The Concept and Essence of Tertiary Education
Defining
tertiary education may be a little difficult. This is so because it refers to
the gamut of all post-secondary educational institutions. It is used
synonymously with higher education. These include the University, Polytechnic,
College of Education, Vocational Training Centre. Their goals, according to the
National Policy on Education (FRN, 2014), include:
1.
To
contribute to national development through high-level relevant manpower
training.
2.
To
provide physical and intellectual skills which enable individuals to be
self-reliant and useful members of the society.
The
question of whether tertiary education in Nigeria plays its role (and
significantly too) particularly with respect to the essence of education and
the goals set for it in the national policy on education should agitate our
minds at this point. In more organized societies, tertiary education is
acknowledged and respected as the engine house for research and innovations
which are fundamental to social and economic transformation. Responsible and
informed governments look upto tertiary institutions for empirically based
ideas to support policies rather than base such policies on common sense or
political consideration as mostly observed in Nigeria. Governments in organized
societies fund tertiary institutions to carry out researches on national
priorities such as security, warfare, health, agriculture etc. When will
governments in Nigeria respect the place of tertiary institutions in this
regard? The recurrent face-off between Academic Staff Union of Universities
(ASUU) and the Federal Government of Nigeria (FGN) on the revitalization of the
universities looks like the government is being bored in its unwillingness to
comprehend the need for a functioning university system nor to fund it.
While
playing its primary role of feeding the human mind and liquidating ignorance,
tertiary education produces competent managers of available resources. These
are persons equipped with appropriate values, thinking, creative and innovative
ability and sound knowledge of how the economy can be made to function and
grow. One of the major roles of tertiary education as a driver and propeller of
the economy is to produce a production-oriented rather than consumption-oriented
citizenry.
Historical Development
of University Education in Nigeria
Nigeria is a multi-ethnic and
multi-religious country. Before the 18th century, there was little or no
difference between Europe and Africa, but the slave trade coupled with the industrial
revolution in Europe changed the socio-economic equation. Africa became the
trading subordinate of Europe and later its colony. A review of the Nigerian
educational system from 1842 to 1959 revealed that there was absolutely nothing
in the Nigerian educational system that promoted “national consciousness”,
“national unity”, “patriotism” or the like (Fafunwa, 2003). Infact, the
colonial government never pretended to build a Nigerian nation. The citizens
were either British subjects or British protected persons whose loyalty was
supposed to be for the British Empire and the King or Queen of England. The
consequent effect of this was that instead of training the people in the area
of technology, majority of the citizens were educated in the area of civics as
they were meant to assist the British colonizers in some administrative duties
(Fafunwa, 2003) The first higher educational institution in Nigeria, the Yaba
Higher College, was established in 1932. The agitation of Nigerians for a more
comprehensive higher education provision led to the constitution of the Asquith
and Elliot Commission on Higher Education. Their reports in 1943 favoured the
establishment of universities in Nigeria. Consequently, in 1948, the University
College Ibadan was founded as an affiliate of the University of London. The
University College continued as the only university institution in Nigeria
until 1960 (Jubril, 2003). In April 1959, the Nigerian government commissioned
an inquiry (Ashby Commission) to advise it on the higher education needs of the
new nation for its first two decades of independence. Before the submission of
the report on 2nd September 1960, the Eastern Region government established its
own university at Nsukka, the University of Nigeria Nsukka, 1960. The recommendations
of the Ashby report include:
i. the Federal Government should give support to the
development of new universities in Nigeria; ii. a university should be
established in the North using the old site of the Nigerian College in Zaria as
its base;
iii. a university should be established in Lagos to handle
courses in business, commerce and economics;
iv. University College Ibadan should widen its curriculum and
develop into a full university;
v. a National Universities Commission should be set up to
have undisputed control over the affairs of the universities, particularly in
terms of finance, staff and courses.
So, the University of Nigeria, Nsukka was
founded in 1960 while the Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife (formerly, the
University of Ife) was established in 1961. Ahmadu Bello University Zaria and
University of Lagos were both established in 1962 while the University College
transformed into a substantive university also in 1962. In 1970, the newly
created Bendel State established a university, known as University of Benin.
Consequently, the six universities established during this period 1960-1970
became known as first generation federal universities. Also, between 1975 and
1977, seven new universities were established which was to reflect the then 19
state structure. These second generation universities as they were referred to
include the University of Calabar (1975); the University of Ilorin (1976); the
University of Jos (1975); the University of Sokoto (1977); the University of
Port Harcourt (1977); and Bayero University, Kano (1977). These universities
became federal universities by virtue of Decree 46 of 1977 which provided for
Federal Government take-over of all universities in Nigeria (Jubril, 2003).
The 1979 constitution transferred university
education from the exclusive to the concurrent legislative list which meant
that state governments were free to establish state-owned universities if they
so desired. Based on this, a number of universities were established between
1979 and 1983. They include, Bendel State University (now Ambrose Alli
University) Ekpoma; Anambra State University of Technology, Enugu; Imo State
University, Owerri; Ogun State University, Iwoye; Ondo State University,
Ado-Ekiti; Rivers State University of Science and Technology, Port Harcourt;
Cross River State University, Uyo and Lagos State University, Ijanikin.
Nigeria currently operates the 9-3-4 system
of education which is part of the Universal Basic Education, UBE, which came as
a replacement for Nigeria’s Universal Primary Education Scheme of the 6-3-3-4
system of education. Students spend six years in secondary school that is
3years of JSS (Junior Secondary School) and 3years of SSS (Senior Secondary School).
First-year entry requirements into most universities in Nigeria include:
Minimum of SSCE/GCE Ordinary Level Credits at maximum of two sittings; Minimum
cut-off marks in Joint Admission and Matriculation Board Entrance Examination
(JAMB) of 200 (although now varies amongst institutions) and above out of a
maximum of 400 marks were required. Candidates with minimum of Merit Pass in
National Certificate of Education (NCE), National Diploma (ND) and other
Advanced Level Certificates with minimum of 5 O/L Credits are given direct
entry admission into the appropriate undergraduate degree programs.
