review-of-the-literature-on-basic-education-in-nigeria-june-2014-3-1

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Review <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>literature</strong> on basic education in NigeriaVarious stakeholders and researchers have suggested <strong>the</strong> need for one or more <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> following: salaryincreases, <strong>the</strong> implementation <strong>of</strong> a standardised promotion and career structure based on merit, and<strong>the</strong> opportunity for teachers to have some say in <strong>the</strong>ir posting (e.g. Adelabu 2005; Adekola 2007;Thomas 2011; FME 2011a). However, while in agreement with <strong>the</strong> need for extrinsic motivation in terms<strong>of</strong> financial incentives, Adekola (2007) notes that teachers who participated in a three-year school-basedteacher development project with no financial benefit reported increased job satisfaction, confidenceand enjoyment in <strong>the</strong>ir teaching. The teacher motivation study also noted that teachers said <strong>the</strong>yexperienced job satisfaction when <strong>the</strong>y succeeded in helping pupils to understand (Sherry 2008),suggesting that both <strong>the</strong> extrinsic and intrinsic motivations <strong>of</strong> teachers need to be addressed in order toimprove <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> teaching and learning.10.4.1 Teachers’ salary scaleAlthough a standardised TSS has been approved at federal level, it has only been implemented in somestates (Sherry 2008; FME 2011a). The PTTE ascribed <strong>the</strong> refusal by some states to implement <strong>the</strong> TSS to<strong>the</strong> cost <strong>of</strong> implementation, insufficient consultations with states and, most <strong>of</strong> all, to a lack <strong>of</strong> politicalwill (FME 2011a).10.5 Teacher educationThe relatively recent Nigeria Teacher Education Policy starts by highlighting <strong>the</strong> need for a teachereducation policy that links pre- and in-service provision, and underlining <strong>the</strong> importance <strong>of</strong> in-servicetraining or CPD to teacher motivation and to teaching quality in schools:There are few teacher education policies that link pre-service and in-service teacher education in anycoherent way, or that fully recognize <strong>the</strong> role <strong>of</strong> ISTE [in-service teacher education] in teacher motivation orimproving instruction quality over time (FME 2009b).Pre-service education takes place in universities, polytechnics, state and federal colleges <strong>of</strong> education,and private institutions. The basic minimum teaching qualification (i.e. <strong>the</strong> NCE) consists <strong>of</strong> three years<strong>of</strong> training, including a three-month placement in a school, which is in <strong>the</strong> process <strong>of</strong> being extended toa one-year internship (NCCE 2005). In-service education is currently primarily aimed at upgradingteachers’ pr<strong>of</strong>essional qualifications (ra<strong>the</strong>r than improving teaching), part <strong>of</strong> a process <strong>of</strong>pr<strong>of</strong>essionalisation that is at an early stage in Nigeria. The upgrading <strong>of</strong> teachers’ qualifications to NCE is<strong>the</strong> responsibility <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> National Teachers’ Institute (Adelabu 2005), while in-service teacher educationis coordinated by <strong>the</strong> Teachers’ Registration Council <strong>of</strong> Nigeria (TCRN), a parastatal <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> FME, which isalso <strong>the</strong> teachers’ regulatory body, but in collaboration with o<strong>the</strong>r agencies and development partners.The upgrading <strong>of</strong> qualifications occurs primarily through distance learning programmes and vacationand ‘sandwich’ programmes run by <strong>the</strong> colleges <strong>of</strong> education and university institutes <strong>of</strong> education(Adekola 2007).10.5.1 Quality <strong>of</strong> initial teacher educationPossession <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> paper qualifications is no guarantee <strong>of</strong> pr<strong>of</strong>essional competence, and <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong>initial (and in-service) teacher education has been subject to persistent criticism (e.g. Urwick and Aliyu2003; Adelabu 2005; FME 2005; Umar 2006; Adekola 2007; Tahir and Girei 2008; Allsop and Howard2009; FME 2011a; Thomas 2011). The main criticisms have mirrored many <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> criticisms directed at<strong>the</strong> school level (Adekola 2007) and many are common to o<strong>the</strong>r countries in SSA (see Bennell andAkyeampong 2007), namely:Outdated curriculum and teaching methodology (Umar 2006; Adekola 2007; Akinbote 2007; Tahirand Girei 2008; Allsop and Howard 2009; Burke 2009; FME 2009b; USAID 2009), specifically <strong>the</strong>EDOREN – Education Data, Research and Evaluation in Nigeria 119
