It is common knowledge that COVID-19 is bringing in a lot of changes into the world. Some of these changes are disruptive, while others are regressive. Among the regressive changes is the re-introduction of Afternoon-School in Nigeria.

“Afternoon-School” was in existence during my primary and secondary school days. I could remember back then in Awka when St. Mary’s Primary School had both morning and afternoon schools, while daytime and night schools existed in Udoka Primary School (St. Patrick) Awka. In those days, afternoon schools were usually attended by house helps and children that have to stay back at home in order to take care of their younger ones until their siblings/mothers/other helps that went to morning schools/businesses come back. It was more like performing division of labour, where some children stay home to do morning shift, while others come back in the afternoon to continue with the duties. Night schools were, however, attended by adults that wished to continue with their education.

For reasons unknown to me, both Afternoon and Night schools were fizzled out of our education system. But the afternoon school is making a comeback into our education system in a grand style, thanks to COVID-19. However, it is not yet certain if this will happen.

The hint that schools in Nigeria will adopt the morning and afternoon “shift” was given by the Minister of State for Education, Emeka Nwajiuba, on Wednesday 27th May, 2020, during a briefing of the Presidential Task Force on COVID-19. He hinted this while addressing the issue of reopening of schools in the country. He noted that the Ministry of Education is still setting up some guidelines for reopening of schools, but that it is still uncertain on when schools will resume. However, he mentioned that the ministry is considering schools operating morning and afternoon shifts so that classes will be decongested. This, he said, will help the students to observe social distancing rules.

As the ministry is setting up guidelines and considering re-introduction of afternoon schools, they should retrace their steps to find out why the afternoon schools were stopped in the first place. If they were discouraged as a result of manpower or poor performance of the students, they may have to bear these in mind when enforcing the implementation of their guidelines.

However, they may also need to put the following into consideration as they carry out their researches:

• Time and Duration of Classes

I know that the best time for learning to take place is in the morning, when the brain is still rested and unburdened by the day’s activities. This being said, there is every possibility that the children that attend schools in the afternoon shift may have difficulties concentrating on their lessons. For this, it will be better if schools consider running for 4 hours on each shift. Maybe morning shift should be 8am to 12pm, while afternoon school starts from 12pm and ends by 4pm. That way, the students in the morning shift will dismiss before they are fatigued and the afternoon session will still be captured before the heat from the sun turns classes and other learning environments uncomfortable.

• Recruitment of More Teachers

There is no way the same set of teachers can handle morning and afternoon schools. People may debate that these teachers have been handling classes for 8 hours per day before COVID-19 and can therefore manage these two sets of schools in a day. Well, those in the school system know that academic activities become less tasking after break. By this time, students and their teachers take things slowly and easily until school dismissal. So if it is insisted that the same teachers should man both morning and afternoon sessions, trust me they will not do their work well. If you ask me, I’ll say that those coming for afternoon schools will lose a lot because their teachers will be tired by then. For this, school proprietors, ministry of education and state education commissions should consider bringing in more manpower to make this a success. They can go for part-time staff if bringing in full-time ones is unattainable.

• Segmenting Classes

It may be difficult for schools to decide on which student comes for morning session and who comes for afternoon one. If parents are asked to decide, a lot of them will go for morning sessions because it is more convenient for them, unless there is an incentive attached to afternoon sessions. For this, it will be better if those setting up guidelines consider how classes should be segmented. If I were asked, I will suggest that certain classes come in the morning while the remaining ones come in the afternoon. For instance, Primary 1 to 3 can come in the morning, while Primary 4 to 6 come in the afternoon. The students can be spread out to the empty classrooms during each session.

As mentioned earlier, the Ministry of Education is still working on the guidelines that will ensure that schools are safe for the children when they resume their academic activities. We applaud their efforts towards securing the lives of teachers and students, and we enjoin them to do whatever that is within their powers to make sure that all schools comply with the guidelines. They should however remember to carry parents along in their decision making.

On Thursday, the US president Donald trump fulfilled his threat to “do something about social media” by signing executive order to that effect.

Trump had threatened to silence social media platforms for what he claimed are “stifling free speech” and silencing conservatives. “This will be a Big Day for Social Media” he tweeted a few hours before he signed the executive order.

The motive behind the order has centered on the events of Tuesday, when Twitter fact-checked him following his tweets calling mail-in voting fraud. Twitter attached a link under the tweet to lead readers to more information about mail-in voting. That didn’t go down well with Trump who considered it an act of censorship and threatened to shut down social media platforms.

