Evolution crisis in the credibility of Nigeria’s ivorty towers

By Professor Adamu Baikie

Late Dr. Tai Solarin

The title of my lecture was carefully and deliberately chosen to draw attention to what I call the evolving crisis in the credibility of Nigeria’s ivory towers. The operative words are “evolving crisis” and “credibility.”

I did not say there is a crisis but that there are signs that extraneous issues are fast developing within Nigeria’s academic community which are on the verge of engendering a crisis that would adversely affect the credibility of the worth of the academic offerings and the products of Nigeria’s ivory towers.

Our concern here is to identify and examine certain unconventional practices which are gaining currency in the university system and which are capable of tarnishing the image of universities. Coombs (1969: 157) described universities as the apex of the educational system. He went further to say that universities are expected to be the guardians of truth, the seekers of new truths... The moulders of its youth and the pathfinder of its future.

Ngara (1995:6) states that a university worthy of its name is part and parcel of the international community and that a university in Africa should meet the requirements of good universities elsewhere in the world. He averred that the staff of an African university who are employed in some universities in other parts of the world should meet the requirements of the universities in their teaching and research. Ngara emphasized that African universities should keep abreast of developments in the international community of universities and their products i.e. the graduates who are out of them, should be as good as those from the best universities anywhere in the world.

Coming nearer home, the National Policy on Education for Nigeria specifically identified universities (in Nigeria) as contributors to national development and that this could be achieved by intensifying and diversifying its programmes for the development of high level manpower within the context of the need of the nation.

The policy also avers that the content of professional courses in universities should reflect national requirements (National Policy 1998:32).

The founding fathers of Nigerian universities, at least at the early stages, did not lose sight of these admirably couched objectives and goals of university education.

The development of university education went through a few interesting phases, the first of which I would describe as the era of building and consolidation. This was the era when we had Mellanby and Saunders at Ibadan; Johnson at Nsukka; Alexander at ABU; Ajose at Ife, Biobaku at Lagos and Glynn Phillips at Benin (Midwest Institute of Technology). The universities were founded and established on firm footing with an impressive cadre of academic staff, experienced and with commitment to entrench quality and excellence in the academic programmes of universities. In spite of the criticisms leveled against some of the universities, that they were structured in line with what obtained in British universities and that their admission policies were inimical to the interest of Nigerian students, the administration of the universities pushed on relentlessly and established standards which produced scholars who were a source of pride to Nigeria.

I would describe the next stage of the development of university education in Nigeria as the era of scholarship and modest expansion. That was the era when the following came into the scene at various times: Dike (Ibadan) Ajayi (Lagos) Audu (ABU) Kodilinye (Nsukka) Oluwansanmi (If e) Thomas (Ibadan) Yesufu (Benin) Adesola (Lagos) Njoku (Lagos) Lambo (Ibadan). The take over of the leadership of Nigerian Universities by Nigerians was fully tested and admirably justified.

Progressive developments both in terms of physical and human resources were at their highest.

The quality of instruction was at its best. The assessment of students exemplified by the extensive use of serious minded external and internal assessors added credibility to the academic work of universities. Scholarship was at its highest and Nigerian lecturers made their mark not only nationally but also internationally.

Nigeria became the “Mecca” of academicians from all over the world and Nigeria took a pride of place as the leading country with a highly developed system of higher education in Africa south of the Sahara. Research activities in the institutions produced world are knowned scholars in various disciplines; they became catalysts in extending the frontiers of knowledge in their disciplines and also became reference points by contemporary scholars who wanted to know and explore more into the unexplored areas of academic endeavours.

Somewhere along the line, two developments, which were to change the course of university education in the country took place. These were the emergence of National Universities Commission as the sole authority that called the shots in all matters pertaining to the development of universities in the country. The second development was the establishment of Joint Admission and Matriculation Board which centralized the admission processes into Nigerian universities.

