MONITORING AND EVALUATION OF THE

UNIVERSAL BASIC EDUCATION PROGRAMME

By Dr. Onwuakpa, NECO office, Minna

Abstract
The success of any programme depends to a great extent on the nature of monitoring
and evaluation of activities taking place during the course of the programme. Monitoring
and evaluation strategies help to ensure standard as well as forestall any possible
problem[s] that might affect the achievement of a programme’s objectives.
In the light of the above, this paper presents some monitoring and evaluation strategies
that shall be built into the Universal Basic Education programme in this country. One of
those strategies is that of National Assessment strategy. The modalities for conducting
such strategies were specified and some useful recommendations made at the end.

Background
Indeed, the importance of education in any society cannot be over-emphasized. Education
constitutes the major engine for sustainable human development, as well as the fulcrum
around which every other activity revolves. It is because of this that development experts
posit that no society can rise beyond its educational level. Accordingly, nations which
have recorded tremendous feats in the world, heavily relied on the instrumentality of
education [Daily Champion, 2000].
The above statements of fact about education could be a major reasons why Nigeria
in the early seventies started to make serious movies for eradicating illiteracy. One of
such movies was the organization of the 1973 conference on education under the
chairmanship of late Chief S. O. Adebo [the then Nigeria permanent representative at the
United Nations]. The outcome of this historic meeting led to the promulgation of the first
National Policy on Education in 1977. There was also the change in the educational
system from the 6-5-2-3 system to 6-3-3-4 system. During the early seventies [in
particular 1976], there was the introduction of the Universal Primary Education
Programme. The programme made Primary Education free. The objective was to make
education to be free in the country as well as to solve the problem of educational
imbalance among the tribes. The UPE programme did not thrive for too long before it
was abandoned by the government who instituted it. The setbacks of the UPE programme
had more to do with planlessness as well as lack of adequate commitment on the part of
those in authority.
The demise of the UPE programme since then has caused much harm to the
primary education system in Nigeria. Primary school pupils suffer from lack of school
facilities, over-population, inadequate staffing, and no attention given to teachers. The
Federal government in response to these problems and needs instituted the National
Primary Education Commission tagged NPEC. NPEC was much welcomed by the
society as well as world organizations such as World Bank, UNESCO, UNICEF and
UNDP. Much funds were invested into NPEC to make it live for a long time in order to
improve the quality of education in the primary schools. All these supports did not yield
much fruit as we continued to experience the problem of poor performance in the
educational achievement of primary school pupils[Falayajo et.al,1995].
In 1991,there was a world conference on education held in Jomtien, Thailand
which was popularly called ‘Education For All”[EFA]. This conference was organized by
the efforts of some of the aforementioned World organizations and it attracted all the
Minister of education from all the countries of the world. The outcome of the world
conference on education was the recommendation of the concept ‘Basic Education’ to be
adopted by all countries in the bid to reduce drop-out and illiteracy rates in every society.
In compliance with this recommendation, the Nigerian government on the 30 th of
September, 1999 launched the Universal Basic Education[UBE] programme with
professor PAI Obanya as National coordinator. The Federal government of Nigeria as
well as word Bank, UNESCO, UNICEF and UNDP has started to invest much money
into UBE. Much we support the government’s efforts, we should not allow the UBE
programme go the way of the Universal Primary Education[UPE]. We should adopt some
intervention strategies to enable it survive. To this end, there is the need to introduce
some monitoring and evaluation strategies into the programme. The achievement of this
goal gives rise to the writing of this paper.
Universal Basic Education[UBE] programme: The Universal Basic Education[UBE]
programme in Nigeria was the result of the Jomtien Declaration and framework of Action
on Education for All[EFA] which took place in 1991. Basic education here does not only
imply years of schooling, but it sees education[in a broader sense] as a close articulation
of the formal, the non-formal and informal approaches to mechanisms for the awakening
and all-round development of the human potential[FME 2000]. The broad aim is to lay
the foundation for life-long learning through the inculcation of appropriate learning-to-
learn, self-awareness, citizenship and life skills.
The specific objectives of free UBE programme in Nigeria among others include:
 The provision of free, universal basic education for every Nigerian child of
school-age;
 Reducing drastically the incidence of drop-out from the formal school system;
 Developing in the entire citizenry a strong consciousness for education and a
strong commitment to its vigorous promotion. In Nigeria, Basic education
encompasses the following:
 Programmes/initiatives for early childhood care and socialization;
 Education programmes for the acquisition of functional literacy, numeracy and
life skills;
 Special programmes for nomadic populations; out-of-school, non-formal
programmes for updating the knowledge and skills of persons who left school
before acquiring the basic needed for life-long learning;
 Non-formal skills and apprenticeship training for adolescent and youth who have
not had the benefit of formal education;
 The formal school system from the beginning of primary education to the end of
the junior secondary school.

