Drawing the line, restoring calm in education

In a season of heightened public anxiety over issues of gender and sexuality, the emphatic declaration by the Minister of Education, Haruna Iddrisu, ought to bring a measure of calm—at least for now (See front page).

By stating clearly that Ghana’s education system recognises only the biological definitions of male and female, and that this position must be reflected in every publication, curriculum and official communication, the minister has removed ambiguity from a debate that was fast becoming emotionally charged and politically combustible.

Education policy thrives on clarity. When uncertainty creeps into curricula, teacher manuals or official documents, it creates room for speculation, mistrust and misinformation.

The recent public outcry over alleged LGBTQ-related content in the Senior High School curriculum is a case in point.

A viral document, developed in 2024 and linked to a teacher manual, was enough to spark fears that the government was quietly introducing concepts at odds with Ghana’s prevailing socio-cultural values. In such a context, silence or half-measures from authorities would only have fuelled suspicion.

Mr Iddrisu’s intervention, therefore, is both timely and necessary. His insistence that the claims were “false and misleading,” and that the document in question did not represent the ministry’s position, sends a strong signal of policy coherence.

More importantly, his directive that the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (NaCCA) revise the affected material underscores a willingness to correct lapses swiftly, rather than defend them stubbornly.

NaCCA’s subsequent clarification reinforces this position.

By stressing that the government has no intention to promote, endorse or introduce LGBTQ content at any level of the education system, the council has aligned itself firmly with the ministry and, by extension, with the broader public sentiment.

The Daily Graphic sees its emphasis that Ghana’s curriculum is anchored in the Constitution, socio-cultural values and child-centred development goals as reflecting the legal and moral framework within which public education must operate.

Crucially, NaCCA’s explanation of the distinction between the curriculum and teacher manuals adds an important layer of nuance often lost in public debate.

The curriculum, as the official policy document, defines what learners must study.

Teacher manuals, on the other hand, are supplementary tools meant to guide pedagogy and are not compulsory.

This clarification matters because it highlights that an error or misjudgement in a manual—while serious—does not automatically translate into a wholesale shift in national education policy.

We consider the decision to revise the Year Two Physical Education and Health elective teacher manual, and to make the corrected version publicly accessible, as also commendable.

Transparency is a powerful antidote to mistrust.

When citizens can verify documents for themselves, rumours lose much of their potency.

In this regard, NaCCA’s responsiveness should be seen not as an admission of ideological drift, but as evidence of an iterative and accountable curriculum development process.

Beyond the immediate controversy, the episode offers broader lessons.

First, it underscores the need for even more rigorous review mechanisms, especially when new materials are introduced—as was the case with teacher manuals at the SHS level in the 2024/2025 academic year.

Second, it highlights the importance of proactive communication.

In an age of viral screenshots and instant outrage, institutions cannot afford to explain themselves only after public trust has been shaken.

The minister’s comments at the National Master Training on Essential Values for Ghanaians also deserve attention.

His emphasis on discipline, character formation and values-based learning reminds us that education is not merely about academic content, but about shaping responsible citizens.

In a society grappling with moral, cultural and generational tensions, schools remain a critical arena for nurturing shared values.

Ultimately, while debates about gender and identity are unlikely to disappear entirely from public discourse, the clear stance articulated by the Ministry of Education should, for now, put the matter to rest within the educational space.

Ghana’s education system cannot be held hostage by recurring controversies rooted in misunderstanding or mistrust. 

We reason that with clarity from leadership, accountability from institutions such as NaCCA, and transparency in curriculum development, the focus can—and should—return to the core mission of education: equipping young people with knowledge, discipline, and values that serve both their personal growth and the nation’s future.