Introduction

Public education as opined by Thomas (2014) is by necessity an extension of the

political system, resulting in schools being reduced to vehicles for implementing their

political mandates. Thus various governments in Nigeria over the years had come up with

various policies and programmes to actualize their beliefs. However, the subject of education

particularly higher education policies and programmes has been a contentious issue in

Nigeria. This is because as noted by Nwagwu (2002), there are diverse interest groups trying

to implement their own agenda through the agency of the school and each stakeholder

determines what its educational objectives should be. Consequently, because education has

social and economic implications for the life of its citizens, it is subject to political pressures

and the vagaries of public opinion. This paper examines the political contests that have

shaped Nigeria’s conceptions about education policies and programmes while critically

examining the overt and covert political nuances that suffuse higher education policies. It

looks at how such policies have influenced the establishment of universities, admission

policies, funding, control and management.

The Politicization of Higher Education

Up till the 1930’s the colonial government played no role in the provision of higher

education for its citizens. However, by 1934 the Yaba Higher College was established to

meet the rising agitation for higher education. With the rising cost of sending Nigerians

abroad for degree courses and greater agitation for a degree awarding institution in Nigeria,

the University College, Ibadan was established in 1948 as well as one College of Science and

Technology with branches in Ibadan, Zaria and Enugu. Before 1960, only these institutions

were in existence. The impetus for the expansion of higher education began with the report of

the Ashby Commission of 1960 which recommended the establishment of three additional

Universities and the upgrading of University College Ibadan to a full-fledged university as

well as colleges of education to take care of high and middle level manpower respectively

1
(Fafunwa, 1998; Ogunkunle & Adekola, 2014). Establishment of these institutions has been

on the increase since then and Osokoya (1989) noted that these increases followed closely

increases in the number of political units. This has led to unprecedented and uncoordinated

expansion of the system especially at the university level at the expense of quality. Today

there are over a hundred and eighty universities (National Universities Commission, 2015)

Politics symbolizes selfish quest for power and authority to share, allocate and control

resources and determine public policies. It is manifested in the winner takes it all syndrome,

protection of sectorial interests, rewards for political support, self survival alliances and

social, religious, ethnic party and economic interests and affiliations. This behaviour has been

transferred to education system (Nwagwu 2002). Hailey (1939) in Fafunwa (1998) once

noted that considerations which decided the character of higher education are largely

political. This observation made years ago still remain true in Nigeria today. Political

interventions in modern education in Nigeria dates back to the 1882 Education Ordinance for

Nigeria. Thus, right from colonial times the policy thrust of the government as regards higher

education has been determined by the political stand of whoever is in charge at a particular

time. Over the years, higher education has become so highly politicized that it is almost

impossible to implement any government policy on education without any political or

religious undertone. This is more felt at the university level where many of the policies and

programmes are determined more by politico-religious considerations than by any academic,

professional or economic rationality as this paper intends to show. The politicization of

higher education will be discussed under the following broad headings with particular

reference to universities:

• Formulation of educational policies

• Establishment pattern

• Location of universities

• Admission policies

2
 • Funding and

• Control and management

Formulation of Educational Policies

Policies are concrete guidelines which would best achieve the set goals of a nation or

country. One of the systems that tend to reflect these policies can be found in its educational

system. In the process of governance, political actors release policies which would best

achieve their goals. Hence there is politicization of educational policies. Right from colonial

era till date, formulation of educational policies has faced many upheavals. Political

instability has contributed. The succession of military and democratic governments has

produced policies that are not always compatible with each other’s regime. As observed by

Ezekiel-Hart (2011), each new regime would want to make its own name by refusing to adopt

the policies of its predecessor. They choose their own set of ministers, commissioners,

technocrats, administrators, etc who will want to start afresh believing in their bloated ego as

messiahs to the ailing system. They (the politicians) want to be seen now and be hailed here

and now. Hence Nigeria has witnessed a multiplicity of policies. In addition, these education

policies are announced and decreed on the populace without due study, analysis and

consultation. For instance, Nigeria was made to change the school calendar from January-

September to September-June in 1973, in 1983 the old system was reintroduced and in 1985

the 1973 model was brought back (Ezekiel-Hart, 2011).