Professor Ade-Ajayi characterized the National Universities Commission as follows: “We can trace the end of that period of autonomy to 1962 when the National Universities Commission was established as a unit in the Prime Minister’s office till it became, in 1974, not just a department but a parastatal with all the arrogance and inefficiencies of Federal Government parastatals. From a “counsellor and watch-dog” it became a monster of an overload. From a buffer to stand between the Government and the university, the National Universities Commission as a parastatal became part of the Ministry of Education, imposing Government interference on universities. Under the military regimes, academic staff became public servants, earning government pensions and subject to the retirement exercise of 1975. In other words, the National Universities Commission was in no position to offer solutions to the problems of the universities as it had itself become part of the problems.”

In a paper I presented to the conference on “Education for Moderni-sation: Creating World-Class Universities in Nigeria”, I quoted Professor Akinkugbe as saying that:

“The amended National Universities Act of 1974 generated considerable criticism from the academic community as they were seen as strengthening the powers of the Commission at the expense of the university, especially in the areas of minimum academic standards, accreditation of programmes, establishment of colleges, faculties, departments and institutes and even in the determination of the commencement and duration of academic courses and semesters.

The situation quoted in the two quotations above have not changed for the better. It has got to a point whereby universities are hardly able to initiate anything that would bring about meaningful change or initiative in running their affairs. The National Universities Commission may indeed be rendering useful service in many areas requiring its attention, but one would want to be unequivocally convinced by the stance of the National Universities Commission that it is protecting the interest of universities and not that of government through the Federal Ministry of Education. We have experienced, in recent times, many scenarios which brought the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) into confrontation with the Federal Government on issues which universities should ordinarily be able to handle individually or collectively through the Committee of Vice Chancellors and/or Councils of Universities: Councils have been rendered impotent and Vice-Chancellors irrelevant while National Universities Commission remains nonchalant.

When Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) declares a warning strike or goes on full-blast strikes, Councils, more often than not, acquiesce and the National Universities Commission remain passive. Government comes up with its usual barking (but no biting) that “no work, no pay”. No Vice­Chancellor dare refuse to pay because the fury will be unleashed on him or her while government is tucked away safely, heavily guarded by you-know-who!

This brings us conveniently to the next era: the era of activism instability and nonchalance. This era was characterized by incessant strikes, frequent closure of universities, with some students graduating six or seven years after enrolling in the university. There was a general nonchalant attitude exhibited by those who should intervene and resolve the issues involved. It was obvious that the initiative had been taken over from Councils and chaos was gradually setting in. We are, to this day, still reminded about the experiences of those dark days by the unresolved issue of the so-called “Borin 49” lecturers.

The Federal Government and, by extension, the universities are all hemmed in and encircled by the often referred to “Government-ASUU Agreement” and each time ASUU sneezes, “Zuba Rock” shivers! None of the functionaries or agencies of the university system could come to the rescue: National Universities Commission, Pro-Chancellors, Chancellors, Vice Chancellors or coun-cils. I almost whispered to the Hon. Minister of Education: “I told you so!”

When universities re-open after strikes, another set of problems emerge: either the semester is extended to make up for lost ground or the semester is shortened and rush through lectures and examinations in order to get out of the god­ forsaken campus. Quite often, students opt for the latter! But if the former was opted for, one had to contend with poor attendance at lectures, fatigue, restlessness, etc. In all this, the quality of academic work would be adversely affected and the credibility of the degrees to be ultimately awarded would be brought to question. Added to this would be the inevitable examination malpractice which would escalate devastatingly.