Review <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>literature</strong> on basic education in Nigeriamismatch between <strong>the</strong>ory-heavy teacher education programmes and <strong>the</strong> practical skills required inschool (Umar 2006; Adekola, 2007 29 ; Allsop and Howard 2009; Thomas 2011); Overcrowded lecture halls (Sherry 2008; Adekola 2007; Allsop and Howard 2009; Burke 2009;Edelenbosch and Short 2009; FME 2009b); Dilapidated infrastructure (Adekola 2007; Burke 2009; Edelenbosch and Short 2009);Lack <strong>of</strong> textbooks (Adekola 2007; Burke 2009; Edelenbosch and Short 2009; FME 2009b)); Limited or no strategic management (Allsop and Howard 2009; Edelenbosch and Short 2009;Thomas 2011); Lack <strong>of</strong> record-keeping and monitoring <strong>of</strong> student progress (Allsop and Howard 2009);Lack <strong>of</strong> essential facilities in state colleges <strong>of</strong> education, especially for Science- and Technologyrelatedsubjects, compared to federal institutions or universities, due to lack <strong>of</strong> funds (Akinbote2007; FME 2009b; Thomas 2011);Lack <strong>of</strong> capacity <strong>of</strong> lecturers in teacher education institutions in terms <strong>of</strong> pr<strong>of</strong>essional andpedagogical knowledge (Adelabu 2005; Adekola 2007; Allsop and Howard 2009; FME 2009b;Thomas 2011). Many lecturers are graduates with no teaching qualifications (Burke 2009; Thomas2011); <strong>the</strong>re is a ‘lack <strong>of</strong> rigour in lecturer recruitments’ (FME 2009b). Lack <strong>of</strong> CPD opportunities for lecturers (Adekola 2007; Allsop and Howard 2009; FME 2009b;Thomas 2011); Poor-calibre trainees – <strong>of</strong>ten students who have failed to be admitted for o<strong>the</strong>r courses (Ejieh 2005;Garuba 2006; Akinbote 2007; Afe 2002, cited in Sherry 2008; Allsop and Howard 2009; USAID 2009)– resulting in only a few having ‘<strong>the</strong> genuine desire to become teachers’ (Akinbote 2007: 64);Student admission numbers are not based on teacher supply and demand needs (Allsop and Howard2009; Thomas 2011); Students struggle to understand lectures in English (Allsop and Howard 2009; Garuba 2010); Teaching practice is too short and inadequately monitored (Umar 2006; Sherry 2008; Adekola 2007;Allsop and Howard 2009; Burke 2009), and schools are <strong>of</strong>ten selected based on <strong>the</strong>ir proximity tosave on transport costs ra<strong>the</strong>r than on account <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> head teacher’s ability to provide support to atrainee teacher (Edelenbosch and Short 2009);Some lecturers are open to bribery to pass students ei<strong>the</strong>r through sexual favours or cash (Bakari2004; Sherry 2008; Burke 2009), while some sell exam papers to students (Burke 2009); andThere is entrenched gender discrimination against female staff and students, as well as againstmales that do not conform to <strong>the</strong> dominant masculinist ideology (Bakari 2004), resulting in very fewfemales, if any, in senior management positions (ibid.; UNICEF 2012).Although <strong>the</strong>re are few empirical studies on <strong>the</strong> effectiveness <strong>of</strong> pre-service teacher education beyondcritiques <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> curriculum, <strong>the</strong> assessments <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> persistently poor teaching quality in primary schoolsand low levels <strong>of</strong> teacher pr<strong>of</strong>essional knowledge suggest <strong>the</strong>re is a real need to improve itseffectiveness. The most striking evidence lies in <strong>the</strong> results <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> teacher development needsassessments performed among all public primary school teachers in <strong>the</strong> ESSPIN-supported states.In Kwara State, 19,000 teachers were tested on basic literacy, numeracy and lesson planning skills, <strong>of</strong>which only 75 (0.4%) scored <strong>the</strong> minimum threshold level <strong>of</strong> over 70% (Johnson 2008). In <strong>the</strong>assessment, qualified teachers fared no better than unqualified teachers; nor were <strong>the</strong>re any discerniblegender differences. In <strong>the</strong> Lagos assessment, 400 teachers (1.9%) achieved over 70% (Johnson, 2010)and <strong>the</strong>re was a significant difference in performance between <strong>the</strong> 52% <strong>of</strong> teachers with highereducation qualifications and those possessing <strong>the</strong> NCE. Literacy in English, however, was particularly29A study asking teachers and head teachers to rate <strong>the</strong> extent to which aspects <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> NCE curriculum prepared primaryteachers for <strong>the</strong> actual tasks <strong>the</strong>y carry out in school found everything (except preparation to teach numeracy) gained aroundonly a 30% approval rating (Adeyanju 2005, cited in Adekola 2007).EDOREN – Education Data, Research and Evaluation in Nigeria 120
Page 1 and 2:
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ON BASICED
Page 3 and 4:
Review of
Page 5 and 6:
Review of
Page 7 and 8:
Review of
Page 9 and 10:
Review of
Page 11 and 12:
Review of
Page 13 and 14:
Review of
Page 15 and 16:
Review of
Page 17 and 18:
Review of
Page 19 and 20:
Review of
Page 21 and 22:
Review of
Page 23 and 24:
Review of
Page 25 and 26:
Review of
Page 27 and 28:
Review of
Page 29 and 30:
Review of
Page 31 and 32:
Review of
Page 33 and 34:
Review of
Page 35 and 36:
Review of
Page 37 and 38:
Review of
Page 39 and 40:
Review of
Page 41 and 42:
Review of
Page 43 and 44:
Review of
Page 45 and 46:
Review of
Page 47 and 48:
Review of
Page 49 and 50:
Review of
Page 51 and 52:
Review of
Page 53 and 54:
Review of
Page 55 and 56:
Review of
Page 57 and 58:
Review of
Page 59 and 60:
Review of
Page 61 and 62:
Review of
Page 63 and 64:
Review of
Page 65 and 66:
Review of
Page 67 and 68:
Review of
Page 69 and 70:
Review of
Page 71 and 72:
Review of
Page 73 and 74:
Review of
Page 75 and 76:
Review of
Page 77 and 78:
Review of
Page 79 and 80:
Review of
Page 81 and 82:
Review of
Page 83 and 84:
Review of
Page 85 and 86:
Review of
Page 87 and 88:
Review of
Page 89 and 90:
Review of
Page 91 and 92:
Review of
Page 93 and 94:
Review of
Page 95 and 96: Review of
Page 145: Review of
Page 197 and 198:
Review of
Page 199 and 200:
Review of
Page 201 and 202:
Review of
Page 203 and 204:
Review of
Page 205 and 206:
Review of
Page 207 and 208:
Review of
Page 209 and 210:
Review of
show all

review-of-the-literature-on-basic-education-in-nigeria-june-2014-3-1

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?