University of Port Harcourt, Nigeria

UNIVERSITY OF PORT HARCOURT, NIGERIA

FACULTY OF EDUCATION
CONFERENCE ON 100 YEARS OF EDUCATION IN NIGERIA
10-12 NOVEMBER 2014

RIGHTING THE WRONGS OF THE NATION’S EDUCATION SYSTEM

KEYNOTE PRESENTATION

PAI OBANYA

(Emeritus Professor, Institute of Education, University of Ibadan)

This presentation will draw heavily from personal experience of involvement in educational development work and will make use of methodologies and frameworks developed over the years in an effort to analyse the forces shaping the course and the fortune of Education in the country. These methodologies and frameworks were the bedrocks of my ‘educationeering’ efforts since 1999 and came into full force in the following specific activities:

the design of the nation’s original UBE (Universal Basic Education) programme (1999)
the development of girls’ education strategies for seven of the northern states of the federation (2001-2002)
a general survey of secondary education in the country, followed by more in-depth studies in four states-Lagos, Kaduna, Enugu and Rivers states (2003-2004)
education sector strategic planning with 30 of the 36 states of the Federation (2008-2012)[i]
chairmanship of the Presidential Task Team on Education (2011)

I had in the course of these activities developed, tested and to some adapted the following analytical tools

A rapid assessment procedure (RAP) for analysing issues and challenges of the education sector
adoption of the RAP framework for education sector SWOT analysis
The problem tree approach for reaching deep down to the root causes of education sector challenges.
bottleneck analysis for probing into barriers to meaningful access to education and full coverage of educational opportunities

SWOTAnalysis (Strengths-Weaknesses-Opportunities-Threats), now called SCOT (replacing ‘weaknesses’ with ‘challenges’) in some quarters, is a ‘thinking through’ tool large used by big business as a starting point in ‘re-ing everything’ to ensure their continued competitiveness. It has been used in our work forbrainstorming, using hard and soft data to analyse education sector challenges ,resulting in a swot profile presented in four quadrants, as in table one below.

Table 1: A SWOT (SCOT) Quadrant

STRENGHTS
Internalfactors----positive in nature---to be capitalised upon by me / OPPORTUNITIES
External factors that could favour my operations---to be mobilised forcefully and used to my advantage
WEAKNESSES (CHALLENGES)
Internal low points-----to be improved upon / THREATS
External conditions that could stunt project attainment----to be counteracted

The thinking through process was in each case aided by a detailed framework, reproduced in table two, the result of which was both a synthesis table in the form of an education sector SWOT Profile and a more detailed issues and challenges document. What then followed was a root-cause analysis of key challenges and the choice of strategic options for addressing them.

Table 2: The RAP Framework Applied to the Educational Sector

EDUCATION CHALLENGE
AREA / ISSUES TO BE EXAMINED

Education Policy Environment

Civil society interest and involvement in education issues
Legislative and regulatory mechanisms for educational development
Education policy development process
Current/extant education policy(ies)
Structures/mechanisms for policy implementation

Access and Equity

Enrolment at various levels/forms of Education
Attendance/drop out/repetition/completion/success/transition to next level
Opportunities for education out-of-school
Gender parity and equity in educational opportunities (all levels/all forms)
Geographical and social coverage of educational opportunities

Quality and Relevance

Educational INPUTS (policy, management framework, teachers, materials, infrastructure, curriculum, funding)
Educational PROCESSES (school level management, teacher-pupil classroom interactions, opportunities for out-of-class learning, inspection/supervision/quality control measures)
Educational OUTCOMES (student learning, examination success rates, learner-behaviour/values/attitudes, types of skills acquired through education
Level of appropriateness of education to children and society’s current and future needs
Relationship between school curriculum and the world of work

Teaching and Learning

Teacher education level/qualifications
Teacher competence/knowledge
Teacher experience
Teacher effectiveness/work ethics/level of creativity
Gender sensitivity among teachers
Learner readiness/attitudes/study habits/work ethics
School and classroom environment/including gender-friendliness levels
Guidance and Counselling services
What students actually learn/or fail to learn
Parental/societal support for school learning

Management and Efficiency

System level management
Institutional level management
Decentralization/devolution of authorities in educational management
Society involvement
Wastages in the system (in what forms at different levels)
Education sector planning
State of Education data
Structures and mechanisms for education service delivery
Level of synergy among parastatals and agencies and departments

Resourcing

Sources of resources for Education
Extant policy on Resourcing Education
Education budgeting methodology
Overall education sector budgetary allocations
Sub sectoral allocations within the education sector (basic/secondary/higher education/non-formal education)
Education service-related budgetary allocations (teachers, infrastructure, materials and equipment central and LGEA administration).
Targeted budgeting for girls’ and women’s education
Fund release methodology
Auditing and education budget tracking
State and conditions of non- financial resources
Resource availability and use at the school level

The table highlights six major challenge areas of a national education system as (i) policy environment, (ii) access and equity, (iii) quality and relevance, (iv) teaching and learning, (v) management and efficiency, (vi) resourcing. For each of these key indices are listed. A detailed analysis, taken all the challenge areas and the specific indices together, would provide a bird’s eye view of the general state of National Education. This presentation would be such a bird’s eye view of Nigeria’s Education system. The presentation will draw special attention to areas in which the right steps would have to be taken to enable Education to contribute to building the desired Nigerian society of the future.

