Earlier this month, the Ministry of Education inaugurated the maiden Ghana Scholarship Authority Board following the passage of the Ghana Scholarship Authority Act in late 2024. The establishment of the Authority is a welcome development, aimed at improving transparency, coordination, and efficiency in the administration of government scholarships.
However, our office observes that the composition of the newly inaugurated Board lacks explicit student representation, raising serious concerns among students and education advocates.
The National Union of Ghana Students (NUGS), along with several student-focused groups, has publicly rejected the current composition of the Board and has called for an amendment of the Act under a certificate of urgency to include a student representative. We note that this situation raises important governance and policy questions that deserve sober national reflection.
What does the exclusion of students mean?
Scholarship policies directly affect students’ access to education, academic continuity, and socio-economic mobility. Decisions taken by the Ghana Scholarship Authority—ranging from eligibility criteria and beneficiary selection to disbursement timelines—have immediate and long-term consequences for students nationwide.
We note that excluding students from the Board risks: weakening beneficiary-centered policy design, creating a disconnect between policymakers and lived student realities and undermining principles of inclusive and participatory governance.
Students are not passive beneficiaries. Our office observes that they are primary stakeholders whose perspectives can significantly enhance policy relevance, effectiveness, and accountability.
Should the Act be amended under a certificate of urgency?
IYASEI GHANA believes the call for an amendment under a certificate of urgency is justifiable.
Our office notes that urgency is warranted because: the Board is already operational and poised to take key decisions.
Again, prolonged exclusion may entrench a governance deficit, but early correction can strengthen institutional legitimacy and public confidence.
We further observe that an amendment formally providing for a student representative—selected through a transparent, nationally recognized student body—would improve the Authority’s decision-making architecture rather than disrupt it.
Crucially, such representation must be substantive, with full participation and voting rights, not merely symbolic inclusion.
Other student-focused issues worth national attention
Beyond board composition, our office observes that several broader issues affecting students merit policy discussion.
These include delays and inconsistencies in scholarship disbursement, limited access for students from underserved and marginalized communities, weak communication channels between scholarship administrators and beneficiaries and inadequate grievance and appeal mechanisms.
These challenges underscore the importance of integrating student perspectives into scholarship governance.
Conclusion: Inclusion strengthens institutions
The absence of student representation on the Ghana Scholarship Authority Board is not simply a procedural matter—it is a governance concern with implications for accountability, effectiveness, and trust.
Our office notes that as Ghana seeks to reform and strengthen scholarship administration, inclusive decision-making must be a guiding principle. Including students at the table is not an act of concession, but a reflection of good governance.
Amending the Ghana Scholarship Authority Act under a certificate of urgency would affirm the value of student voices and reinforce the Authority’s mandate to serve the very constituency it exists to support.
By IYASEI GHANA
Signed:
Mark Kojo Medegli
Country Manager, IYASEI GHANA
📞 +233 24 791 9783
mmedegli@gmail.com