Higher educational Institutions in Nigeria
include Universities, Polytechnics and Colleges of Education. As at There are
currently 158 approved universities in Nigeria comprising 40 Federal
Universities, 44 State Universities and 74 Private Universities (NUC, 2017).
Also, Nigeria has a total 128 approved polytechnics and 117 approved Colleges
of Education in Nigeria, making it the largest higher education system on the
African Continent (Adesulu, 2013). Although Public Universities have dominated
the higher education landscape in Nigeria for several decades, their failure to
cope with admission pressure became more compelling from the 1990s. In 1990
about 250,000 candidates applied for admission and less than 50,000
constituting (20%) of the candidates were admitted. In 1992, close to 300,000
applied for admission and about 50,000 amounting to 17% got admitted while in
1994, out of the 400,000 that applied for admission, less than 50,000 totaling
13% got admitted into different universities in Nigeria (Obasi & Eboh,
2001). Moja (2000), affirmed that “Access to higher education and the lack of
the capacity of the system to absorb the numbers of students seeking admission
to higher education institutions continues to pose a serious problem. For
example, it is estimated that out of 400,000 JAMB candidates seeking admission
to university education, more than 320,000, which is about 80% are not able to
gain admission to any of the 37 Nigerian universities”. Also, Onyekakeyah
(2005), stated that, “The Joint Admission and Matriculation Board (JAMB)
figures clearly show that the situation has not improved. According to JAMB
figures, out of about 800,000 candidates that sat for the 2005 examination,
only 147,000 were offered places in the existing universities, representing
only 18.4 percent”.
Another major problem facing higher
education especially Federal and State Institutions is funding. Enrolments have
increased more quickly than government’s capacity to finance these
institutions. This has hampered education delivery, monitoring, inspection and
other quality assurance activities. Government has made efforts at addressing
this problem; for example, in 1993, the Education Tax Decree was enacted to
provide 2% of the profits of companies registered in Nigeria to be collected by
government and paid into a fund called the Education Tax Fund (ETF) now
(Education Trust Fund). Despite increase in funding from over 11 billion naira in
1999 to over 90 billion naira in 2008, funding still remains a major challenge
(Dawodu, 2010). This was the trend in Nigeria such that the admission crisis
became more critical after 2001. The access rate had fallen by 2002 to less
than 13 percent (Okebukola 2002). Based on this fact, the expansion of access
through the establishment of Private Universities became one of the most
reasonable policy options (Obasi, 2005). According to Aluede et al (2012), of
the number of candidates applying for admission every year in Nigeria, only
about 5.2 percent to 15.3 percent get admitted every year, meaning that about
84.7 percent to 94.8 percent of the candidates seeking admission never get
admitted. The emergence of private provision of higher education in Nigeria came
with the inauguration of a democratic system of government under President
Olusegun Obasanjo in 1999. The National Universities Commission was empowered
to receive applications, examine and validate the facilities of serious
applicants of private Universities across the country. And so, in 1999, three
private universities emerged namely, Igbinedion University, Okada, Edo State;
Babcock University, Ileshan Remo, Ogun State and Madonna University, Okija,
Anambra State. In 2001, Bowen University, Iwo, Oyo State was established while
Covenant University, Ota, Ogun State was established in 2002.
According to Ojerinde (2011), of the
1,185,579 persons that took the JAMB examination in 2009, a total of 211,991
was admitted, amounting to 17.9 percent of the applicants. This shows that less
than 20 percent of those who apply to universities are admitted. Also, Adesulu
(2013) reports that, in 2010/2011, Nigeria had 112 universities with carrying
capacity of 450,000 and 1,493,611 applicants. Thus, the admitting capacity was
30.13 per cent of the total number of applicants. This means that at best, only
30.13 per cent of the total number of applicants were accommodated during that
academic session. In the 2011/2012 session, five universities were added,
bringing the number to 117, with 500,000 carrying capacity amounting to 33.25
per cent and 1,503,933 students applied that year. However, in 2012/2013, 11
universities were added bringing it to 128 with 520,000 (29.96 percent)
admission spaces. In that year, a total of 1,735,729 applied for UTME. In fact,
the National Universities Commission report of 2011/2012 showed that, most of
the universities in Nigeria exceeded their allotted admission quota. Having
understood the nature of the Nigerian Higher education system, the study in
this segment, shall focus on the study on tertiary education institutions in
Nigeria. The major ones are Universities, Polytechnics and colleges of
education. Each of these shall be studied in this section. The section shall as
well throw light on its regulatory bodies.
The
Nigerian University System
There are 158 licensed universities operating in Nigeria as at January
2013 (National Universities Commission, 2017). In addition, there are 50 degree
mills or unlicensed universities which have either been closed down or are
still operating as well as unapproved satellite campuses of licensed
universities (National Universities Commission, 2013, pp. 12-13). The Nigerian
University System is the largest subsystem of the higher education system as
well as the apex of that system. The Nigerian University System is also the
largest in Africa (O. E. Anyanwu, 2011, p. 178). The Nigerian University System
comprises 104 conventional universities, 17 technological universities, three
agriculture universities, two universities of education, one military
university and one police university. Okojie (2008) refers to the universities
of education and those engaged in the development of manpower and technology
for specific natural resources as “specialized universities”.
The universities constitute the
most important component of the higher education system, not only because of
their size relative to the other components but also because of the purposes at
which university education aims. According to Daniel Inusa (2000), “university
education in Nigeria is offered to organize higher education towards meeting
society’s basic high-level manpower needs in various fields of human
endeavour”. Universities are the suppliers of the high-level manpower needs of
the country. The enunciation and articulation of the purposes of university
education has evolved over time from the period when there were no universities
in Nigeria and those who wanted it could only obtain it outside the shores of
the country to the era of the first generation universities, and to the
present.
