Abstract

This work is a reflection of distributive justice and the quota system policy of admission in Nigeria with special consideration on its effects on the quality of tertiary education in Nigeria. Quota system policy of admission is a policy that hinges on the principles of distributive justice. Distributive justice principles call for fairness and equity in the distribution of limited national resources. The research discovers that the application of the policy itself gives room for compromise on the quality of tertiary education by allowing the admission of less qualified candidates from educationally underdeveloped states where opportunities are yet to be taken up to the disadvantaged of more qualified candidates from educationally developed states. By this, competition to obtain high grades among students is reduced to the barest minimum or through malpractices because a reasonable percentage of these candidates came in with learning deficiencies. The multiplier effects of quota system policy include; examination malpractices, campus prostitution, cultism and inefficiency in the world of work. The research concluded that in order for the tertiary education to meet up with the aim and objectives of her establishment as well as compete favourably with her counterparts elsewhere in the world the policy of quota system of admission should be removed.

Introduction

All desirable developments in the society hinge upon education to see the light of the day. It is therefore, not surprising that the issues of education become of concern to every stakeholder in the society and usually generate a lot of arguments, tension and sometimes agitations among the citizenry. Though, a particular educational issue may dominate the scene at a particular point in time, it is interesting to note that hardly any of them has ever been completely resolved. They may be temporarily forgotten or overtaken by events, but they have a tendency of re-emerging in the same or slightly modified form in the future. In other words, they have become perennial. Therefore, a philosophical reflection on some of these issues will be of help keeping the present generation of educationist on track with past and current educational issues.

Arguably, one of such educational issues that have assumed perennial status is the debate on equality of educational opportunities on the Nigerian educational scene. The heat, emotions and agitations the debate on equality of educational opportunities generated gave birth to the Quota system policy introduction in the 1970s into the education system. The quota system seems to have gained a permanent seat in the educational terrain owing to the fact that education like other natural and human resources which are not so much in abundance  to the extent that each can dip his hand into and take for himself as much as he wants without shortening the ration of others. In other words, so long as resources are limited and people’s demands are unlimited there will always be the question of criteria for distributing the resources and the all-important question of fairness and equity of the distributing system.[i]

Justice, fairness and equity issues in the distribution of educational opportunities become phenomena of concern to all and sundry because years over Nigeria has looked to education to solve some major problems raised in other critical areas of national life. For instance, economic issues such as the disparity between the rich and the poor and the disparity between the rural and urban areas are attributed to education. Political challenges such as differences in political awareness, hence disparity in the level of political participation; and the civilization as well as literacy gab between the Northern and Southern parts of the country are all attributed to educational opportunities and basic amenities distribution in the long run.

The foregoing instances are all cases of transfer of issues and problems from non-educational areas into education arena seeking for solution. It is worthy of noting at this juncture, that these economical, political, cultural and social issues and problems are interpreted in terms of the absence of education or the past unequal distribution of educational opportunities to various parts of the country. In order to overcome these challenges, the principles of distributive justice, fair play and equity are always invoked at the detriment of merit and quality of the products of education. These principles are invoked in the spirit of fostering “a just and egalitarian society” and “a united, strong and self-reliant nation”[ii] all and sundry most be carried along in the distribution of all educational opportunities available for all to have a sense of national unity. To this end, the questions that beg for answers; can there be unity where injustice prevails? Should quality education in Nigeria be sacrificed at the altars of fair play, equity, national unity? When the administration of distributive justice turns into injustice herself what is the possible way out now? Is distributive justice a perfect formula for the sharing of educational opportunities in Nigeria as far quality is concern?

Quality Tertiary Education

Federal Government of Nigeria through the National Policy on Education broadly classifies education into different levels via; Nursery and Primary level, Secondary level and Post-Secondary or tertiary level. This classification facilitates and enhances teaching in the graded manner so that every matter is dealt with at the ages where physical and mental capacity can cope with the appropriate level of study. To this end therefore;

Tertiary education is the education given after Post-Basic Education in institutions such as Universities, and Inter-University Centres such as the Nigeria French Village, Nigeria Arabic Language Village, National Institute of Nigerian Languages, institutes such as Innovation Enterprise Institutes (IEIs), and Colleges of Education, Monotechnic, Polytechnics and other specialized institutions such as Colleges of Agriculture, Schools of Health and Technology and the National Teachers’ Institutes (NTI).[iii]

These categories of institutions made up the tertiary education level in Nigeria with the university as the apex institution of learning among them all. The Federal Government of Nigeria also clearly spells out the goals of Tertiary Education to include;

 Contribution to national development through high level manpower training; provide accessible and affordable quality opportunities in the formal and informal education in response to the needs and interests of all Nigerians; provide high quality career counselling and lifelong learning programmes that prepare students with the knowledge and skills for self-reliance and the world of work; reduce skill shortages through the production of skilled manpower relevant to the needs of the labour market; promote and encourage scholarship, entrepreneurship community service; forge and cement national unity; and promote national and international interaction.[iv]

These are the task of tertiary education to provide the Nigerian world of work and beyond with highly skilled manpower relevant to the needs of the labour market. This shows that the society depends on the tertiary education for labour and whatever quality of products the tertiary education offers that is what the society gets. No wonder the saying a society cannot rise above her quality of education.

Quality as a concept has been viewed differently by different scholars due to its multidimensional meaning which has also assume different meanings to different people. According to Fadipe[v], quality can be regarded as “fitness for purpose”. It encapsulates the concept of meeting commonly agreed standards. Such standards may be defined by law, an institution, a coordinating body or a professional society. In the diverse arena of tertiary education, fitness for purpose varies tremendously by field and programme. Quality refers to the standard of a phenomenon when it is compared to other things like it: how good or bad something is, that is, to be of good/poor/top quality or of a high standard. In the context of this paper, it is associated with the ‘monitoring and evaluation components of education’ to assess whether or not the outcome is good and of the intended standard. Quality is the ability or degree with which a product, service or phenomenon conforms to established standards and which makes it to be relatively superior to others. With respect to education, this implies the ability or degree with which an educational system conforms to the established standards and appropriateness of the inputs available for the delivery of the system. Therefore, quality education means the relevance and appropriateness of the education programmes to the needs of the society for which it is provided.

On the other hand, quality education is that education that is relevant and adapted to the needs of the society.[vi] It is in this line of thought that Majasan[vii] is of the view that quality education is value-loaded arguing that quality education should produce disciplined behaviour, hard work, improved cultural heritage and mutual respect within and outside the school community. If a society expects quality manpower for rapid development and transformation, quality education is inevitable. This is because quality education is necessary to address critical issues via dignity of labour, quality leadership, committed citizenship, industrial harmony, political stability, religious tolerance, self-reliance and security. Therefore, quality tertiary education entails the products of tertiary education to perform optimally to meet up set standards and compete favourably with their peers from other parts of the globe.

Distributive Justice

Justice as Fairness: this theory is championed by John Rawls in his work A Theory of Justice where he hypothesized the administration of justice in the society. Rawls opines that the principles of justice which form the foundation of the society are arrived at through agreement as suggest by Locke’s social contract theory. Borrowing concepts from the social contract theory, Rawls envisions a society in which the principles of justice are founded in a social contract. Having identified the problems and faulty areas of the social contract theory as propounded by Locke that hinder fairness and equity among members of the society Rawls hypothesized a social contract which is negotiated behind a “veil of ignorance”. The veil of ignorance for Rawls means a circumstance where the negotiating partners have no idea what their race, gender, education, geographical location, health and other characteristics are; how the various alternative will affect their own particular case, yet are obliged to evaluate principles primarily on the basis of general considerations.

Perusing the theory of justice as fairness as propounded by Rawls certain questions readily come to mind; what exactly does Rawls meant by “veil of ignorance”? Is Rawls trying to say that the various professionals (let us say in the case of education teachers and professors; in the case of health, health consultants and health professors; in the legal sector, legal luminaries, judges and justices just to mention but a few), stakeholders involved as well as consulted at various stages of the negotiations reached are not well informed in their respective fields of endeavour to take a decision or predict a risk as well as a likely advantage on behalf of the citizenry? Or could it be the case that Rawls is saying that at given material time the various factors at play definitely warrant the negotiating partners to reached a decision but cannot with all certainty guarantee whether or not such a decision will continue to favour his on society, group or organization in the future when new or unforeseen factors may likely alter the reality on ground.

Consequently, if Rawls’ ‘veil of ignorance’ means that the negotiating partners cannot rule out the likelihood of other factors that may come to play in the future to destabilize previously perceived fair negations or decisions, it then follows that a decision or negation as well as a particular policy can only said to be fair or just in a given material time and circumstance not at all times. In other words, a fair and just policy or negotiation is always dependent on the factors at play and will remain open to new negations relying on the factors at play at a given material time to be considered by the various negotiating partners.

Utilitarianism Distributive Justice: this theory is found in the works of Aristotle, John Stuart Mill, and Jeremy Bentham. Utilitarianism centres her theory of justice on individual utility and welfare. It builds on the belief that any action which increases the overall welfare in the society is good and any action that decreases the welfare in the society is bad. By this understanding focus lies with its outcomes and pays little or no attention to how these hope outcomes are shaped. However, the utilitarian theory of justice is challenged on the grounds with regards to how one can clearly delineate those actions which constitutes welfare and those that do not.

The question that comes to mind perusing this theory of justice is; what are those actions/inactions that promote the welfare of members of the society? For this theory to be implemented in a society the need to identify the various actions and inactions of the members of the society that will encourage the common good of all in the society be carried out. This raises another question in the mind. What is the criterion for identifying those actions and inactions that will increase the good of one and that of others in the society and the other way round? Therefore, there is no guarantee that the criterion that will be put in place may not likely violent a number of basic human rights that would possibly generate new problems in the society. Out of curiosity one may be tempted to further ask; if such a criterion is put in place, will it be a valid criterion all through other circumstances or it will be a onetime criterion? To this end therefore, what constitutes justice in one circumstance may likely not be justice in another circumstance.