Concepts of Monitoring And Evaluation Defined

The concept of ‘monitoring’ and ‘evaluation’ need some kind of explanation in this
paper for the purpose of clarity in their usage. Literally, Monitoring means to check,
inspect, observe, police, or investigate into an activity or programme. Its primary aim is
to identify the strengths, weaknesses and loop-holes in a programme for the sake of
maintaining standard quality. Evaluation is the process of determining the extent to which
an activity /programme has achieved the objective for it was designed. It involves some
kind of measurement, assessment and value judgment. In a nut shell, evaluation provides
information for decision-making and value judgment on whatever is measured and
assessed[Okpala et.al. 1994]. It also tells us whether a programme is effective or not.
In this paper, monitoring should mean the whole activities involved in observing and
inspecting a programme, whereas evaluation should be the process of quantifying,
assessing and making decision on whatever might be the result of monitoring. In this
case, monitoring should take place before evaluation comes into play.

Monitoring And Evaluation Strategies For UBE Programme In Nigeria

In the time past, monitoring of programmes[in particular educational programmes]
are done by means of inspections through state and federal ministries of education.
School inspectors from these ministries visit school on scheduled periods to observe the
kind of teaching going on in the school. They inspect teachers mark-books, registers,
diaries, lesson-notes, report-booklets as well as the adequacy of school facilities. All
these measures are not empirical enough to tell us whether the programme is effective or
not. There is the need diverge from these obsolete methods of monitoring[inspection]to
new ones which are described as ‘National Assessment’ and ‘Continuous assessment’.

The National Assessment Strategy

National assessment otherwise called National Assessment Of Education
Progress[NAEP] came into existence in 1948. It first took place in Great Britain and was
carried out in the form of assessing reading competence among 11 year olds [during the
last year of primary schooling]and 15 year olds[during the final year of compulsory
schooling]. The reason given for carrying out the assessment was to provide information
about the suggestion that ‘illiteracy’ had increased during the second world war[1939-
1945]. Standardized tests of ‘silent reading’ and ‘comprehensive’ were used for the
exercise.
 In America, National Assessment of Educational Progress[NAEP] was started in the
late sixties. To be very precise, the first assessment was carried out during the 1969/1970
school year. The planning and execution was done by a group of distinguished American
Educators over a period of four years from 1965 under the chairmanship of Ralph Tyler.
The strategies for monitoring and evaluation according to the National Assessment
of Educational Progress requires us to assess the macro and micro indicators of the entire
system. The macro indicators[direct measurable indicators] are: provision of access,
enrolment, retention, attrition rates, availability of infrastructure, instructional facilities,
level of funds etc. The micro indicators are those indicators or variables that cannot be
measured directly but through indirect means. For instance, the level of learning
achievement of the pupils/students in a school system. According to article 4 of the
World Declaration on Education for All, all monitoring and evaluation procedures must
focus on the inputs, processes and outputs.
The model that is adopted for an effective National Assessment of Educational
Progress takes care of these variables as shown below:

Input processes Outputs

Class size, Student-teacher classroom Learning out-comes
Student-teacher ratio, interactions; -Cognitive
School population, Students’ learning -Affective
Funds, activities; -Psychomotor
Libraries, Teacher’s activities;
Laboratories, School administration and
Students’ and teachers’ management
characteristics

Adapted from Onwuakpa[1998]. Institute of Education, University of Ibadan, Ibadan.