Inusa summarizes the objectives
of university education in Nigeria as follows:
a) to encourage the advancement of learning
and offer all persons (irrespective of race, creed, sex, or political
conviction) the opportunity of acquiring high-level education and professional
training, b) to provide relevant courses of instruction and other facilities to
qualified persons for the pursuit of learning in all its theoretical and
practical ramifications, to encourage conduct of research in all fields of
learning and human endeavour,
c) to undertake any activities aimed at
promoting the highest ideals of learning (Inusa, 2000). Universities have the
tasks of
i) training and educating men and women for
various professions, vocations and high-level occupations,
ii) teaching citizens to be able to apply
their knowledge acquired in schools to solving societal problems,
iii) providing training centres for the
promotion of scholarship, research and public service (Inusa, 2000).
Universities are the pivot not just of higher education but also that
around which the economic development and modernization of the nation was and
is expected to revolve. This centrality of university education is reflected
partly in the demand it generates and partly in the diversified proprietorship
of universities. The ownership structure of universities is skewed in favour of
government owned institutions both in terms of number, and access and research
capacity among other variables.
The
Polytechnic System
The Polytechnic System is the oldest higher
education sector in Nigeria with the oldest higher education institution (in
the country) being Yaba Polytechnic, which was established in 1934. But the
emergence of polytechnics as tertiary institutions with distinct
characteristics and goals can be traced back only to 1987 when the National
Council on Education adopted the term ‘Polytechnic’ to refer to “all
post-secondary technical education institutions offering two-year and four-year
programmes leading to the award of National Diploma (ND) and Higher National
Diploma (HND) respectively” (Yabani, 2006, p. 17). According to the National
Policy on Education (1981), technical education is “that aspect of education
which leads to the acquisition of practical and applied skills as well as the
basic scientific knowledge” (Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1981, p. 28). The
1981 edition of the National Policy on Education also stated that technical
education was provided in “pre-vocational and vocational schools at the post-primary
level, the technical colleges, the polytechnics, and colleges of Technical
Teacher education at post-secondary level” besides the universities (Federal
Republic of Nigeria, 1981). Technical education and the institutions that
provided them thus lacked a clear classification as tertiary learning. The aims
of technical education enunciated in the National Policy on Education 1981
reinforce this view.
The aims of technical education were:
(a) to provide trained manpower in applied
science, technology and commerce particularly at sub-professional grades;
(b) to provide the technical knowledge and
vocational skills necessary for agricultural, industrial, commercial and
economic development;
(c) to provide people who can apply
scientific knowledge to the improvement and solution of environmental problems
for the use and convenience of man;
(d) to give an introduction to professional
studies in engineering and other technologies;
(e) to give training and impart the
necessary skills leading to the production of craftsmen, technicians and other
skilled personnel who will be enterprising and self-reliant, and
(f) to enable our young men and women to
have an intelligent understanding of the Increasing complexity of technology
(Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1981).
By 2007 the nomenclature for
technical education had changed. The National Policy on Education 2007 thus
uses the term technology education in place of technical education and the
provision of technology education is now a tertiary level enterprise. The focus
of technology was also upgraded from the production of sub-professional
manpower to professional manpower. The new goals of technology education were
to
(a) provide courses of instruction and
training in engineering, other technologies, applied science, business and
management, leading to the production of trained manpower;
(b) provide the technical knowledge and
skills necessary for agricultural, industrial, commercial, and economic
development of Nigeria;
(c) give training that impart the necessary
skills for the production of technicians, technologists and other skilled
personnel who shall be enterprising and self-reliant;
(d) train people who can apply scientific
knowledge to solve environmental problems for the convenience of man; and
(e) give exposure on professional studies
in the technologies (Federal Republic of Nigeria, 2007).
Upgrading the status of
technology education has, however, not removed the pressure on universities as
tertiary institutions of choice, even in technology related disciplines. This
is despite the fact that a large pool of university rejects exists and claims
that polytechnic graduates perform better than their counterparts from
universities The Polytechnic System comprises of 84 polytechnics institutions
(NBTE, 2013, p. 13), and the regulatory and professional bodies in the sector
as well as education ministries and departments. The monotechnics and
innovation and vocational enterprise institutions offering vocational education
can also be included in this sector because of the type of programmes they
offer. As is the case with universities, the ownership of polytechnics is
dominated by government and even more so than universities. Thus, while the
Federal and State governments account for about 61 per cent of the universities
in the country, in the polytechnic sector the percentage increases to just over
70.2 per cent. Although the states overtake the Federal Government as the
largest type of ownership by accounting for nearly 45 per cent of the
polytechnics in the country, the Federal Government remains the single largest
owner of polytechnics.
The
Colleges of Education System
The Colleges of Education
System is responsible for the training and retraining of teachers for primary
and secondary schools. The Colleges of education system comprise 100 colleges
of education, polytechnics offering NCE programmes, and their regulatory
agencies The Federal and State governments account for 67 per cent of all the
colleges of the education among them. They also account for 92 per cent of the
ownership of the technical colleges of education. The Federal Government also
owns the only institution in this sector that trains teachers of the physically
and mentally challenged. The apparent lack of interest of the private sector in
the establishment of colleges of education may not be unconnected with the low
valuation placed on teaching as a career.