Egalitarianism Distributive Justice: this principle of justice is built on the notion of equal worth and moral status of human beings. It is concerned with equal treatments of all citizens in all respect and in relation to the state as well as one another. egalitarian distributive justice focuses more on the process through which distribution takes place, evaluates the justification based on how the society and its institutions have been shaped rather than what the outcomes is.

Equalitarianism likely sees human beings from a lens that seems to portray human beings to be the same regardless of their differences in terms of their needs, wants, desires, height, weight, race, tribe, religion and geographical locations. These differences are sufficient grounds through which human beings ought not to be regarded as equals nor treated equally in many ramifications. Therefore, the principles of equity and fairness are invoked in every society whenever ‘equals are treated unequally’ and ‘unequals are treated equally’. This act of treating equals unequally and unequals equally in itself is likely considered as an injustice in some societies. Since, humans are not all equal owing to the aforementioned factors it will amount to an injustice to treat equals unequally and treat unequals equally. To this end, justice will mean given to each individual or group of individuals his due. The question that comes to mind is what is the individual’s due? What the criterion is for determines the individual’s due?

The challenge with this theory of justice is that it labels humans to be of equal worth therefore, any treatment most be measured on the same scale relegating any other factor or attribute to the background. It is inconsistent by treating un-equals equally in the first instance as Aristotle who say. If everybody stands the chance of getting equal ration of the reward of labour at the end of the month then many may tend not to put in their best in the services, they provide in the system they belong to.

Quota System Policy of Admission; fairness or Breading mediocrity?

Quota system is a policy in Nigeria that allocates percentage of access to socio-economic, political or any other benefit to a given set of people based on factors such as gender, geographical area or a certain group of the country. This policy was first introduced in Nigeria by the colonial government in 1958 as a solution to agitations seeking equal access to public offices and representation in the political arena by various groups.[viii] The thrust of this policy lies on its principle of distribution of available opportunities to different unites or parts of the country not necessarily based on merits or quality of the applicants. In other words, this principle offers socio-economic and political opportunities to Nigerians based on state of origin’s percentage not only merits. Therefore, the chances of one accessing certain socio-economic opportunities is determined by the number of other applicants from one’s state of origin or geographical area not necessarily skills he has mastered and demonstrated at the recruitment exercise. It is evident in the foregoing that quota system hinges on the theory of distributive justice to allow for fair and equitable sharing of scarce resources and opportunities across board.

The quota system policy found its way into the Nigeria’s education arena with the aim of addressing disparities in the socio-economic and political development of identified geographical areas. In order to implement the quota system in the educational sector, states were categorized into; educationally advantage also known as educationally developed and educationally disadvantage also known as educationally underdeveloped states[ix]. In the light of the foregoing, Odigwe and Swem opine that “quota system of admission allows admitting only a certain percentage of candidates from each state of the country into schools in one academic year.[x] This shows that the thrust of quota system of admission is the distribution of educational opportunities to various states of the country. In other words, educational opportunities are reserved to applicants on the basis of their states of origin relegating merits to the background.

Consequently, relegating merits to the background usually comes with multiplier effects in the long run in any given society. One of the effects of quota system policy of admission is that it waters down the quality of the tertiary education system and by implication her products too. Demonstrably, sacrificing merits at the altar of fairness, unity and justice gives room for compromise as far as quality tertiary education is concern in that candidates with learning deficiencies, ill-equip to study in the tertiary institutions are offered the opportunity thereby end up struggling to survive in the system. The mere presence of these unqualified candidates reduces the competition for excellence in the system among students. Whenever a reasonable percentage of the students are having some learning deficiencies at various degrees this reduces the job of the lecturer from imparting knowledge, skills and competencies of his subject area into a remedial services render. This practice inferably, reduces competition among students. Therefore, when students do not strive for excellence in their academic pursuits their efficiency in the world of work will be affect too.

Thus, the quality of the products of tertiary education gets questioned whenever the aim or any of its objectives is not met up with especially in the world of work via; development of high-level manpower training, prepare students with the knowledge kills for self-reliance and reduce skills shortage in the world of work. For instance, a quality knife cuts things to the satisfaction of the owner.  Therefore, are the products of our tertiary education measuring up to the demands of the world of work in Nigeria adequate? The issues of quality in the tertiary education system have been attributed to the rampant news of collapse buildings some even still under construction in Nigeria; Nigeria refining her crude oil elsewhere; importation of automobiles and seeking major medical services outside Nigeria. it is worthy of noting down here that people die in hands of ill equip medical doctors, people die and resources worth billions lost in collapse buildings, the agricultural sector losses billions upon billions of naira in the hands of ill equip veterinarians and agronomists.

The problem of examination malpractice in tertiary institutions of learning is also traceable to the quota systems application. The policy intentionally allows candidates with learning deficiencies into the system yet encourages high performance and rewards it at the end of the day. These students with learning in competences in the quest to measure up to the expectations of the school end up engaging in examination malpractice. Wherever malpractices exist in the system the standard and quality cannot be sustained any longer. For quality to be sustained in our tertiary education the postulations of Plato need to taking seriously where people ascend through the levels of education purely on the basis of merits and capabilities and eventually only the philosopher kings get to helms of affairs by merits handling their task conveniently.

The factors that affect the quality of a product are usually multifarious in nature. In the case of tertiary education, the learning environment could be a factor, the instructional material, the quality of the teacher, the home background of the learner and exposure of the learners hitherto. Of concern in this work among these factors is the home background of the learner and their exposure before gaining admission into the tertiary institution. The nature of groom students right from primary level and secondary levels of education manifest itself on the calibre of students seeking for admission into the tertiary institutions of learning. What this means is that for quality and to be maintained and the quota system policy tension calm down in our tertiary education the necessary attention must be given to our primary and secondary levels of studies in order to create a fair playing ground for the competitive placement examination into the tertiary education. Other multiplier effects of quota system policy of admission in our tertiary education include campus prostitution, cultism and truancy.

As currently practiced in Nigeria, the guideline of quota system of admission stipulates the following; 45%  of admissions based on merits as determined by the UTME scores, 20% allocated to educationally advantage areas, 35% allocated to catchment areas[xi]. The application of this policy in tertiary education admission seems to contradict itself in that, it aims at serving justice to states that have be categorized as educationally underdeveloped and end serving injustice to states that are categorized as educationally developed in the long run. This policy denies qualified candidates of educational opportunities on the bases of state of origin while offers same opportunities to lesser qualified candidates. Arguing from the egalitarian perspective of justice at face value it may seem justified that the policy encourages even distribution of educational opportunities across board for all sections of the country to have a sense of belonging. With the foregoing in mind, the questions bellow beg for answers; those qualified and were discriminated to the advantage of those performed less than them on the basis of quota system policy are they not humans too? If they are humans too then where is the equalitarianism in this practice?

Conclusion

The instrumentality of Nigerian tertiary education in ensuring high manpower training to respond to the need of the labour market as well as rapid socio-economic developments among individuals and the international scene is imperative however, in the spirit of fairness, equity and oneness the quota system policy of admission into tertiary institutions was enact for all and sundry to partake in the limit available educational opportunities. The application of this policy has ushered into the system a series of multiplier effects ranging from examination malpractice, poor quality of learning and effectiveness in the world of work injustice to the educationally developed states and psychological damage to these candidates. Therefore, the policy is due for removal in order to restore sanity and quality back to tertiary education in Nigeria.

 Recommendations

1. Admissions into Nigerian Tertiary Institutions should be based on merits.
2. More institutions of learning should be established in order to accommodate the teaming Nigerians seeking for admission into tertiary institutions of learning based on merits.
3. Quota system of admission should be removed out of tertiary education system in order to enable the tertiary education to achieve her aim and objectives of establishment of producing high skill man power to move economy greater heights and compete favourably in the committee of nations.
4. Other levels of learning lower than the tertiary education should carry out their task effectively and efficiently in order to create the enabling playground the competitive admissions based on merits into the tertiary institutions of learning.

ENDNOTES

[1]Akinpelu, J. A., An Introduction to Philosophy of Education. (1981)  London Mcmillam Press. p. 211

[1] Federal Government of Nigeria, National Policy on Education. Abuja: 2013 p. 25

[1] Ibid

[1] Ibid p. 26

[1] Nwagwu, C. C. University Access and Matriculation Requirement. The Delimma of Nigerian Secondary school leavers. International Journal of Educational Research, (2010) 5, 45-51.

[1] Niomu O., Experiment with mass University Education in Post-Civil war in Nigeria, 1070-1979, in Journal of Nigerian Studies (1989), 1 (1), pp.1-36

[1] Majasan Increase Access to University/Higher Education in Africa: A Brief Literature Review. Forum for International Research in Education. (1998) 4(3), pp. 210-227

[1] Onwaka, C. J. A., History of Nigerian Education: Philosophical and Political Dimentions. Onitcha: Greenlink Publishers.

[1] Ogoke, J. C., Onwuka, C. J. A. & Enemuo, P. C., John Rawl’s Theory of Justice and the Quota System of Admission in Nigerian Universities. In Nigerian Journal of Educational Philosophy. (2021), Vol. 32 PP122-126

[1] Odigwe, F. & Swem, T., Ipact of Quota System of Admission on Quality Education in Universities in Cross River State, International Journal of Scientific Research in Education, (2016) 9 (4), 325-332

[1] Ogoke, J. C., Onwuka, C. J. A. & Enemuo, P. C., Op.Cit.

