By Luzinda Peter
Parents and education stakeholders across Uganda are increasingly rejecting proposals to scrap nursery education, even as support grows for reducing the country’s school calendar from three terms to two.
The debate, which has exploded on social media and public discussion forums, has exposed deep divisions among Ugandans over how to balance affordable education with maintaining strong learning foundations for children.
The proposals were popularised by businessman and artist Muyanja Sharifu, who called for a two-term school system to ease financial pressure on parents, and media personality Nyanzi Martin Luther, who has advocated for broader reforms in Uganda’s education sector.
Supporters of the two-term proposal argue that the current academic calendar has become too expensive for ordinary families, forcing parents to struggle with tuition, transport, uniforms, and school requirements three times a year.
“As parents, we are overwhelmed every term,” said Asiimwe Evaristo during an online discussion. He proposed a school calendar running from March to June, before resuming from August to November.
Others suggested that nursery education should also be shortened to further reduce costs.
Kule Asansio proposed limiting nursery education to one year and allowing children to begin school at age five.
“School terms should be reduced to two to ease pressure on parents,” he argued.
KUTOSI BENARD also supported reducing the number of school terms, claiming that the current third term is too short and mainly benefits school proprietors financially.
“We only make money for directors; it is too short,” he said.
However, strong resistance quickly emerged against suggestions to remove nursery education altogether.
Many parents argued that nursery school is essential in preparing children academically, socially, and emotionally before they enter primary school.
“Reducing school terms, yes — but banning nursery school is a big NO,” said Seraph Otlego.
Otlego revealed that missing nursery education negatively affected his communication skills later in life.
“I’m suffering simply because I never attended nursery school, in addition to receiving a poor primary education,” he explained, adding that it contributed to his “poor English and poor accent regardless of the academic level attained.”
Wambuga David warned that reducing school time and removing nursery education could weaken education standards and leave children without proper supervision at home.
“This would weaken our education standards and place our children in the hands of parents or guardians who have no time for them,” he argued, pointing to the discipline challenges many families experienced during the COVID-19 lockdown period.
Others insisted that nursery education remains critical in preparing children for formal learning. KUTOSI BENARD stressed that nursery education “contributes greatly to our children’s development and prepares them for primary school.”
The debate also reopened wider frustrations about the cost of education in Uganda.
“It’s only education that has impoverished Ugandans,” argued Osten Bakesigaki. “School fees and requirements are too high, yet learners get little value for the money spent.”
Some contributors accused lawmakers of having conflicts of interest, alleging that many own private schools and may therefore resist reforms that could lower school fees.
As pressure for reforms continues to grow, the Ministry of Education and Sports has yet to issue an official response to the proposals.
But as Ugandans continue debating the future of the country’s education system, one message from many parents remains clear: reducing school costs may be necessary, but scrapping nursery education is a line many are unwilling to cross.