In conducting a National Assessment Progress [NAEP] using the above model [I.P.O
model],the use of varieties of instruments such as questionnaires, observational
schedules, check-lists, achievement tests and anecdotal records is required. It also
requires the coverage of wide population of the pupils/students in the school system and
systematic sampling techniques being used for the selection of sample.
Information about the cognitive and affective characteristics of the students is
obtained in the course of the monitoring as well as teachers’ and schools’ data.
The information collected in a National Assessment of Educational Progress is
analysed using descriptive and relational analyses derived from an SPSS programme of a
computer-PC. However, such data analyses are well-detailed in such a way as to enhance
interpretation for policy and decision making by the programme coordinators.
In summary, the following are the key points in the conduct of a National
Assessment of Educational Progress:
 Formulation of competencies[outcomes or abilities] expected of children of
different age or school grade levels in different school activities;
 Undertaking periodic national surveys as to the degree of attainment of these
competencies;
 Identifying variables that can be used to explain the attainment of these
competencies;
 Preparing strategies for arresting any observed unacceptable trends;
 Publishing periodic digest of the attainment of the pupils in various school
activities;[Falayajo, 1982].

Continuous Assessment Strategy

Continuous Assessment came into operation in Nigeria as far back as 1980, as
one of the most important features of the National Policy on Education.
The National Policy succinctly puts it… ‘Greater emphasis will place on Continuous
Assessment’. It even went further to state that assessment at the primary school level
shall be by continuous assessment and that the age-long primary school leaving
certificate examination shall be replaced by continuous assessment.
By definition, continuous assessment is that assessment which takes care of
what the pupils/students have gained from learning activities in terms of knowledge,
thinking and reasoning, character development and industry. In a more technical
sense of it, it is a mechanism whereby the final grading of a pupil/student in the
cognitive, affective and psychomotor domains of behaviour takes account, in a
systematic way, of all his performance during a given period of schooling. Such an
assessment involves the use of a great variety of modes of evaluation for the purpose
of guiding and improving the learning and performance of the students[FME, 1985].
Continuous Assessment as earlier defined is characterized as being systematic,
comprehensive, cumulative and guidance –oriented.
In the light of the above definition, we can see that continuous assessment could
be used as a device or strategy for monitoring and evaluation of the educational
progress of the UBE programme. This is because information of the pupils/students
on under the UBE program is derived in a continuous manner on daily, weekly,
monthly, timely, and sessional basis. For the UBE programme to succeed, there is
the need to collect information about the pupils/students in a comprehensive manner
comprising of their cognitive, affective and psychomotor learning outcomes. This
can only be achieved using a continuous assessment strategy/device. Since
continuous assessment involves collecting students/pupils data in a cumulative
process[daily, weekly, termly, monthly and sessional], it then implies that
students/pupils problems could be arrested immediately and a corrective measure[s]
taken.

Recommendations And Conclusions

In the light of what have been said about Universal Basic Education[UBE]
as well as the proposed monitoring and evaluation strategies, it is
imperative to proffer some recommendations for effective operation of the
UBE programme in Nigeria. The following is thereby recommended:
 The issue of continuous assessment should be taken very
seriously and be carried out at school, local government, state and
national levels respectively;
 There should be a capacity building exercise for the UBE
programme officers especially in the area of computer
applications and development of instruments for collecting data
on the pupils, teachers and schools;
  There should be a pre-determined period of monitoring and
evaluation of schools in order to generate a cumulative set of
data;
 There is the need for bodies like NECO[National Examinations
Council] and NERDC[Nigerian Educational Research and
Development Council] to be involved in the National Assessment
of Educational Progress exercise because of their roles in
monitoring and evaluation;
a monitoring and evaluation unit should be built into the UBE
programme.
In conclusion, the Universal Basic Education programme can surely succeed if
and only if the Federal Government funds it adequately.

Reference:
1. Federal Ministry of Education[1982]. A handbook on Continuous Assessment in
Nigeria. Federal Government of Nigeria Press.
2. Federal Ministry of Education[2000], Implementation Guidelines for the Universal
Basic Education[UBE] programme.
3. Falayajo, Wole[1982], Proposal for a National Assessment project in Nigeria. A paper
presented at the I.C.E.E., Institute of Education, University of Ibadan, Ibadan.
4. Okpala, P.N et.al[1994] Measurement and Evaluation in Education, Hordes Publishing
Company, Benin City.
5. Onwuakpa, F.I.W [1998], An Evaluation of some school Quality Indicators in
Secondary Schools in Imo State. An unpublished Ph.D Thesis, University of Ibadan,
Ibadan.