The politicization of education policies also manifests in the cart before the horse

syndrome as most education reforms are not planned before they are foisted on the populace.

Most times those in political power make statements at political rallies and courtesy calls and

planners and administrators are forced to analyze their statements and figure out how to make

it work. Hence we have had the 6-5-4, 6-3-3-4, 9-3-4 and now 9 years of basic education

policies. We have also had at various times, government policies on nomadic education,

fishermen education and most recently by former President Dr Goodluck Ebele Jonathan, the

3
Almajiri education policy where government purported to spend billions of naira in

establishing Almajiri Schools all over the North. Even currently on the top burner now is the

issue of admission process into universities. The Federal Government through its Minister of

Education has banned Post-UTME without any clear statement as to how students should

now be admitted, hence putting the admission process in limbo. Thus the nation’s education

policies often do not meet its objective because they are drafted policies based on the whims

and caprices of whoever is in power who want to gain popularity and before long they end up

being mere documents.

Establishment pattern
Before the Ashby Commission report in 1960, there were only three (3) higher

institutions in Nigeria. The Commission recommended the establishment of additional four

(4) universities which they felt was the number required to meet the manpower needs at the

time. However, five (5) universities were established for political reasons. Between 1960 and

2015 there are 137 universities (Federal, State and Private) established. The table 1 shows the

establishment pattern of the universities.

Table 1: Establishment of universities

Federal State Private Total

1960-1970 6 6

1971-1980 8 1 9

1981-1990 9 6 15

1991-2000 3 8 5 16

2001-2010 1 19 37 57

2011-2015 13 4 17 34

Total 40 38 59 137

Source: NUC (2015)

4
Table 1 shows the sharp gulf in terms of time. A study of it would show that Universities

were established more to satisfy the increasing demand for higher education and for political

expedience. The table shows that between 1960 and 1970 there were only six (6) universities,

but from then on universities were established at random. Most of the universities were

established during the period of democracy and politics, especially between 2011 and 2015

when education was used as a political vote catcher and government liberalization policy. To

a great extent establishment of universities is still a political, ethnic and religious interplay as

every person that comes on board in the political realm feels the only legacy they can leave

for their people is a university or at the very least a college of education or polytechnic. This

has been the situation till date. Thus most of these universities were established not according

to manpower needs. Such a situation has grave implications for the future of higher education

in Nigeria.

Location of schools
Location refers to the geographical area where a school is established. Politicization of

geographical spread of universities will be discussed under two subheadings.

a. Geo-political location
Geographical location of universities are based more on selfishness and clannishness than

on any other consideration. For instance, at independence Ashby Commission recommended

establishment of three (3) additional universities, one each in the North, East and Mid-West

respectively since there was already one in the West (Fafunwa, 1998). But due to political

and ethnic interplay the recommendation was not followed as four universities were

established, two to the West, one each to the North and East and none to the Mid-West.

University of Ife (now Obafemi Awolowo University) established in 1962 was supposed to

have gone to the Mid-West but because of the influence of late Chief Obafemi Awolowo and

his Action Group it was taken to the West. Between 1960 and 1970 of the six universities

established, only one was in the North and five in the South. Even in the South it tended to

5
favour the South West as out of the five in the South three were in the West. This is not

surprising as most of those who were in government at that time and who determined the

policies were from the West. Between 1971 and 1980 when baton changed hands, the Federal

Government under Northern leadership attempted to address the perceived geographical

imbalance by formulating some policies and carrying out certain actions which ultimately

was meant to be to their advantage. Some of these included free tuition at university level to

expand access, introduction of quota system, division of Nigeria into educationally

advantaged and disadvantaged states, a unified admission examination process through Joint

Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB), etc implications of which will be discussed

later. But since education is on the concurrent list the Southern states go on establishing

schools to gain political favour in the sight of their citizens. This has been the scenario since

independence till date.