The explosion in the demand for university education and the resultant decay in the system constitute the next era in our discussion. The number of universities in the country may be an answer to the high demand for university education and this may be a reflection of the society’s demand for higher education. However, our experience in Nigeria today seem to suggest that not much planning had gone into the widespread establishment of universities in the country. The National Universities Commission argues that owing to the abysmally low level of admission into universities in Nigeria, the answer would be found in increasing the number of universities in the country. References were often made to countries like Japan with a population of 127.5 million having about 1,223 Universities, and why should Nigeria with a population of about 140 million not have more universities? It must have dawned on National Universities Commission (NUC) by now that their extrapolation has not yielded any remarkable improvement in the admission of students into Nigeria’s new and old universities. It is obvious that the National Universities Commission (NUC) had consistently confined itself to the readiness of potential proprietors in establishing new universities without taking into account other ramifications in planning for the establishment of new universities. Distances from home, saturation of existing (older) universities, the choice patterns of potential students, carrying capacities, staffing, etc, are all factors that must be taken into account. Ironically it is the same National Universities Commission (NUC) that sets a limit to the number of students to be admitted into each university based on the assessed carrying capacity of each university. But it is the same National Universities Commission (NUC) that would turn round and lament over the low enrolment of students in Nigerian universities.

For example, for the 2008/2009 admissions, about 1.3 million were reported to have sat for the JAMB examinations; a little over nine hundred thousand (900,000) results were released. The total number of students to be admitted into all Nigerian universities (federal, state and private) was given as 183,000 by National Universities Commission (NUC) based on assessed carrying capacities. The worst scenario is to assume that only 450,000 passed the examinations, this will mean that about 267,000 candidates will remain unplaced after admitting the National Universities Commission (NUC) figure of183,000.

In spite of NUC’s efforts to ensure that enrolments in universities are pegged down by the carrying capacities of university, some universities were so daring that they each enrolled very many more students than the facilities of the universities would allow them to enroll. A sampling from a study on the carrying capacity of Nigerian universities conducted by National Universities Commission showed the following remarkable results!

Out of the 53 universities surveyed in the study, thirty (56.6%) over-enrolled while twenty (37.7%) under-enrolled and only three (5.7%) had not admitted students.

It is significant to note that majority of the universities studied had over subscribed their admission. quota. Certainly, the environment and conditions of leaming in the affected universities could not be said to be conclusive. Besides, as Professor Ajayi pointed out in his response to a National Universities Commission presentation, “few of those seeking admission can be regarded as clearly worthy and a lot of the pressure come from admission centralized under JAMB and playing the game of numbers... By establishing so many universities at the same time, we were lowering the standards of the universities.”

It should be a matter of great concern for us in this country that qualifications obtained in our institutions of higher learning are given a low rating not only by the world outside Nigeria but also by Nigerians within the country. That is what I called the crisis of credibility which appear to have encircled the worthiness of the academic qualifications obtained in Nigerian universities today. This is what Professor Uvah of the National Universities Commission (NUC) said about the issue of credibility:

“Employers of labour and the general public have expressed concern over the quality of graduates of Nigerian universities. The situation is glaringly evident when Nigerian graduates seek to practise their professions or further their education outside the country where they are requested to take qualifying examinations.

Hitherto Nigerian certificates were offered automatic recognition abroad. Similarly, an increasing number of employers are forced to practically retrain newly recruited graduates to give them the skills that should have been acquired in the university.”

This statement, coming from National Universities Commission (NUC) sources, is not only an indictment of the National Universities Commission (NUC), the custodian of Nigeria’s university education, but also of the governments of Nigeria, the universities, parents and the society at large. We have, in our various ways, contributed to the decay of the system and we are today producing graduates whose qualifications are not being accepted confidently. The ivory towers of Nigeria that have remained upright for long are on the verge of becoming the leaning towers of Nigeria.

Many factors may be responsible for this state of affairs. Admission into the university, which I had mentioned earlier, is a case in point. Admission rackets is on the ascendancy; very many sophisticated methods are used in securing admission into universities illegally. Many students gain admission into universities without basic qualifications with the connivance of insiders in the universities. It is not outside the realms of possibility that some so-called students could graduate without as much as take full blown examinations in the university.

