Notes on Administration of Higher Educational Systems

Department of Political Science and Public Administration
Adekunle Ajasin University, Akungba-Akoko
MPA 709 (Administration of Higher Educational Systems) Course Outline
Introduction
Higher educational institutions are recognized all over the world as centres of excellence where knowledge is not only acquired but also disseminated to those who require it, through teaching and research. Higher educational institutions are the summit where everything that happens directly comes together and where learning in the deepest sense of the word is cultivated.   The administration of higher educational institutions refers to the means by which higher educational institutions are operated, organized and managed. The administration of higher educational institutions deals with how higher educational institutions steer themselves as well as the process used to manage them in such a way as to lead to effective performance in achieving desired outcomes, goals and satisfaction of stakeholders.
Topics
1. Introduction
2. Education for National Development
3. The State of Higher Education in Nigeria
4. The concept of University
5. Universities in Nigeria
6. University Autonomy and governance of Higher Education
7. Review of Documents and Policies
- Nigeria’s Vision 20:2020
- National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy (NEEDS)
- National Policy on Education
- National Roadmap for the Education Sector
- Labour Migration Policy for Nigeria
- Nigeria’s Education Sector Analysis by World Bank
- UNESCO Report on Nigerian Education
- Report on Needs Assessment of Nigerian Public Universities
8. The imperative of ICT in Higher Education Administration
Reading Texts
Abdulrahman, Y.M., & Ogbaondah, L. (2007). Policy nurturing and puncturing in the Nigerian educational reforms and implementation. African Journal for Contemporary issues in Education, 1, 112-120.
Adedeji, S. (2002). The cost and financing of education in Nigeria: The historical perspective. A paper presented at the forum on cost and financing of education in Nigeria. Education Sector Analysis (ESA): Abuja, Nigeria.
Abiose, S.H. (2008). Gender Policy for Obafemi Awolowo University. OAU-Carnegie Gender Equity Initiative Bulletin, 6(1), 2-3.
Adamolekun, D. (2007). Challenges of University Governance in Nigeria: Reflections of an Old Fogey. Convocation Lecture, Adekunle Ajasin University, Akungba, Ondo State. February 22, 2007.
Aina, O.I. (2007). Alternative modes of financing Higher education in Nigeria and implications for university governance. In Babalola , J.B. and Emunemu B.O. (Eds.)Issues in higher education: Research evidence from sub-Saharan African. Lagos: Bolabay Publications.
Mimiko, N.O (2017) Getting Our Universities Back On Track: Reflections and Governance Paradigms From My Vice-Chancellorship, Austin, TX: Pan-African University Press
Okebukola, P.A. (2002). The state of university education in Nigeria. Abuja: National Universities Commission.
Okebukola, P. (2006). Principles Guiding Current Reforms in Nigerian Universities. Journal of Higher Educational Administration, 4(1), 25-36.













Administration of Higher Education
Governance in higher education is the means by which institutions for higher education (tertiary or post-secondary education) are formally organized and managed (though often there is a distinction between definitions of management and governance). Simply, university governance is the way in which universities are operated. Governing structures for higher education are highly differentiated throughout the world, but the different models nonetheless share a common heritage. Internationally, tertiary education includes private not-for-profit, private for-profit, and public institutions governed by differentiated structures of management.
Governance and management of post-secondary institutions becomes even more diverse with the differences in defining the relationships between higher and tertiary education (university education), postsecondary education, technical and vocational education, and community college models of education. The issues are complicated by current debates over collegial and shared forms of governance contrasted to corporate and business forms of institutional governance.
The concept of governance in postsecondary education predominantly refers to the internal structure, organization and management of autonomous institutions. The internal governance organization typically consists of a governing board (board of regents, board of directors), the university president (executive head, CEO) with a team of administrative chancellors and staff, faculty senates, academic deans, department chairs, and usually some form of organization for student representation. In the United States, state institution governing boards often emphasize the concept of citizen governance in recognizing that board members serve a civic role for the institution. Management structures themselves have become increasingly complex due to the increasing complexity of intraorganizational, interorganizational and governmental relationships. Whether college and university education, adult education, technical or vocational education, educational administration presents complex challenges at all levels of private and public education.
As universities have become increasingly interdependent with external forces, institutions are accountable to external organizational relationships such as local and federal governments, equally in managing business and corporate relationships. The nature of the managing relationships characterize whether governance is corporate and business oriented or defined more by a collegial shared form of governance. "Governance" in this sense is discussed by Kezar and Eckel, who define it at the macro-level of policy decision making. Kezar and Eckel suggest governance is a multi-level concept including several different bodies and processes with different decision-making functions. In this way, governance is sometimes defined at difference to the internal management of institutions. Throughout the world, many national, state and local governments have begun to establish coordinating and governing boards as both buffer and bridge to coordinate governance and institutional management.
With the complexity of internal structures, the external relationships between institutions and local, state, and national governments are evidently equally differentiated given the different forms of government in the international system (making the concepts of governance for postsecondary education pluralistic in its broadest sense and usage). External governing relationships depends much on institutions, government policy, and any other formal or informal organizational obligations. Generally, institutions are recognized as autonomous actors with varying degrees of interdependence with, and legislated commitments to the external stakeholders, local and national government.

Education for National Development
Education can be described as an instrument par excellence for ensuring National development. This can only be achieved through effective management and administration. The provision of management and administration of educational system is the responsibility of Government at all levels (Local Government, State and Federal Governments). In the past few years there have been myriads of administrative problems confronting the educational system in Nigeria. The system has not only witnessed decayed facilities and infrastructures, poor funding, poor quality products, low morale of teachers, incessant crisis, inadequate research but also that the government of Nigeria have been saddled with too many responsibilities; it does not seem to be able or willing to provide solution for solving these problems. These problems have become a recurring demand in the history of Nigerian education. For many years, budgets of education have been under enormous pressure as a result of declining budgetary allocation and increase in enrolment and, shortfalls from Nigerian Universities Commission funds. The effect of this on education management is better imagined. In spite of the efforts of different donor countries in providing assistance for education; the system still lacks the necessary fund and materials to implement the various programmes. The situation has become worse due to current global financial crisis which has impacted on the world economy.
The invaluable roles and contributions of education in the development of an individual and the society cannot be over emphasized. Many countries including Nigeria, take education as an instrument for the promotion of national development as well as effecting desirable social change (NPE, 2004) this perhaps, might be responsible for the continuous growing concern of all stakeholders in education industry on changes that are likely to affect it as well as the implications such changes will have on the management and administration of education. There is therefore, the urgent need to really look into the future of our nations education Vis-à-vis the challenges ahead with a view to achieving effectiveness, quality and relevance in the entire system. By discussing the challenges ahead, our nation’s educational managers and administrators will be aware of their enormous responsibilities and be able to find lasting solution to the problem currently facing the educational sector and threatening the system. The paper examines the management and administration of Nigeria education from the historical perspective, highlights some of the endemic problems confronting the nation’s education and the challenges ahead. Concept of Management and Administration In this paper, attempt shall be made to define the two concepts of management and administration with a view to bringing out the distinctions between them, Adepoju (1998:11) observed that even though the two concepts have been used interchangeably, however there are several distinction between them; one of which is the fact that management is wider in scope than administration in other words, management implies a process of which administration is an aspect of such process. Riesser in Babarinde (2001:43) opines that management is the utilization of physical and human resources through cooperative efforts and it is accomplished by performing the function of planning, organizing, staffing directing and controlling on the other hand Peretomode (1991) views administration as concerned with the performance of executive duties, the carrying our of policies and decisions to fulfill a purpose, and the controlling of the day-today running of an organization. It is also the careful and systematic arrangement and use of resource (human and material), situations and opportunities for the achievement of the specified objectives of a given organization (Nwankwo, 1994). Administration is a sub-set of management.