b. Siting of schools
Hallak (1977) had viewed school mapping as the orderly procedure for determining

where to site educational institutions to ensure proper coverage, and maximum benefit to the

communities they are intended to serve. Thus school mapping is a process whereby

institutions are planned, coordinated and established to ensure maximum efficiency in

resource utilization and best benefit to the end users. In Nigeria however, oftentimes political

and personal or religious considerations over-ride such tenets and as such schools are sited

without merit or suitability. This is more predominant among state universities which are

established by politicians and private universities established by private individuals/agencies

or religious bodies. In most cases such universities end up in the home town of the founder.

For instance, Ambrose Alli University started in an erosion prone site simply because the

then Governor, Professor Ambrose Alli wanted it in his home town. In 1980 Governor Sam

Mbakwe established a multi-campus university with headquarters in the Etiti Local

Government Area of the Governor with the permanent site in his own home clan Obowo.

However, when in 1984 Major General Ike Nwachukwu came on stream, the university was
6
transferred to Uturu near the Governor’s home town. It was an erosion site which gulped

billions of naira in what is now Abia State University. The Anambra State University of

Science and Technology is located in Governor Mbadinuju’s home town, Ulli. The Federal

Government under President Dr Goodluck Ebele Jonathan in 2011 established 12 new federal

universities and of course one ended up in his home town of Otuoke and the others were

distributed in the home towns of his cronies. The list is endless. The private universities

especially those established by private individuals do not fair any better for nearly all of them

are sited in the home town of the founder. The root of this phenomenon is that every

representative wants a university as they see it as being beneficial to them and the easiest

means of bringing development or government presence in their area.

From the above, one can see that politics and tribal considerations more than anything

over-ride school mapping ethics, equity, rationality and considerations for effective

management.

Admission Policies
The intervention of political considerations has often led to formulation of education

policies which are negative. The federal government of the 70s in an attempt to correct the

perceived educational imbalance between the North and the South made certain policies for

admission into a federal university. This imbalance in education can be traced to some

historical facts that influenced the establishment and spread of Western education. While the

South embraced it, the Muslim North did not (Lassa, 2014). It introduced admission based on

quota system in an attempt to reflect and encourage the political imperative of “federal

character”. To implement this quota system of admission into federal universities, it adopted

the following criteria:

a. Merit 40%

b. Catchment area of university 30%

c. Educationally less developed states 20%

7
 d. Discretion 10% (Kosemani, 1992)

To effectively implement criterion (c) there arose the politics of Educationally Less

Developed States (ELDS) of which some states mostly in the North were identified. Those

states clamoured for special attention through special funding which in most cases are

diverted to other purposes. On seeing this, other states in the south also demanded to be

classified as educationally backward in order to enjoy those funds. Thus, for political reasons,

states want to be classified as educationally backward because of the benefits they receive

from the Federal Government for educational development and it has become a serious

problem today (Lassa 2014).

The introduction of the quota system while enhancing the chances of one, reduces the

chances of another. Thus quality was sacrificed on the altar of quota, for as Sogolo (1989)

asserted, this system was an attempt by the federal government of the day to reckon with and

address our social and historical antecedents forgetting that such policies will not only kill

merit but perpetuate inequality in terms of access to university education. Hence Uduanya

(1981) had warned that unless the government of the day employed the right concept of equal

opportunities, it may result in greater disparity and discontent among the states and

individuals. This policy which was meant to foster unity has created hatred and suspicion

among the citizens as people no longer cherish the citizenship of Nigeria but indigenes of a

particular state or region.

As observed by Ezekiel-Hart (2011), Nigeria’s educational reform policies are often

criticized for their ad hoc approach to issues. They address one issue at a time without any

organic link with related problems and oftentimes without carrying the stakeholders along.

Thus, universities were established according to the government programme of the day.

Hence a government that believes in promoting science and technology established

universities of science and technology and introduced the admission policy of 60:40 Science

to Arts ratio when the government of the day suddenly realized that there was need to
8
encourage science and technology. Universities of Agriculture were established when the

government of the day believed in and wanted to encourage agriculture.

