Beyond 60 or 70: What will make academics stay?

By Isaac Frimpong (Ph.D.)

”It is not about age; it is about the system.”  That was a response from one retired lecturer in a survey I conducted last year among retired university staff at a public university in Ghana.

Many said they still feel intellectually capable and passionate about teaching, but would not return under current conditions.

This insight is timely. In recent months, two proposals to raise the retirement age of Ghanaian workers have come to light. One came from the minister responsible for labour, jobs, and employment.

The other came from university vice-chancellors, suggesting an extension for lecturers from 60 to 70 years. This article focuses on the academic proposal and builds on my earlier piece, Navigating Ghana’s Pension Landscape: A Call for Reflection.

The vice-chancellors’ reasoning is understandable. They believe it will promote continuity, preserve institutional memory, and enhance mentorship and research excellence. However, this approach risks missing the point.

Raising the retirement age will not fix the systemic challenges: poor service conditions, frozen recruitment, increased workloads, limited research support and the elimination of the “publish or perish” culture. But before we talk about extending the clock, we must fix the broken parts.

Balancing Wisdom and Innovation

Academia thrives on both fresh thinking and experience. Senior academics provide valuable mentorship, continuity and institutional memory. Many continue teaching post-retirement because of their passion and commitment, despite “burnout, stress and ethical dilemmas”.

Yes, Ghana’s public university system is under pressure. Extending retirement age may preserve continuity, but without reforms, it risks promoting stagnation rather than innovation.

Without deliberate effort to attract, support and retain early-career scholars, the system becomes over-reliant on ageing faculty. Increasing the retirement age to 70 could work in a well-resourced environment with proper research funding, sabbaticals, incentives for innovation, and professional development. However, in Ghana, this support is either weak or absent.

Low pay, delayed allowances and small pension benefits remain critical issues. Part-time lecturers sometimes earn as little as 98 cedis per session and are often paid late. Many full-time lecturers supplement their income by teaching across multiple institutions to meet basic living costs. This undermines morale and drives brain drain.

Recruitment Gaps Undermine Growth

Recruitment practices also need attention. The Ghana Tertiary Education Commission (GTEC) advises recruitment based on the highest academic qualifications. Yet, some universities prefer strict vertical academic pathways, such as BSc, MSc, and PhD in the same discipline, sidelining those with interdisciplinary or horizontal paths. While this may be administratively convenient, especially where resources are constrained, it holds back creativity and partnerships with industry.

In contrast, top global universities, including those in the Ivy League and the Russell Group, embrace diverse academic backgrounds, which enrich teaching and research. Ghanaian universities could benefit from similar flexibility, especially as they seek to align with national development and industrial needs.

Meanwhile, a freeze on recruitment continues even as student enrolment grows. The contradiction is clear: universities are unable to hire new lecturers, yet they seek to extend the service of those already in place. The long-term effects include outdated curricula, faculty burnout, and overburdened staff. Early-career researchers remain underutilised, creating a vacuum in leadership and mentorship.

A more sustained approach might involve a gradual transition of older lecturers into primarily 80 per cent research and mentorship and 20 per cent teaching. This would make room for new hires while retaining valuable expertise.

What We Should Fix

Extending the retirement age could be a useful foundation for reform if only paired with efforts to address deeper issues within the university system. Age should not be the main determinant of extending service. What matters more is demonstrated experience, expertise, and measurable contribution. The way forward could include:

1. Performance-based extension of service assessed annually on research output, teaching quality, and mentorship.
2. Improved service conditions through the advocacy of the University Teachers Association of Ghana (UTAG) and the vice-chancellors for fair compensation, academic freedom, and an environment that makes academia a career of pride and purpose.
3. Support for early-career researchers through competitive pay, research opportunities, and a clear career progression.

Conclusion

The call for extending the retirement age from 60 to 70 is a noble idea. But real reform must extend beyond just age. A thriving academic system values new ideas and experienced voices. The priority should be on creating conditions that make academia a career worth pursuing at all stages.

Retaining 70-year-old lecturers while 30-year-olds struggle to find academic footing shows a systemic imbalance.  Retirement age reform may be warranted down the line, but for now, let us fix the foundation.

Isaac is a Researcher and Consultant

[email protected]

The post Beyond 60 or 70: What will make academics stay? appeared first on The Business & Financial Times.

Read Full Story