By Fawas Balogun
At every tertiary institution, newly admitted students, often referred to as freshers, are introduced to campus life through orientation programmes.
These initiatives are designed to familiarize them with the academic environment, institutional culture, and expectations that will shape their journey.
This traditional practice is no different at the University of Ibadan. Within the first week of academic resumption, various student bodies, ranging from departmental and faculty associations to halls of residence and religious organizations, often organize orientation activities for these newcomers.
The idea is simple. To catch them young and guide them as they transition into a new phase of life. These students often arrive with what can be described as tabula rasa minds, open, impressionable, and ready to absorb whatever they are taught.
However, the nature and content of these orientations raise serious concerns. Rather than equipping freshers with independent thinking and civic responsibility, many of these programmes subtly discourage critical engagement.
The orientations often play a decisive role in shaping how students navigate campus life, yet the messages passed across are sometimes problematic.
For instance, it is not uncommon to hear students assert that they cannot participate in protests or activism because it is “wrong” or even forbidden based on certain ideological or religious interpretations.
While personal beliefs should be respected, the concern lies in how such rigid stances are formed, not through critical reflection, but through one-sided orientation narratives.
In several orientation sessions organized across halls, faculties, and departments, students are explicitly or implicitly warned against challenging authority, particularly the university management. They are told to “focus on their studies” and avoid anything that might bring them into conflict with the system. While academic focus is undeniably important, presenting it as mutually exclusive with civic engagement is misleading and dangerous.
This approach produces students who are passive, overly cautious, and disconnected from the realities of student advocacy. In essence, it risks turning vibrant young minds into mere followers, what one might metaphorically describe as “zombies.
This is an aberration, especially in a public university setting where education should foster critical thinking, questioning, and active citizenship.
To illustrate this concern, consider a hypothetical scenario. Ade, as a 100-level student, attends an orientation where he is warned against confronting the status quo. Over time, this message becomes internalized. Fast forward a few years, Ade rises to become the Students’ Union President. However, instead of representing student interests, he becomes indifferent to their struggles, aligning more with management than with the student body. While this is an imagined example, it reflects a pattern that has become our reality on campus.
When students are conditioned early to avoid dissent, the consequences can extend far beyond their undergraduate years.
The culture of fear and excessive caution on campus further reinforces this issue. At the University of Ibadan, many students are hyper-aware of their actions and expressions, often worried that even well-intentioned conduct could be interpreted as misconduct.
The line between discipline and intolerance of dissent becomes blurred, and students gradually learn to self-censor rather than engage.
More troubling is the current state of orientation programmes organized by the recent Students’ Union leaders. In recent times, these orientation programmes been dominated by social events, such as parties, rallies, and entertainment at the expense of meaningful engagement.
While there is nothing inherently wrong with social bonding, it should not replace the core purpose of orientation.
Freshers need to understand the history, structure, and significance of student unionism. They should be introduced to the principles of representation, accountability, and collective action.
Student unionism is not merely an administrative structure, it is the backbone of student welfare. When students are disconnected from this reality, they are less likely to demand accountability from their leaders or participate in decision-making processes.
This issue is not limited to the Students’ Union alone. Across halls of residence, faculties, and departments, there is a noticeable gap in civic education. Many students do not take the time to read the university handbook or the constitutions guiding their various constituencies.
This lack of awareness further weakens their ability to engage meaningfully within the system.Religious organizations, which play a significant role in shaping student perspectives, are not exempt from this responsibility.
While they provide moral and spiritual guidance, they should also encourage members to be active participants in the broader university community. Policies made by both student leaders and university management affect everyone, regardless of religious affiliation.
Therefore, students should be empowered and not discouraged to take part in discussions and decisions that shape their environment.
If the current trend continues, the institution risks producing graduates who are academically sound but civically disengaged. This is a disservice not only to the students but to society at large.
Universities are meant to be breeding grounds for leaders, thinkers, and change-makers, not passive observers.
It is therefore imperative to rethink the orientation given to freshers. Beyond the social activities and ceremonial welcomes, there must be a deliberate effort to instill critical thinking, civic responsibility, and a sense of agency.
Freshers should be taught that their voices matter, that questioning authority is not inherently wrong, and that constructive engagement is a vital part of their education.
Staylites, those who have spent more time within the system, have a crucial role to play. They must go beyond organizing events and take on the responsibility of mentorship. By sharing experiences, encouraging dialogue, and modeling active citizenship, they can help shape a new generation of students who are both academically grounded and socially conscious.
Orientation should not be reduced to a ritual or a formality. It is a powerful tool that can either empower or limit students. If we truly want our 77 year-old tertiary institution to live up to its reputation for excellence, we must ensure that the orientation we give freshers prepares them not just for exams, but for life. Until then, we risk turning what should be a citadel of learning into a citadel of conformity, devoid of the critical mass needed to drive meaningful change in the University and country at large.