---

 

Endnotes

[i]Akinpelu, J. A., An Introduction to Philosophy of Education. (1981)  London Mcmillam Press. p. 211

[ii] Federal Government of Nigeria, National Policy on Education. Abuja: 2013 p. 25

[iii] Ibid

[iv] Ibid p. 26

[v] Nwagwu, C. C. University Access and Matriculation Requirement. The Delimma of Nigerian Secondary school leavers. International Journal of Educational Research, (2010) 5, 45-51.

[vi] Niomu O., Experiment with mass University Education in Post-Civil war in Nigeria, 1070-1979, in Journal of Nigerian Studies (1989), 1 (1), pp.1-36

[vii] Majasan Increase Access to University/Higher Education in Africa: A Brief Literature Review. Forum for International Research in Education. (1998) 4(3), pp. 210-227

[viii] Onwaka, C. J. A., History of Nigerian Education: Philosophical and Political Dimentions. Onitcha: Greenlink Publishers.

[ix] Ogoke, J. C., Onwuka, C. J. A. & Enemuo, P. C., John Rawl’s Theory of Justice and the Quota System of Admission in Nigerian Universities. In Nigerian Journal of Educational Philosophy. (2021), Vol. 32 PP122-126

[x] Odigwe, F. & Swem, T., Ipact of Quota System of Admission on Quality Education in Universities in Cross River State, International Journal of Scientific Research in Education, (2016) 9 (4), 325-332

[xi] Ogoke, J. C., Onwuka, C. J. A. & Enemuo, P. C., Op.Cit

Download/View the cover of paper, NJEP Vol. 34, No. 1.

Abstract                                                       

This paper sought to analyze the academic freedom of lecturers and institutional autonomy in the management of Nigerian university education using the philosophical approach. Concepts such as university education, academic freedom and institutional autonomy were discussed. Equally, related sub-headings such as management of university education in Nigeria, legal perspectives of academic freedom and institutional autonomy of Nigerian university education were conversed. It was reviewed that theoretically, Nigerian universities have been granted their fair share of autonomy but in actual practice do not have reasonable and workable autonomy. This informed the need to therefore analyze the academic freedom of lecturers and institutional autonomy of universities in the management of Nigerian university education. Based on the analysis, the erosion of university autonomy is still on the increase as government still interferes in the appointment of key managers of the system such as Chancellors, Pro-Chancellors and external members of the governing councils to run the affairs of universities without recourse to the system. To this end, recommendations were made. The writers’ therefore concludes that for  academic freedom of lecturers and institutional autonomy in the management of Nigerian university education to be attainable,  the government is expected to give autonomy to universities in the following areas such as: academic, administrative and finance. This is necessary in that an agreement which cannot be enforced or kept should not be undertaken, for it is like a sword which has no strength to secure a man at all. 

Introduction

One of the universal ideas of the university is a community of scholars, free to pursue knowledge without undue interference from any quarters.  In its strict sense, Benjamin is of the opinion that universities are ivory towers, where instruction is given and received without harassment and undue influence from the outside world.¹ To this end, universities were established with autonomy. As expressed by Ojo, legal freedom is afforded to each university to conduct its own affairs and policies without undue interference from outside bodies, persons, or, most importantly, from the government.² However, in recent times, though the laws establishing these universities are still intact with some reviewed, universities are no longer allowed the flexibility of the powers to manage their affairs in consonance with the laws

establishing them, hence the erosion of their autonomy. Going by the immediate state of act, Mbaji reiterated that many universities in Nigeria are still suffocating under strangulating control of the government.³ This tends to erode their academic freedom and institutional autonomy and calls for immediate intervention. The focus of this study therefore is to philosophically analyze the academic freedom of lecturers and institutional autonomy of universities in the management of Nigerian university education. To this end, clarifications of concepts such as university education, academic freedom and institutional autonomy are considered necessary.

Conceptual Clarifications on University Education, Academic Freedom and Institutional Autonomy

The university is an institution at the highest level of education where one can study for a degree or research. Odekunle viewed universities as centres of excellence, where knowledge is not only acquired, but also disseminated to those who require it.⁴ Universities educate future leaders and develop the high-level technical capacities that underpin economic growth and development. Thus, the main purpose and relevance of university education in Nigeria is the provision of much needed manpower to accelerate the socio-economic development of the nation. They are formal institutions set up by the society to be centers of learning that is rich in ideas and ideals.  Universities are enterprises that produce and distribute a “public good”, which is knowledge.  Knowledge production is the focus of universities and the production of knowledge is the drive behind teaching and research.

Academic freedom is a generic word, consisting of academic and freedom.  Freedom on one hand could be viewed as a state in which an individual can act without inhibition. On the other hand, academic is used to describe things that relate to the work done in schools, colleges, and universities, especially work which involves studying and reasoning rather than practical or technical skills. academic can equally be seen as a teacher or scholar in a university or other institute of higher learning. Put together, Sanda refers academic freedom to the freedom of individual members of the academic community to pursue their research, teaching, and learning.⁵ It is the liberty and obligation to study, investigate, present and interpret, and to discuss facts and ideas concerning man, human society, the physical and biological world in all branches and fields of learning.

Institutional autonomy is an institutional privilege. Fourie defined institutional autonomy as referring to the relative freedom of the institution to conduct its own affairs free from outside interference, whether from the state, the market, donors or other stakeholders.⁶ The author further states that institutional autonomy has two dimensions: Substantive autonomy: this has to do with the power of the institution to determine its own goals and programmes. Procedural autonomy: this refers to the power of the institution to determine the means by, which its goals and programmes will be pursued, the how of academy. However, Akpan and Glory holds that the essential ingredients of institutional autonomy include: (i) freedom to select staff and students; (ii) determine the conditions under which they remain in the university; (iii) freedom to determine curriculum contents and degree standards; and (iv) freedom to allocate funds across different categories of expenditures.⁷

Institutional autonomy and academic freedom as concepts are closely related, but are not the same. While institutional autonomy is an institutional privilege for the universities, lecturers enjoy academic freedom. Malherbe relates that, the two concepts, though closely related, however, are not the same for the following reasons: first, the actual content of academic freedom and university autonomy differ in the sense that the former refers to the rights of the individual academic, whereas the latter refers to those aspects of the right to be pursued by the institution. Secondly, although autonomy over academic-related matters includes matters of primary importance to the individual lecturer, academic freedom applies to everybody involved in the practice of science and not only to lecturers. Thirdly, for the fact that an autonomous university may restrict the academic freedom of its lecturers, autonomy, therefore, is no guarantee of academic freedom; it is, however, a question whether academic freedom can flourish in the absence of autonomy.⁸ To a reasonable extent, academic freedom and the autonomy of university depends on the managerial approach to university governance in relation to the coordination and management of university activities. To this end, the issue is; who in actual sense is the proprietor or the manager of Nigerian university education? Or how is university education managed in Nigeria? This question is one of the thrusts of this paper.

Management of University Education in Nigeria

University managers are the relevant stakeholders or bodies involved in the strategic formulation and implementation of the university’s broad policy and ensuring proper organization and coordination of human and material resources towards achieving the purpose and objectives for which the institutions were established.

However, management of university education in Nigeria can be looked at from two dimensions: the external and internal levels. At the external level, the universities are controlled by the federal government through the federal ministry of education. The Nigerian federal ministry of education is the government body that directs education in Nigeria. It was established in 1988. According to the federal ministry of education FME,functions of the federal ministry of educationamong others include: formulating a national policy on education, collating data for the purposes of educational planning and financing, maintaining uniform standards of education throughout the country and controlling the quality of education in the country through the supervisory role of the directors.⁹ Directors of federal ministry of education are staff of the federal ministry of education. They are senior officials of the federal ministry of education that directs education in Nigeria through various departments.

By internal management, each university is represented by a simple organogram. As explained by Adegbite, the first is the Visitor who is usually the Head of State or the Head of Government that established it, followed by the Chancellor, who is the titular head of the university and the Governing Council, which is headed by the Chairman (Pro-Chancellor) who is charged with the administrative functions in the areas of goal setting, policy formulation, staff development, general discipline, budget approval and liaison activities with the government.¹⁰ For Ibukun, the main organ regulating the internal academic activities of the universities is the Senate, headed by the Vice-Chancellor and the Registrar as the Secretary.¹¹ According to the writer, the Senate regulates the academic activities of the university following the general guidelines provided by the federal ministry of education.  To this end, there is need therefore to analyze the legal perspectives of academic freedom of lecturers and institutional autonomy of Nigerian university education.

Legal Perspectives of Academic Freedom and Institutional Autonomy of Nigerian University Education

Institutional autonomyimplies that each institution should operate without undue interference from the government in the conduct of its affairs. Hence, the goals and objectives of the higher institutions will be achieved.

Thus, the following according to Akpan and Glory constitute legalindices of institutional autonomy.

