The Facts and Fictions about JKUAT PhD Acquisition – Weekly Citizen

A section of the media has raised concerns about PhD acquisition and quality in Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology; this is premeditated by misinformation lies and outright malice devoid of any tangible facts and evidence. First the quality of any academic course is measured by the international best practice that has been in place, most PhD programs have a component of class work which the students has to be examined on specific relevant units then the research work which has proposal defense and final thesis defense. This defenses are done by independent boards which both the student and the supervisor have no control whatsoever. The case of JKUAT is not any different and has an additional component of seminar presentation which the student has to prove to a panel that the changes made after the proposal has been elaborately implemented. The final work is then examined both internally and externally before the final defense is organized which is meant to check the new knowledge created, all this is done totally independent of the student and the supervisor.

JKUAT Chancellor Prof Joseph Ndung’u (centre) confers a PhD Degree assisted by Vice Chancellor Prof. Victoria Ngumi during University’s 33rd graduation.

The supervisory part each student is supervised by a minimum of two supervisors, the CUE requirements is a supervisor to handle 3 PhD students per year, though the practicability of this is subject to further analysis, a supervisor will have 3 students in 2010 but the students due to other factors such as student failed one of the above processes or health challenges takes over 7 years to graduate should the lecturer not be allowed to take any other students for supervising despite the issue is beyond him. This explains why in JKUAT’s case some lecturers were above limit in students’ number, most students were overlapping students from diverse years and some students had resubmission of their thesis and affected their due dates. This is why the issue and regulation of supervision needs a careful looked at and requires further interpretation.

Lastly the issue of publications has also been questioned this is due the journals are deemed as ‘’local.’’ CUE regulations in regards publication talks about peer reviewed journals and the issue is CUE has not provided a list of journals that should be used for publications and students lack guidance on this matter and since it is in the interest of any student to graduate any journal that accepts his publication will be used. This grey area needs to be filled. This comes to the conclusion that the questions that were raised by Donald Kipkorir, Ahmednasir and Makau Mutua lacked merit and a full understanding of the process. Quality is not defined by high or low numbers of graduands it is the adherence to procedures and best practices, and the quality of the documents produced. This should be read together with the implementation challenges some regulation has faced with regards to improving them.

Concerned Victim, Nairobi