Historical Overview Management and administration of education in Nigeria dates back to the commencement of Western education in the country. It has close link with the periods of the nations political history. Although, scholar, writers and experts Odebiyi, A. I. Aina O. I. and Soetan, R.O. (1997) in the field of education identified various periods concerning educational management and administration. For the purpose of this paper, three major periods are identified namely; the missionary period, the pre-independence period and post-independence period. Gang, Udo and Akpa citing Nwankwo (1983:1) assert that the administration and management of education in Nigeria, reflects the earlier impact of the various agencies such as the missionaries, British colonial government and Nigeria herself. Each of these agencies left foot prints that have adversely guided the educational administration, management and supervision in Nigeria. At the inception of western education in Nigeria around the 1840s educational management and administration was solely in the hands of the missionaries. This spanned between 1840 and 1887. Although, the colonial government made an educational ordinance in 1882, government was not interested in the management and administration of education it only made grants-in-aids available to schools. The first colonial government intervention in the national education management, control and administration took place in 1887 with promulgation of the first purely Nigerian educational ordinance between 1887 and 1960, the colonial government and the nationalists played significant roles in the national educational management and administration. There were many educational codes policies, ordinance and commission aimed at proper management and administration of education. The country’s nationalists, having recognized the roles of education as an instrument of colonial liberation, played active part in the management and administration of the country’s educational system. At independence in 1960, the management and administration of Nigeria education rest on Nigerians themselves. This period witnessed active participation by non-governmental agencies communities and individuals as well as government intervention (NPE, 2004). It should be noted however that although the Nigeria government got involved in the management of education as from the time of the Richards constitution of 1946 with the creation or regional governments, total management and administration of Nigeria education by Nigerian started after independence precisely. The most important giant step ever taken in the management and administration of the nation’s education took place in 1969 with convention of the national curriculum conference which leads to the provision of the educational document christened national policy on education in 1977 that serves as guide to the direction of our educational practice. The administration of Nigerian education however, changed between the civilians and the military from 1960-1999 when the record of education industry in the country witnessed unstable educational policies. Administration and management of education in the 21st century has actively experience a laudable and historic landmark as Nigerian, took complete control of their destiny in education. Indeed there are numerous positive landmarks in education in Nigeria presently. In other words Nigeria has accomplished more in education than during the previous one hundred years of British colonial administrative rule of the country. This period of what we may call home grown. Nigeria educational administration management was greeted with several heights such as issues bordering on national education policies, primary education, secondary education, the Universal Basic Education (UBE) tertiary education as well as the institutional frameworks for regulating education. Successive governments in both state and federal have continued to allocate over 30% of their budget to education. The establishment of over 50 educational institutions within the second quarter of the 21st century is not a common achievement in the history of educational administration, management and development in the country. In spite  of this laudable efforts of successive state and federal governments in re-positioning Nigeria education on the world map, Nigerian educational system and its productivity in the 21st has continued to suffer some set back; as a result of misconceived and misdirected social values and corruption.

The State of Higher Education in Nigeria
The recent findings on the state of higher education in Nigeria as conducted by the World Bank and UNESCO had confirmed the degradation of the Nigerian educational system. Nigeria was a country that produced world-class university graduates that could compete with their counterparts around the world and hard work was their watchword. Today, we only produce the worst set of uneducated tertiary graduates that cannot structure a simple sentence.

Prior to the Nigerian oil industry evolution in the late 1960s, the Nigerian economy was wholly-funded by revenue generated from cash crops such as groundnut, cocoa and palm oil, all produced from the northern, western and eastern part of Nigeria respectively. Then, the fruits of hard work were imbedded in the heart and mind of every student because they saw how hardworking their parents were on the farms and moral education was part of family responsibilities. Today, students are unable to compete in a healthy academic atmosphere due to the destructive role of the family, government, and the university community.

Regrettably, most parents lack all ingredients to be called fathers and mothers because the family structure has been destroyed. These so-called parents hardly oversee the growth and development of their children, rather they chase after the fruits of the world. Family values and respect are now things of the past. These parents prefer to buy admission letters for their children rather than encouraging them to properly prepare for their examinations. And for the parents who refuse to engage in these illegal and immoral practices, they are victimized and their children end up staying at home for years until their parents or the students learn how to beat or cheat the system. Most of these parents always use a famous proverb to justify their unwarranted actions, which goes as follows: "If you can’t beat them, then join them". But these parents fail to realize that they are destroying the future of their children and unborn children without consideration of the long-term consequences and implications.




THE CONCEPT OF UNIVERSITY
The notion of teaching and learning at the higher education level commenced on the basis of tutelage and apprenticeship, well before the 11th century. Renowned scholars, not institutions, at different locations attracted students who negotiated with and studied directly under them, commonly in the disciplines of Medicine, Law and Divinity – the original professions. With time, these teaching and learning centres became more formalized in a manner in which the scholars were aggregated into centres which then, as corporate bodies, took over the responsibly for imparting knowledge.
The name university by which such centres gradually became known, probably originated about the middle of the eleventh century, from the Latin word, universitas, which at the time, was not used only for institutions of higher learning. Over the centuries, however, the name evolved into that of its present usage – an institution incorporating the scholars, the teachers, the generality of subjects taught and the physical location of the organisation. Thus justifying my description of the university at the 24th Convocation Lecture of this institution, as “a community of teachers and scholars who commit themselves to the dissemination of knowledge through teaching and its acquisition through learning, research and scientific enquiry”.
The honest and relentless pursuit of truth for a better understanding of the world is the supreme remit of all universities. They achieve this by engaging in scholarly activities that expand the frontiers of knowledge and lead to innovations, inventions and discoveries. Furthermore, they inclusively educate and transmit knowledge to deserving students and scholars and participate in those activities in the local and international arena that enhance the common good and well-being of all mankind. Not surprising therefore, universities, now about 25,000 globally, play increasingly important roles in modern society and they are now seen as crucial national assets in addressing many policy priorities.




UNIVERSITIES IN NIGERIA
Nigeria’s premier university, the University of Ibadan was established in January 1948 following the Elliot Commission Report6, as a College of the University of London. It became independent of London University in 1962 and thereby converted to a full-fledged University of Ibadan.
However, in anticipation of the needs, especially for manpower development for the soon-would-be independent nation of Nigeria, government set up an 8-man Commission on Higher Education chaired by Eric Ashby, in 1959, “to conduct an investigation into Nigeria’s needs in the field of post-School Certificate and Higher Education over the next twenty years”.  In a comprehensive report, which was submitted in 1960, the Commission noted the need to expand university places and recommended the establishment of a University in Lagos, then capital of Nigeria, and one each in the three regions as they then were, incorporating the then existing Nigerian Colleges of Arts, Science and Technology7.
Partly in response to these recommendations, four universities were established between 1960 and 1962, namely : University of Nigeria, Nsukka; University of Ife, Ile Ife; Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria and the University of Lagos, Lagos. Of these, only that in Lagos was established by the federal government, the others came into being on Acts of Parliament that were enacted by their respective regional governments, even though the universities were all eventually handed over to the federal government.
Currently, the number of universities in Nigeria has risen to 174, with the three newest ones that were established in January 2013 by the federal government in Gashua, in Yobe State, Birini kebi in Kebbi State and Gusau in Zamfara State. Of these, 43 are owned by the federal government, 52 by State governments and 79 by private individuals and organisations. These universities make up the Nigerian University System (NUS) and their activities are coordinated by the National Universities Commission (NUC) in consonance with some aspects of the recommendation of the Ashby’s Commission for the establishment of such a body.
ADMINISTRATIVE FORMATION AND MODE OF OPERATION
The administrative formation and mode of operation of universities in Nigeria differ and depend to some extent on their stated institutional objectives, the orientation of their proprietor(s), and the university’s area of specialization, if any, These structural and operational details are usually clearly stated in a document which is enacted into the Enabling Law or Decree of the particular university by the federal government in the case of federal and privately- owned universities and state governments for universities owned by them. The Enabling Law or Decree defines the governance structure and clearly spells out the responsibilities and limitations to the powers and authority of each of the organs and officers of the university.