Funding Policies
Another area that is highly politicized is in the area of funding. When government

adopted education as an instrument "par excellence" for national development and placed

education on the exclusive list, it went ahead to declare university education tuition free as

usual without a thought for its planning implications. This policy was introduced more to

gain popularity among the citizens and pacify them. Events have shown however that

government alone cannot effectively fund university education. It would not allow charging

of fees because it is a politically sensitive issue. When for instance it attempted to do so in

1978 it met with stiff resistance from both students and parents because it was given a

political interpretation. As such even though faced with the reality of the times it lacks the

political will power to take the necessary step. This issue of funding has been a sore point

between the government of the day and Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) which

has often led to confrontation between the two, leading to strikes and closure of schools with

its attendant consequence on academic calendar. Government on its part also politick with

this issue of funding by attempting to cover up their inadequacies through playing up public

emotions. They often quote quantums of naira spent on education without such details as the

percentage of the budget, unit cost etc. This is used as electioneering campaign strategy and

to give the people a feeling that so much is being done. In an attempt to address the issue of

funding, government in 1993 through the Education Tax Act established an intervention

agency the Education Tax Fund (ETF) and the Tertiary Education Fund (TETFund) to

disburse funds to the relevant institutions. Particularly the TETFund was set up to provide

funds to state and federal universities for educational development such as staff training,

research, equipment procurement, among others. Who gets what from these funds is also

highly politicized.

9
Control and Management Policy
Public universities are either funded by the federal or state government. Because of this,

they interfere in almost all aspects of higher education and have control over it. The Federal

Government set up various external bodies which are very powerful in the management of

higher education. These are;

1. National Universities Commission (NUC)

2. The National Commission for Colleges of Education (NCCE)

3. National Board for Technical Education(NBTE)

These are to take charge of the planning, funding and coordinating of the activities of their

respective levels.

4. Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB): This was a political decision to

centralize admissions as a result of the imbalance earlier mentioned. It is the sole

organ of control of the conduct of matriculation examinations for admission into

higher institutions in Nigeria. However, due to pressure from the university

community, government has had to introduce a post-UTME examination for qualified

candidates purportedly to further select the best. Be that as it may, issues of

admissions still lies with JAMB as no university can independently admit a student

without reference to JAMB.

5. The Federal (State) Ministry of Education which formulates policies and programmes

and monitors its implementation.

These are the agencies government has set up through which its programmes and agendas

are implemented. Because of this aspect of control, the institutions have lost their autonomy

and academic freedom hence they are exposed to being affected by the whims and caprices of

those at the helm of affairs. This issue of autonomy has been a sore point between ASUU and

government relations over the years, mostly because of the political implications for

government. If the universities have autonomy they would be left to run themselves and the
10
government would no longer have so much influence in the recruitment, training and

promotion of staff and other key personnel. If this were to happen, politicians would no

longer be able to use education as a political game card. This of course they do not want.

Reddy (2000) noted that governance of universities is purely a state controlled system hence

it has assumed the power to appoint and dismiss Vice Chancellors. The flaw in this is that

politics prefers leadership characteristics above expertise. No politician can possibly have the

expertise and experience needed but unfortunately, the direct roles of governors and

Presidents as related to education have increased dramatically often with education as a

central plank in their campaigns. Appointment of key persons in the system such as Vice

Chancellor, Rector, Provost, are done by the government. The Governing Council as

employer and the highest decision making organ of the universities are also appointed by the

government. In these appointments, a lot of politicking goes on and in most cases people are

appointed not necessarily because they are the best but because they are close to the corridors

of power. As a result, people who have no or very little experience or expertise as educators

or scholars are appointed to leading positions responsible for forming and implementing

education policies. This often leads to gross mismanagement and internal crisis as according

to Thomas (2014) inexpert political leaders believe in and act upon the faith in the

effectiveness of their cult of personality. The politics which has pervaded the whole facet of

university education management in Nigeria has given rise to volatile situations which can

erupt at any time.