The generality of students are not serious-minded students and they take cover under cultism to intimidate others into falling in line with their dastardly acts of violence and disturbance of peace in the campuses.

Students are very important inputs into the educational system and if their preparation for entry into any level of the educational ladder is faulty and inefficient, the system will irretrievably be affected detrimentally. It would appear that the demand for university education in Nigeria has grown faster than we can cope with, hence the neck-breaking rush to gain admission by all hooks and crooks.

If, however, the system is populated by unqualified students, the effect, in the long run, will be disastrous for the country. The danger signals are already appearing; qualifications from Nigerian universities are being given low rating nationally and internationally thus placing the credibility of our degrees in great jeopardy.

We do not seem to have learnt anything from these danger signals; JAMB is selling more forms; the quota of admission is being controlled by the carrying capacities of universities; more and more students want to go to universities and nowhere else and yet the old machine grinds on without pausing to take a stock of what is happening in the education sector at all levels. We must stop the old machine from galloping us into educational disaster.

Examination malpractices are rife in the country; they occur in nearly all public examinations administered in the country. The collusion of parents and some functionaries of the educational system must not be dismissed out of hand. So much money is spent to oil the palms of the agents of examination malpractices and racketeers. It should however be expected that if ill-equipped students are admitted into universities in large numbers and they do not attend lectures, they must seek for ways and means of justifying their presence in the university, hence they involve themselves in malpractices. Students must not however be entirely blamed for the incidents. The work under intense pressure and under very stressful conditions imposed on them by the society, their parents and the school environment in which they study. Society places a very high premium in the possession of certificates particularly university certificates as against the acquisition of skills. This trend must be changed if we are to bring back some sanity into the system.

Reference has already been made to the issue of the establishment of more universities in the country. I think there are over a hundred universities in the country today. It however needs to be appreciated, as Scott (1984:109) pointed out, that as higher education become much more widely available, it would inevitably become less precious, in a precise economic sense and in a more general social and cultural sense and that the more graduates there are, the smaller will be economic value of a degree to the individual who posses them. What we are saying is that university degrees in Nigeria will soon undergo a spate of devaluation that would render the degrees ineffective in securing job. Soludo, Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria said recently that sixty percent (60%) of graduates. from Nigerian universities are unemployable.

New universities and, to some extent, the older ones will have to contend with the problems of staffing. There are minimum requirements for staffing programmes in departments and failure to meet with the requirements would incur the wrath of National Universities Commission (NUC) and the denial of accreditation would follow. Younger lecturers are being employed in universities and they go through a tutelage that is devoid of a mentoring system from where they could gain in experience and mature in their professional/academic development. Senior academics have either retired (having attained retirement age) or are busy recycling themselves trying to cope with new challenges in newly established universities. In the absence of senior academic colleagues, new young staffs are virtually on their own and are hardly able to cut their teeth adequately in research, publications, teaching skills and other preparations without the valuable assistance and guidance of veterans of vast experience.

The issue of the retirement of senior academics calls for a review essentially because their services are very much required in the system if for no other reason than to help in research and the development of young academics in postgraduate work. The prevailing situation calls for a total overhaul of the educational system, particularly the university system.

Universities should be released from the total grip and absolute control of the various governments that own them; private universities which come under the same predicament should be similarly advised. Universities should be granted the freedom and independence to manage and administer themselves in lines which would promote their progress and enhance the physical and academic development of the institutions.

If universities are to be put in the path of restitution, the present structure of governance must change radically. The first step is to put in place a Board of Governors or Trustees which would be the very apex of the university system. The concept of visitorship as presently constituted should cease. There are 104 (one hundred and four) universities, including eight campuses of the University of Wales in United Kingdom. The Queen is Visitor to only 24 (twenty four) universities, the Duke of Edinburgh is Visitor to 4 (four) and the Baroness Thatcher only 1 (one). The Prime Minister of England is not a Visitor to any university.