The colleges of education are largely
responsible for the realisation of the goals of teacher education as enunciated
in the National Policy on Education. These goals are to: (a) produce highly
motivated, conscientious and efficient classroom teachers for all levels of our
educational system; (b) further encourage the spirit of enquiry and creativity
in teachers; (c) help teachers fit into the social life of the community and
the society at large and enhance their commitment to national goals; (d)
provide teachers with the intellectual and professional background adequate for
their assignment and to make them adaptable to changing situations; (e) enhance
teachers' commitment to the teaching profession (Federal Republic of Nigeria,
2007). These are laudable objectives. However, they are far from being met. The
colleges of education are unable to produce enough teachers of the right
quality for the basic and post-basic education sectors. Thus according to the
Roadmap for the Nigerian Education Sector of 2009 A large number of teachers
with certificates below the NCE (38.75%) still abound in the system. In the
North-East and North-West regions, the figure is about 70%. The existing
shortfalls in teachers are 969,078 for ECCDE; 338,147 for Primary education;
581 for JSS; 1,580,000 for adult literacy and 12,329 for nomadic education
(Federal Ministry of Education, 2009, p. 26) The shortage is not limited to the
early childhood care development and education and basic sector, it affects the
post-basic sector also. The post-basic sector also suffers gross shortages of
qualified teachers. “Out of a total of 180,540 teachers in the secondary
schools, only 141,517 are qualified teachers, while 39,023 are unqualified”
(Federal Ministry of Education, 2009, p. 40). In the technical and vocational
sub-sector of post-basic education, there is “lack of teachers with the
requisite skills and competence to teach technology” (Federal Ministry of
Education, 2009, p. 48). The shortage of qualified teachers at the above levels
has been attributed to low public esteem and poor remuneration. 172 The impact
of the low remuneration and delayed salary payment, include high attrition
rate, low morale and motivation to teach, endless struggle to make ends meet;
sometimes toiling as 'okada' riders …The cumulative effects of poor
teaching-learning conditions and teaching incentives are low performance and
poor teacher retention rate. (Federal Ministry of Education, 2012a, p. 45). The
shortage of qualified teachers at the basic and post-basic levels is said to be
responsible for “the poor quality of educational outcomes recorded in recent
years” (Federal Ministry of Education, 2012a, p. 44) in the senior school
certificate examinations conducted by the West African Examinations Council and
the National Examination Council of Nigeria as well as the Unified Tertiary
Matriculation Examination of the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board.
Another consequence is that teachers are overworked with the average teacher to
student ratio standing at 1:75, more than twice the UNESCO recommended standard
of 1:35 (Federal Ministry of Education, 2012a). The teacher problem pervades
all levels of education. The 4-Year Strategic Plan makes a similar observation
with regard to higher education as it did of the lower levels of the
educational sector. Thus it observes as follows: The quality of the lecturers
is, to a large extent poor. Most of them lack adequate research-based
qualifications. They are also faced with the problem of inadequate teaching
resources, access to modern library and information resources and exposure to
other educational systems. The result of all these, is that most teachers'
skills are too basic and limited to be able to communicate the curriculum
effectively (Federal Ministry of Education, 2012a, p. 44).
Regulatory
Frameworks on Higher Education in Nigeria
Generally speaking, higher education refers
to post-secondary education or tertiary educational institutions other than
universities The National Policy on Education in Nigeria (FGN, 2004) defines
higher education as post-secondary education comprising universities,
polytechnics and colleges of education including such institutions as may be
allied to them. In Nigeria, higher education is involved in the traditional
functions of teaching, research and community service so as to develop manpower
and disseminate necessary knowledge needed in Industry and other sectors.
Education in general and higher education in particular are fundamental to the
construction of a knowledge economy in all nations. The decade from 1990
witnessed an upsurge in the number of private institutions of learning in
Africa in general and Nigeria in particular. Before this decade, most African
countries committed much of their expenditures on public education, which
served as an instrument for building the nation, following independence. Today,
there is an increasing pressure on African governments to shift from
subsidization to privatization of their education systems especially at the
university level. This pressure arises from economic liberalism, growing
political pluralism, rising public demand for education in the face of a
declining economy and increasing competition among public sectors, as well as
lingering government’s failure in the provision of qualitative schooling. In
many parts of the world, increased competition from private institutions has
brought about greater diversity and choice for students and has served as a
powerful incentive for public universities to innovate and modernize
(IBRD/World Bank, 2002:72). The establishment of higher educational
institutions was in pursuit of meeting the global requirements of producing
manpower that will serve in different capacities and contribute positively to
the nation’s socio-economic and political development in Nigeria (Abdulkareem,
Fasasi & Akinubi, 2011). Federal Government of Nigeria promulgated enabling
law to found higher education towards producing high level relevant manpower
training, self-reliance, national utility through the establishment of both
conventional and special universities, polytechnics, colleges of education and
monotechnics in different parts of the country by the Federal, state
governments, private organizations and individuals (Abdulkareem, Fasasi &
Akinubi, 2011). Akinyemi (2013) reported that the 1979 constitution placed
education on the concurrent legislative list with the establishment of Rivers
State University of Science and Technology (RSUST) in 1980 as the first state
University. Okojie, Oloyede, and Obanya, (2011) listed 41 private universities
to have been issued licenses to operate in accordance with Decree 9 of 1993 for
the establishment of private universities expanding Nigerian university
education system from one University College in 1948 to 117 in 2011. Accoeding
to Okojie (2007), the National University Commission (NUC) has control over all
federal, state and private universities, especially in terms of accreditation
of courses, approval of courses and programmes, maintenance of minimum academic
standards, monitoring of universities, giving guidelines for setting up of
universities, monitoring of private universities, deterrence of the
establishment of illegal campus and implementing appropriate sanctions. There
is no doubt that the quality of higher education determines the quality of
human resources of a country. One of the major objectives of the universities
is to produce a qualified, skilled and globally competent workforce for the
labour market of business and industry, which is a critical factor to national
growth and development (Obadara & Alaka, 2013). Since no nation can develop
beyond the quality of its higher education. Recent developments such as
increasing student enrolments; reduced state funding for public higher
education; increasing number of private providers; internationalization cross
border education have also influenced the purpose and functions of higher
education (Hayward, 2006). As part of the efforts to ensure qualitative
university education in Nigeria, the NUC was particular about ensuring
accreditation of academic programmes in Nigerian universities in order to produce
graduates who are relevant to the Nigerian economy. Emphasis was laid on the
quality of academic staff and students to be admitted and employed
respectively. The National Universities Commission started as an advisory
agency in the Cabinet Office in 1962. However, in 1974, it became a corporate
body with statutory functions and powers by virtue of the National Universities
Commission Act No. 1 of 1974. The Commission is committed to improving the
quality of university programmes through injection of requisite inputs as well
as assuring quality process and outputs based on the decree 49 of 1988 that
widen its scope. Also, the power to lay down minimum standards for all
universities and other institutions of higher learning in the federation and
the accreditation of their degrees and other academic awards is vested in the
National Universities Commission by virtue of section 10(1) of the Education
(National Minimum Standards and Establishment of Institutions) Act, Cap. E3,
Laws of the Federation, 2004 (formerly Section 10 of Act No. 16 of 1985). This
Act vested in the NUC very wide and enormous powers with respect to the
supervision and regulation of university education in Nigeria (NUC, 2006). The
need for global competiveness is another recent development that has impacted
higher education. In Nigeria, some of these recent developments are reflected
in the mission statement of the National Universities Commission (NUC), which
is the regulatory body established to oversee the administration and delivery of
higher education in Nigeria: ‘to ensure the orderly development of a
well-coordinated and productive university system that will guarantee quality
and relevant education for national development and global competitiveness
(NUC, 2009). The rapid expansion of universities is at a price to the nation.
