ASUU and the post-UME
Guardian Editorial
THE Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) in briefing and de-briefing the public on the formal ending of its four-month protracted dispute with the Federal Government, recently declared as illegal the Post-University Matriculation Examination (UME) through which Nigerian universities now admit candidates to their first degree programmes. During a press conference, the President of ASUU, Professor Ukachukwu Awuzie presented the salient issues agreed upon in the final negotiation rounds with the Federal Government, including the 40 per cent increase in salary, autonomy of the university administration (outside funding), increase to 70 years of the retirement age of university Professors and enhanced funding of the universities.
Above all, the Federal Government conceded that the funding of education will be based on UNESCO’s prescription that a minimum of 26 per cent of the annual budget should be allocated to education. This shall progressively be attained by the year 2020 in accordance with the Vision 20: 2020 of the government. The strike action declared by ASUU has since ended, and normalcy has returned to the university campuses. Nevertheless, it is unfortunate that a whole semester of academic work was sacrificed in the course of a clearly avoidable impasse which was unduly prolonged.
With the new agreements in place, government should waste no time in giving effect to the contents as agreed, with the sole aim of avoiding any subsequent rancour. The vigilance of ASUU is imperative in ensuring adherence to the agreement should government fail to take advantage of the opportunity as a launch-pad for the improvement of university education in Nigeria in the march towards 2020.
Nonetheless, it is one of the comments made by Professor Awuzie that interests us here even more than the issues above in order to prevent the recurrence of more serious problems in the future. The ASUU President had condemned the Post-UME exercise, now a formidable prerequisite for the admission of candidates to the universities, dubbing it an illegality. He also condemned the proposed Unified Tertiary Matriculation Examination (UTME) which is supposed to replace the UME, and make it possible to conduct just one and the same examination for candidates seeking admission into universities, monotechnics, polytechnics and colleges of education, combining the erstwhile entrance examinations into higher institutions in the country.
The UTME, already in its proposal stage might soon be implemented unless the National Assembly or the government intervenes before JAMB acts on this apparently unpopular proposal. JAMB has shown no evidence of real efficiency in its conduct of examinations. Its primary interest should be in raising its level of performance. Besides, the unified examination structure is bound to result in additional problems, in addition to the obvious reduction of options for candidates.
The debate about the scope and powers of JAMB is neither new nor original. Was Professor Awuzie speaking on behalf of ASUU or in his personal capacity, particularly on the subject of the post-UME which is strongly defended by many ASUU members as an illustration of the freedom of each university to choose its own students? Professor Awuzie argues that the Post-UME is unknown to university statutes, and that only the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB) has the sole right to conduct entrance examinations to the universities.
The reality is that the Post-UME exercise has been in existence for more than two years in both public and private universities where the JAMB examination is now treated as secondary. Government itself through JAMB had in the past consistently opposed the idea of a post-UME conducted by different universities to select their own students. But the universities were adamant. They complained about the gap between JAMB results and the actual ability of candidates. Public attention was further drawn to how examination malpractice had discredited JAMB-conducted examinations.
The question to ask is whether the continuation and strengthening of Post-UME processes by the universities would not eventually weaken the conduct of the Universities Matriculation Examination (UME) by JAMB. The Council and Senate of each university continues to insist on the integrity of the Post-UME in the various universities. Unless the integrity of JAMB examinations improve in a similar manner if not faster, a time may come when JAMB itself will become an unwelcome nuisance in the admission process, at which point Post-UME will become an unchallengeable phenomenon.
Whichever scenario is considered, what is clear is that there is a need for government to re-examine the policy framework at this early stage. For example, will JAMB continue to exist and in what context vis-?-vis a post-UME that supplants the UME? It is in this regard that Professor Awuzie’s comment becomes important and relevant, not just on the Post-UME but also, the scope and relevance of JAMB.
These are issues which the Federal Ministry of Education should re-examine. It should ensure that its policies are consistent with the wishes of stakeholders in the sector. The education sector is too important to be subjected to trial and error. This is why there must be a continuous discussion of the issues and such discussions should not be limited to only government circles. We therefore call on the National Assembly to conduct a forum for public debate on these issues so that most of the stakeholders can have the opportunity of advising government in their various capacities. The education sector is so important, it cannot be left to chance.
November 17, 2009
Tags: ASUU, Education, JAMB, Nigeria Posted in: Guardian
Loading ...