In any case what exactly is the meaning and purpose of having a Visitor to universities in the Nigerian culture? It is about time we discarded a borrowed practise which is increasingly becoming irrelevant and is not being fully practiced in the country from where we borrowed the tradition.

Chancellorship should cease to be ceremonial in concept only; the position should be occupied by someone with a commanding status and with strong connections and influence who can work to enhance the economic and social welfare of the university. In the same vein, a Pro-Chancellor should be someone who can bring succour to the university by being adventurous in attracting funds to the university from industries, multinationals, etc, and not someone who would take more than a fair share out of the university. Both Chancellor and Pro-Chancellor should be appointed by the joint participation of Council and Board of Governors/Trustees.

The Council, Board of Trustees, Chancellor and Pro-Chancellor should be responsible to the university and not to anyone else. With regards to funding, the Federal or State Governments should give at least eighty percent (80%) or more of the approved budget of universities as grants. The universities should charge fees which should be paid for by a scholarship scheme which would oblige the Board to pay what is due to the universities directly. Allowances should, of course, be paid to students. A sizeable percentage of funds accruable to Education Trust Fund should be shared proportionately to universities and paid to the universities directly.

The Vice-Chancellor
A critical factor in the management of authority in Nigerian universities is the leadership qualities and management skills of the Chief Executive of the institution namely the Vice ­Chancellor. It needs to be stressed that the Vice-Chancellor cannot, in today’s institutions of higher learning, function satisfactorily without being able to relate to and balance the various sectors and structures of the university. The concept of running higher institutions should shift from administration to that of management.

The Vice-Chancellor is essentially the manager of the university and his function in a university is to ensure that he operates the system in a manner which enables him carry his constituents along. This can be achieved by running an open system, promote dialogue and arrive at a consensus in decision-making.

Today, vice-chancellorship is founded on the tripod of ethnicity, god-fatherism and the wishes of Academic Staff Union of Universities. Vice-chancellors are hardly able to move academic anthills let alone mountains; much of their time is spent either in taking care of municipal problems (which should normally not be their business), or running round circles to and from Abuja pursuing shadows. How can academic excellence be promoted to the level of world-class status under such unbearable conditions? The staff of universities are crucial in contributing towards the attainment of world-class status of universities. Their contributions must be aligned to scholarship, industry, academic integrity and achievement.

The unions and the university administration should not exist as opposing groups with antagonistic interests, continually at odds with each other, but rather as complementary organs of the same institutions sharing common ideals and common problems. The objectives of unions/associations should revert to that of working together with the university administration for the advancement of learning, for the attainment of the highest academic standards and the provision of conditions and facilities conducive for effective learning and teaching and the welfare of the entire university community.

There is need for us to develop a culture of tolerance, patience, understanding and trust in our intellectual community. Some of the fundamental traits of democratic way of life which must be cultivated in the individual such as respect for self and others, obedience to constituted authority, discipline and hard work, patriotism, incorruptibility and moral exactitude are grossly deficient in our lives at the moment, hence our democracy is dangling and swaying dangerously because it is not anchored on any of the attributes identified above. The universities must not only imbibe these attributes but must also be seen to demonstrate their impact in the day-to-day affairs of the universities. The university system is in desperate need for freedom and autonomy; the creativity of the universities have not blossomed neither have innovations been given incentives to flourish. Nigerian universities must operate in line with what the 21st century expects of us: dynamic, excellent, progressive, relevant, inventive, creative and service oriented. These can only be achieved if we are free, self-reliant, proactive and adventurous. Anything short of these attributes will sentence us to academic stagnation of unimaginable proportion.