Hours before he signed the executive order, Trump said the move was to “defend free speech from one of the greatest dangers it has faced in American history.”

He said that social media monopoly has enabled unchecked power to censor all forms of communication.

“A small handful of social media monopolies controls a vast portion of all public and private communications in the United States. They have had unchecked power to censor, restrict, edit, shape, hide, alter, virtually any form of communication between private citizens and large public audiences,” he said.

The order was based on the communication Decency Act section 230, which exempts social media platforms from liability for contents put out by users. Part of the Act says that social media platforms can only be exempt if they “act in good faith.” Trump signed the executive order on the argument that they have not.

“In a country that has long cherished the freedom of expression, we cannot allow a limited number of online platforms to hand-pick the speech that Americans may access and convey on the internet. This practice is fundamentally un-American and anti-democratic. When large, powerful social media companies censor opinions with which they disagree, they exercise a dangerous power,” the order said.

The order says that social media platforms have been “invoking inconsistent, irrational, and groundless justifications to censor or otherwise punish Americans’ speech here at home.”

The draft order means that watchdogs like the Commerce Department and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) could now reinterpret to “act on good faith” and allow the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to make room for users to report bias online. According to the order, the National telecommunication and Information Administration will need to file a petition for rulemaking with the FCC in 60 days.

When there is an allegation of anti-conservative bias, the order directs the justice department to consult with state attorneys general. If it established that the “good faith” principle under section 230 has been violated, federal agencies will be banned from advertising on the responsible platform. As part of the order, the FTC will be required to report on complaints of bias collected by the White House and commence legal action against the social media platform as soon as wrongdoing has been established.

Legal experts across the left and right wings said it may be unconstitutional because it risks infringing on the first amendment rights of private companies and it also attempts to circumvent the two other branches of government.

Others believe it’s Trump’s way of getting back to those who disagree with him. Democratic Senator, Ron Wyden of Oregon, who introduced the Decency Act back in 1996, said Trump is trying to steal court power for his own gain.

“Trump is trying to steal for himself the power of the courts and Congress to rewrite decades of settled law. He decides what is legal based on his interest,” he said.

Trump is known for being very critical about the tech industry, and the Tuesday events appear to have offered him an opportunity to escalate it. Social media platforms have been at the center of “bias practice” controversy following allegations by the right wing that the left are being favored and conservative voices are being suppressed.

Facebook had on Tuesday condemned Twitter’s decision to fact-check Trump. CEO Mark Zuckerberg said in an interview with CNBC that social media platforms shouldn’t be “acting as an arbiter of truth.”

In response, Twitter CEO, Jack Dorsey said the social media platform has done nothing out of place, and would continue to point out incorrect or disputed information.

“Fact Check: there is someone ultimately accountable for our actions as a company, and that’s me,” Jack wrote on Thursday. “We’ll continue to point out incorrect or disputed information about elections globally. And we will admit to and own any mistakes will make.

“This does not make us an “arbiter of truth.” Our intention is to connect the dots of conflicting statements and show the information in dispute so people can judge for themselves. More transparency from us is critical so folks can clearly see the why behind our actions.”

Despite the different view Zuckerberg has about the fact-check, Facebook joined Google in condemning Trump’s executive order. The companies said the decision will hurt the digital economy and the internet at large.

“By exposing companies to potential liability for everything that billions of people around the world say, this would penalize companies that choose to allow controversial speech and encourage platforms to censor anything that might offend anyone,” Facebook spokesman Andy Stone said in a statement.

Google’s spokeswoman Riva Sciuto said: “Our platforms have empowered a wide range of people and organizations from across the political spectrum, giving them a voice and new ways to reach their audiences. Undermining Section 230 in this way would hurt America’s economy and its global leadership on internet freedom.”

However, Twitter appears undeterred by Trump’s move. It said on Thursday that the order “is a reactionary and politicized approach to landmark law.” On Friday, Twitter placed a notice of violation of rule on Trump’s tweet, but allowed the tweet because it was made in public interest.

Trump tweeted that he is sending the national guard to Minnesota where there is rioting over the killing of an African-American man, George Floyd. Part of the tweet reads: “Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts.” Twitter policy prohibits promotion of violence of any form.

The controversy that started with a tweet has escalated the existing tension between the tech industry and the White House. But Donald Trump acknowledged it will not be easy because he knows; “it’s going to be challenged in court.”