Despite the differences that may exist, there are many common areas in the way universities in Nigeria administer and run their affairs. The tradition is essentially British and is a throwback to the University of Ibadan, with its origin from the University of London and which, by virtue of its foremost position in the NUS, has produced a large pool of university administrators in Nigeria of a particular mold. This similarity exits whether the universities are organised in the Collegiate, School or Faculty Systems.
Many universities in Nigeria, function through the following officers and bodies.
Visitor
Chancellor
Pro-chancellor
Governing Council
Vice-Chancellor and other principal officers
Senate
Congregation and Convocation
Colleges/Schools/Faculties/Departments
This list is not exhaustive but a description of the functions of those mentioned, coupled with the other issues that will be ventilated later should give members of Council the feel of how a university operates.
Visitor
The Visitor to the univesity is usually the head of the organisation that owns the institution- Mr. President in the case of federal universities and the Governors, for state- owned universities. The Visitor is not usually involved in the management process of the institution but he is expected to order a periodic review of the operations of the institution – a process known as Visitation, to assess the state of health of the university.
Chancellor.
The Chancellor is the titular or ceremonial head of the university. He awards the degrees of the institution at Convocation ceremonies when he is present. Revered traditional rulers and accomplished senior citizens are the ones that often get appointed as Chancellors of universities.
Pro-chancellor
The Pro-chancellor is the chairman of the Governing Council as well as some Committees of Council such as Finance and General Purposes Committee and Tenders Board and in these capacities, he is more directly involved with the operations of the institution than either the Visitor or Chancellor. The Pro-chancellor and the Council that he leads play a critical role in the affairs of a university.
Governing Council
In addition to the Chairman, the composition of Council consists of those appointed by the proprietor(s) usually from outside the institution representing public interest, ex- officio members and those elected from the university representing Senate and Congregation.. The Council is charged with the “general control and superintendence of the policy, finance and property of the university, including its public relations”8. Nothing further need be said on the role of this all-important body in the affairs of the university and which is also the kernel of this retreat, as this will be adequately handled by the next speaker.
Vice-Chancellor and other Principal Officers
The Vice-Chancellor is the head of the university and is responsible for its day-to-day management. He and other very highly placed officers of the institution, such as the Deputy Vice-Chancellor(s), Registrar, Bursar and University Librarian, who man various sections of the institution, and all of whom report to the Vice-Chancellor, are often referred to as Principal Officers, as they constitute the immediate support of the Vice-Chancellor in the running of the affairs of the university.
While the Deputy Vice-Chancellor(s) works directly with the Vice-Chancellor, the Registrar as the chief administrative officer, is in charge of the Registry, where university records, Seal and Articles of Authority as well as other documents pertaining to the governance, administration and management of the institution are kept and administered. The Registrar also serves as the Secretary to Council, Senate and Congregation In the same vein, the Bursar, as the chief finance officer, is in charge of the Treasury of the university and manages the finances of the institution, while the University Librarian is in charge of the Library, where the volumes of books owned by the university are kept and managed. Some universities also classify the Director of Works and the Director of Health Services, as Principal officers.
Until recently, the Vice-Chancellor was appointed by the Visitor on the recommendation of Council for federal universities while the other Principal Officers are appointed by Council on the recommendation of Senate and other bodies with the authority to do so.
Senate
The Senate of a university serves as the supreme body on academic matters. It is charged with the responsibility of initiating and supervising courses of studies and organising as well as controlling teaching, the admission and discipline of students and the promotion of research9 The Vice-Chancellor is the chairman of Senate with the professors, and heads of various academic units making up its membership in many universities. The Vice-Chancellor is also the chairman of several committees of Council and Senate, like the Appointments and Promotions Committees. It is by the Authority of Senate that the Chancellor, or, in his absence, the Vice-Chancellor, awards the degrees of the university to deserving students at convocations as such degrees are only awarded after formal approval by Senate..
Convocation and Congregation
The Convocation is the assemblage of the staff and students of the university constituted usually for the purposes of the award of degrees and diplomas as approved by Senate while the Congregation is the body of graduate staff of the university who meet to express opinion on various issues in the institution. The Vice-Chancellor presides over Congregation and also Convocation, in the absence of the Chancellor.
Colleges/Schools/Faculties/Departments
These are academic units which all report to Senate and have different levels of responsibilities. The teaching, learning and research activities of a university are carried out through them. Related Schools and Faculties make up a College while related Departments make up a Faculty. A College is headed by a Provost, a School or Faculty by a Dean and a Department by a Head. The Departments are the smallest academic units where teaching, learning and research work are carried out usually on the bases of single subject areas in which degrees are awarded, as part of the overall portfolio of a Faculty, School or College of a university.
Most universities operate the “Committee System” in the decision making process in which issues are freely debated at scheduled meetings and democratically decided upon. In some cases, such decisions may need ratification by higher bodies, like Senate on academic matters and Council in others, before implementation.
CHALLENGES
Commenting on the University College, Ibadan, which was already in existence at the time the Commission was carrying out its assignment, the Ashby Commission noted the contribution of the university and applauded its quality of programmes as “without reproach”10. Indeed, that much could also have been said of the early universities in the country – those that were established in the 1960s. They had the requisite physical infrastructure for the proper running of a university. The utilities, especially those of portable water supply and electricity, functioned. Student intake was controlled and they were quartered in hospitable environments. The Senate of the universities assured quality of educational instruction and students’ work was properly supervised by staff resulting in the production of graduates who were highly regarded and well sought after, within and outside Nigeria as they possessed the necessary knowledge and skills expected of them.
However, in the past two or three decades, there has been an outcry that the general standard of work in many universities in Nigeria has declined. Infrastructure, especially those for teaching and learning has become poorer. Large number of students are admitted, outside due process and beyond what the institutions can reasonably cater for, based on their facilities and academic staff strength and that additionally, most graduates no longer possess the requisite knowledge and skills to back their degrees. Several publications, including one in the Punch Newspaper of 18th. January, 2013, allege that there are graduates of Nigerian Universities who wish to serve in the National Youth Service Corps who are unable to read and write!!
If indeed this chorus of disapproval is true, the reasons are to be found in the tremendous challenges which some of the universities have faced over the years. I will quickly elaborate on a few of them.
Inadequate Institutional Care
Inadequate planning for infrastructure, academic programmes and funding sources constitute aspects of the inadequate care that some universities suffer in Nigeria, even when they have ostensibly met the NUC’s requirement for opening a university. Pre-existing schools and other institutions which were not built for such a purpose are swiftly converted to allow for the commencement of a university, with emphasis on early admission of students.
Once students are admitted, enrolments are expanded but with little or no commensurate increase in academic staff, research funding and other infrastructure as it should be, in line with global trends11.
The issue with regard to funding of the universities is complex. Not only is the funding of the initial capital outlay heavy, the continuing physical development and recurrent expenditure are also profound. It is no wonder therefore that funding issues have been at the heart of most of the strike actions by the unions, especially those by ASUU.
Outside direct funding by the proprietors, the sources from which a university obtains its revenue are intricate and depend, to some extent on whether the institutional policy approves students’ tuition fees or not . Where this is not allowed and the university is unable to source sufficient funds, the institution is denied a vital element it requires to carry out its dedicated functions, including the hiring of .good staff. The neglect suffered by the university under such circumstances is immense and includes the dilapidation of infrastructure, collapse of utilities, run down students’ hostels, classrooms that are devoid of chairs, laboratories with no chemicals, and many more. It is probably for this reason that the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Senator Ayim Pius Ayim, described funding as a “facilitator for the resolution of the challenges in the education sector” while delivering the Convocation Lecture at. the Joint 28th, 29th, 30th and 31st Convocation Ceremony of the Usmanu Danfodiyo University, Sokoto, on Friday 30th November 2012.
Corrupt Practices and Poor Management
Corrupt practices in universities include examination malpractices, plagiarism and award of grades for various forms of gratifications. Cheating at examinations often commences even before the would-be-students get into the universities at their GCE O level and JAMB examinations, where prerequisite entry qualifications are meant to be obtained. No wonder some of those who gain admission to university with high GCE and JAMB scores are not necessarily good students. It was this finding that brought about the need for the establishment of University Matriculation Examination (UME) for university entrants – an action that was strongly opposed by some stakeholders in the sector.
