Kenya Medical Training College needs to be revamped

Kenya Medical Training College, my alma mater, is an institution still stuck in the 20th century. For some reasons unbeknown to me the college has refused to advance. They still issue the very certificates and diplomas they started with in the second quarter of the last century. However, even despite this many Kenyans still see it as a prestigious institution. Indeed, every year, thousands, if not tens of thousands, apply for a place in one of the several programmes that are offered by the centres dotted all over the country.

In 1996, I was one such naïve youth. I had just finished high school the previous year. Of course, like most of my contemporaries, I was highly elated about my prospects when I got the admission; my future, somehow, seemed very bright. An admission to the college would assure me a permanent job with the government, or so we innocently thought. Scholarship for further studies though not a guarantee was also possible, depending on how tall your relatives were - yeah, that is Kenya.

However, things would not be rosy forever for we got the shock of our life while still studying at the institution. The former President - Moi - while officiating at the college’s graduation ceremony, in 1998, informed us that the government would thenceforth stop employing us automatically after finishing our studies. A Ministry of Health job was no longer a guarantee for us. This, however, has not deterred some more credulous Kenyan boys and girls from seeking a place at the institution. In fact, the college gets an even more number of new students every year. The increase year on year though not exponential is still significant. The numbers are so high that, like the other institutions of higher learning in the country, the administrators have started evening classes and some other forms of ‘parallel arrangements’.

There is no problem with our youth getting some form of education. I do, indeed, applaud such an initiative and would go for even the most humble form of education. However, there is a big problem that only graduates of these centres are aware of; the issue is so grave that many a former student is seen regretting the very idea of joining the supposedly prestigious institution, in the first place. These students, immediately after completing their programmes realise that they are stuck with transcripts they can’t transfer to other degree granting institutions. No university in Kenya offers the same courses, as offered at KMTC, at a higher level. Thus, with the exception of a few and mostly nurses, there are no prospects for further education for the rest, at least in Kenya.

Actually, most graduates realise that they can’t even compete at the job market; almost every other person has a degree. I can’t fault potential employers for giving preference to degree holders. This, therefore, leads most former students to enrol in any degree programme that is convenient for them. You will be surprised to see quite a number of them attend evening classes to get some Bachelor of Arts degree. Not that there is anything wrong with getting a BA but I just find it not necessary for health professionals. I think we need them to continue learning in their field and not what is easily available in the market. However, I gather Mount Kenya University and KEMU are currently offering degree programmes in line with certain programmes taught at KMTC while accepting credit transfer. This should be a commendable endeavour from their part.

Also, a few years back, most universities in Kenya were admitting KMTC graduates in their Master of Public Health programmes but they have all stopped that. The exception in this regard is the newly formed Great Lakes University of Kisumu. Luckily, many British universities recognise the worth of the diplomas from the medical college but only a very negligible few can afford to continue their postgraduate education in the United Kingdom. Sadly, KMTC is not even listed with UNESCO as an institution of higher learning in Kenya. This, thus, precludes former students from attempting to apply to most countries (especially other European countries) that utilise the UNESCO list as a source of confirmation for accredited institutions, all over the world.

At the turn of the new millennium, I remember seeing a plan of modernising KMTC to make it a degree granting college. However, this ambitious plan was thwarted by the myopic view of the tutors at the college. Majority of the instructors are themselves just diploma holders and they had real fears about their would have been imminent redundancies, if the plan would have kicked off. In fact, there was an advert in the newspapers for lectures with a minimum of a master’s degree. This was not to be, the vacancies’ notice was cancelled just a few days later. Rumour had it that the tutors threatened to strike and paralysis the centres. I am not sure why the administrators gave in to that but close to a decade later I have not come across anything similar, at least in the media.

Therefore, while acknowledging the need to have middle-level skilled health professionals we also need to have mechanisms to ensure the quality of their knowledge and skills. This can only be guaranteed if the lecturers themselves are well qualified. However, whereas I do not think that being a diploma holder in itself is a bad thing we need to have training opportunities for the tutors first. I believe well trained lecturers would be at a better position in imparting knowledge to their students than is currently the case. They need to be well updated in their respective fields and be competitive globally, as well.

