What I Saw At Lead City University, Ibadan (2)

By Toyin Falola 

I do not know the transgressions committed by Lead City University, and I cannot hold any brief for them. However, my experience on what I saw on the ground did not correlate with the reasons I read in the newspaper concerning the suspension of its licence. Neither is it in the best interest of the NUC to be engaging in a brawl with a university, treating university officers and administrators as domestic servants. In the interest of higher education, the NUC must resolve its differences with Lead City University, which now appear to the public as no more than political disagreements and reflective of egos and personality clashes.

Given the manpower and infrastructural facilities available at Lead City University, I believe that what the NUC and the public must do is to correct the inadequacies where noticed, rather than de-market and destroy the institution and the legacy it has established in its short period of active existence. Although I learned that the immediate sanction is that the institution should not admit students for the current year, the NUC and the Nigerian public should be aware of some possible fallouts of this stern measure taken against a young university. The long term consequences are enormous.

We need more universities. Of course, they have to be excellent centres of learning. However, we must not confuse their learning curves with carelessness. If they are set up as just business ventures, we have to complain. We must praise the educators and founders for their foresight, not discredit them. Where they make mistakes, we must correct them, not destroy them. It is already clear that both the federal and state governments cannot create enough universities for a growing population, and we must make private institutions both functional and efficient.

From this unfortunate example of a sudden announcement without pre-warning, without detailed information to the public, without a paper trail for decent people and committed scholars to review, and without data that will compare one university to another, a new culture to establish and demonstrate transparency, fairness and justice must emerge.

First, the NUC and the public must actually agree on what universities do, and what they are expected to do in our society. We have moved away from reproducing the culture of European medieval universities, where secular institutions were set apart from religious ones. Political leaders and citizens must all agree on what we want private universities to do, and how they have to be defined, so that we do not shift our methods of evaluation. Our emphasis, as far as I understand it, is that we want students to learn, acquire skills, and be thoughtful. We want to educate.

Second, it is imperative that the NUC makes public notices of its incremental warnings and sanctions, elaborate visitation reports, and responses by universities. A disorderly announcement of suspension does not take the students and parents into consideration and confidence, nor does it take cognisance of the investments made by all the stake holders.

Third, private and public institutions must now be compared in relation to available resources and outcome. From my experience, were Lead City University owned by a state government, its licence would not have been suspended—not because the state school is running well, but because the NUC and its chairman would not have the courage or the clout to deal with the nationalistic uproar that would greet their decision.

Fourth, an independent body should be in place to examine what people do with degrees after graduation. Since Lead City University has produced five sets of graduates who have done their national youth service and are in employment in various places, there should be a system to track their performance in relation to training. Until such an independent body emerges, Lead City University may take it upon itself to build such a data base as part of its public relations. I know that using the market to test the quality of university products is still difficult in Nigeria, but ultimately market forces will determine the worth of these graduates.

In the spirit of its own integrity, the NUC must not just give one-liner reasons for suspending a university’s licence. It must make available to the public the full reports of their investigation, the dates it was conducted, the warnings to the university concerned, and how those warnings have been repeatedly neglected. Their own system must be transparent so that the public may know the reasons for the decisions of the NUC beyond the brief catalogue that it provides in paid newspaper advertisements.  The regularity functions of the NUC must be conducted with respect for all stake-holders, and university administrators, too, must be careful with their public statements. The NUC must also be accountable to a higher body to ensure that it does not abuse its powers. If universities cannot appeal to higher political and judicial authorities, the NUC may become a lawless outfit.

Lastly, and on a note of caution, the need for credibility, fairness, and justice: I was wondering about the apparent disparities in the NUC’s review of federal and state universities, on the one hand, and the privately owned institutions, on the other. Still puzzled, I ask, when will the licences of all the new federal universities be withdrawn since they clearly have nothing on the ground to justify the recruitment of a single student? Why are several state universities, which do not have half of the intellectual resources and infrastructure of Lead City University, still standing? Have these institutions been objectively reviewed and compared with institutions like Lead City University? Do inadequacies in a department or a programme create enough reason to suspend a university’s entire licence? Has Lead City University truly failed in the auditing of its structures, processes, rules, and personnel? If so, the reports should be made public. What is the nation doing in striving to reclaim the lost integrity of its university system? The NUC should really applaud Lead City’s efforts by encouraging them to do even better, in the hope that other institutions can copy and learn from them. We really do not want to think that private institutions are being treated unfairly or picked on for irrelevant things, when underperforming state and federal universities are left alone. We need as many efficient universities as possible.

These are food for thought in our collective drive for a better and just society. While we are ruminating over these and other tangential issues, let us be reminded that running academic institutions is not like trading in produce, livestock, or other products. Shaping human minds is shaping humanity, history, and development. It is serious business, and must be rigorously and doggedly pursued. The outcomes are not transient; rather, they have great implications for us and the generations to come. A commitment to a solid foundation and a sustainable education sector should not be compromised on the platter of politics.  The NUC must always conduct its business in a way to retain the confidence and trust of the majority of sincere educators.

–Toyin Falola wrote this piece for TheNEWS magazine.