• Respective universities must exercise legal right of ownership of University
• Assets including land, buildings and plants.
• Freedom to set strategic plans and pursue them independently.
• The right to budget for the running of the university.
• Freedom to design academic programmes that are considered suitable to the
• University
• The right to recruit and sack university academic and non-academic staff
• The freedom to determine the fees and charges students should pay
• The freedom to develop and run salary structure that is suitable to the university
• The right to determine students’ enrolment.
• The right to independently determine and run suitable academic calendar.
• The right to select administrative heads of the institution.
• The right to decide admission policy
• The right to determine the intake capacity in various courses and faculties
• The right to determine teachers’ work load.
• The right to conduct admission and degree awarding examinations.
• The right to enjoy full financial autonomy, including the right to run institutions bank account, operating internal auditing, right to generate income.
• Enjoying administrative autonomy void of government political and bureaucratic interference.¹²

Equally, every university has its law, edict or even decree which spells out the functions of the various organs, such as Council, Senate, Congregation, Faculty, Department, Institute and others. Thus, the functions of the university are usually clearly stated in its laws, which confer on the university such powers, as in its opinion are necessary to effectively advance the objects of the university. These functions for Okojie,usually include the following:

• to provide courses of instruction and learning in the identified disciplines;
• to make provisions for research and for the advancement of knowledge in the branches of learning in the identified disciplines for such persons and in such manner as it shall determine;
• to institute the various cadres in the career profile for academic and non-academic staff;
• to award degrees, in the identified disciplines, including honorary degrees, diplomas, certificates and other academic distinctions such as fellowships bursaries, prizes, titles etc;
• to acquire by purchase or gift movable or immovable property and to sell, lease, mortgage or otherwise alienate or dispose of any such property;
• to establish campuses, facilities, schools, extra-moral departments and other teaching and research units within the university from time to time;
• to provide the necessary physical and infrastructural facilities including libraries, sporting facilities, lecture halls and others necessary for discharging the responsibilities implicit in its objects;
• subject to the provisions of the law, to invest any monies appearing to the university and such other monies that may not be immediately required for recurrent expenditure;
• to borrow money;
• to demand and receive from students such fees as the University may determine subject to the directives of the Minister for Education in case of Federal owned Universities and the appropriate offices in the case of State owned and Private Universities;
• to provide for the welfare and discipline of the students and other members of the University Community. ¹³

Consequent upon the above legalindices and functions of the university which spells out the functions of the various organs such as council, senate, congregation, faculty, department, institute and others, the law gives enough leverage to the system for effective institutional management. The problem therefore is: with the above legal backup, what are the factors that still undermine the degree of university autonomy? This informed the need to therefore analyze the academic freedom of lecturers and institutional autonomy of universities in the management of Nigerian university education.

Analysis of Academic Freedom and Autonomy of Nigerian University Education

It is often believed that Nigerian universities have been granted their fair share of autonomy. Notwithstanding, Sorkaa submitted that the clamour for university autonomy across the globe is a clear indication that there exists the significant level of interference in the university administration and operation by the government and other external forces.¹⁴ Thus, the question at this juncture is: who owns the university and who funds

it? This question is necessary judging that the owner and sponsor of an institution are supposed to be in charge of the operation of the institution.

Going by the immediate state of act, it is obvious that Nigerian universities do not have reasonable and workable autonomy. It can be said that university or institutional autonomy is an unwritten covenant between society and the academic community which concedes to the latter a free will to determine its guiding principles and self-regulate itself. Thus, the Nigerian universities are tied to the financial apron strings of their provider of finances – that is government. The universities are forced to dance to the tunes composed and rendered outside their portals. This informs the assertion of Mbaji who holds that the Nigerian government in the context of institutional autonomy is a financial colonial master who tied the universities on her monetary twine.¹⁵

The issue of university autonomy and academic freedom has also been a vexed matter between government and the university managements. The Federal Republic of Nigeria  had recognized that: the internal organization and administration of each institution (of higher learning) shall be its own responsibility; the traditional areas of academic freedom for the institutions are to select their students, except where the law prescribes otherwise; appoint their staff; teach, select areas of research; and determine the content of courses.¹⁶ However, government has always hidden under the following clause, which says: “Government shall continue to respect this freedom as long as these areas are in consonance with national goals”. The question is: What constitutes “consonance with national goals”? In actual practice, what is university autonomy?  Ojedele and Ilusanya  describe university autonomy as protection of the universities from interference by government officials in the day to day running of the institution especially on the issues related to the selection of student, the appointment and removal of academic staff including the vice-chancellors, the determination of content of university education and the control of the degree, standard and the determination of size and the rate of growth. ¹⁷

Indeed, university autonomy implies that each university must be governed according to the law that establishes it. Every university has its law, edict or even decree which spells out the functions of the various organs, such as Council, Senate, Congregation, Faculty, Department, Institute and others. But successive governments have often infringed on this autonomy, usually hiding under the cover of national interest. According to Ajayi and Ayodele, government involvement in university governance has been a cause of strife between the government and ASUU over some time now.¹⁸ Universities suffered from arbitrary governance, rather than being a place where justice and truth are to be nurtured, the universities triumphed on mediocrity and untruths. As stated by Arikewuyo, promotion was earned through sycophancy and the admission procedure became systematically bastardized. ¹⁹ In addition, the author stated that past and present governments have encroached on university autonomy. Equally, staff and student unions were banned and unbanned at various times, many Vice Chancellors have been removed for not complying with directives from the government, a major General was even appointed as the sole administrator in a first generation university, many academics have been dismissed for instance, forty-nine academic staff of the University of Ilorin were dismissed for taking part in a nation-wide strike called by ASUU in 2001. Thus, the question is: if academics could be dismissed unjustly in a democratic government, one could imagine what would happen under a military regime?

The erosion of university autonomy is still on the increase as Government still interferes in appointment of key managers of the system such as Chancellors, Pro-Chancellors and external members of the governing councils to run the affairs of universities without recourse to the system. Such appointments are made most times to reward political patronage.  Without a doubt, it has become common place to have some university councils’ members whose knowledge of University affairs is ill equipped. As a result, it is quite challenging for Nigerian universities to recruit, sustain, and retain some of their talents. As such, quality human resource is lost to the organized private sector or to some foreign universities that provide better options than what is obtained in Nigeria. To this end, government-owned universities in Nigeria suffer a lot of setback in terms of falling standards, deteriorating infrastructure, and poor human resource development, which emanates from years of poor funding and direct interference into its day to day administration by government agencies and some regulatory bodies responsible for standards, quality, and admissions. Judging from the above state of acts, can one boldly state that Nigerian universities have been granted their fair share of autonomy? This question, in actual sense is an irony or sarcasm as institutional autonomy in the management of Nigerian university education is far-fetched.

Recommendations

The following recommendations are hereby made to aid academic freedom and institutional autonomy in the management of Nigerian university education:

• The Nigerian universities institutions should be given free hands to govern themselves. In that case, the power of NUC over the control of academic programs, determination and maintaining academic programs and academic standard should be reduced and be given to the institutions to be exercised through the university Senate.
• The universities (Miscellaneous) Act, 1993, gives the senate of each university powers, among other things, to have control over teaching and research; admission of students; award of degrees, as well as promotion of research in accordance with university statutes and laws. In this regard, the governments, especially visitors to the universities need to imbibe the culture of democratic principles. In that wise the universities should be allowed to govern themselves according to the laws and acts that establish them.
•  Appointments of governing councils and principal officers should be largely carried out with reasonable consent of universities. Such appointments should not be made to reward political patronage whose knowledge of university affairs is ill equipped.
•  Government should desist from compelling universities to rely on public service circulars for their day to day administration since the universities on their own runs a calendar distinct from that of the civil service.

Conclusion

The struggle to rebuild institutional autonomy and academic freedom as a means of re engineering Nigerian universities is not a demand for monastic separation from society. It is a sincere and right step to impart knowledge in materially tolerable conditions without hindrance from political authorities. Thus, for academic freedom of lecturers and institutional autonomy in the management of Nigerian university education to be attainable, government is expected to give autonomy to universities in the following areas such as: academic, administrative and finance. Though, absolute freedom may not be possible.  Nevertheless, the universities should still be allowed to be run according to universally acceptable norms and principles. In that wise, the various organs of the university, such as governing council, senate, faculties and departments should be allowed to perform their statutory functions. This is necessary in that an agreement which cannot be enforced or kept should not be undertaken, for it is like a sword which has no strength to secure a man at all.

References

Arikewuyo, M.O. (2009). Restructuring as a panacea for the sustainable development of the Nigerian university system, Higher Education Policy, (22):245-257.

Benjamin, S. A. (2001). Perspective on University autonomy and the sustainability of higher education in Nigeria. Proceedings of the 12th General Assembly of the Social Science Academy of Nigeria, 21-28.

Ojo, J.D. (1990). Law and University Administration in Nigeria, Lagos; Malthouse Publishing Limited.

Mbaji, I. N. (2017). Rousseau’s social contract: application in conflict resolution between the federal government of Nigeria and academic staff union of universities. Being a Ph.d. Thesis Submitted to the Department of Educational Foundations, University of Nigeria, Nsukka. June, 2017

Odekunle, K. S. (2001).Funding of university education under democratic rule in Nigeria: Problems and prospects. Proceedings of the 12^th General Assembly of SSAN.

Sanda A. O. (1992): Managing Nigeria Universities. Spectrum Books Ltd.

Fourie, M. (2004). Autonomy and accountability: Keeping the balance in South African Higher Education.

Akpan K. & Glory A. (2017) University autonomy and academic freedom in Nigeria: A theoretical over view .International Journal of Academic Research and Development.(2)4: 2

Malherbe R. (2004) Equal Educational Opportunities in South Africa: the Constitutional Framework’ (3) TSAR 427-447.

Federal Ministry Of Education (2008). Education Sector Status Report. Abuja: Federal Ministry of Education.

Adegbite, J. O (2007) The Education Reform Agenda: Challenges for tertiary education administration in Nigeria; being a paper presented at the sixth annual seminar of the Conference of Registrars of Colleges of Education in Nigeria (South West Zone) at the College of Education, Ikere-Ekiti, Ekiti State.

Ibukun, W.O (1997). Educational management: theory and practice. Ado- Ekiti: Green Line Publishers.

Akpan K. & Glory A. (2017) Ibid

Okojie, J.A. (2011). University autonomy: Repositioning the Nigerian education system in the 21st century, retrieved on September 18, 2023 from  www.nuc.edu.ng

Sorkaa, A.P. (2001). University Autonomy and Academic Freedom: Problems and Prospects. A paper presented at the 2001 National Conference of the Association of Nigerian University Professional Administrators (ANUPA), held at Central Auditorium (North Core), University of Agriculture, Makurdi; 21st – 23rd November.