Universities are facing serious crises in all respects. The physical facilities
of all public universities that offer most of the places to students are
grossly inadequate and/or in a complete state of disrepair. Their libraries are
bereft of leading international journals and new books while the quality and
quantity of teachers have declined. Most of them also lack information and
communication technologies. Finally, most of the public institutions have become
a haven for cultism, sexual harassment, and other unlawful practices. One of
the reasons for the deplorable state of Nigeria’s public universities is
uncontrolled expansion. Banjo (2004), a former Vice-Chancellor of Nigeria’s
premier University, the University of Ibadan, observed that: Ibadan is the
first degree-awarding institution in the country. Then followed the big
explosions: seven new universities in the seventies and eighties. Clearly,
other motivations than excellence were behind this proliferation. Not
unexpectedly, the new universities found it hard to keep up with the older
ones, and what is worse, they also began to drag the older ones down with them
into the quagmire of under-funding, compromised quality and other attendant
problems Prolonged military rule affected all departments of life in Nigeria
including universities (Adesina & Awonusi, 2004). Successive military
regimes eroded the autonomy of these institutions and most of the
vice-chancellors gradually became dignified agents of the government of the
day. Military rule also affected management style as well as subverted the due
process that is customary of universities (Ekong, 2002). The self-concept of
academics and the capacity of their institutions to play their accustomed role
in society also diminished. The final assault on universities came through the
implementation of SAP in the 1980s which had a deleterious impact on the
funding of these institutions (Obikoya, 2002) resulting in low salaries and
poor facilities including low morale.
Characteristics
of University Education in Nigeria
In the 1960s, schools were properly
administered and discipline was enforced. The quality of graduates was high and
certificates awarded by the schools were equal to those awarded by schools in
the West. Demand for higher education in Nigeria increased during the oil boom
of the 1970s and the number of students increased without commensurate funding.
However, things went really sour in the late 1980s, and education was
neglected; and the quality of graduates has since been compromised, affecting
every facet of the society. In the 1990s, some of the loans from the World Bank
for education were used to purchase irrelevant books and “expensive equipment”
that could not be maintained. Funding for education has not been commensurate
with the demand of the education sector. Reportedly, the percentage of federal
budgetary allocation to education has been dwindling. It was 7.2% in 1995 and
4.5% in 2004. The condition becomes more pathetic when Nigeria’s Gross National
Product (GNP) allocation to education is compared with those of less affluent
African nations that allocate greater percentage: Ivory Coast allocates 5% of
its GNP to education, Kenya 6.5% and Nigeria 0.76%. Lack of teaching tools and
poor remuneration has contributed to “acute shortage of qualified teachers”
that leads to the falling standards of university education. More revealing is
the 2006 ranking of African universities in which Nigerian universities, that
were once highly rated, were behind universities in poorer countries. It is
imperative to add that in 2004, the sum of N216, 708,206.00 was requested by
the federal funded universities. The Federal government released the sum of
N53, 406,287.01 representing 24.7% of the budget request from the Universities
(Okuwa, 2004; Aluede, et al, 2012). As espoused by Odebiyi and Aina (1999), the
multiplier effects of this low level of funding include: poor laboratory
facilities; limited number of field trips and academic conferences; inadequate
and obsolete infrastructure and equipment; embargo on study fellowship and
reduction in study grants. This is the educational situation in Nigeria that
gave birth to the emergence of private universities. It is imperative to state
that private universities especially Christian or Mission- based Universities
of which Covenant University from the webometrics ranking (CSIC, 2014) is the
leading private university in Nigeria, is aimed at raising a new generation of
leaders for the emancipation of the black race. At present, the private sector
is a fast expanding segment of university education in Nigeria, although it
still constitutes a small share of enrolment in university education (Ajadi,
2012). Good education is the best way to prepare a nation for excellence.
Without good education and proper skill, how would the people grow, develop and
compete effectively in the rapidly changing global economy? The failure of the
government to implement its agreement with university teachers prompted the
2003 ASUU strike that lasted for about six months. This exacerbated the mass
exodus (‘brain-drain’) of experienced professors to countries with better
working conditions. Not much has changed because ASUU strike actions have
become a common occurrence in Nigeria. How would the nation ensure sustainable
growth and development without investing in the educational sector? How would
the society train the critical and creative minds to manage its democratic
process without investing copiously on human capital development? How would the
youth compete effectively in the global marketplace without giving the citizens
the skills and knowledge to produce high quality goods and services? Education
is the cornerstone of a nation; something is obviously wrong with any society
that does not take its educational institutions seriously. Corruption and mismanagement
of funds are at the centre of the sordid state of university system in Nigeria.
The neglect of the sector has created many problems in the society, including
cultism and cheating in examinations, poor quality graduates, unemployment and
poverty including rising moral laxity and gross in-discipline (Dike, 2006). So
the problems with university education in Nigeria are many. Indeed, poor
working condition is dissuading talented individuals from entering the teaching
profession. Some lecturers in Nigerian universities are said to teach up to six
courses per semester. That is a lot of course load. Teachers are not expected
to perform miracles without the necessary teaching tools. Schools need
functional libraries, current books and modern laboratories. Also, classrooms
need modern instructional technologies and computers connected to the Internet,
projectors, audio-visual and video conferencing equipment, and others.
