Rethinking Ogun tertiary education reform
By ABDUL-WAREES SOLANKE
Thursday February 23, 2012
The announcement by the Ogun State Government ‘dismantling’ and merging a number of tertiary institutions, including the Tai Solarin University of Education, Ijagun Ijebu Ode and the four ICT Polytechnics it inherited from its predecessors is justifiably causing ripples in the Gateway state. Expectedly, the first voice of protest is that of students of the affected institutions, and more bitter criticisms from a wide range of interest groups and stakeholders whose understanding of the development will be purely political are still ahead.
According to the government spokesmen, the changes are based on the recommendations of the visitation panel set up to review the performance and viability of the institutions. By the very notion and mandates of the high-power visitation panel headed by the state deputy governor, it is obvious that there is a problem in that sector demanding urgent attention before it assumes crisis proportion, as the tertiary education sector like the other critical public service sectors which gulp huge government resources, and is open to corruption and abuses, hence needs reform.
Indeed, the challenge or demand of managing government established institutions necessitates reforms that will result in alignment and coordination to avoid duplication and waste, value for money in service delivery, citizen focus or orientation, effectiveness, efficiency and economy in resource mobilization and utilization and competitiveness if they are to truly fulfil their public service remit. The concern here is that government funded establishments, while creating value must be managed in a manner that they are not a burden to the state. I want to assume that the findings of the visitation panel found these institutions scoring low on management and governance indices, and are therefore constrained in meeting the very goals and objectives for which they were established, that is providing quality education, not only for sons and daughters of the state, but other Nigerians wherever they may come from.
Taking a decision on the basis of the foregoing scenario will be seen to be rational and assumed to be in the interest of the state. But let us ask: How best can rationality serve the purpose of peace and cohesion; when does rationality serve the essence of construction, stability and development in a largely complex political environment? We are of course in a society where rationality is defined by political wisdom,a and as such, the gains of rational decision are measured by the sustainability of the reform arising from the policy option and legitimacy or the aggregate of coalition and support such decision generates and enjoys among all the stakeholders in the polity. Thus, in addressing a problem and reaching a decision, there is nothing wrong in the adoption and use of a template; a tailors made or ready-made solution. But such template must be smart and fit for the situation it is employed. It must graft seamlessly, not suffering rejection syndrome.
Therefore, in subjecting tertiary education reform in Ogun to template approach, the easiest resort of course would be a template of merger or return to status quo, which is exactly what the visitation panel recommended. Unfortunately, this is a very, very wrong template! With all sense of humility, the visitation panel did not go outside the box in its recommendations to scrap TASUED and merge the four ICT polytechnics. In the dilemma of education reform that confronted Ogun, I do not expect the eminent members of the visitation panel to unwittingly hole themselves in a capture and capitulation mentality to address the critical problem at hand. They seem to be overwhelmed by the challenges without exploring the long-term development gains and opportunities beholding in the establishment of those institution by looking at other ways and means of relieving the government of financial burden without abdicating its leadership and directive role in providing the enabling environment for a thriving tertiary education sector in the state to the envy of all other states.
If Ogun is highly revered as a pioneer state in modern education in Nigeria, there is nothing wrong in using the state as a fine example of diversity and diversification of the education industry and education tourism in the country. Today, indigenes of the state are getting educationally and employment disadvantaged. While it may be true that Ogun has the highest concentration of tertiary institutions, a higher percentage of her sons and daughters are, however, excluded by exorbitant fees charged by most of these institutions (after all, majority of them are owned by private investors). This is apart from the prohibitively high merit admission criteria imposed on students of Ogun origin (for producing the highest number of best performing students with intimidating credentials!).
How many of such bright students of Ogun heritage can afford Covenant, Babcock, and the Bell etc that populate Ogun as tertiary institutions! How many of them are offered admission to federal universities and polytechnics from the horde of eligible candidates the state produces each year at home and the Diaspora!
With the scrapping of TASUED and merger of the four polytechnics (renaming them the Ogun State Institute of Technology), the state government and its advisers only exhibited a one-sided understanding of the role of government in leading development. They have acted with the 1960s mentality of the all-powerful, “Big Government”, failing to reckon with the new philosophy of governance where the government is just a driver and promoter in a tripartite governance structure, and not necessarily the sole funder and provider. The government advisers in this case did not fully appreciate the notions of leadership and ownership which transcend funding commitments. Whereas the government may be the identifier and sponsor of any development project and reform initiative, the intrinsic ownership, ultimately, does not belong to the government .
While the process, timing and delivery of the government action are inauspicious, it further portrays the government as insensitive to the feelings of pride and identity of the hosts. There is wisdom in discretion. So, instead of reducing the prestige of these institutions and eroding the pride of their host communities, the government advisers should have focussed on a more pragmatic policy measure that would have diversified stakeholding in the schools and stimulate involvement, investment, sacrifice, commitment and ownership beyond the government. The least the government could have done in this regard for each of the institutions is a new development plan that reflects new management and governance mechanisms through host community’s endowments, public private partnership, Diaspora investment and other Brain Gain measures that will substantially reduce funding pressure on the government.
It does not matter who established these institutions and what political motives they had then when they were established. What is of significance is that those institutions have placed their host communities on the development map of the state, and therefore would in the future be their nuclei of social and corporate consciousness and advancement. After all, the existence of the Universities of Ibadan, Lagos, and Ife in the Western Nigeria at a time the Northern and Eastern regions could only boast of one university each accounted for the faster modernization and urbanization of the West ahead of the rest regions of the country in the immediate post-independent Nigeria. Therefore, turning TASUED and the four new polytechnics to affiliates and satellite campuses of other existing schools and contemporaries cannot imbue in those communities in which they were sited the pride of ownership for them to commit themselves and contribute to their development.
While the government may be sincere and literally rational in its action, this reform in Ogun tertiary education sector looks like a blind shot. The government may have diagnosed correctly that something is clinically wrong with the institutions, and therefore they need a surgical operation. However, a surgery from which anaesthesia the patient does not recover or one that leaves surgical blades, scalpels, bandages, lint and gloves stitched up in the patient is nothing but a clinical calamity. It’s death on the surgeon’s table.
Solanke writes from Lagos.
