Free SHS in Ghana: A Question of Quality Over Quantity

Ghana’s Free Senior High School (Free SHS) policy, a flagship program of President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo’s government, has been heralded by most people as a transformative step toward ensuring access to education for all. As a Ghanaian citizen, I am not against this noble idea of making education free and accessible to every Ghanaian child, regardless of their financial background. Education is indeed a right, not a privilege. However, my concern lies in the quality of education delivered under this policy. For, as Aristotle once said, “The roots of education are bitter, but the fruit is sweet.” Yet, in Ghana today, the sweetness of that fruit seems to be under threat.

In conversations with teachers, a troubling pattern emerges. Many admit that the energy and passion they once poured into teaching have diminished under the Free SHS policy. The influx of students, without a proportional increase in teaching staff or resources, has left teachers overwhelmed. Large class sizes, inadequate teaching materials, and mounting administrative duties mean they are stretched beyond capacity. As one teacher aptly put it, “How can you effectively water a garden when the water you have is barely enough for one flower?” This is indeed a disturbing issue that needs immediate attention.

This pressure not only affects the teachers but also the students, who receive less personalized attention. The outcome? A compromised learning experience that undermines the very foundation of the policy’s intent.

For students, the story is equally disheartening. Those attending government schools—often overcrowded and under-resourced—report missing out on vital topics before their final exams; the West African Senior School Certificate Examination (WASSCE). This deficiency creates an uneven playing field, where wealthier students can afford private tuition to cover the gaps.

For many less privileged students, however, such luxuries are out of reach. As a result, they face the harsh reality of competing in exams without adequate preparation, leaving them at a significant disadvantage compared to their peers from better-funded schools or families who can afford extra lessons but when arguing points out, others say students were already failing before this policy so this is not a big deal, adding that less privileged but intelligent students still manage to pass no matter the circumstance. Are they forgetting that not all fingers are the same? Some may be naturally smart and intelligent learners, what of those that need assistance in other to make it out there?

This inequity raises a critical question: If the Free SHS policy is as effective as its architects’ claim, why don’t policymakers enrol their children in these schools? The answer, though unspoken, is glaring. The schools they champion for the masses are not deemed good enough for their own children. This contradiction reminds me of a poignant African proverb: “When there is no enemy within, the enemies outside cannot hurt you.” In this case, the enemy within is the quality deficit of the Free SHS system—a reality that cannot be ignored.

The Free SHS policy is a bold step in the right direction, but boldness without thorough planning risks turning a dream into a nightmare. If we are to uphold the vision of equitable education for all, then the government must focus on improving quality, not just access.