In the universities, some students, sometimes in collaboration with others, devise all manner of ingenious ways to cheat and obtain unearned grades. They bribe willing lecturers with money or sex, have prior knowledge of examination questions, copy at examinations and get others to sit for examinations on their behalf. As for plagiarism – the stealing of intellectual material- academic staff not uncommonly engage in this unconscionable act in their quest to meet set standards for promotion.
Several factors contribute to poor management of academic institutions. They include outright inefficiency or dishonesty by those in charge of the affairs of the university, especially, Council members and principal officers. While with Council members this is usually manifest in irregularities in the award of contracts, principal officers are inefficient or dishonest in a plethora of ways especially through the admission of students and misapplication of university funds. From time to time, such malfeasances get unearthed through Visitation Panel Reports as was the case recently with the University of Abuja, where the Visitation Panel strongly castigated the Council and all principal officers of the institution and recommended their immediate replacement…
Destructive Trade Unionism
Trade unionism in Nigerian universities, notably those by the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU), the Senior Staff Association of Nigerian Universities (SSANU) and the Non Academic Staff Union (NASU) have proved to be major challenges facing the smooth administration of these institutions. There is also the Students Union whose activities bear remarkably on the running of Nigerian universities. Of course the point must be made, that trade unions are important as they serve as effective liaisons between management and the groups they represent. They ensure that managers do not wield undue authoritarian influences on their employees and that the welfare of workers is appropriately protected.
With this background, it must be accepted that the contribution of some of the Unions to the NUS has been profound. For instance, it was ASUU that in 1993, came up with the idea of the establishment of an Education Tax Fund (Now Tertiary Education Trust Fund TETFund) into which monies accruing from an obligatory 2% Education Tax on the assessable profit of all registered companies in Nigeria, can be paid. The proposal was made on the strong aurgment that these companies are the consumers of the products of the universities and so should be made to have a stake in the funding of the institutions. Monies from this fund, have been of tremendous value to the NUS.
However, the point must also be made, that the frequent use of disruptive strike actions as a means of protest or conflict resolution in federal and state-government universities, which has become the stock-in-trade of the unions, has done untold harm to the NUS. Offices, libraries, classrooms, laboratories, conference centres and other physical structures of universities have remained closed for long periods thereby paralysing all academic activities in the institutions..It does not matter if the issues in dispute are within the purview of the federal or state government as the unions always manage to paralyse the entire system nationwide due to the central command structure that they operate
The result of this has been frequent disruptions leading to poor quality of academic work and irregular and uncertain university calendars. Thus, a four year programme might take even a bright student six years to complete. This is in sharp contrast with my experience as a medical student at the University of Lagos in the 1960s where I graduated, after a five year course of study, exactly on the date that was indicated in the University Calendar that was handed over to me five years previously.
Culture of Violence
The decay in the Nigerian polity2 which has been evident for decades now has made some communities in the country seem like theatres of war. The universities, sadly, have not been spared.
The main agent here is a strange, devilish, satanic and totally repugnant phenomenon known as Cultism, where groups of students, sometimes with some staff, form sects that are dedicated to actions well beyond accepted norms even for universities, which by their very nature, offer a voice and do not sniffle dissent.
The medium of their act is terror, violence, intimidation and outright killing of “marked” persons and of the many varieties that have held the university system hostage, the Virkings, Black Axe and Buccaneers are the most vicious. They maim and kill with incredible ferocity, those who attempt to deflect from their ranks or give out classified information about the “family” or “frat”. Students are terrorised with dangerous weapons in classrooms – guns, knives, explosives; girls are raped and property stolen. Even the females are not shielded from this malady – “Daughters of Jezebel” and the “Black Brassieres” are equally vicious..Many believe that the gruesome broad day burning to death of four students of the University of Port Harcourt late last year in the neighbouring village of Aluu, that stunned a global community which saw it all on television, was a cult -related activity which went badly wrong.
On the whole, secret cult activities and the culture of violence which they institute, have done incalculable harm to Nigerian Universities. From the mayhem, death and destruction they cause to the fear, apprehension and state of insecurity they impose on campuses, the phenomenon has wrecked the lives of many students and forced families to seek more conducive environment for the education of their children outside the country.
The challenges that have been described and much more are some of the reasons for which stringent criticisms and disdain have been poured on some Nigerian universities in the past two or three decades.. To many, they have become the face of the NUS and, at least in part, had led to the brain and man-power drain in which some highly trained staff had left the system and sought careers in institutions and industries outside the country where things are better organised. In the same vein, they are partly responsible for the massive increase in the number of Nigerian students who seek admissions into universities outside the country, especially our neighbouring countries, where they pay much higher fees as “foreign students”. Only recently, in September last year, the Chairman, Committee of Pro-Chancellors of Nigerian Universities, Dr Wale Babalakin disclosed that no fewer than 75,000 Nigerian students were studying in three Ghanaian universities in which they incurred a total of N160billion expenditure annually. Many of the alumni produced under these circumstances are poorly motivated and in some instances, shun all forms of interactions with their alma mater.
However, even with all these “scourges” as I described them in a previous paper12, no one needs to throw up his hand in utter despair and give up on the NUS. The universities are redeemable as the issues highlighted can be corrected. For one thing, many private universities are coming on board following the approval that was given through Decree 9 of 1999 for their establishment. Many of them charge proper fees to maintain qualitative education and taboo disruptive unionism. New federal and state universities are being established to enhance access and so reduce the pressure on the existing ones. A relentless war is being waged on cultism and examination malpractice. Better funding options are being examined and much effort put into the improvement of university governance by the NUC.
But the point must be made and strongly too, that tackling these challenges, for individual universities is to a large extent, the responsibility of the Council and principal officers. Council must show the resolve, ability, commitment and sagacity to stand up to these issues and so bring some succor, through its own university, to the NUS.
 University Autonomy and Governance of Higher Education
What does University autonomy mean? Does it mean, for example, that the government must take no interest of any kind in university governance? Does it mean, on the other hand, that the government can impose a strategic direction, merely allowing universities to choose methods of implementation?
The word Autonomy is coined from the greek words auto nomos (auto meaning self, and nomos meaning law). Put together it means to give oneself one's own law. Contextually, it is the capacity of an individual or institution to make an informed, un-coerced decision by its own self, it is the state or condition of having independence or freedom to decide a course of action. The European Universities Association for example, defines it as including organizational, financial, staffing and academic independence of Universities. The 1997 UNESCO Recommendation concerning the Status of Higher-Education Teaching Personnel, contains an elaborate elucidation of the concept of University Autonomy. It defines University Autonomy in Paragraphs 17-21 as follows:
Autonomy is that degree of self-governance necessary for effective decision making by institutions of higher education regarding their academic work, standards, management and related activities consistent with systems of public accountability, especially in respect of funding provided by the state, and respect for academic freedom and human rights.
Autonomy is the institutional form of academic freedom and a necessary precondition to guarantee the proper fulfilment of the functions entrusted to higher-education teaching personnel and institutions. It places an obligation on countries to protect higher education institutions from threats to their autonomy coming from any source.
According to UNESCO, there are three essential components of meaningful University Autonomy: Self-governance, collegiality and appropriate academic leadership.
Self governance refers to the ability of a University to exercise internal control or rule over itself. It refers to internal integrity and the ability of an institution to derive authority for its key decisions from within. Collegiality refers to shared power and authority vested among colleagues. In an autonomous university, decision making powers are exercised amongst scholars, students, staffs, and stakeholders in the academic environment in a fair and democratic way. As such, those decisions are autochthonous (i.e home grown) and derive legitimacy from within. The third aspect of University autonomy is appropriate academic leadership which refers to leadership at all relevant department levels of a University by the most qualified members of that University community. It refers to a meritocratic system in which the most qualified scholars are promoted to occupy leadership positions, based on the fundamental belief that power should be vested in individuals according to merit.
