https://www.facebook.com/134133289772847/

Daybreak Education Desk, Takoradi (2026)

28/07/2026

‎
‎𝗔 𝗥𝗢𝗕𝗢𝗧 𝗧𝗨𝗧𝗢𝗥 𝗙𝗢𝗥 𝗘𝗩𝗘𝗥𝗬 𝗚𝗛𝗔𝗡𝗔𝗜𝗔𝗡 𝗖𝗛𝗜𝗟𝗗? 𝗟𝗘𝗧'𝗦 𝗧𝗔𝗟𝗞 𝗔𝗕𝗢𝗨𝗧 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗙𝗜𝗡𝗘 𝗣𝗥𝗜𝗡𝗧 𝗕𝗘𝗙𝗢𝗥𝗘 𝗪𝗘 𝗧𝗔𝗟𝗞 𝗔𝗕𝗢𝗨𝗧 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗙𝗨𝗧𝗨𝗥𝗘.
‎
‎Every child, a personal tutor. Every promise, a personal follow-up question.
‎
‎The Minister for Education, Hon. Haruna Iddrisu, sat down this week with a delegation from Scola.AI Ghana, led by Group Chairman Jacek Ślotała, to discuss what could become one of the most ambitious education partnerships in recent memory.
‎
‎The pitch: an AI-powered platform offering every student in Ghana a personalised digital tutor, aligned with the national curriculum, available in English and eleven Ghanaian languages, working both online and offline.
‎
‎On paper, this is the stuff of education ministry dreams. A tutor for every child, not just the ones whose parents can afford extra classes.
‎
‎ A tool that speaks Dagbani as comfortably as it speaks English. A system built to narrow the very inequality gap our classrooms have struggled with for decades.
‎
‎Here's my observation.
‎
‎I want to believe this one. I genuinely do. But I've watched enough curriculum reforms, pilot programmes, and "game-changing partnerships" walk through the Ministry's doors to know that the presentation is always the easy part.
‎
‎The harder part is what happens after the handshake photos are taken down from the wall.
‎
‎So let's ask the questions this announcement deserves, not out of cynicism, but out of respect for how many times we've heard "this will transform education" before.
‎
‎1. Offline access is mentioned, but how offline, really?
‎A personalised AI tutor sounds wonderful until you remember that some classrooms still don't have reliable electricity, let alone the devices to run this platform on.
‎
‎Will this reach the village school with one working laptop, or only the ones already resourced enough to not need it most?
‎
‎2. Eleven Ghanaian languages is impressive on a slide. Is it just as impressive in practice?
‎Building a language model that genuinely understands nuance across eleven local languages, not just direct translation, but actual pedagogical sense, is no small technical feat.
‎
‎Has that been tested with real learners, or is it still a promise waiting to meet a classroom?
‎
‎3. Where do teachers fit into this picture?
‎A digital tutor is a powerful complement, but it cannot replace the teacher who notices when a child hasn't eaten breakfast, or when a struggling learner just needs someone patient in the room.
‎
‎Is this platform designed to support teachers, or quietly designed to eventually need fewer of them?
‎
‎4. What happens after the pilot ends?
‎Partnerships like this often launch with energy and press coverage, then quietly fade once the initial funding cycle closes. What's the sustainability plan beyond year one?
‎
‎To be clear, innovation in education is not the enemy here, complacency is. If Scola.AI can genuinely deliver on even half of what was presented, it could meaningfully change how learning happens in under-resourced classrooms across the country. That possibility is worth taking seriously.
‎
‎But "worth taking seriously" also means asking hard questions now, while the ink is still wet, rather than three years from now when we're writing another piece asking what happened to the AI tutor that was supposed to reach every child.
‎
‎Until the next reflection, teach with your eyes open, artificial intelligence included.
‎
‎Done ✅

Michael Asabil
‎

28/07/2026

𝗚𝗘𝗦 𝗥𝗘𝗦𝗖𝗛𝗘𝗗𝗨𝗟𝗘𝗦 𝗡𝗔𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡𝗪𝗜𝗗𝗘 𝗧𝗥𝗔𝗜𝗡𝗜𝗡𝗚 𝗢𝗡 2026 𝗦𝗖𝗛𝗢𝗢𝗟 𝗦𝗘𝗟𝗘𝗖𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡 𝗚𝗨𝗜𝗗𝗘𝗟𝗜𝗡𝗘𝗦

New Dates: Wednesday, 29th July – Friday, 7th August, 2026

Michael Asabil

28/07/2026

‎"𝗜 𝗗𝗢𝗡'𝗧 𝗛𝗔𝗩𝗘 𝗔 𝗠𝗔𝗚𝗜𝗖 𝗪𝗔𝗡𝗗," 𝗦𝗔𝗬𝗦 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗠𝗜𝗡𝗜𝗦𝗧𝗘𝗥. 𝗙𝗨𝗡𝗡𝗬, 𝗕𝗘𝗖𝗔𝗨𝗦𝗘 33,000 𝗚𝗥𝗔𝗗𝗨𝗔𝗧𝗘𝗦 𝗪𝗘𝗥𝗘 𝗛𝗢𝗣𝗜𝗡𝗚 𝗙𝗢𝗥 𝗢𝗡𝗘.