Mbaji, I. N. (2017). Ibid

Federal Ministry of Education (2008). Ibid

Ojedele, P. & Ilusanya, G. (2006). Planning and policy of higher education in Nigeria. In J. B. Babalola, A. O. Ayeni, S. O. Adedeji, A. A. Suleiman and M. O. Arikewuyo (eds) Educational Management: Thoughts and Practice. Ibadan: Codat publications

Ajayi, I. A. & Ayodele, J. B. (2004). Fundamentals of educational management. Ado-Ekiti: Green-line publishers.

Download/View the cover of paper, NJEP Vol. 34, No. 1.

Abstract

Egalitarian and standardized educational system that could guarantee equity and justice in Nigeria have seemingly remain a far cry, with constant fallacy of begging the question. Such lofty dreams have been impinged upon by inimical indices such as deregulation, privatization, Commercialization and poor funding of educational sector in the country. Qualitative education globally, stands out as a formidable key to socio-political and economic development. Education especially at the tertiary levels is designed to train and equip learners with desirable skills that could enable its recipients’ function creditably in response to societal yearnings and aspirations.  It is in recognition of such indispensable needs of education with its attendant gains, that every meaningful and sensible nation hold the need of having her citizenry educated, close to heart. However, nations that undermine the all importance role of qualitative education, risk the chances of meaningful growth and development. Nigeria, from our founding fathers treasured the gains of education, and enshrined it not only in the constitution of the country but also developed a national policy on education as a blueprint, and operational matrix for both government and educational operators. Perhaps they envisaged that a time like this will come where the nation will down play on the educational standard of her subjects. This paper therefore, aims at entrenching the imperatives of the National Policy on Education objectives as a mission to achieving the attainment of equal opportunity for all citizenry, development of manpower in all ramifications as a bridge – end to meaningful growth and development. Qualitative education was intended to negate tribalism, inequality, injustice, exploitation, subjugation, nepotism and the likes capable of resulting in corruption, retrogression and negative trajectory. Lucid understanding of the aims/objectives of National Policy on Education, would have possibly trumpeted the Nation Nigeria to the comity of Nations where education would have possibly be seen as a money spinner, and an index for individual and National revamping mechanism. But sadly, like the sayings of Chinua Achebe in Things Fall Apart, deregulation, privatization, commercialization, politicization and poor funding of the nations educational system could be likened to the bane to our education. Indeed, the seeming “white man’s knife” puts on the things that held us together and we have now fallen not only apart but into shreds. This conference would not have come at any time better than now of bemoaning the broken, disheartening and inhabitable educational system; also, that the glamour for resilience and sincere yearnings for building a strong and dependable educational system with a stronger advocacy unto posterity, and a clarion call  to quit era of folding of arms and do nothing. If this is the position of everyone in this conference, then, you are all welcome. Otherwise, posterity may not forgive us. Hence, the urgent need for us all to retreat to the

drawing board sincerely and objectively devoid of lip service, re-examine our goals and objectives in line with global educational best practice and “fight” with the last strength in us perhaps even following Esther’s dictum if we perish, we perish. The time for this radical approach, is now.

Keywords: Deregulation, Commercialization, Educational Imbalance, National Development

Introduction                              

Nigeria, like other nations of the world accepted formal education on the advent of Europeans. The zeal for formal education increased over years and of recent, emphasis is on tertiary education because of the basic benefits achievable from tertiary education. Tertiary education serves as a tool or means for social, economic, development and transformation. It also enhances higher level of workforce, managerially and technologically. Tertiary systems of education are generally, aimed at meeting modern social, economic and political needs. Tertiary education provides special kind of education and training for special needs in the society. This is possible because of its insistence of increased research activities for improved contribution to public awareness, knowledge and development. Ruqayyatu Amed Rufai, in a paper. National Policy on Education (formulated in the early 1970s), holds that, “this is a document that was originally informed by the need to provide access to education for all Nigerians, regardless of the social class or region. It aimed to improve the quality of education in Nigeria” (www.entoday .com/rational policy…). The basic objectives of the policy include, increase primary school’s enrolment rate, improving teachers’ training and educational infrastructure, expanding access to secondary and tertiary education. Although the policy was revised, the above stated objectives were retained and a number of new objectives were added, namely: increase access to early childhood education, improving education, improving literacy levels and promoting vocational and technical training. The revised policy also provided room for the use of technology in education to ensure that all Nigeria students have access to computers and the internet by 2020.

National Policy on Education: The Implementation Challenge.

This policy on education became the blue-print upon which the nation education builds. It could be observed that prior to 1977, Nigeria operated an educational policy inherited from Britain prior to Independence. However, given one inadequacy or the other, National Educational Research and Development Council kept reviewing the policy in pursuit of the desire to attain National Development Plan aimed at building:

-a free and democratic society;

– a just and egalitarian society;

-a United strong and self-reliant nation;

-a great and dynamic economy;

– a land of bright and full opportunities for all citizens (FRN, 1998).

Despite the above objectives, implementation so far left us with little to be desired. Efforts have been made to develop education in Nigeria since independence in 1960.  Such efforts notwithstanding, the state of education is still deplorable. Most prominent Nigerians that would have possibly lend their voices to building a dependable educational system for Nigerians, prefer sending their children to Europe, America, South Africa and even to small countries like Ghana, Cameroun, Niger Republic, etc. It could be argued by most noble minds that when Nigeria is addressed as the Giant of Africa, it hits hard on many, as derogatory because though with the rich endowment, about 80% Nigerians live below the poverty line of $1 per day. The national policy on education objectives of building a free and democratic society; a just and egalitarian society, a united strong and self-reliant nation, a great and dynamic economy, and to build a land of bright and full opportunities for all citizens is sophistry, an illusion, deceptive, an empty chanting, worst still, a vocal emission, either due to lack of political will to drive full implementation of humane policies or corruption, greed and lots more.

Hoghes (26) noted Nigeria development failure to have sprung from lack of success in achieving an effective model of governance resulting from instability, generated by rivalry for control of huge resources accruing to the state from oil industry, and the negative use of political power to milk the state for personal gain rather than promote economic and social development. Again, most policies died on arrival because of political instability which often than not, stalled policies implementation. On corruption, if anything has contributed to stagnation of corporate development of Nigeria, it is corruption. This “virus” has placed our country on the path of negative prominence on the global space. Corruption perception index ranked Nigeria as the third most corrupt countries in the World. In 2003, the watch dog on global corruption ranked Nigeria as the second most corrupt countries in the world (Adesina (16). One could readily bemoan a deplorable state of the nation educational sector being corroded by the “venom” of corrupt practices. Despite enormous oil and gas wealth at the disposal of the country, basic things of life to include food, shelter, portable water, electricity, good road and education etc, have long eluded us. Corruption has as well stagnated the development of education in Nigeria. The designers of national policies from all intent and purposes were visionary and should be applauded. The objectives of most policies in this country are often derailed at the implementation stage duly to;

1. Cupidity of our lawmakers.

2. Reluctance to release funds for implementation by the executive arm of government.

3. If funds are eventually released, they are grossly inadequate.

 It could be emphasized that, the essence of rigorous articulation lies in advocacy rather speaking of grammar. Let us objectify this problem and create a propelling advocacy to gain positive change.

Challenges to Education in Nigeria

“An investment in knowledge pays the best interest” – Benjamin Franklin

“Whatever the cost of our libraries, the price is cheap compared to that of an ignorant nation” – Walter Cronkite.

Deregulation

Deregulation is against these two important quotes. Deregulation can be seen as an economic reform, a fiscal monitory policy measure in which laws or rules of entry and exit into the market are weakened, relaxed or totally removed in order to enhance the competitiveness of economic actors (http://www.researchgate.net.July 2023) it was introduced in Nigeria when Nigeria was no longer able to handle her financial indebtedness to International Monetary Fund (IMF). One of the conditionalities of IMF was for Nigeria to deregulate the system including education. In 1985, an 11- person technical committee on commercialization was inaugurated. “As part of the recommendation to government from International Monetary Fund and an International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (now World Bank) was the rationalization and privatization of public enterprises to encourage competition through liberation and deregulation”  (http://www.researchgate.net.3, July, 2013). Deregulation actually became effective when there were increased need and demand on education system due to growth, economic and social necessities (http://www.researchgate.net.3, July, 2023). Deregulation of education can be described as “a sale of knowledge to the highest bidder, which has the effect of lowering standards for the attraction of customers” (http://www.researchgate.net. 2023). With deregulation, education has become a private and money-making venture. Education in the face of deregulation in Nigeria is in the hands of individuals or groups who invest and are out to maximize profits to the detriment of children of low-income parents. This has stifled the access to education by all citizens. Thus, exposes children and schools, especially public schools to struggle for survival in the face of competition. Deregulation of education enhances privatization and commercialization which greatly affects funding and accessibility. This in turn affects equality and quality. Because of the gains of deregulation in terms of profit maximization, more private and public universities have been established and more applications are to be approved. Many students have dropped out of schools, due to high school charges. Deregulation killed education subsidy, bursary awards, scholarships and loan schemes. One of the off-shoot of deregulation is commercialization.

Commercialization

Commercialization of education offers education services for profits or gains. Schools operates as money or profits making ventures or institutions. On the bases of this, the government expects public schools to survive without any subvention, yet expecting the same quality, equality and efficiency. How possible is it?

Commercialization is the process at which government makes tertiary education a profitable business or profit making institutions (http://www. researchgate.net2023). Schools owners demonstrate without constrain or censorship, their capitalists attitudes to the death of all the inclusion of the benefits to citizens in the National Policy on Education. Another component of deregulation is privatization.

Privatization

Privatization is more or less transfer of ownership of property or enterprise from one person, group of persons or government to other individuals or agencies. Privatization is also a capitalist and materialistic approach to maximize profits. Public (government) ventures attract the enjoyment of social facilities or amenities. The desire to privatize is to maximize profits.