Conclusion
The politicization of higher education in Nigeria is one of the major factors in the

crisis of management of the system today. Because these institutions are funded by the

government, they interfere in all aspect of higher education. This tendency has left many

institutions hostage to the factional policies with decisions on establishment of schools,

student selection, appointments and promotions, curriculum design, etc made on political

grounds rather than professional or academic merit. All these factors discussed above and
11
many more have interplayed with one another to determine the ecology and the crisis of

management of Nigerian universities today. It is a negative and inhibitive tendency for in

most cases merit and quality are relegated to the background and with these political

considerations conflicting with the philosophy of education and the National Policy on

Education, the system cannot grow.

Recommendations

If higher education in Nigeria is to grow and be recognized as having world class

universities, Government must stop playing politics with education. In order to do this the

following are suggested:

1. There should be a separation between education and government. Power over funding

and broad performance benchmarks can remain with the political leaders but the

operational details should be left to educators and local administrators who are the

people best suited to achieve education goals.

2. Government should not exercise excessive control or dominate the management and

control of higher education. Institutions should be given reasonable real academic

freedom and institutional autonomy in order for them to be efficient and effective in

the organization and management of such institution.

3. Government ad hoc approach and the syndrome of putting the cart before the horse as

regards educational reforms and policies should be stopped. Education reforms should

be driven by educators and researchers who have lived, practiced and considered

carefully what the goals of education should be, the hurdles for improving educational

outcomes and how to foster a culture that supports and embraces the system.

12
 References

Ezekiel-Hart, J. (2011). Reflections on politics and policies of education for vision 20:20:20,
European Journal of Educational Studies, 3(2), Ozean Publication
Fafunwa, B. (1998). History of Education in Nigeria (Revised ed), Ibadan: NPS Educational
Publishers.
Kelly, A. (2014, March 31). The thorny politics of higher education reform, Forbes Online
Opinion downloaded from http://www.forbes.com/sites/akelly/2014/03/31/the-thorny-
politics-of-higher-education-reform.html.
Kosemani, J. M. (1992). Democratic values and university admission in Nigeria, Journal of
Nigerian Educational Research Association 11(1), p. 58-62
Lassa, P. N. (2014). The politics of educational planning and policy formulation in Nigeria,
In N. A. Nwagwu & U. M. O. Ivowi (Eds), Education in Nigeria: Development and
Challenges, A book of readings in memory of Prof Aliyu Babatunde Fafunwa,
(pp.397-412), Ikeja, Lagos: Foremost Educational Services Ltd,
Monchinski, T. (2007). The politics of education: an introduction, New York, USA, Sense
Publishers
Uduaya, M. O. (1981): Equalization of educational opportunities in Nigeria: a four dimension
concept, Review of Education, 7(1), p. 112-120
Nwagwu, N. A. (2000). Issues in the financing of higher education In E. Maduewesi (Ed),
Financing Education, Benin City: Institute of Education University of Benin.
Nwagwu, N. A. (2002). The politics of education policies in Nigeria, Faculty of Education
Lecture Series No 1, University of Benin, Benin City.
Ogunkunle, A. & Adekola, G. (2014). Trends in transformation of higher education in
Nigeria retrieved from http://www./trends-in-higher-education-in-nigeria/0123.html
Osokoya, I. O.(1989). History and policy of Nigerian education in world perspective, Ibadan,
AMD Publishers.
Reddy, J. (2000). African higher education management and leadership in the information
age, A paper delivered at Association of African Universities Conference, 5-9,
February, Nairobi, Kenya
Sogolo, P. P. (1989). Justice, equity and the logic of reverse discrimination in Nigerian
politics, In P. P. Okoh & E. E. Osaghae (Eds) Federal Character and Federalism in
Nigeria, Ibadan, Heinemann Educational Books (Nigeria) Limited.
Thomas, P. L. (2012). Politics and education don’t mix, Retrieved from
http://politicsandeducation-dont-mix.Html on 12/9/2015.

13