Thus, the government needs to take the issue of health care personnel in Kenya very seriously. Else KMTC will be rendered obsolete in due course. I think it won’t be long before we reach there. Already, I see some former colleagues advising their younger ones to rather attend universities, here in Kenya or even Uganda, than joining KMTC for a diploma that they would be stuck with. Let’s take the issue of KMTC seriously, in the spirit of Vision 2030. I honestly do not see the reason why someone should waste three years to get a diploma that is not equivalent to a two years associate degree in the United States. Of course we need to have competent graduates but we also need to think of their future scholastic ambitions. We can only prosper once we have an adequate pool of qualified and competent human resources.

Refuting Hon. William Ruto's statistical fallacies

Following the just concluded referendum, it is evident that Kenyans have overwhelmingly accepted the Proposed Constitution. The proponents of the ‘No’ side, on the other hand, have also ‘conceded defeat’. However, their concession has come forth with some statistical fallacies that should not be left unchallenged.

Hon. Ruto was quoted in most media outlets, in the country, inferring that close to 60% of Kenyans either out rightly rejected the Proposed Constitution or abstained from voting. However, one key issue that all Kenyans need to note is that the referendum, just like all the preceding opinion polls, showed that a significant majority of the people of Kenya are in favour of the new Constitution. Of all the polls that were conducted, the most valid and accurate should ideally be the referendum itself, which has a much larger ‘sample’, read voters.

Earlier, it was reported in the media that the registered voters for the referendum were over 12.5 million. And the results showed that 70% of those who participated in the plebiscite voted for the new Constitution with 30% voting ‘no’. However, the 70% and 30% respectively represents the universe of those who voted only. Those who abstained from the referendum were about 30%, according to the IIEC. A distinction, therefore, needs to be made as regards these two similar but separate 30 percents.

In combining both the proportion that abstained and the ones that voted ‘red’, the ideal thing is to recalculate using the absolute numbers, rather than incorrectly adding the two percentage figures. If we add the percentages, the ‘60% that either abstained or rejected’ the Proposed Constitution’ and the 70% that voted ‘green’, then you end up with an accumulated 130%. You do not need to be a statistician to know that this is impossible. If we recalculate using the total registered voters, we find that 48% voted ‘yes’ and 22% voted ‘no’ and a 30% that abstained. These correctly add up to 100%.

Since we know that the referendum was the most valid and accurate poll; then, using the same 70 and 30 percents, we can correctly come to the conclusion that, of those who abstained, 21% would have voted ‘yes’ and only 9% voting ‘no’. These last two figures are respectively, 70% and 30% of the 30% that abstained. Therefore, using these recalculated percentages, we end up with about 69% ‘green’ and 31% ‘red’. In absolute figures, these would mean; 6 million who actually voted for ‘yes’ and another 2.6 million hypothetically voting ‘green’. On the flip side, it means 2.8 million Kenyans who actually voted ‘no’ and another 1.1 million hypothetically voting ‘red’. The total, both for the absolute figures and the percentages, add up to the number of registered voters (12.5 million) and 100% respectively.

I need to also caution the propagators of these misconceptions from attempting to use the 48% figure written above as below the ‘internationally recommended 50% threshold’. This figure only comes up when you try to cater for the abstained votes, among the universe of the registered voters. Therefore, the correct thing would be to use the same (48%) while acknowledging the proven breakdown of ‘yes’ and ‘no’ voters among the abstainers – which, as stated, is 70% and 30 % respectively. Thus, you either accept the 48% with the additional hypothetical votes or else leave it as it is currently – 70% actually voting ‘yes’.

Also, we can, with statistical certainty, predict that the so named hypothetical voters above, given a chance, would have voted exactly in the manner as envisaged above. This is informed by the fact that, as written above, the validity and accuracy of the plebiscite is above reproach. Therefore, if we had other Kenyans who being eligible to vote but did not register; then they too would most likely have voted 70% for ‘yes’ and 30% ‘no’.

Using the same distorted logic circulated - that of 60% either rejecting or abstaining from the referendum - we can as well come to the conclusion that 70% of the registered voters turned out for the referendum and 70% of them voted ‘yes’ adding up to a total of 140%. However, it would be inappropriate for me to refute one statistical fallacy with yet another one.

Therefore, the only valid conclusion is that the majority of Kenyans are in favour of the Proposed Constitution, regardless of whether they registered for the referendum, voted on August 4th, or whichever side they voted for or would have voted for. In other words, if your get a fairly representative number of Kenyans anywhere, they would have voted 70% for ‘green’ and 30% for ‘red’. We have no reason, at this point in time, to believe that those who abstained were a homogenous group; from the same region, with similar ethnic and religious background etc.