‎No wand, no plan, no problem, apparently.
‎
‎Hon. Haruna Iddrisu looked into the camera and delivered a line that will likely outlive this entire recruitment saga: "I have applications within 24 hours of over 40,000. What can you do? I don't have the magic wand."
‎
‎Minister, respectfully, nobody asked for Hogwarts( a school for learning magic). We asked for arithmetic.
‎
‎Forty thousand people applied for seven thousand slots. The government has now added that an extra 8,000 teachers will be recruited in 2027 to help reduce the deficit.
‎
‎ And here's the kicker delivered almost as an afterthought: the applicant pool is only going to grow, because this first batch didn't even include everyone. University graduates, diploma holders, degree holders, and College of Education graduates who sat this one out are all lining up for the next round.
‎
‎Here's my observation.
‎
‎If 40,000 people showed up for a door that could only fit 7,000, and you already know a bigger crowd is coming next time, calling for a magic wand isn't humility, it's a preview.
‎
‎ It's the Minister quietly telling us, "brace yourselves, because whatever chaos we saw this time is about to get a sequel with a bigger cast."
‎
‎A magic wand was never the ask. A functioning calculator, a transparent plan, and an honest number that matches the crisis, that was the ask. Somehow, that got mistaken for sorcery.
‎
‎1. If the Ministry already knew this year's applicant pool would balloon further in 2027, why wasn't that scaling built into this year's planning, wand or no wand?
‎
‎2. Is "I don't have a magic wand" a defence, or is it a quiet confession that this problem has been left to fix itself?
‎
‎3. When 8,000 more slots are added for 2027, but even more graduates are expected to apply, are we solving the deficit, or just feeding a bigger version of the same bottleneck next time around?
‎
‎Minister, nobody's demanding you conjure jobs out of thin air. We're demanding you stop being surprised by numbers you helped generate.
‎
‎Forty thousand applicants for seven thousand slots wasn't a plot twist, it was predictable. You don't need a magic wand for that. You need a spreadsheet, and apparently, a much longer memory.
‎
‎Until the next reflection, teach with your eyes open.
‎
‎Done ✅

Michael Asabil

27/07/2026

‎‎𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗣𝗥𝗢𝗕𝗟𝗘𝗠 𝗜𝗦𝗡'𝗧 𝗧𝗛𝗘 7,000. 𝗜𝗧'𝗦 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗖𝗛𝗔𝗢𝗦 𝗧𝗛𝗘𝗬 𝗪𝗘𝗥𝗘 𝗣𝗢𝗨𝗥𝗘𝗗 𝗜𝗡𝗧𝗢.
‎
‎
‎You can shrink a meal, Minister, but you don't have to throw all the plates on the floor first.
‎
‎The most disappointing part of this recruitment exercise was never really the number. Seven thousand slots is seven thousand slots, small, yes, but numbers can be negotiated, budgets can be argued over, treasuries can be pressured.
‎
‎What cannot be easily forgiven is how those seven thousand slots were handed out.
‎
‎Here's my observation.
‎
‎There was already a structure in place. University graduate teachers and College of Education graduates did not scramble in the same pool, on the same day, for the same seats.
‎
‎There was order, sequence, a queue that made sense. If that structure had a flaw, the job was to fix the flaw, not set the whole structure on fire and call the ashes "reform."
‎
‎The excuse given is financial space, there simply isn't enough this year to recruit the usual 15,000 to 25,000. Fine. That's a fair constraint, budgets are real, and nobody's asking for miracles.
‎
‎But here's the part that doesn't add up: if only 7,000 slots were available, what exactly stopped GES from phasing it properly? Open this round strictly to university graduates.
‎
‎Let the next recruitment carry the first 8,000 for the 2023 College of Education batch, and split the remaining 8,000 between both groups. Simple. Structured. Fair, even in scarcity.
‎
‎Instead, the gates were flung open to everyone at once, university and college graduates, multiple year groups, all thrown into a single pool to fight it out.
‎
‎The result wasn't efficient. It was chaotic. Disorganized. A process that looked less like policy and more like improvisation dressed up in a press release.
‎
‎1. If financial constraints genuinely limited the numbers, why did they not also limit the chaos by keeping the existing order intact?
‎
‎2. Is it harder to manage scarcity with structure, or is it simply easier to manage scarcity with confusion, because confusion draws less accountability?
‎
‎3. Is this truly the "reset," or is "reset" simply the softer word for "we didn't plan this properly"?
‎
‎Minister, scarcity is understandable. Disorder is not. You can serve a smaller meal and still set the table properly. What you cannot do is scatter the food on the floor and call it a banquet.
‎
‎Until the next reflection, teach with your eyes open.
‎
‎Done ✅