Historically, Nigeria's University system had all these three trappings of being autonomous, collegial and self-governing. The Nigerian University system was in its early days influenced by the classical British system. For example, when the University College Ibadan was established in 1948 as Nigeria's first University, its composition and structure was meticulously patterned after elite UK Universities such as the University College London and Oxford University. In the UK systems created in the thirteenth century and surviving more or less till date, the classical British university was a feudal institution grounded on the UNESCO model of an autonomous, collegial and self-governing system. As the former UK Prime Minster Benjamin Disraeli, once famously remarked "A University should be a place of light, of liberty, and of learning". The classical UK University was controlled solely through a democratic system operated and run by tenured Professors and scholars. It was a compact system of organization in which leadership and responsibility were decentralized on the basis of expertise in scholarship. The classical university also was funded on a very restrictive base through private endowments, or benefaction by the wealthy and by the missionary with whom the university was closely allied in its origins.
This model of University governance began to fade globally after the Second World War; the influence of which continues to shape what we have in Nigeria today. After the Second World War, there was an exponential growth in the so-called welfare state idea. The welfare state recognized the benefits of public investment in the conduct of advanced learning, research, technology development, foreign policy and war. Governments began to recognise the relationships between a country's war strategies and its abilities to produce technology through research. There was therefore a geometric rise in the level of relationships between governments and the universities. The result was the evolution of Universities and learning centers funded directly by governments. With increased funding came a sharp rise in governmental influence in key decisions on admissions, access, enrolment, faculty composition, tenure and the election of principal officers.
The breakdown of the elite classical model of University education continued at an exponential rate with the take over of governments by military dictatorships in many parts of Africa. With military leadership in Nigeria came the added impetus for military authorities to curtail student demands and protests, checkmate University Staff Unions and influence key decisions such as governing council constitutions, university quotas, policies and structure. In the periods between 1966 to 1999 when Nigeria was under military rule, Nigerian University systems therefore became increasingly less autonomous, less collegial, and highly dependent on government for funding and for decision making. Government involvement increased with controls over the constitution and membership of Governing Councils, direct control over the appointment of key administrative officers of Universities; and financial controls. Simply put, Government became a key stakeholder and decision maker in Nigeria's University systems. These relics of military rule are unfortunately still present today. As such, the reality of University education in Nigeria today remains that of perpetual demand by University authorities for more autonomy to internally decide, run and execute their own programs and policies.
Why is University Autonomy Important?
Before I consider this question, I want to introduce you to the theoretical teachings of one of the greatest University reformers of all times- Sir Robert Menzies- the former Prime Minister of Australia- who is credited to be the father of University education and reform in Australia. When Menzies first became Prime Minister of Australia in 1939, there were six universities in Australia and 14,236 University students, in a country with a population of seven million. By the time he retired in 1966 there were 16 universities and 91,272 University students. One of the key principles advocated by Sir Menzies is the importance of University autonomy. In an address on his first day as Prime Minister in 1939, he asked the questions, ‘What are we to look for in a true university? What causes should it serve?’. He then put forward answers in response to these questions.
In his words, the University must be:
·         a place of pure culture and learning;
·         a training school for the professions;
·         a liaison between the academician and the ‘good practical man’ (i.e a bridge between theoretical learning and its practical application);
·         the home of research;
·         a trainer of character;
·         a training ground for leaders,
·         a custodian of the unfettered search for truth; and
·         an autonomous institution.
Sir Menzies was emphatic in his words, that it is:
utterly undesirable that any government in a free country should tell a university what and how it is to teach...
He also noted:
I prefer to think of academic freedom as a precious and shining example of that kind of freedom which all thinking men and women want for themselves, and will not abandon without a struggle...Universities … are accorded a high degree of autonomy and self-determination on the ground that the particular services which they render, both to their country and to mankind in general, cannot be rendered without such freedom.
Sir Menzies advocated that the way to a strong higher education system was to create the conditions that allow universities to thrive, and to give them the freedom to chart their own course and then get on with it.
Unfortunately, many Nigerian Universities are weighed down by
the bureaucratic demands of political correctness, reporting and regulation that stifle productivity and capacity to innovate.
University Scholars must also be free to air out results of findings without fear of backlash from funding agencies, governments and authorities. Of what use is knowledge that cannot be freely disseminated? The freedom to disseminate research knowledge is often hindered by internal screenings and vetting to avoid regulatory backlash thereby diluting the very essence and key findings of many important research endeavour.
Autonomy is also important to promote a culture of merit and fairness within the University system. In an era whereby many key University appointments and decisions are made from outside the University, meritocracy is eroded and replaced with nepotism, god-fatherism, lobbying and political patronage. The result is a system whereby the most eligible are often frustrated and left without promotions. This has led to the unsavoury situation in which the best currently do not thrive within Nigerian University systems. How can Nigerian Universities compete with the rest of the world when the best are not rewarded? How also can we demonstrate the virtues of hard work and merit to students when these values are not in demonstration within the walls of the University?
Autonomy is also vital to reduce the perennial tensions, clashes and strikes between Governments and University hierarchy. University authorities must be given the freedom to chart their own course and then implement without undue manipulations or interference by governments. When University authorities are allowed to design their own programs and empowered to execute and deliver them, they are morally bound to ensure that such programs succeed. This will lead to an increased sense of responsibility and ownership by Universities thereby eliminating some of the root causes of the recurrent strike actions in Nigeria. Like Judges, University officials must feel a sense of independence and job security while executing their sacred functions of knowledge dissemination to the country. A situation whereby government interferes in appointments, dismissals, promotions, tenure and administrative roles erodes Universities of their abilities to independently perform their primordial functions and roles without pressure.
Closely intertwined with this is the fact that Universities require autonomy to be able to attract and retain the very best minds. Many Universities in Nigeria are unable to compete with their foreign counterparts in recruiting the most qualified Professors and teachers, some of whom are Nigerians, but are now scattered in foreign destinations. To stem the tide of this brain drain, Universities must have the budget, freedom and financial independence to be able to recruit the very best at all times.  It is this independence that allows a young University like ours to have recorded many landmark success within the last five years. Without financial independence, a University's wings to fly is clipped and it is left to walk, or at best crawl.
Autonomy is important to allow innovation and excellence. So many roads lead to the same destination, the ultimate destination for higher education is to have Nigerian Universities that can compete in terms of quality, standards and products that can compete neck-to-neck with other universities in the world. Universities must be allowed to internally innovate different ways to get to this destination. Universities are better placed to determine the problems they face and to develop solutions to them, after all there reside some of Nigeria's finest and most talented minds. Nigerian Universities cannot be regulated into excellence. It is only through respecting the autonomy of universities that we can have the competition that drives the excellence, diversity and innovation that we need.
How then can we achieve true University Autonomy in Nigeria?
To answer the question posed earlier, when we speak of autonomy, what is the ideal situation. Is it a situation where the government must take no interest of any kind in university governance? Does it mean, on the other hand, that the government can impose a strategic direction, merely allowing universities to choose methods of implementation?  The answer lies somewhere in between these two rather different propositions.
Autonomy cannot mean that the government has no stake in universities and that its leaders should mind their own business; that would suggest a level of independence from anyone’s oversight that no other public body in the Nigerian society, whether public or private, enjoys by law. On the other hand autonomy, if it is to mean anything, must include the right of a university to determine its own strategy, taking into account the public interest. Simply put, autonomy for Nigerian Universities  should mean the right of a University to enjoy the core privileges of: academic freedom, substantive independence, and procedural self-governance, subject only to public accountability. I will briefly discuss these three elements.
1. Academic Freedom
Academic freedom is the right of the scholar in his/her teaching and research to follow the truth wherever it leads without fear of punishment for having violated some political, social or religious orthodoxy. For comparative purposes, Section 14 of the Irish Universities Act 1997provides an excellent analogy of academic freedom, It states that:
A member of the academic staff … shall have the freedom, within the law, in his or her teaching, research and any other activities in or outside the university, to question and test received wisdom, to put forward new ideas and to state controversial or unpopular opinions, and shall not be disadvantaged, or subject to less favourable treatment by the university, for the exercise of that freedom.