I would like to bring the lecture to a close by quoting from a paper presented by Professor Akinkugbe. He discussed the issue of the establishment of a world class university in Nigeria and wrote, among other things, that “a university that is fiscally self-sufficient, whose begging bowl does not extend much beyond its alumni and corporate bodies, that has the reputation of attracting the best and the brightest scholars (undergraduate, postgraduate and faculty), whose curricula are relevant to society’s needs and expectations, whose research out­put brings its rewards by way of numbers of its faculty with Nobel Prizes does not need to convince anyone that it is of gold standard. But a university that is limping after the Western intellectual tradition by developing structures far less efficient and impactful will do no more than glory in its own self-deception.

Mr. Chairman, I said at the beginning of the lecture that nothing particularly new may emerge from what I would say; many of the issues raised are common knowledge but were discussed in the context ofthe general theme of the lecture. It is not often realized that the credibility of Nigeria’s university education lies on the integrity of the internal mechanisms of the system in all ramifications. The cracks in the walls of our educational system have given birth to the establishment of “English Secondary Schools” in Nigeria and vociferous advertisements in our media for qualitative university education obtainable in British or European universities.

No one has questioned the need or the appropriateness of such advertisements in our media, but we know why! I want to state with emphasis that there is no desire whatsoever to down-play the record of achievements in many spheres of our academic endeavours in some of our universities; neither is it intended to minimize the significant work being done by National Universities Commission (NUC) to restore the academic dignity of Nigerian universities. The fact however remains that there is great deal to be done to rehabilitate Nigerian universities and this cannot be achieved if we remain nonchalant or acquiesce in spite of the overwhelming evidence on display.

This lecture is in honour of our indomitable icon, Tai Solarin; any lecture given in his honour must reflect what he would not disagree with. I do not know how he would feel about this lecture; he may feel it is not adequate given the magnitude of the problems on ground; he may also forgive me for being patronizing in a few cases. Of one thing I am sure, he would not condone any acts or behaviour that would bring Nigeria’s education to disrepute. That is what this lecture is about to reconstruct and uphold the credibility of education in Nigeria’s universities.

Toward the end, the following suggestions are proffered:
1. The process of admission should be re-visited with a view to analytically assess the advantages, disadvantages and appropriateness of the functions of JAMB having regard to the effectiveness or otherwise of the services rendered by the Board to date.
2. The National Universities Commission’ should be re­modelled to serve the needs’ of universities and not those of government. The Commission should operate independent of government and serve as a buffer and a catalyst in promoting the cause of universities in all ramifications.
3. The process for the establishment of universities should take into account the needs of the country not only from the point of view of increasing enrolments in universities, but also by ensuring that unnecessary duplications of programmes are avoided and programmes should focus on areas that would promote national development.
4. In order to migrate the dearth of staff with good higher degrees, top-level postgraduate schools, adequately funded by government through National Universities Commission (NUC), should be established in strategically located centres of learning in some of our universities.
5. The universities should be granted the autonomy to manage their affairs in conformity with he best traditions of accepted academic norms.
6. The administrative machinery of universities should be overhauled and made to fall in .line with the demands of efficiency and proactiveness. The hierarchy of authority should also change to make room for the adoption of autonomy and thus encourage the development of universities.
7. Trade Unions are necessary evils in universities but the policy if incessant strikes would need to be reviewed in the interest of the well-being of institutions and the country in general. Strategies now in use by Unions should be revalidated in view of the multiplicity of institutions, which do not come directly under the control of the Federal Government.
8. Staff should assist and be involved in stabilizing institutions through active participation in processes, which would promote and enhance an academic activities and also help in eradicating or minimizing acts which would bring institutions to disrepute.
9. A scheme whereby Nigerian academicians in the diaspora could be attracted to come to teach in Nigerian universities at least for three to six months at a time should be put in place. This gradual approach may attract them to return home voluntarily.
10. Retired professors who are desirous of providing services to universities after retirement should be encouraged to do so.

Professor Adamu Baikie, Vice Chancellor, Nasarawa State University, Keffi, delivered this lecture on the occasion of the Fourth Tai Solarin Annual National Memorial Lecture held in Lagos recently.