Note: Which Education Minister handled the teacher recruitment much better??

27/07/2026

𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗚𝗘𝗦 𝗥𝗘𝗖𝗥𝗨𝗜𝗧𝗠𝗘𝗡𝗧 𝗠𝗬𝗦𝗧𝗘𝗥𝗬: 𝗨𝗡𝗦𝗨𝗖𝗖𝗘𝗦𝗦𝗙𝗨𝗟 𝗔𝗣𝗣𝗟𝗜𝗖𝗔𝗡𝗧𝗦 𝗗𝗘𝗠𝗔𝗡𝗗 𝗔𝗡𝗦𝗪𝗘𝗥𝗦

Thousands of qualified applicants were simply told: unsuccessful. No reason. No breakdown. Just a red verdict and a closed door.

QUESTION 1
If GES can publish a list of names, why is publishing the criteria behind that list suddenly too difficult?

QUESTION 2
When "unsuccessful" comes with zero explanation, who exactly is protected by that silence the institution, or the applicant?

QUESTION 3
If thousands remain unemployed after this exercise, is batch recruitment truly outdated, or was it simply more accountable than whatever this is?

The Coalition of Unemployed Trained Teachers (CUTT 2023) has come out swinging and rightly so. Their demands are not rebellion, they are due process:

✅ Publish the selection criteria
✅ Explain the rejections
✅ Set up a review process for applicants who suspect an error

"Power is like ice, it starts melting from the very day it's handed to you."

🔴 THE RUMOUR THAT WON'T DIE

Shortlisted names may be released without appointment letters. Just enough for applicants to "know" they've been recruited conveniently timed for certain "protocol payments" to be finalized quietly on the side.

If true, that's not recruitment. That's a toll booth with a school badge on it.

What do you think? Is this the "automatic postings" the government once promised or did automatic quietly get replaced with automatic-ish?

Share this if you believe applicants deserve clarity, not silence.

Source: Coalition of Unemployed Trained Teachers - CUTT Official

27/07/2026

‎𝗚𝗘𝗦 𝗣𝗥𝗢 𝘀𝗮𝘆𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲'𝘀 𝗻𝗼 𝗺𝗼𝗻𝗲𝘁𝗶𝘇𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻. 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗰𝗮𝗹𝗰𝘂𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿 𝘀𝗮𝘆𝘀 𝗼𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿𝘄𝗶𝘀𝗲, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗰𝗮𝗹𝗰𝘂𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘀 𝗱𝗼𝗻'𝘁 𝗱𝗼 𝗣𝗥.
‎
‎According to the Public Relations Officer of the Ghana Education Service, the last time recruitment was "monetized" was December 2024.
‎
‎Said with a straight face, like it's a badge, like we should throw a small party for it.
‎
‎Meanwhile, over the weekend, roughly 40,000 applicants queued up to purchase a voucher at GHC 25 each, just to find out whether their name was written in green or red. Only 7,000 walked away successful.
‎
‎Let's not speculate. Let's do the arithmetic, since apparently mathematics is still a compulsory subject.
‎
‎40,000 multiplied by GHC 25 comes to GHC 1,000,000. One million cedis, collected from people checking a status they had zero control over, dressed up as a "verification fee."
‎
‎Here's my observation.
‎
‎If that's not monetization, then GES PR has quietly redefined the word, and nobody sent the rest of us the memo.
‎
‎Apparently, in this new dictionary, monetization only counts once it crosses GHC 10,000 per transaction. Below that? Just "administrative cost." Above that? Scandal. Somewhere in the middle? A convenient blind spot.
‎
‎That's not policy, that's a technicality wearing a policy's clothes.
‎
‎1. If GHC 25 multiplied by 40,000 doesn't qualify as monetization, what exactly is the threshold, and who drew that line?
‎
‎2. Why should applicants pay to receive a verdict they had no part in shaping, success or rejection?
‎
‎3. Is "we didn't monetize it" a statement of fact, or a statement of hope that nobody would reach for a calculator?
‎
‎Because someone reached for the calculator. And the numbers don't do spin, they just do multiplication.
‎
‎Next joke please, indeed. This one wasn't even funny, it was just expensive.
‎
‎Until the next reflection, teach with your eyes open, and keep your calculator closer than your trust in press statements.
‎
‎Done ✅
‎