Justice Frankfurter's opinion in the US Case of  Sweezy v New Hampshire, 354 U.S. 234, 250, 77 S.Ct.1203, l L.Ed.2d 1311, 1957, also illuminates what academic freedom entails. he noted:
the four essential freedoms of a university are– to determine for itself on academic grounds who may teach, what may be taught, how it shall be taught, and who may be admitted to study.
A University should not be coerced to make admission and tenure decisions based on political, federal character or other non-academic basis. Academic freedom encompasses the rights of the University to determine academic issues based solely on what it considers the most meritorious. A University should have the capacity to decide on overall student numbers on the criteria for selecting them.
Academic freedom is not just an idea for publicly funded Universities. Rather it is a value that should be recognized and practiced in any university, public or private, that wants to claim the title of a University. Universities must remain the place for unadulterated research and learning. A situation where Universities are coerced whether directly or indirectly into making admission, tenure and appointment decisions on non-academic grounds is an affront to autonomy. Furthermore, a situation in some countries whereby truth is distorted or teachings are altered, academic freedom is also eroded. For example in China and Libya where there have been allegations that Universities are forced to indoctrinate students on the supremacy of the President or where academic publications are altered and doctored by University authorities to avoid the wrath of the government, University autonomy is eroded. In an autonomous system, scholars and faculty members are accorded primacy in academic matters.
2. Substantive Independence
To determine the level of autonomy enjoyed by a University, the first source to examine is the enabling Act or law establishing the University. This spells out the level of regulatory or governmental involvement in the day to day running of the University. Typically, many enabling University Charters in Nigeria vest the Government a strong influence and control over routine University decisions and issues. Substantive independence deals with enabling and empowering the University to carry out its roles and mission without overbearing governmental influence. This includes: Freedom to select University leadership and holders of key administrative positions; Freedom to allocate funds (within the amounts available) across different categories of expenditure. Including the freedom to keep surplus money from budgets; ability to borrow money; ability to decide what to charge as tuitions for foreign nationals; Freedom to select staff and students and to determine the conditions under which they remain in the university and the capacity to decide on salaries amongst others.
For example in many UK Universities, Chairs of Governing Councils including Visitors and Pro-Chancellors are elected by staff, students and other stakeholders. Even if we currently do not have the structure to implement such a process in Nigeria, University leadership should at the least have strong inputs in the selection of members of the Governing Council who ultimately go a long way in shaping the destinies of the Universities.
Similarly, Universities must be free to decide divide and distribute their funding internally according to their priorities needs without restrictions.
3. Procedural Self Governance
Autonomy is as much a matter of how universities are constituted, as it a matter of how they are led. Procedural self governance refers to independence and freedom of Universities to formulate and design their own strategies and to freely implement them. This is different from the freedom to choose appropriate management methods to implement the strategy put in place by the government for Universities. In an autonomous system, the University formulates its own strategies and decides exactly how it hopes to carry out its programs and missions.
The tasks of University Governance should be wholesomely formulated by the Governing Council, on paper and in practice. The Governing Council should without undue governmental influence be given the freedom to formulate growth strategies for the University. The Governing Council should be directly responsible for overseeing the institution’s activities, determining its future direction and fostering an environment in which the institutional mission is achieved and the potential of all staffs and students are maximised. Council should be the final arbiter on rules that determine the appointment and dismissal of key administrative heads of the University without interference or final approval by the Government.
Balancing Autonomy with Accountability for public finance
One of the key questions that reoccur is that public universities are funded by the government and by public monies, should the government not then have a right to oversee how public funds are spent, and to decide how government strategies are implemented in those public institutions. I hasten to mention that accountability for public and private funds is entirely compatible with autonomy. Autonomy does not mean the absence of regulations. Indeed, accountability for public funds is essential to continuing public support for the substantial investment of public money in a system of essentially autonomous universities.
The answer to this is internal integrity and transparency by University officials. Accountability is the obligation to demonstrate that a University and its resources have been administered and utilized in accordance with agreed rules and standards and to report fairly and accurately on performance results vis-à-vis mandated roles and/or plans.  Higher education institutions should endeavour to open their governance in order to be accountable. They should be accountable for:
(a) effective communication to the public concerning the nature of their educational mission;
(b) a commitment to quality and excellence in their teaching, scholarship and research functions, and an obligation to protect and ensure the integrity of their teaching, scholarship and research against intrusions inconsistent with their academic missions;
(c) effective support of academic freedom and fundamental human rights;
(d) ensuring high quality education for as many academically qualified individuals as possible subject to the constraints of the resources available to them;
(e) a commitment to the provision of opportunities for lifelong learning, consistent with the mission of the institution and the resources provided;
(f) ensuring that students are treated fairly and justly, and without discrimination;
(g) adopting policies and procedures to ensure the equitable treatment of women and minorities and to eliminate sexual and racial harassment;
(h) ensuring that higher education personnel are not impeded in their work in the classroom or in their research capacity by violence, intimidation or harassment;
(i) honest and open accounting;
(j) efficient use of resources;
(k) the creation, through the collegial process and/or through negotiation with organizations representing higher-education teaching personnel, consistent with the principles of academic freedom and freedom of speech, of statements or codes of ethics to guide higher education personnel in their teaching, scholarship, research and extension work;
(l) assistance in the fulfilment of economic, social, cultural and political rights while striving to prevent the use of knowledge, science and technology to the detriment of those rights, or for purposes which run counter to generally accepted academic ethics, human rights and peace;
(m) ensuring that they address themselves to the contemporary problems facing society; to this end, their curricula, as well as their activities, should respond, where appropriate, to the current and future needs of the local community and of society at large, and they should play an important role in enhancing the labour market opportunities of their graduates;
(n) encouraging, where possible and appropriate, international academic co-operation which transcends national, regional, political, ethnic and other barriers, striving to prevent the scientific and technological exploitation of one state by another, and promoting equal partnership of all the academic communities of the world in the pursuit and use of knowledge and the preservation of cultural heritages;
(o) ensuring up-to-date libraries and access, without censorship, to modern teaching, research and information resources providing information required by higher-education teaching personnel or by students for teaching, scholarship or research;
(p) ensuring the facilities and equipment necessary for the mission of the institution and their proper upkeep;
(q) ensuring that when engaged in classified research it will not contradict the educational mission and objectives of the institutions and will not run counter to the general objectives of peace, human rights, sustainable development and environment.
Autonomy therefore does not mean freedom from accountability and internal integrity. Universities must be ready to play their own part by promoting public disclosure mechanisms through which budgets, spending, policies and practices are proactively disclosed to the public and to governments. This would include the need to establish public disclosure systems to release such information on a regular basis, even when governments or the public do not specifically make requests for such information. Internally, there is a need to establish a comprehensive information management system that allows members of the University community to receive the latest and most up to date information about programs, funding, tenure and promotions. The aim must be to reduce the culture of secrecy in governance and to ensure that the right to receive information is not only reactive, but also proactive. University authorities must demonstrate that they have established a system of publishing information suo motu (proactively) on their own volition.
Nigerian Universities need academic freedom, substantive independence and procedural governance which will greatly assist university governance including appointment of university governing councils, empower universities to raise the much needed funds from sources other than government as practised in other countries thereby enabling public universities to cope with the multifarious problems affecting public universities in Nigeria.