Essentially, there are six major problems to be solved in order to achieve
quality education in Nigerian universities. Three of the problems are primary
in the sense that they are largely responsible for the other three.
The primary problems are: funding shortages; the negative influence of a
corruptive and valueless political system; and planning and implementation
problems. These have led to the weakening of university administration; poor
teaching and learning outcomes; diminishing research and consultancy
traditions; and questionable service to the community. Viewed very closely, the
last three problems point to diminishing returns in the basic missions of
universities. The government’s poor planning and defective implementation of
policies and projects has also adversely affected the universities. The
situation has since worsened to the point that it is unclear which education
policy is now operative. Within the past year alone, the overall education
structure changed, or so we were told, from 6-3-3-4 to 9-3-4. Within the same
period, President Goodluck Jonathan’s administration established nine new
universities without regard to the problems facing existing universities and
mass unemployment of existing graduates. The future of the new universities and
their graduates was never seriously considered. According to Akinnaso (2012),
in the absence of adequate funding and clear direction, universities are left
to engage mainly in routine activities. There are master plans alright and
periodic development plans are constructed, but neither is implemented. A
number of federal and state universities have remained on their temporary sites
for decades because the government has failed to back up its initial promise
with adequate funding. The government’s failure to respect its agreements with
the Academic Staff Union of Universities has frequently led to strikes and
university closures. Inadequate funding, poor planning, and the erosion of
values have produced a culture of underachievement that will take decades to
change. Particularly affected by these factors are the universities’ internal
administration and the trio of teaching/learning; research/consultancies; and
community service.
The
National Universities Commission
The National Universities Commission (NUC)
was established in 1962 on the recommendation of the Ashby Commission. The
Ashby Commission based its recommendation on the fact that “the administration
of universities involves highly technical questions” which no ministry is
equipped to handle (Federal Ministry of Education, 1960, p. 32). It therefore
recommended the setting up of a body which will enjoy the confidence of the
government and the universities; “have the interests of both at heart: to
protect universities at all times from control from outside, and to protect the
public against needless duplication or wastage of scarce resources” and be “a
counsellor and watchdog” (Federal Ministry of Education, 1960, p. 32). The
Ashby Commission considered the establishment of a National Universities
Commission an urgent national priority because the “financing and coordination
of universities’ in Nigeria had ‘their special problems” including (i)
universities by their nature must be national, yet they are on the concurrent
list of the Constitution; (ii) for many years to come universities will be a
heavy burden on the budget, and competition between universities for limited
resources will be very severe; any uncontrolled proliferation of universities
might be disastrous; (iii) the Nigerians who have the necessary experience to
advise the Government on universities are already very heavily burdened with
public affairs (Federal Ministry of Education, 1960, p. 33). The original
mandate of the NUC therefore was to advise both the Government and the
universities; and “to play a vital part in securing money for universities and
distributing it to them, in coordinating (without interfering with) their
activities, and in providing cohesion” for the higher education system of the
country (Federal Ministry of Education, 1960, p. 33). The Ashby Commission
Report also dealt with the membership and composition of the NUC. The powers of
the NUC have since exceeded those envisaged by the Ashby Commission. The NUC
started operation as a coordinating body without an enabling law or autonomous
existence. It initially operated from the Prime Minister’s office who was the
Minister in charge of higher education and so was to all intents and purposes
more or less an administrative department. At this stage its functions were i)
To inquire into and advise the government on the financial needs both recurrent
and capital of university education in Nigeria. ii) To assist in consultation
with the Universities and other bodies concerned in planning the balanced and
coordinated development of the universities in order to ensure that they are
fully adequate to national needs. iii) To receive annually a block grant from
the federal government and to allocate it to universities with such conditions
attached as the commission may think advisable. iv) To act as an agency for
channelling all external aid to the universities throughout the federation. v)
To take into account, in advising the federal government, such grants as may be
made to the universities by regional governments, persons and institutions both
at home and abroad.
vi) To collate, analyse and publish information
relating to universities’ finance and university education both in Nigeria and
abroad. vii)To make, either by itself or through committees, such other
investigations relating to higher education as the commission may consider
necessary and, for the purpose of such investigations, have access to the
records of universities seeking or receiving federal grants. viii) To make such
other recommendations to the federal government or to universities relating to
higher education as the commission may consider to be in the national interest
(Njoku, 2002) 42
It became a statutory body only with the
promulgation of Decree No 1 of 1974. On becoming a statutory body, the NUC was
empowered to: a. Advise the President and Governors of the States, through the
Minister of Education, on the creation of new universities and other degree
awarding institutions in Nigeria; b. Prepare, after consultation with all state
Governments, the Universities, the National Manpower Board and such other
bodies as may be appropriate, periodic master plans for the balanced
development of all Universities in Nigeria; c. Make such other investigations
relating to higher education as the commission may consider to be in the
national interest; d. Inquire into and advise the Federal Government on the
financial needs, both recurrent and capital of University education in Nigeria
and in particular, to investigate and study the financial needs of university
research and to ensure that adequate provision is made for this in the
Universities; e. Increase block grants from the Federal Government and allocate
them to Federal Universities in accordance with such formula as may be laid
down by the National Council of Ministers; f. Collate, analyse and publish
information relating to University education in Nigeria; g. Undertake periodic
reviews of the terms and conditions of service of personnel engaged in the
Universities; and h. Recommend to the Visitor of the Federal Universities that
a visitation be made to such University as at when it considers it necessary
(Okoroma, 2007, p. 38). 42 Original paper not paginated.182 However, the
expansion of the functions and powers of the NUC has detracted from the
intentions of the Ashby Commission for the body as an institution enjoying the
confidence of the government and the universities and serving as a honest broker
between them. Over the years, especially with the long years of military rule
and the militarization of the culture of higher education institutions, the NUC
has largely lost the confidence of important sectors of the university
community, especially lecturers and students, who see it as a government
instrument for stifling academic freedom. According to Amadi (n.d., p. 38), the
scope of operations of NUC has been expanded to usurp “the powers of the
university Senate to regulate curriculum and syllabus” and “stripped the
universities of their power to develop new programmes’ or ‘realign their
courses to match labour market requirements except with the approval of NUC”.