27/07/2026

‎
‎𝗡𝗶 𝗵𝗮𝗼? 𝗢𝗿 𝘀𝗵𝗼𝘂𝗹𝗱 𝘄𝗲 𝗳𝗶𝗿𝘀𝘁 𝘀𝗮𝘆 "𝗔𝗸𝘄𝗮𝗮𝗯𝗮" 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗹𝘆 𝗯𝗲𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗮𝗱𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗿𝗱 𝗹𝗮𝗻𝗴𝘂𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗺𝗶𝘅?
‎
‎The Ministry of Education has unveiled its revised curriculum, and among the fresh additions is Chinese, introduced as an optional subject, with a pilot scheme currently running in just ten schools and three teachers courtesy of the Confucius Centre.
‎
‎Bold move. Ambitious. Also, mildly hilarious when you consider the terrain we're currently standing on.
‎
‎Here's my observation.
‎
‎We are still hunting for enough Ghanaian language textbooks to properly ground kindergarten pupils in their mother tongue, the very medium of instruction the Ministry itself insists on from KG to Primary Three,
‎
‎and somehow, in the middle of that hunt, Mandarin has strolled in like an uninvited guest who brought better party favours than the host.
‎
‎Before we get lost in translation, a few questions in plain English, since apparently that's still negotiable too.
‎
‎1. Do we have the materials?
‎Ten pilot schools and three teachers sound less like a national curriculum rollout and more like a WhatsApp group chat.
‎
‎Where are the textbooks, workbooks, and flashcards for a language most of our own teacher training colleges have never taught?
‎
‎2. Who exactly is teaching this?
‎Is it the teacher from Bolga, freshly posted to the Central Region, currently mid-battle trying to master Fante greetings, who's now expected to somehow pivot and start conjugating Mandarin tones by next term? Because that's not a lesson plan, that's a hostage situation.
‎
‎3. Is there an actual pipeline, or just good intentions in a press release?
‎Training partnerships take years. Textbook production takes planning.
‎
‎Right now, it sounds like we're building the plane while asking kindergarteners to already be seated for takeoff.
‎
‎Don't get me wrong, exposing our children to global languages is a genuinely good idea, and Chinese, given its growing economic weight, isn't a bad choice at all.
‎
‎But good ideas without groundwork often land the same way: beautifully announced, badly implemented.
‎
‎We can't run before we've comfortably learned to spell in our own mother tongue.
‎
‎Let's fix the foundation before we start decorating the roof with characters we can't yet read ourselves.
‎
‎𝑰𝒇 𝒂 𝒇𝒊𝒗𝒆-𝒚𝒆𝒂𝒓-𝒐𝒍𝒅 𝒊𝒏 𝑩𝒐𝒍𝒈𝒂𝒕𝒂𝒏𝒈𝒂 𝒊𝒔 𝒔𝒕𝒊𝒍𝒍 𝒔𝒕𝒓𝒖𝒈𝒈𝒍𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒕𝒐 𝒇𝒊𝒏𝒅 𝒂 𝑫𝒂𝒈𝒃𝒂𝒏𝒊 𝒓𝒆𝒂𝒅𝒆𝒓, 𝒘𝒉𝒂𝒕 𝒆𝒙𝒂𝒄𝒕𝒍𝒚 𝒂𝒓𝒆 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒐𝒅𝒅𝒔 𝒉𝒆'𝒔 𝒇𝒍𝒖𝒆𝒏𝒕 𝒊𝒏 𝑴𝒂𝒏𝒅𝒂𝒓𝒊𝒏 𝒃𝒚 𝑷𝒓𝒊𝒎𝒂𝒓𝒚 𝑭𝒐𝒖𝒓?
‎
‎
‎Until the next reflection, teach with your eyes open, and maybe, just maybe, teach one language properly before adding a fourth to the syllabus.
‎
‎Done ✅

Source: GHOne TV

‎

Daybreak Education Desk

28/07/2026

28/07/2026

28/07/2026

27/07/2026

27/07/2026

27/07/2026

27/07/2026

Address

Website

Alerts

Contact The School

Shortcuts

Share

Category

Listing takedown request