators should report these to higher authorities to ensure the integrity of the educational supply chain.

For Policy Watchers and Civil Society

• Monitor Parliamentary Proceedings: Given the CDM’s call for a parliamentary inquiry, interested parties should monitor the Hansard (official parliamentary record) for any discussions regarding the Ministry of Education or NaCCA.
• Verify Information: Cross-reference claims with official documents released by the Ministry of Education to distinguish between verified facts and public speculation.

FAQ

Conclusion

The controversy surrounding the redefined gender identification content in Ghana’s SHS curriculum highlights critical gaps in stakeholder engagement and administrative transparency. The Centre for Democratic Movement’s critique places the spotlight firmly on the Ministry of Education, NaCCA, and GES, demanding accountability for the materials circulated under their authority.

At the heart of this issue is the tension between modernizing educational content and preserving indigenous Ghanaian values. The alleged signature discrepancy involving Hon. Haruna Iddrisu further complicates the narrative, raising questions about the approval processes of national education policies. As the call for a parliamentary inquiry grows louder, the resolution of this matter will likely set a precedent for how curriculum reforms are handled in the future. Ensuring that educational materials reflect the consensus of the society they serve remains paramount for maintaining public trust in Ghana’s education system.