EDUCATION POLICY ENVIRONMENT

Civil Society Involvement

Education has always been with human societies, while schooling is a relatively recent phenomenon. The various communities that make up Nigeria have always had structures for performing the primary goal of Education, which is the trans-generational transmission of cultural heritage. Islam, Christianity, the colonial experience and post-colonial nation building efforts have since played a dominant role in the evolution of the Nation’s education with an ever increasing dominance of formalised Education.

One interesting aspect of the penetration of the schooling into Education in Nigeria is the heavy involvement of local communities. Most of the early Christian missionaries relied heavily on traditional authorities and indigenous manpower for access to land and the construction of school buildings, in addition to using local mobilisation procedures for attracting pupils to schools. The town unions of communities in southern and middle belt unions of Nigeria were known to have made immense contributions to the spread of both primary and secondary education up till the early 1960s, during which time local communities (as voluntary agencies’) bore a good proportion of the financial burden of running their schools, with different levels of grants-in-aid from government.

The situation was to change dramatically with government take-over of schools in the years following the end of the civil war. The not-so-free free education programmes that the Nation has known since the mid-1970s have further alienated communities, as their schools are now seen as government owned (meaning ‘owned by an anonymous and amorphous authority).

The spate of NGOs claiming to champion the cause of Education cannot be a replacement of people ownership of the system. They are still not close enough to the real people (the genuine need bearers). This fundamental wrong should be the first to be righted. Let us work out locality-specific and culture-rooted strategies for bringing back local communities to the education development equation.

A related and a more serious issue is that Education in Nigeria has not been allowed to play its primary role of trans-generational transmission of culture. The foundation for divesting Education from Culture was laid in Christian missionary and colonial days, and post-independence reforms have neither adequately nor appropriately addressed the issue, for a number of reasons: a gross misinterpretation of culture, the severe value-crisis in Nigerian society, our failure to evolve a coherent national identity, and a prevailing reductionist/materialistic view of Education as schooling for entry into a culture-blind elite class. Embedding nation cultural values in the Education system is therefore the second serious wrong to be righted.

Legislative and Regulatory Mechanisms for Educational Development

Box one below shows the five levels of the educational management hierarchy in Nigeria. The operation of the template suffers from serious defaults that have not made for the smooth running of the system.

Box 1: NIGERIA – EDUCATIONAL MANAGEMENT HIERARCHY

LEVEL ONE: Legislation

The National Assembly
The State Houses of Assembly
The Local Governments

LEVEL TWO: Policy

The National Council on Education (NCE)
The Joint Consultative Committee on Education (JCC)
Reference Committees of the JCC
Civil Society/Institutions/Professional bodies

LEVEL THREE: System Management

Federal Level (Ministry of Education and its parastatals)
State Level (Ministry of Education and its parastatals)
Local Government Levels (Local Government Education Authorities – LGEAs)

LEVEL FOUR: Institutional Level

Institutional hierarchy (heads/assistant heads/heads of units/departments)
School Management Committees/School Boards/PTAS – Parents’ Teachers’ Associations

The most striking default is the true federalism challenge, the federal government biting more than it can chew and the States complaining of inadequate financial resources, and with the local governments left completely powerless. A growing trend since return to civil rule is that of the federal government taking initiatives and launching them with pomp (e.g., the food feeding programme,) and then calling on the states to ‘buy in’. The practice was a major reason for the limited success of Oby Ezekwesili’s well –intentioned reforms of 2004-2007.[ii]

Management at the systems level is marred by unwieldy, non-professionalised structures and the preponderance of parastatals. At the institutional level, non-professionalization has become the bane. Added to this is the lack of autonomy by heads of schools, in a situation in which there are practically no funds at the disposal of heads of institutions. There are therefore two major wrongs to be righted here:

a political/constitutional intervention that restores more authority to the states and devolves more authority for school management, especially at the basic education level to local government education authorities
profesionalisation of educational management both at the system and institutional levels
streamlining the management structure of ministries of Education at federal and state levels
drastically cutting down on the number of parastatals

Education Policy Development Process

Nigeria’s experience has been one of mere education policy drafting, which is an entirely different concept from education policy development. The current practice is one in which the genuine need bearers (classes 1, 2 and 2 in table three below) are denied participation.