In other words, the body has moved from being a coordinating body to a
controlling state organ. It now accredits academic programmes of universities,
approves the establishment of new departments and faculties, establishes and
enforces a minimum academic standard, undertakes sabbatical placement for
universities, assesses academic journals, ranks universities, and even
encroaches on the teaching function of universities through a virtual institute
for higher education pedagogy. It is also responsible for the licensing of new
universities. There is nothing inherently wrong with the centralization of the
functions the NUC has come to assume if it represents the interests of the
government as well as those of the university communities and the general
public but this has not been the case, at least, not from the point of view of
faculty and staff of universities. From the perspective of staff and faculty of
universities, it serves the interest of the government and infringes on the
rights of individual universities to create their own programmes, determine
their curriculum, and train their personnel (Amadi, n.d., p. 40). In
particular, it was always in a hurry to execute ordinary pronouncements of
education ministers even when such are not backed by law.43 One of the primary
reasons for its establishment was the need to create an autonomous agency which
would enjoy the confidence and trust of both the government and the
universities but the Commission, as it currently stands, does not enjoy the
confidence and trust of university lecturers. It is now largely seen as “a
clearing house and inspector for the universities” (Abdulkareem & Muraina,
2001, p. 8)
The
National Board for Technical Education (NBTE)
Like the NUC, the NBTE is an organ or
parastatal under the supervision of the Federal Ministry of Education. But
unlike the NUC which deals only with tertiary education, the NBTE deals with
technical education in the country at all levels. It was established to
coordinate all aspects of technical and vocational education falling outside
universities”. The Board is managed by an Executive Secretary under the
supervision of a 19-member board appointed by the President. The National Board
for Technical Education Act, 1977, which established it, details its functions
and powers as follows The functions of the Board shall be- (a) to advise the
Federal Government on, and to co-ordinate all aspects of, technical and
vocational education falling outside the universities and to make
recommendations on the national policy necessary for the full development of
technical and vocational education for the training of technicians, craftsmen
and other middle-level and skilled manpower; (b) to determine, after
consultation with the National Manpower Board, the Industrial Training Fund and
such bodies as it considers appropriate, the skilled and middle-level manpower
needs of the country in the industrial, commercial and other relevant fields
for the purpose of planning training facilities and in particular to prepare
periodic master plans for the balance and co-ordinated development of
polytechnics and colleges of technology and such plans shall include- (i) the
general programmes to be pursued by polytechnics and colleges of technology in
order to maximize the use of available facilities and avoid unnecessary
duplication while ensuring that they are adequate to the manpower needs of the
country; and (ii) recommendations for the establishment and location of new
polytechnics and colleges of technology as and when considered necessary; (c)
to inquire into and advise the Federal Government on the financial needs, both recurrent
and capital, of polytechnics and colleges of technology and other technical
institutions to enable them meet the objective of producing the trained
manpower needs of the country;
(d) to receive block grants from the
Federal Government and allocate them to polytechnics and colleges of technology
in accordance with such formula as may be laid down by the President; (e) to
act as the agency for channelling all external aid to polytechnics and colleges
of technology in Nigeria; (f) to advise on, and take steps to harmonise entry
requirements and duration of courses at technical institutions; (g) to lay down
standards of skill to be attained and to continually review such standards as
necessitated by technological and national needs; (h) to review methods of
assessment of students and trainees and to develop a scheme of national
certification for technicians, craftsmen and other skilled personnel in
collaboration with Ministries and organisations having technical training
programmes; (i) to undertake periodic reviews of the terms and conditions of
service of personnel in polytechnics and colleges of technology and to make
recommendations thereon to the Federal Government; (j) to collate, analyse and
publish information relating to technical and vocational education; (k) to
recommend to the Visitor of a polytechnic that a visitation be made to the
polytechnic as and when it considers necessary; (l) to consider any matter
pertaining to technical or technological education as may be referred to it
from time to time by the Minister; and (m) to carry out such other activities
as are conducive to the discharge of its functions under this Act. The NBTE
thus performs parallel functions to the NUC in respect of monotechnics,
polytechnics, colleges of technology, and vocational institutions. Therefore,
in addition to the above functions enumerated in the original act that created
it, the NBTE also has responsibility to establish and maintain minimum
standards for all levels of technical education; accredit programmes of
technical and vocational institutions for the award of national certificates
and diplomas and such similar awards; and to recommend the establishment of
polytechnics. In the exercise of the above powers and functions, it carries out
accreditation programmes in the polytechnics and other institutions awarding
qualifications in technical and vocational education. Institutions which fail
its accreditation are barred from admitting fresh students into programmes that
do not meet its minimum standards.
The National Commission for Colleges of
Education (NCCE) The NCCE was established “to advise the Federal Government on
all aspects of teacher education falling outside the universities, and
polytechnics and other matters ancillary thereto”. Its jurisdiction is limited
to teacher education below the degree level. Established by the National
Commission for Colleges of Education Act of 1989, the Commission coordinates
all aspects of teacher education; sets minimum standards for the teacher
education and accredits the certificates and other academic awards issued by
colleges of education; sets guidelines for the accreditation of colleges of
education and the criteria for the approval of the establishment of new
colleges; determines the teacher needs of the country; determines and advises
the Federal Government about financial needs of the colleges of education;
receives and allocates block grants to the colleges of education; determines
the entry qualifications into colleges of education and the duration of
courses; collates, analyses, and publishes information on teacher education;
and recommends visitation to the colleges. With many colleges of education
running degree programmes, it often has to share jurisdiction with the NUC in
such colleges. Its limitation to dealing with teacher education below the
degree level makes it a third tier coordination and regulatory mechanism in the
higher education sector.
