Sub-region 2 in Region 10 needs a resident Education Officer

Dear Editor, As I read your editorial dated May 16, 2017 captioned ‘Ghost teachers,’ I concluded that the Commission of Inquiry’s visit to Sub-region No 2 in Region 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 aloud 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 had been assigned to this Sub-district, and as usual she would be a resident. To date this officer visits the riverine area 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 only a few hours. Telephone contact with this Education Officer in most cases has proved futile, and the few times this has succeeded, it has always ended unsatisfactorily.

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 such as Welfare, Probation and even the Assistant Regional Executive Officer (AREO) are trying their best, but this is not enough. Bringing an end to this kind of situation should include Education Officers not wishing to be posted in the riverine area.

In short, there is no resident District Education Officer (DEO) in the Subregion No 2, in Region No 10, even though it may seem so on paper. This matter should not escape the attention of all the authorities whose are concerned about the need to do more to improve the quality of education delivery to our children in the riverine areas.

Yours faithfully, (Name and address provided)