REVIEW OF DOCUMENTS AND POLICIES
The aim of this chapter is to review existing documents and policies which guide the education sector in Nigeria; and which have concomitant implications for diaspora intervention and engagement. In this vein, the following national and international documents, protocols and policies are considered:
Nigeria’s Vision 20:2020
National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy (NEEDS)
National Policy on Education
National Roadmap for the Education Sector
Labour Migration Policy for Nigeria
Nigeria’s Education Sector Analysis by World Bank
UNESCO Report on Nigerian Education
Report on Needs Assessment of Nigerian Public Universities
Nigeria’s Vision 20:2020 The Vision 20:2020 is Nigeria’s blueprint for economic transformation. Launched in 2003, it is Nigeria’s long term development agenda aimed at repositioning it to become one of the twenty largest economies in the world by the year 2020. The National Vision of Nigeria expresses the country’s aspiration to improve the quality of Life of its people through the development of an information and knowledge based economy which the people can use to gain social, economic and educational benefits and fulfill their potentials. The vision is all encompassing and recognized the need to develop not only economically but for transformation and advancements in the social, economic, political, educational and cultural ways. To attain the overarching goal of reaching the top twenty economies by year 2020, the Government realized the need to enhance development in key sectors such as education. In education, the goal is to develop a modern and vibrant education system which will provide for every Nigerian the opportunity and facility to achieve his or her maximum potential and provide the country with adequate and competent manpower.
National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy The National Economic Empowerment Development Strategy (NEEDS) is an initiative set up by the Federal Government in 2003. It was designed to achieve macroeconomic stability, wealth creation and employment generation. A key component of the initiative is poverty alleviation. NEEDS redefines the role of private and public sectors within the Nigerian economy. The public sector is expected to provide enabling environment for the private sector to grow the economy and drive socio-economic development. NEEDS provides a framework for nationally coordinated programmes of action by the federal, state and local governments. In addition to programmes initiated by the federal government, state and local governments are encouraged to design and implement equivalent programmes based on the objectives of NEEDS.
National Policy on Education Nigeria’s “National Policy on Education,” was published in 1977. It was revised in 1981 to ensure that the policy addressed the perceived needs of the government in power and also to ensure that the education sector was supportive of government development goals. Again, in 1990, government acknowledged the need to review and update the policy following recent political changes, which saw the reintroduction of democracy in the country. Nigeria’s vision of education as an instrument for national development is reflected in the NPE. The government relies on education as a springboard for its development and reform agenda. This is reflected in the emphatic resonance in the NPE that “no nation can rise about the quality of its education system”. Thus, five main national objectives have been endorsed as the necessary foundation for the National Policy on education. These are the building of: (a) a free and, democratic society; (b) a just egalitarian society; (c) a united, strong and self-reliant nations; (d) a great and dynamic economy; (e) a land full of bright opportunities for all citizens. The National Policy on Education (NPE) defines the structure of Nigeria’s education. The document consists of 13 sections which handle critical issues about the educational sector. As stipulated in the NPE (2004), basic education covers nine years of formal (compulsory) schooling consisting of six years of primary and three years of junior secondary. Post-basic education comprises three years of senior secondary education in either an academic or technical stream. At the tertiary level, the system consists of the university, polytechnics, and colleges of education sub-sectors. The National Policy on Education (NPE) document addresses the issues of imbalance in the provision of education in different parts of the country with regard to access, quality of resources and girls’ education. Education is organized into 9 years of basic education, 3 years of senior secondary education and 4 years of university/ polytechnic/college education.
National RoadMap for the Education Sector In 2009 the Federal Ministry of Education published the Roadmap for the Nigerian Education Sector. The roadmap was developed to address issues in the education sector related to mismanagement and inadequacy of resources commensurate with national needs, population growth and demand. As a result of these challenges, education as a strategic priority of the government has not been well positioned as a transformational tool and a pillar for socio-economic empowerment and development (FME, 2009). The roadmap outlines improvement and turn-around strategies for each of the sub-sectors of education namely basic, post-basic and tertiary. The plan is to use a representative sample of schools and institutions across the country as demonstration projects.
Labour Migration Policy for Nigeria In 2004, at the request of the Federal Ministry of Labour and Productivity the ILO provided technical support in setting up an International Labour Migration Desk at the Ministry, and in October, 2008, the Minister of Labour formally requested both ILO and IOM to assist in preparing a national labour migration policy, and to help establish bilateral arrangements for employment of Nigerians abroad. The Labour Migration Policy addresses three broad objectives, namely: promotion of good governance of labour migration; protection of migrant workers and promotion of their welfare and that of families left behind; and optimizing the benefits of labour migration on development, while mitigating its adverse impact. This policy is divided into three parts. Part 1 deals with ‘Promoting Good Governance in Labour Migration’, which aims to facilitate rights protection and to achieve equitable social and economic outcomes; Part 2 is headed ‘Protection of Migrant Workers and Promotion of their Welfare’, which includes that of members of their families, and Part 3, covering ‘Optimzing the Benefits of Labour Migration for Development’, deals with how migration contributions can be mainstreamed into national development plans. The Labour Migration Policy for Nigeria has been developed with the active involvement of key stakeholders: the relevant ministries, departments, and agencies., The Federal Ministry of Labour and Productivity is responsible for coordinating and monitoring the implementation of the policy, in collaboration with the identified key stakeholders, especially the Social Partners – labour unions and employers’ associations. It will also periodically evaluate the process, to ensure that labour migration from and to Nigeria takes place in an atmosphere of freedom, dignity and respect of workers’ rights.
Nigeria’s Education Sector Analysis by World Bank The World Bank is a major international development partner that has supported the education sector in Nigeria. It focused its role in supporting the implementation of the universal basic education. The Bank provided financial assistance to support the Primary Education Project in Nigeria. The project was aimed at upgrading and monitoring quality in primary education, improve planning and research capacities, and contribute to the improvement of resource allocations (World Bank, 2000). The first phase of the project was more of a consolidation phase that provided support for planning the UPE. The second phase was more focused and concentrated upon a limited number of schools throughout Nigeria. Five main issues were addressed: human resource capacity, access and equity, quality, and information for decision-making. These choices were strategic and based upon the experience gained in the first phase, such as the capacity within the country, the cost of interventions, the need to make an early and visible impact, and the contribution that could be made by all levels of government and local communities (World Bank, 2000). According to the World Bank Reports, some of the major issues in Nigerian teacher education that need attention are: • The shortage of primary school teachers required to attain the projected population of primary school pupils; • The extremely high teacher-pupil ratio which is currently operating at 1:76; • The low numbers of graduates going into the teaching profession; • The fact that teachers have become marginalized and the profession is the most impoverished of all sectors of the labor force in Nigeria; • Poor salaries and benefits of teachers, poor conditions of the work environment, unimpressive access to information and new technology; • Inequities in the availability of qualified teachers in the different States. • Most current primary school teachers have yet to attain the minimum qualification (NCE) as required by the National Policy on Education. • Most Colleges of Education offer courses which are not appropriate or relevant to the level and needs of most primary teachers. • Oversupply of NCE and graduate teachers in some disciplines and subject combinations while there is a general shortage of teachers in others such as Physics, Mathematics, Home Economics, Business Education, Technical Education, Primary Education Studies, Nursery Education and Computer Science. • Lack of professionally qualified and competent staff in management positions in tertiary institutions. • The serious gender imbalance in some states is of concern, particularly a decline in the numbers of male teachers and their importance as role models.
UNESCO Report on Nigeria Education The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) is another international development partner which has contributed significantly to the development of Nigeria’s education sector. Periodically, the organization carries out a situational analysis of the state of Nigerian education pointing out necessary areas for intervention. The latest of such efforts is the 2012 Education For All (EFA) Global Monitoring Report (GMR) of the International Bureau of Education, an agency of UNESCO. The EFA Global Monitoring Report, launched in January, 2014 by UNESCO, tells a very sad tale of Nigerian education. According to it, Nigeria has some of the worst education indicators globally. The EFA GMR indicates that Nigeria has about 10.5 million of out-of- school children, which is the largest in Africa in absolute terms. It also identifies inequity and education costs as indices that have contributed to the damning evidence on the state of education. From these indications, it is obvious that Nigeria might not achieve the millenium development goal of Education For All, by the 2015 global time line in spite of the commitment and efforts of the Federal Government toward the attainment of same (UNESCO, 2014) The report proposes a pathway that is seen as a template or framework for government to address the basic, transferable and technical skills of the youth, as well as the challenges of access, equity, quality, gender and poverty trap. In ‘Teaching and learning: Achieving quality for all’, the report indicates that Nigeria is among the 37 countries that are losing money spent on education, because children are not learning. UNESCO disclosed that the menace is already costing governments $129 billion a year. It stressed further that despite the money being spent, the rejuvenation of the primary education is not in the near future because of poor quality education that is failing to ensure that children learn. The bleak future that Nigeria’s education sector faces means that it would not be able to meet EFA’s Goals 1, 2 and 4 by the year 2015. According to the UNESCO’s report, Nigeria is one of the only 15 countries that are projected to have fewer than 80 per cent of its primary school age children enrolled in school by 2015. Nigeria’s out-of-school population not only grew the most in terms of any country in the world since 2004-2005 by 3.4 million, but also had the 4th highest growth rate in the world (UNESCO, 2014).