Commercialization and privatization, as the main components of deregulation do not seem to have clear-out distinction. They both suffocate government responsibilities to the citizens to death. The concepts wherever and whenever implemented, do not and cannot afford anyone or society the opportunity to enjoy or access government social amenities freely.  

Education for National Development

Development is indeed, multifaceted in meaning and multidimensional in content. It concerns itself with the all-round development of the human person. In fact, investment in education directs to human capital development that could be seen as paradigmatic, and fundamental to every meaningful growth and development. It has severally been argued that, since education is geared towards training of the learner to acquire useful and meaningful skills that are in line with societal needs and aspirations, it is therefore sure that education will equip learners to acquire such desirable skills that could result in: increase productivity, develop talents and desired work ethics, develop right and seasoned personnel, develop competence to harness qualitative integration of resources for social and national development.

National development is directly attached to the quality and standard of education of any society. The development of human capacity is the bedrock of national development. The death of quality and equality in Nigeria education system has affected National development. This can be explained in the light of the fact that, many students from low income families cannot afford the high cost of education in Nigeria and it should be noted that there are brilliant and bright children from poor families who are not given any opportunity to kindle the ability in them for their contribution to national development.

The importance of investment in education cannot be overemphasized. Although in 1944, when the World Bank was first established, education was not included among the productive purposes for which it was saddled to execute. The bank concentrated its lending on projects designed to make a direct contribution to the productive capacity of its members, and not to finance projects such as the construction and equipment of Schools, Colleges and Universities. The bank undermined education as essential to the development of a country. However, there was a paradigm shift in 1960 to the economic value of education, described by Bowman as the “human investment revolution in economic thought” (scholar.google.com).

According to Psacharapoulos and Woodhall (1993), “Before long, economist were trying to measure the contribution of education to economic growth (Schultz1961, 1963; Denison, 1962, 1967; 1968), and many were examining the concept of investment in human capital (Becker, 1964, 1975). (scholar.google.com). based on the above, governments, planners, international agencies, and educators throughout the world, and Nigeria was not on exception, were influenced in favour of education. The failure to consider the significance of education in national development had slowed down the investment attitude in education and consequently, slowed down development. The Nigeria case was worsened by the introduction of deregulation, commercialization and privatization. Corruption in Nigeria alongside the above, remain the greatest barrier to the nation’s aspirations, pursuit and realization towards human capacity building for national development.

In the light of the above, no nation can experience remarkable national development outside education. Hence, national development is attached to human capacity building and national capacity building is achieved through meaningful investment in education. Nigeria is yet to reap the objectives of National Policy on Education. This means failure to produce human capacity. This is a result of poor funding of education which has resulted in fallen standard, strikes, brain drain and students’ dropout.

Human capacity building or education precedes all forms of development. Hence, human capacity or development, must be ensured if Nigeria is to be developed.

Qualitative education is a sure bet that could guarantee a seeming permanent change in human behavior that would in turn generate sufficient manpower to drive the nation’s economy away from degeneracy into self-sustaining one and from a consuming economy into a production economy.

Benefits of Proper Implementation of Education Policy

• Quality Education
• Quality Institutions
• Quality Staffing
• Quality Students
• Efficiency
• National Development

Suggestions for Improvement

“Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world” – Nelson Mandela.

Education is the fundamental means through which development can be achieved. Education improves the quality of human life. Education makes people to be humble for peaceful society. It also liberates the citizens and they can never be enslaved. It kindles a flame of the ability endowed in humans. This is why when the quality of human capacity or capital development is below expectations, the result is political instability, gangsterism, economic and social imbalance as well as social agitations.

In the light of a colossal damage caused on the educational system in Nigeria, and its attendant disruption on quality of the schools and the graduates, lack of academic and administrative autonomy of schools, necessitates urgent need for repairs. Some of the ways to repair the damaged educational system in Nigeria include:

•  Return to and full implementation of the National Policy on Education in other to achieve the goals therein
• Revival of education sectors through proper funding by government
• Instant stoppage of implementation of deregulation, commercialization and privatization of education. Nigeria has many sources of income, namely oil, timber, cocoa, cold, tin, etc. which if properly harnessed, will be enough to fund education for optimal service delivery.
•    Full autonomy of academic and administration be granted to institutions to admit qualified students, recruit qualified staff to ensure quality teaching and learning for efficiency.
• De politicization of education. All matters pertaining to education should be handled by qualified hands and not by people whose academics status are in doubt.
• Proper or heavy funding of education should be prioritized by government. Education is the liberating premise of progress and development anywhere in the world. So government should take over funding of education.
• Corruption had been inimical to the success of education in Nigeria. For progress to be made handlers of education with questionable characters should have nothing to do in the business of education. And all those who are identified as being corrupt should face the full wrath of the law of the land. Favoritism in the system supports corruption. Education should be devoid of corrupt people.
• Establishment of more schools should stop forthwith to be able to effectively carter for the existing ones. Private institutions of learning should be censored, academically and administratively. All their activities should be monitored.
• Monitoring and evaluations are important for assessment to determine whether or not there is progress in education.

Conclusion

The state of education in Nigeria has been very worrisome. There seem to be nothing wrong with the National Policy on Education. Many attempts have been made to right the wrongs but such attempts do not seem to yield the desired results as the standard is falling, low quality infrastructure, low quality and low number of staff and students, strikes by staff, brain drain, etc, directly affecting national development. It has been established that poor funding, deregulation, commercialization, privatization, politicization and corruption are some of the major challenges of education for national development in Nigeria. The way out is to return to full implementation of the national policy on education to achieve the intended goals of the policy. Funding of education should be the sole responsibility of the government.  Academic and administrative autonomy should be given to schools devoid of the misinterpreted autonomy of funding by schools. Until there is access to education for all at all levels, there will be no remarkable human capacity building that can enhance national development.

Thank you for listening. 

References

Abdu, P. S. (2003). “The Cost and Finance of Education in Nigeria”, Education

Today Quaterly June 10 (1).

Adesina, O. (2004). The Guardian Newspaper, Monday 1, 2016.

Adesina, S. (1977). Planning and Educational Development Nigeria, Ibadan: Education Industries Nigeria.

Ake, C. (1988). “Quality Education in a Dwindling Economy” 11^th Convocation

Ceremony of Rivers State College of Education. Port Harcourt. 

Akinwumi, F. S., Isuku , E. J. and Agwaranze D. I. (2005). “University Education

Deregulation: Pros and Cos”. In G. O. Akpa, S. U. Udoh and E. O. Fagbamiye (Eds). Contemporary Issues in Educational Management, Ibadan: Department of Educational Management.

Baguada Report. (1980). Perspectives of Quantities and Qualities Education in

Nigerian Education. 

Alibi, A. T. (2005). Deregulation of the Nigerian University Education: Issues and

Challenges. In In G. O. Akpa, S. U. Udoh and E. O. Fagbamiye (Eds). Contemporary Issues in Educational Management, Jos: The Nigerian Association for Educational Administration and Planning.

Anikweze, C. M. (1999). Equalization of Educational Opportunities: Dissonance

between Access and Demand in Nigeria. The Academy of Education held at the Federal College of Education Knao 16^th – 20^th November, Pp 125-144.

Decree 16 of 1985, “Education, National Minimum Standards and Establishment

of Higher Institution, Lagos, Section 10.

Encarta Encyclopedia (2003). Deregulation, CDROM.

Fabunmi, M. (2005) Historical Analysis of Educational Policy Formulation in

Nigeria: Implications for Educational Planning and Policy. International Journal of African and African American Studies. Vol. 5, No. 2.

Federal Republic of Nigeria (FRN), National Policy on Education. 2013.

Ifedili C. A. (2006). Recruitment and Quality Academic Staff Selection: The Case

of Covenant University, Psychologia 14 (12), 118-121.

Ifenkwe, G. E. (2013). Educational Development in Nigeria: Challenges and

Prospects in the 21^st Century. Universal Journal of Education and General Studies. Vol. 2 (1). 2013, Pp 7-17.

Izibili, M. A. and Aiya F. (2007) Deregulation and Corruption in Nigeria: An Ethical

Response, Kamla-Raj Journal of Social Science, Vol. 14, No. 3. Pp 229-234.

Jerome A. (2008), Privatization and Enterprise Performance in Nigeria: A Case

Study of some Privatized Enterprise. Africa Economic Research Consortium, Nairobi.

Okebukola, P. (2002). The State of University Education in Nigeria.  National

University Commission. 

Okoroma, N. S. (2000). Factors Militating against the Effective Implementation of

the basic Education Programme in River State.

Schrum, L. (2002). Education and Commercialization: Raising Awareness and

 making wise Decisions. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher           Education. 2 (2), 170-177.

Utili T. (2008). University Authonomy and the Brain Drain Syndrome in Nigeria.

Paper presented at the 3^rd Conference of the Acu’s Human Resource Management Network, 23^rd – 25^th May Trinidad and Tobago, West Indies.

Utulu C. C. (2001). “Quality of University Education in Nigeria; Problems and

Solutions” Journal of the Common Wealth Council for Educational Administration and Management. 29 (1).

Taiwo, C. O. (1980). The Nigeria Educational System: Past Present and Future.

Thomas Nelson Publishers.

Tijani Yakubu. Philosophy of Education, Education Policy, Policy Implemented,

and Result. Journal of Development Economics, 2020.

Daily Trust. “Nigerians Need Equitable Access to Higher Education”. 29^th January,

2015.

In the Info. Higher Education: Quality, Equity and Effiency. July, 2016.

