PDF (Online Text) - EURAC

implemented at all. While Yusuf (1998) sees its lack of success as resulting from
teachers’ incompetence, Jegede & Owolabi (2003) have come to the following
conclusions in their own survey: the policy’s software and hardware stipulations are
completely outdated and not maintained, its teachers’ in-service training provision
has never been practiced, and the stipulated number of computers per secondary
school is rarely to be found. All these can only but confirm the conclusion that “the
current pronouncements are obsolete and need to be updated within the dynamic
world of computers” (Jegede & Owolabi 2003: 9). The recent Nigerian National
Policy for Information Technology has not fared any better. With the assumption that
information technology can be said to have started more intensively in the country
with the return of democracy in 1999 (Ajayi 2003), the failure of the previous national
computer policy is often overlooked, so that the failings of the older policy are simply
being repeated. But some of what is being presented as the ‘achievements’ of the new
policy actually diverts attention from simple core issues that need to be addressed
before such achievements can be effective nationwide. The first example of such an
achievement is a concentration of energy on the readily visible Internet access and on
IT workshops for high officials of the government at the federal level (while leaving
the average civil servants of the lower cadre to find the means of helping themselves).
However, it is especially those of the lower cadre who are surely to be involved
in the actual implementation/execution of the policies. The second example is the
establishment of the National Information Technology Development Agency (NITDA)
with the sum of about $10 million (Nigerian National Policy for Information Technology
2001:vii). One of the agency’s achievements is its ‘Nigerian Keyboard’ project, which
only led to the production of a downloadable single keyboard dll file for the Microsoft
operating system (NITDA: http://www.nitda.org/projects/kbd/index.php). It shall be
shown below how the effort that is being made by the private sector, with little or
no financial support, is yielding more benefit. Finally, just like the computer policy of
1988, the more recent policy has also not contributed much to the educational sector.
In his examination of the impact of the most recent policy on Nigeria’s educational
system, Yusuf (2005) sees it as not providing any specific provision for (or application
to) education, being market driven, dependent on imported software, and without
any specific direction at the institutional levels. His conclusions are that:
The need for integration in teaching and learning, the need for quality professional
development programs for pre-service and serving teachers, research, evaluation
and development, and the development of local context software are not addressed
(Yusuf 2005:320).
248