Report on Needs Assessment of Nigerian Public Universities Government through its agencies and commissions carries out periodic needs assessment of different sectors of education. It is believed that periodic appraisal of government institutions is the best way to reposition and transform them. (FGN, 2012). The most-recent assessment of manpower needs of Nigerian public universities was conducted in 2012 by an inter-ministerial committee set up by the Federal Government. The purpose of the assessment was to elicit information on issues of concern to university education in order to formulate policies and take decisions for addressing such issues. The exercise was conducted to determine, among other issues, the quantity and quality of academic staff required for effective teaching and learning in Nigerian universities. It was intended to be an appraisal of the existing situation in the university sub-sector with a view to determining what was needed for revitalization and transformation. The report of the Needs Assessment was presented to the Federal Government in November, 2012. It identified manpower shortage as one of the reasons why Nigerian universities have been unable to compete favourably with universities in many other parts of the world. According to the report, a combination of infrastructural and manpower challenges is responsible for the sharp decline in scholarship in Nigerian universities. On manpower challenges, the report indicated that as at November 2012, there were 37,504 academic staff in 74 public universities in Nigeria. Considering the number of staff vis-a-viz the student population, the report revealed an unmanageable student-lecture ratio. For example, at the National Open University the academic staff-to-student ratio was 1:363, at Lagos State University it was 1:144 and at the University of Abuja it was 1:122. Kano State University which was eleven years old at the time of the Needs Assessment had one professor and 25 lecturers with PhDs while Kebbi State University had two professors and five lecturers with doctorate degrees. These statistics revealed wide disparities between Nigerian universities and their counterparts in other parts of the world. For instance, staff-student ratio in Harvard University is 1 to 4, Massachusetts Institute of Technology- 1 to 9, and the University of Cambridge is 1 to 3. Gender disparities were also found in the distribution of academic staff. About 83% of academic staff in the universities were men and 16% women. Further classification of academic staff by qualification and rank indicated that the university system was experiencing a staffing or manpower crisis. For illustration, only about 16,127, representing 43% of academic staff in the universities have doctorate degrees, instead of 75% recommended by the NUC. Only about 16,502 (44%) are within the bracket of Senior lecturers and Professors. Surprisingly, only seven out of 74 public universities in Nigeria have up to 60 per cent of their teaching staff with PhD qualifications. These deficiencies have led to a situation in which many universities had to rely exclusively on part-time and under-qualified academics with negative implications for quality education in the institutions.
Usage of ICT for Information Administration in Higher Education Institutions
Change has been happening at an uneven pace in any growth-oriented industry, and the education sector is no exception. Rapid growth in the field of education has made governance in academic sector a very complex task. The 21st century has witnessed tremendous advancements in technology which has led to far-reaching developments in the administrative system. Cost-effective technology combined with the flexibility in learning and administrative activities is essential to enhance efficiency. Computers can be used extensively for educational administration. The following are some of the areas where computers can be used for effective educational administration (Ben-Zion Barta et. al. 1995):
• General Administration
• Pay Roll and Financial Accounting
• Administration of Student Data
• Inventory Management
• Personnel Records Maintenance
• Library System Information and Communication Technology (ICT) plays a vital role in supporting powerful, efficient management and administration in education sector. It is specified that technology can be used right from student administration to various resource administration in an education institution (Christiana Maki 2008). Sharad Sinha (2008) mentioned the various administrative challenges for Indian education system of the 21st century as given below:
• Global and local challenges
• Universal and individual challenges
• Balancing between traditional and modern approaches
• Long term and short term considerations
• Competition and equity challenges
• Extraordinary expansion of knowledge As a part of strategy, the author mentioned that these challenges could be overcome with the proper usage of technology. Moreover many studies revealed the need for ICT integration into administrative activities of higher education institutions. The various ways of introducing technology in education institution administration are the following (Caroline Salerno 2009):
• Sending e-mail notices and agendas to staff, rather than printing and distributing them
• Submission of lesson plans through e-mail
• Foster technology growth by asking parents to write e-mail addresses on medical forms.
• Insist that all teachers create a class Web page
• Attend technology conferences to see what other schools are doing, what other teachers are doing to integrate technology, and what principals are doing to encourage the use of technology in their schools and classrooms.
• Admissions through web-enabled services.
• All day-to-day activities of the institution (General Administration)
• Staff administration.
Olive Mugenda (2006) said ICT fosters the dissemination of information and knowledge by separating content from its physical location. This flow of information is largely impervious to geographic boundaries allowing remote communities to become integrated into global networks and making information, knowledge and culture accessible, in theory, to anyone. It is also mentioned that ICT enhances day-to-day management of institutions and the various functional areas in which it could be used are specified below:
• Timetabling
• Student admission and Tracking
• Financial Management
• Medical services
• Procurement and Store management
• Data distribution and management ICT is used in maintenance of student and staff records and for communication and document management (OECS 2001). Ashish Kumar and Arun Kumar (2005) have mentioned about the positive perception towards the use of ICT in education. It is mentioned in the study that students of different universities reported the usage of ICT for communication and for on-line discussion forums. ICT facilitated contact and information exchange and also promoted access to higher education. ICTs included systems for student admission and records, examination results and transcripts, finance database, human resources database, and management information. Various literature reviews reveal that Information administration is one part of overall administration of education institutions which mainly covers general and day-to-day operational activities. Hence, it could be concluded that Information administration cycle includes four major components namely, Student administration, Staff administration, and General administration. A theoretical model for Information administration has been formulated, and is depicted below:

Information administration in this context refers to activities relating to the management of higher education institutions which is often mentioned in other studies as managerial activities in higher education institutions. The administrative systems include Personnel administration, student administration, resources administration, financial administration and general administration (Christiana Maki, 2008). Based on the literature review the three main functional areas of information administration that are of great significance for day-to-day management of higher education institutions was identified as follows:
• Student administration
• Staff administration
• General administration Student administration is an important and integral part of information administration. This involves various activities commencing from the admission process to learning activities till processing of results and performance analysis. The integration of ICT into this process enhances the overall admission activities of higher education institutions by making it more accessible to many (Thomas Kwaku Obeng 2004). Based on the literature review, the important items identified under this category relates to the automation of admission process through e-media. This includes admission enquiry by students, applying for admissions through electronic media, registration / enrolment using computers, course allotment, and availability of information like timetable / class schedule in electronic form and attendance monitoring / maintenance through e-media. Further it includes the various communications relating to transport, hostel accommodation and other communication to guardians/parents. The integration also helps in expansion of the geographical boundaries for student intake, thus facilitating cross-border higher education. Staff administration includes recruitment and work allotment of faculty and staff in the institution, their attendance and leave management, and performance appraisal. This also includes relevant communication to and from the institutions and among peers. Staff administration done through Information and communication technology (ICT) helps in processing of voluminous records in a quick, meticulous, and impeccable manner thereby making data retrieval easier (Thomas Kwaku Obeng 2004). In general, a good communication system should also be in place for the overall effectiveness of administration. ICT helps in providing a good communication system in higher education system (Magni 2009). ICT helps in providing timely information to all concerned. Communication could be for internal and external information acquisition and dissemination. It includes communication between the important stakeholders of the system such as sending e-circulars to students, faculty and staff. The dissemination of information about the institution using e-kiosks is also a very important item to be considered.