1. Protocol
2. Proem

It is an honour and indeed a privilege for me to be invited to this important academic event as a Keynote Address presenter. I must thank the organizers for assembling a cross section of philosophers, educationists, educators, stakeholders and leaders in the tertiary sphere of our education system to appreciate a topic so apt with the title: Equality, Quality and Autonomy of Nigerian Tertiary Education. The organizers, indeed, deserve a stoutest ovation. Their effort is even more commendable when one considers the undoubted fact that currently in Nigeria our tertiary education system in under very serious directional threat. The dearth of recognizable targets, objectives and policies in the system is challenging. The need to fashion out a structure and function that would depoliticize the governance and economics of tertiary education for the purpose of engendering nation-building could not, therefore, be overemphasized (Brown, 2012). Hence, the importance and significance of this topic.

May I inform you that I am neither an Educationist nor a Philosopher by certification (Etuk, 2000). At best I am a Criminologist by education, qualification, certification and profession; though in my journey as an Academic I have done quite some work in the area of education. You may, therefore, have to take me the way I am as I hope that I have solved a possible identity crisis.

By way of delineation, the aim of this paper is to possibly set the tone for the necessary attempt at unbundling the conundrum inherent in the equality-quality-autonomy-of tertiary education interact; with the view to galvanizing governance structures and processes that would be socially responsible and sustainably responsive to the needs of the people, with the utilization of raised ethical and accountability standards for nation-building. This, it must be noted, is not predicated on a system or kind of government; but on the cultural reorientation of the major players in the polity and education sector, as well as, deployment of legislative and judicial realities. Worthy of note is the fact that these must be built on sound philosophies – hence – the value of this gathering made possible by the Philosophers of Education Association of Nigeria (PEAN). In order to achieve the task of this paper, emphasis will be placed on the following: conceptualizations, the main issue, points of emphasis, and conclusion.

• Conceptualizations
• Education

To Ekong (2003), education like other social institutions is a system of social practices evolved around a valued function of the society. It is also an activity for the transmission and

 acquisition of socially approved and desirable aspects of cultural heritage. In the contemporary western view, it is epitomized by the formal organization known as school (Gordner, 2018).

The functions include:

• the transmission of culture from one generation to another;
• training of people for specialized adult roles;
• drives social change; consequentially
•  differentiates people in the society and validates social statuses; and
• Provides settings for social interaction.

  Put summarily, education is the very ingredient for a guaranteed future – the key to unlocking the locked potentials, imaginations, aspirations, thoughts and dreams in people’s minds and hearts (Brown, 2007 and 2019).

• Tertiary Education

This is the third-level, third-stage, or post-secondary education. The World Bank grants a definitive guide to include: universities, colleges of education and technology, Polytechnics and Monotechnics. They provide platforms for training people in all spheres of life including arts, humanities, science and technology; with the view to driving development.

This stage of education in Nigeria is bedeviled by not a few concerns, including: poor quality of education at the feeder levels, ownership structure, funding, the economics of education, quality of service delivery, infrastructure, public-private interface, to mention but a few. Yet, the expectations are high.

• Quality of (Tertiary) Education

Simply put, quality points to peculiar and essential character, inherent feature, and in this case, degree of excellence. The quality of tertiary education will raise queries on the content, teacher and teaching methods, learning environment, management and governance concerns, funding and organization, as well as, pre-conditions for students.

This is complemented by what Parinos, et al (2014) in their contribution in Education for Global Development advanced as the Six A’s of Quality Education, including:

• Assessment,
• Autonomy,
• Accountability,
• Attention to teachers,
• Attention to Upbringing, and
• Attention to culture.

Attending to the Six A’s above would undoubtedly answer the posers from the Sustainable Development Goal (4) which aim at ensuring inclusive and equitable quality education and promoting lifelong learning opportunities for all. This serves as the mission statement.

• Autonomy

This is an on-going thorny issue between governments and various workers unions in tertiary institutions in Nigeria. By occidental drift, it refers to the ability to take control of one’s own learning, independently or in collaboration with others. Here, the learner is expected to take greater responsibility in his or her leaning process. There is, therefore, a suggestion of freedom and independence with less interference from governmental quarters.

On the other hand, oriental classics sees it as the continuous funding of education by government but less responsibility on the governance of the institutions.

A quagmire is a consequence. Participants here will have to place the two views side-by-side and think through for what is best for our nation, bearing in mind the concerns of quality, equality, and inclusivity in a developing economy as ours.

• Nigeria

A geo-political sovereign entity on the west coast of Africa. Projected to be about 218 million people and with the highest percentage of out of school children in the world, it is a developing country in dire need of support from its producers of middle and higher-level service hands (Brown, 2012). Arguably, the national psyche is suffering from the problem of certification (Brown and Umoh, 2014), where people just crave to be certificated; not necessarily certified.

• The Main Issue

The extant situation is grotesque and calls for a rethinking. Doing a rethink in the context of Equality, Quality and Autonomy of Nigerian Tertiary Education, aptly calls for emphasis to be placed on the major concepts, namely: equality, quality, and autonomy within the Nigerian space.

• In dealing with the challenge of equality, the basic questions are: is equality even achievable? Could there be geographic, economic, gender (Brown and Umoh, 2009), security, physical and otherwise challenges, special needs, language, political, and cultural equality?
• The issue of quality brings to mind the realities of the National Policy on Education. How qualitatively advantageous is the policy to the country and its pressing needs? What is the relationship between our quality of education and our standard of education? Of what use is our political mechanisms engendering quality? (Brown and Umoh, 2014). How do we manage the entry of CCMAS into the university arena? How did CCMAS emerge? Of what good is CCMAS to the contemporary Nigerian? Whose interest is CCMAS intended to serve? A dispassionate probe into these questions will open a new vista into the realities of quality of education.
• The nagging issue of autonomy requires a dispassionate appraisal in the context of our dear nation as a struggling and developing country in dire need of a delicate balance with respect to the role of government and the challenges of equality and inclusion. The Student Loans Scheme takes off in January 2024, what could this conference do to help prepare the grounds so as to avoid the kind of bumps and hiccups experienced in the evolution of new policies? The Naira Redesign and Subsidy Removal policies of government, and the aftermath of their promulgation are handy illustrations.

• Points of Emphasis

Thoughts should be given to the role of: law, administration, social justice, infrastructure, finance and funding, geography (in the context of the possible terrorism of geography and the geography of terrorism), business and investments, technology and ICT, language and pedagogy, special education and meeting the needs of those with special needs, statistics, politics and security concerns (Brown, forthcoming).

• Conclusion

I feel safe to submit that it is difficult to rejig the system. Yet, Philosophers of Education Association of Nigeria (PEAN) have taken a bold step to help stem the tide; which calls for support. If we must succeed in our bid to make good the Equality-Quality-Autonomy equation in our tertiary institutions for national rebirth and development, then there has to be a tangible element of intentionality, to which PEAN has ventured. No doubt, this event is an expression of a bold step taken by our hosts to declare its intention. I pray for sustainability which is motivated by a drift to carve delicate balance for the common good.

From the heights of this place; to the end of this era and beyond, may we intentionally and consciously be determined to galvanize a tertiary education system that scores high in the Sustainable Development Goals index by ensuring equality, quality, and worthy autonomy in Nigeria. While wishing you all the very rewarding conference, thank you very immensely for holding your patience and hearing me through.

Aniekan Brown, PhD           

(Professor of Criminology)

References

Brown, A. S. & U. E. Umoh (2014) “Certification and Overschooling in Nigeria: A Criminological Appraisal of the Socio-Economic Dynamics”. In M. Afolabi & J. A. Ushie (eds.) Harvests from the Gown. Uyo: Flypapers. Vol. 2. (pp 616-624).

Brown, A. S. (2012) “Nigeria as a Social System” N. S. Nkanga, F. S. Ekpu, & R. O. Dode (eds.) Citizenship and Peace Studies. Uyo: Directorate of General Studies, University of Uyo.

Brown, A. S. and E. D. Umoh (2009) “Gender Question in Nigeria: Rethinking the Concept of Empowerment” International Journal of African Culture, Politics and Development.  Vol.4, No.1, April (pp. 127 – 136).

Brown, A.S. (2007) “For the ‘UBE’ to Answer the Question in Nigeria: A Sociological Comment” E.N. Etuk, I. M. Udofot, & A. E. Udosen (eds.) Education in Nigeria in the 21^st Century: Focus and Imperatives. Uyo: Abaam Publishing Company (pp. 271 – 285).

Brown, A.S. (2019) “Human Capacity Development for Sustainable Transformation of Persons and Society”. A Keynote Address Presented at the First Akwa Ibom State Education Summit and Exhibition, Organized by the Akwa Ibom State Ministry of Education, at Mboho Mkparawa Ibibio Udo Udoma House, Udo Udoma Avenue, Uyo, on September 05, 2019.

Brown, A. S. (Forthcoming) “Zonalization of Crime in Nigeria: The Case of Ownership.”

Ekong, E. E. (2003) An Introduction to Rural Sociology. Uyo: Dove Educational.

Gordner, H. (2018) Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York: Basic Books.

Oyebode, A. (2003) “The Challenge of Building a Virile Democratic Nation”. Delivered at the Annual Leadership Lecture and Awards organized by Leadership Watch, Lagos, October 30.

Udo, E. (2000) The Riches of Philosophy. Uyo: Scholars Press.

Download NJEP Vol. 34, No. 1 COVER

Presented by Prof Kola Babarinde:

Protocol
The Chief-Host and Vice-Chancellor, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Prof. C. A. Igwe,
Eminent Guests on the High Table,
Executive Committee Members of PEAN,
Fellows of PEAN,
Members of PEAN from all States of the Federation,
Distinguished Awardees,
Members of the Press,
Distinguished Ladies and Gentlemen.

On behalf of the Executive Committee and members of PEAN, I welcome you all to this year’s annual conference which is unique in many ways. Although it is the 41st annual conference of PEAN, it also marks PEAN’s 40th anniversary celebration which was initially scheduled for University of Benin, Benin City within October of last year, but had to be postponed till this year. Although last year’s conference was held virtually (on Zoom) as dictated by the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, the anniversary aspect was rescheduled for this year.