Table 3: Five Broad Classes of Stakeholders in Education

Class One / Class Two / Class Three / Class Four / Class Five
Rural Dwellers
The Urban Poor
Traditional
Institutions
Grassroots
Based Organisations / Women Groups
Youth Organisations
Organised Labour
Small Scale Economic Operators
Local Government
Agencies / Practising Teachers
Teacher Associations
Parent-Teacher
Associations
Political Parties
Religious
Bodies / Education Sector Technocrats
Academics
Organised Private Sector
Professional Bodies / Government Agencies
Legislature
Education Ministry
Education
Sector
Parastatals
Other Government Ministries

Policies have therefore been largely for the people and not with the people resulting in a phenomenon of Education for Them and NOT for US. Righting this wrong would require a right about turn to more participatory processes that involve a broader spectrum of stakeholders at all phases. This would require a reconceptualization of policy work no longer as an event but as an unending process in which stakeholders are is able to master the content and directions of a policy and, most importantly, internalise its spirit.

Current/Extant Education Policy

It would not be out of place to say that Nigeria once had a National Policy on Education. The 1977 document on the subject was the product of systematic, participatory and consultative process. On the ground, however, there has been more emphasis on its bare bones than on its flesh and blood. Its implementation has suffered from ‘this-is-Nigeria’ type of hitches, while its revision to fit into changing times has not been a fully participatory affair.

There is every need (as an integral part of righting our education sector wrongs) to breathe flesh and blood into the 6-3-3-4 education sector, for which the 1977 National Policy is well-known. The essential duties here have been well articulated in the report of the 2011 Presidential Task Team on Education (box 2)

[iii]

In place of a coherent policy, the Nigerian Education scene is dominated by a variety of directives and operational instructions, as in the following illustrative examples:

Unsustainable rules and directives (Here, a good example would be radio and television announcements that proclaim that parents who send out their children to hawk wares on the road side (while they should be in school) would be persecuted. As we all know, such ‘laws’ are often respected in breech than in compliance. Street-hawking children will flood the streets and no sanction will be taken against their parents).
Routine administrative interventions (Every year, there is an increase in budgetary allocations to education (as claimed by governments), as evidence of the priority accorded to the sector, and in order to improve both facilities and performance. This goal is however not being attained, as the funds (if at all they exist) do not go to where the education action really is – schools and classrooms)
Changes merely decreed into existence (one blatant example being the decision by government in 1978 to deploy soldiers to schools to instil discipline in students. The hell that was let loose by that decision led to a tactical withdrawal of the soldiers. There was no formal announcement of the abandonment of the intervention. In spite of the might of the military regime of the time, the ‘reform’ simply died a natural death)
Face-saving changes (Nigeria introduced a new school calendar, running from October to June in 1973. Then, in a New Year broadcast in 1977, the then head of State announced (to the surprise of the nation) a reversal to the former school calendar that ran from January to December. Government was later to apply the face-saving approach to return to the October-June school year, its argument of reform ‘in conformity with the farming calendar of our people’ notwithstanding)
Musical Chair syndrome (The game of musical chairs is best illustrated by the frequent changes in the political leadership of education ministries (federal ministers and state commissioners). Each new minister comes – not to ensure continuity and consolidate on past achievements – but to carve a niche through a new brand of ‘reforms’)
Politically-motivated shakeups (One good example of this is the citing of educational institutions. In many cases, schools are cited in places that are also the political constituency of the person taking the institution or in the political strong holds of known political heavyweights in society. The well-ventilated rationale is to bring services closer to the people, therefore facilitating access. Such schools get all the required attention as long as the promoters are in office. The fate of the institution when the promoters are voted out of office is often downright neglect).
Ill-thought-out/feebly implemented ideas (One classic example of ill-thought and feebly implemented idea in the Nigerian experience was the introduction of Modern Mathematics in the 1970s. This was a borrowed idea that aped global trends at the period. Its intention was partly to de-mystify mathematics and to make it more attractive and accessible to students. The country was awash with workshops and materials for the ‘new’ concepts and methods. Schools were expected to be implementing a modern mathematics curriculum at all levels. It became unfashionable (perhaps, no longer prestigious) to talk of Mathematics without the epithet ‘Modern’.

However, there was no consensus among mathematicians on what was ‘Modern’ in Modern Mathematics. Teachers were not quite sure of what they were teaching. Learner achievement, attitude and motivation did not seem to have improved. It therefore required what was called ‘the great modern mathematics controversy’ for the nation to settle for ‘simply mathematics’ and for curricula to be reversed as a consequence.)

Nigerians are used to the expression ‘policy summersault’. Our own experience is that there is hardly any summersault but evidence-based adjustments in cases of genuine policy development. In cases of instructions and directives not involving the critical stakeholders, rapid turn overs occur as ill thought changes tend to create more problems than they were intended to solve.

ACCESS AND EQUITY

The Dynamics of Access[iv]

Access to Education goes beyond mere physically stepping into a school, or any other educational opportunity. There are socio-economic, geographical, and psychological factors that can help or hinder access. There are also demand and supply-side bottlenecks to access. The first refers to people acceptability of educational offers, while the second refers to the extent to which the offer of educational opportunity meets the requirements of the people.