In the December 20th, 2003 letter in SN, the UG administration stated: "UG’s Chemistry Department was reviewed early in 2002 by Professor Tinto of UWI, Cave Hill and in 2003 by Professor Balwin Mootoo of UWI, St Augustine. Both Assessors gave the programme approval ratings."

In a previous letter, I asked that the unedited reports by these Reviewers be published, so that the public can be reassured. I and/or others who worked in the program would be able to comment. We are still waiting on UG to show some transparency and efficiency on this matter.

The above quoted statement raises serious questions. Both Dr. A. Daljeet and I were there in early 2002 when Dr Tinto gave his lecture in the evening at the Main Street Plaza Hotel. The University and the public were invited to the public lecture. Neither of us were aware that Dr. Tinto’s visit included an examination/accreditation of the Department of Chemistry. This information was news to us, since this was never mentioned in any of the Departmental meetings. In addition, it was never mentioned in any of the Natural Sciences Faculty meeting. Surely, the Dean would have mentioned this to the faculty and asked that all members cooperate with Dr.Tinto. The minutes of these meetings showed that no such notice of an impending accreditation was ever given.

I now quote from a letter seeking clarification from Mr. Alfred Bhulai (former lecturer and Head of Chemistry at UG) concerning whether he was aware that the Dept was being accredited and/or examined by Dr. Tinto and Prof. B. Mootoo.

" Neither as Head of Department nor in my private capacity was I ever informed that Dr. Tinto was conducting an examination/accreditation of the current B.Sc. programme." Mr. Bhulai continues: "Prof. Mootoo spent longer, but at no time was I apprised that we were under examination or working for some kind of accreditation. Prof (Emeritus) Mootoo came to advise, and was very helpful to me and the Dept. He gave lectures, and spent much quality time with our advanced students, collectively and individually, demonstrating the uses of research organic chemistry and inspiring them…. If he had come here for our accreditation, then I as Head of Dept. would have had to know and append my signature for any such thing to be valid."

This is incredible! The Head of Chemistry Dept. did not know that the Dept. of Chemistry was being accredited, but only the administration knew. Would the UG administration produce these requested documents to support its statements that there were two accreditations, when the current information suggests otherwise?

The administration concluded that: "It must be remembered that, as crucial as labs are, the degree programme has other components".

This statement shows that the administration does not understand science or the culture of science. The labs are an integral part of the courses. The lab sessions and classroom theoretical sessions are inseparable and complement each other. Without strong training in each component, the science graduates would fail to perform (e.g. as is now evident by the rejection of UG graduates by some major employers in Guyana. It is more difficult to get away with deficient training in industry than it is in academia). In addition, the University would in reality become a "Liberal Arts College" only.

I would like to ask what are the "other components" in the program? The staff is under-qualified, and inadequate. There are virtually no support structures (research facilities, equipment) and resources (journals, books, and computers) for the faculty. Where is the ‘strong core of well- qualified staff’ in science that the administration boasts about?

If the University examines the list of its Science staff for the last 10 years, this would show that there is rapid turnover of staff. No qualified biochemists and/or molecular biologists have been hired to replace me [Departed Feb., 2002.] and/or Dr Sithu [Departed Sept 2002]. Who are the ‘strong core of well-qualified staff’ running the Biochemistry program now?

I assume that the program is still being run. Such rapid turnover in staff should have been addressed years ago, before these crises situations are reached.

The UG administration stated that: "the necessary material for labs cannot be provided out of the fees paid by students." This is a very interesting statement, since the University accepted the student’s lab fees and is now stating that it cannot provide the service. This sounds like a breach of contract – accepting monies for a service and afterwards claiming that you cannot provide that service. No statement was made that the labs may or may not occur. How long has UG been collecting monies knowing that it cannot fulfill its contractual obligations? At least refunds and letter of apologies should be going out to the students.

The administration claimed that despite the lack of unsupported staff, inadequate equipment, lab facilities, books, etc., - "the training they received at UG has been strong enough to allow them, not merely to cope, but to excel"!

It is hard to imagine that a University administration would make such claims. Educators from around the world are going to beat a path to UG when word of this gets out. UG has found that deprivation (staff, books, facilities, labs etc.) causes students to excel! Such profound findings would be publishable in the prestigious journals of Nature and/or Science. This statement only further embarrasses UG and Guyanese. Now the world will think that we are simply insane.

From the above we can see that the Administration of UG is making erroneous and misleading statements in their defense of the deficiencies of the University. We expect a University administration to examine the charges and take the necessary steps to remedy the situation. It does not listen to the voices of the students, faculty, and staff. Unfortunately, it failed to respond correctly as outlined above, over and over again. It has failed horribly to execute its responsibilities towards the students, faculty, staff, and Guyana. It is also not listening to legitimate concerns of local businesses. We must ask whose interests is the UG administration serving? How long must our students suffer? Our history is one of impoverishment, deprivation, brutality - this should not be allowed to continue in Guyana, especially in the "crown jewel" of our educational institutions. It is way beyond time that the suffering stops – the students have persevered long enough at great personal cost.

Would the overseas Guyanese and/or other citizens (concerned about the future of this University), please ask their respective consulates/embassies for explanations why these sad state of affairs are allowed?

(Former Senior Lecturer in the Faculty of Natural Science)