I congratulate and commend our members, of the University of Nigeria, Nsukka for accepting to host us and for working tirelessly to see it to success. Through them, I specially extend the appreciation of PEAN to the authorities of UNN under the dynamic leadership of Prof. C. A. Igwe for accepting to be our Chief Host and for extending the facilities and hospitalities of UNN to us.

PEAN is an acronym for Philosophers of Education Association of Nigeria—a professional/ academic association of thinkers, Scholars and academics whose primary training and interest is to reflect, engage, critique, analyse and prescribe in the different aspects of education—including goals, aims, purposes, contents, curriculum, methodologies, government policies, implementation and other facets of education. PEAN was established in 1980 through the initiatives and efforts of our founding fathers such as Prof. J. N. Omatseye (University of Benin), Prof. Jones Akinpelu (University of Ibadan), Prof J. D. Okoh (University of Port Harcourt), Prof. F. C. Okafor (University of Nigeria, Nsukka), Prof. Otonti A. Nduka (University of Port Harcourt) among others.

Welcome Address by the President of Philosophers of Education Association of Nigeria (PEAN) | Prof. Kola Babarinde
Philosophy of Education Association of Nigeria (PEAN) Vol. 33 No. 1, October 2022 | 2
PEAN parades a rich history of past Presidents, viz:

1. Prof. J. N. Omatseye—University of Benin
2. Prof. Jones Akinpelu – University of Ibadan
3. Prof. J.D. Okoh – University of Port Harcourt
4. Prof. Ayo Adewole – University of Jos
5. Prof. Oluremi Ayodele Bamisaiye – University of Ibadan
6. Prof. Adisson Mark Wokocha -Rivers State University of Science and Technology and Registrar/CEO, TRCN
7. Prof. Orona Oroka – Delta State College of Education, Abraka
8. Prof. A.O. Enoh – Cross River State University of Technology, Calabar
9. Prof. Abubakar Bagudo – Usmanu Dan Fodiyo University, Sokoto
   We are very proud of a rich and wonderful academic and professional heritage which has produced Nigerian Journal of Educational Philosophy on annual basis to its current 31st edition and a number of other publications in between, including the seminar publication on Philosophical Research Methods in Education, which has served as a major text for guidance into philosophical research in tertiary education in Nigeria. The publication has tried to settle the debate on the feasibility of a unique method of studying of Philosophy of Education and particularly in carrying out research works at Masters and Doctoral levels in the area.
   We have received complaints of policies demanding that our higher education students and young colleagues must always and only conduct their research and write their research report in a particular way usually the socio-scientific/historical methods. This was described as “tyranny of socio-scientific research against Philosophical Research Method” in our publication. We wish to plead for openness and supporting policies by our Postgraduate Colleges and Schools and our colleagues in the Faculties of Education and beyond. Philosophy and Philosophers may be somewhat peculiar; although they might be argumentative, they mean well. They may demand for details, often intolerant of tardiness and incompetence; these should not be considered as negative. As John Gardner once cautioned,
   An excellent plumber is infinitely more admirable than an incompetent philosopher. The society which scorns excellence in plumbing because plumbing is a humble activity and tolerates shoddiness in philosophy because it is an exalted activity, will have neither good plumbing nor good philosophy. Neither its pipes nor its theories will hold water- John W. Gardner, 1981
   Openness to shades of knowledge and diversity in methodologies can only make the academy more productive and better. At any rate, all of us with PhD and those who aspire to this academic laurel should realize that PhD is an acronym for Doctor of Philosophy. Philosophy here means love of wisdom as conceived by great minds of Western Philosophy such as Socrates, Plato, Aristotle and their descendants.
   Let me return to our 40th anniversary which we celebrate with a number of landmark activities including;
   Welcome Address by the President of Philosophers of Education Association of Nigeria (PEAN) | Prof. Kola Babarinde
   Philosophy of Education Association of Nigeria (PEAN) Vol. 33 No. 1, October 2022 | 3
10. Unveiling of latest edition of our journal – Nigerian Journal of Educational Philosophy (NJEP) publication.
11. Conferment of fellowships and awards to deserving members of the Association, State Governments, parastatal and an International NGO.
    In our 41 years history, the annual conferences have been held across the length and breadth of Nigeria; from University of Benin to University of Ibadan, University of Jos, Usman dan Fodiyo University, Sokoto, University of Calabar, University of Lagos, Lagos State University, Ojoo, University of Port-Harcourt and so on. I am delighted to report that this is the third time PEAN is holding her annual conference here at the University of Nigeria, Nsukka. This confirms the significance and strength of her members here at UNN and we are very proud of them.
    The annual conferences have been used as opportunity to gather the best minds in Philosophy of Education in particular and other specialisations in Education in general together, first to examine current issues in Education and proffer policy directions and probable solutions to educational challenges. The annual conference is also used for annual general meetings where administrative and organisational matters are discussed and decided.
    This Year’s Conference Theme
    This year’s main theme is; Education, security, economy and viability of digital response. The COVID-19 pandemic has been a major challenge and traumatic experience to humanity and a unique experience almost without any similar direct experience to any living man/woman. It has affected education, economy and posed huge challenges to security of lives and property. Human creativity, knowledge and resources have been deployed to finding solutions to this health challenge. There have been non-pharmaceutical protocols to be observed such as face masking, social distancing, regular hand washing and sanitizing among others. Vaccinations have also been introduced to manage the pandemic and reduce mortality. Several million lives have been lost and the world is yet to fully overcome the pandemic. While I am not attempting to do the job of the keynote speaker and lead paper presenter in setting the tone for the conference, permit me to raise some tentative questions.
    What is the metaphysical, epistemological and axiological implications of the pandemic? Has it altered our conception of man? Is man an animal or machine? On the epistemological side, what knowledge is of most worth? Is digital knowledge now more valuable than any and all types of knowledge? Does digital solution offer more viable outcome to all human challenges? What is the implication of this on our conception of right/wrong; good/bad and the definition of “the good life”? How safe and secure is digital space and the solutions it offers?
    What is the role of education in our response to contemporary challenges? Can we continue to respond in the traditional ways and hope to get different results? What is the limit and possibilities of the aphorism; learn, teach, lead and survive or Do-nothing, whine, wail and die?
    The Chief – Host, Eminent guests, members of PEAN, ladies and gentlemen, it is not my duty to give the keynote address, I have only attempted as a student of Philosophy, to raise some Philosophical questions to wet our intellectual appetite.
    Welcome Address by the President of Philosophers of Education Association of Nigeria (PEAN) | Prof. Kola Babarinde
    Philosophy of Education Association of Nigeria (PEAN) Vol. 33 No. 1, October 2022 | 4
    Once again, on behalf of the Executive Committee of PEAN, I welcome all members and Conference participants from across the length and breadth of Nigeria to this year’s annual Conference and the 40th Anniversary celebrations. The Chief – Host and other dignitaries in attendance, I thank you all for your patience.

Abstract

In a bid to proffer solution to Nigeria’s ubiquitous societal problems, many have argued that what the nation needs presently is a solid human development for all its citizens. Sadly, human development in our present society is at its lowest ebb due to decadence in values. Stories of human killings, kidnappings, cultism, nepotism, corruption, rape and many other vices fill the air. Nigeria cannot develop if her citizens are deficient in values. Hence, the need for a reflection of what is best for the country. These writers argue that moral education is the panacea for these social ills. They believe that students at all levels of education should be taught moral education as this will help in bringing out that rationality in them as well as help them to attain self-autonomy at which stage, they already know what is best for them and their society and will consequently choose to practice what is right at all times.

Read/download the full paper below

Abstract

This paper seeks to examine the relevance of national security efforts and its implication for quality and standard education in Nigerian schools. Nigeria as a democratic government in Africa especially under the fourth republic has been engulfed with series of insecurity problems which in one way or the other affect academic activities designed to be achieved in public schools nationwide. Academic programs in most affected states and local governments are directly affected and some schools were closed due to insecurity problems, For instance farmer/herder conflicts, religious crisis and communal crisis that contributed to the failure in educational achievement in most pre-tertiary institutions nationwide. Other factors responsible for under achievement in Nigerian education include, arm bandits, arm robbers, kidnappers and boko haram insurgency among others. These activities engaged by members of banditry and kidnappers have systematically force some state governors to locked down both public and private schools for a duration of time to safe both learners and teachers lives in schools. This paper identified among other as some insecurity problems comprises ethno-religion crisis, weak security principles and leadership. This paper suggested among other the way forward that would help in tackling insecurity problems is by improving good governance, creating employment for the unemployed graduates and training and re-training of all security personnel these serve as steps towards reducing insecurity problems and as well as to pave way for quality education in all tiers of education.

Read/download the full paper below

Abstract

This paper is a critical reflection on knowledge economy and Nigeria’s preparedness to meet its demands in the 21^st century. It discussed the emergence of knowledge economy as the dominant economic system of the moment and the role education plays in its development. The paper argued that knowledge economy is creating a highly competitive global community, a community where good thinking results in good product. For a nation like Nigeria to survive this competitive pressure, the paper suggested the need for a change in the mode of doing things within Nigeria’s education system and business environment. If the global community has changed the base of its economy, so should education and schooling system. It proposed that Nigeria’s workforce largely groomed in academic institutions must have ability to adapt to constant change and uncertainty. They must be educated to be creative and innovative, using the opportunities that modern technology especially information and communications technology offer. This is to boost their capacity to work in knowledge and service based economies. The paper highlighted the priorities of Knowledge Economy and made some recommendations such as investing in the abundant human resources of the nation, providing sufficient funds for education and employment of qualified staff, provision of basic amenities especially electricity which technologies require to function effectively. These will enable Nigerian policy makers in education prepare a generation of workforce necessary for seamless migration into knowledge based economy.

Read/download the full paper below