Deviation from the Norms
Examination Malpractice
The rampant
occurrence of examination malpractice and certificate racketeering in the recent times has become an issue of growing
importance and concern in the global education system. Most examinations are
marked by complaints of various forms of malpractice, and in most of these
examinations, cheating is a recurrent event (Petters & Okon, 2014).
Cheating in examinations is a worldwide phenomenon (Nyamwange, Ondima &
Onderi, 2013) and, according to Anderman and Midgley (2000), about 80% of
high-achieving high school students and 75% of college students admitted having
cheated in an examination. Isangedighi (2007) also observed that the rising
wave of examination malpractice amongst today’s youths poses a big challenge to
contemporary society.
Adams and
Esther (2013) lamented that it is regrettable, that in most countries of the
world, the examination system is infected with examination misconduct or
wrongdoing.
According to
Shahid (2007), examinations are designed to evaluate the academic achievement
of students and to ascertain whether they have achieved a standard of academic
learning and knowledge. Examinations are considered the basis for promotion to
higher classes, a source of motivation for learners to advance to additional
studies, and a basis for prediction about students’ future education and job
aptitudes. Nyamwange et al. (2013) opined that school examinations are a tool
for measuring learners’ mastery of content and instructors’ effectiveness in
delivering the content at different levels of schooling in education systems
all over the world.
Educators
have viewed examination malpractice variously. Busayo (2008) viewed examination malpractice
as an improper and dishonest act with a view to obtaining an unmerited
advantage. Bruno and Obidigbo (2012) viewed examination malpractice as any
action carried out by stakeholders such as educational administrators, teachers,
parents or students that is likely to render the assessment or examination
ineffective or useless. Ifijeh, Michael-Onuoha, Ilogho, and Osinulu (2015)
defined examination malpractice as dishonest practice that encompasses any
action by an individual or group of students to gain an undue advantage in any
form of assessment, be it coursework, tests, or examinations.
In the same
vein, Petters and Okon (2014) argued that despite ugly penalties such as
suspension, methods of cheating continue to increase in strength and
sophistication.
They further
argued that examination may no longer be a true test of one’s ability since
most students are not serious with their studies and indulge in examination
malpractice as a shortcut to success.
Examinations
should be reliable and consistent as means of measuring students’ achievement
(Wilayat, 2009), however, when irregularities or examination malpractice
occurs, then the validity and resulting outcomes become questionable (Akaranga
& Ongong, 2013). To this end, Fasasi (2006) concluded that examination
malpractice is an unethical act because it encourages mediocrity in the sense
that students who succeed through such unorthodox methods may be rated equal to
those who struggle on their own to excel.
Petters and
Okon (2014) observed that although many efforts have been put forward by
different governments, school authorities and individuals to eradicate this
malady, in most instances these efforts have proved unsuccessful. Examination
malpractice is becoming a menace in many educational systems. Many reasons have
been given for the prevalence of examination malpractice, and the causes are
thought to be multi-dimensional.
Asante-Kyei
and Nduro (2014) listed a number of additional factors that lead to examination
malpractice, including cultural practices, school programs, teaching or
learning environment, and characteristics of teachers and students. They noted
that cheating has become an indicator of a serious breakdown in the cultural
structure as a result of the confusion between cultural norms and goals and the
capacities of members to act in accordance with it.
According to
Anzene (2014), the root causes of examination malpractice include the
following: an emphasis on paper qualifications or certificates, inadequate teaching
and learning facilities such as classrooms, libraries, laboratories, high
student/teacher ratios which in turn affect teaching and learning, poor moral
upbringing of some of the youths by parents, and students’ vices such as
cultism, drug abuse, sexual promiscuity, and truancy.
In a study
by Suleman, Gul, Ambrin, and Kamran (2015), factors that contribute to
examination malpractice at the secondary school level in Kohat Division in
Pakistan were also identified. The study found the following as factors that
contribute to examination malpractice: corruption, poor implementation of
examination rules, poor
invigilation,
students and parental threats, lack of fear of punishment, inadequate
preparation for examinations, and collusion. Other factors included disloyalty
of examination bodies, fear of failure, poor morale, and economic depression of
supervisory staff. The sample for Suleman et al.’s (2015) study was made up of
840 respondents, selected through simple random sampling technique from 80
all-male secondary schools. A semi-structured questionnaire was used as a
research instrument for data collection.
Illegal
admission
the Enugu State University of Technology
announced the expulsion and handing-over to the police of “544 students who
allegedly secured admission into the university illegally” (Yusuf, 2012). Some
of the students so expelled were in their final year.
At another state university, Nasarawa
State University, Keffi, an investigative panel discovered the existence of 80
illegal students according to the Daily Trust Newspaper (Daily Trust Reporter,
2012). The investigative panel found that the names of the students were added
“on the admission lists sent to various departments in the university during
the 2009 admission exercise” (Daily Trust Reporter, 2012). The decision of the
University in this case was to disown the students and sack the officials who
perpetrated the deal. There are no reports that the culprits were handed over
to the police for prosecution. The affected students, who had already spent
three sessions in the university at the time of their discovery, were also not
reported to have been handed to the police for prosecution. Among the
mechanisms for illegal admission of students to higher education institutions
is the operation of fake websites. The Nasarawa State University was also a
victim in this as a fake website was used to admit 200 students (Daily Trust
Reporter, 2012). However, the phenomenon of “illegal students” arising from
illegal admissions is not limited to universities.
At Auchi Polytechnic, 700 students were
expelled for getting into the institution through dubious means (Adekoye,
2005). The institution in its statement announcing the expulsion of the illegal
students, observed that illegal admissions have become “a recurring decimal in
the nations (sic) higher institution (sic)” (Adekoye, 2005). A very worrisome aspect
of the Auchi scandal is that all 700 illegal students entered the polytechnic
in just one admission exercise.
Comments
Post a Comment