Total education budget not enough for TETfund intervention – C’tte chairman

Prof Nazifi A. Darma

Total education budget not enough for TETfund intervention – C’tte
chairman
Nazifi Abdullahi Darma is a professor of Development Economics at
the University of Abuja, and co-chairman and coordinator of impact assessment
ad hoc committee of TETfund interventions in 20 years. In this chat with UJI
ABDULLAHI ILIYASU, he discloses the efforts the three TETFund ad hoc committees
are making to accomplish a thorough job and sundry issues.
As part of impact assessment committee, how far have you gone in
assignment?
As part of reinvigorating forces, Professor Elias Suleiman Bogoro
inaugurated three committees in order to refurbish TETfund towards achieving
its mandate in intervention in order to attain quality education in Nigeria’s
tertiary schools.  Number one is the
issue of Technical Advisory Group (TAG), which is the highest intellectual
decision-making body. Number one is book development committee, research and
development committee which my co-chairman, Professor Njoku who is now the
deputy governor-elect of Imo state, is chairing.   The third committee is the Technical Action
Committee on Impact Assessment (TACIA) of TETfund interventions in 20
years. 
What we have done  so far is
enough, but because of   lack of
publicity some people may constrained to think we have not been doing anything.
Since our inauguration in September last year, what we did is to we have a
series of meetings to define modalities to carry out our assignments based on
the terms defined by TETfund. And let me tell you with all sincerity and
appreciation that this is the first time a public-sector-funded institution in
Nigeria is forming an independent self-evaluation team to assess its activities
by outsiders. This is very unprecedented in the history of public expenditure
in Nigeria.   
With this independent assessment team, we are now in the process of
telling TETFund where it is doing well so that it can increase performance and
where it is underperforming so that it can make corrections.
We have had several meetings with three to six members of TACIA. We
developed modalities; we created a sub-team which we called core technical
team, composed of 12 members of the 63 that are well grounded as far as
evaluation is concerned. We develop a comprehensive work plan and this started
with the development of tools and instruments for the assignment. We have
developed questionnaires and questions for the interview guide as well as focal
discussion group question guide.
We have got documents from TETfund as far as every aspect of
intervention is concerned. Our impact assessment is looking at 15 different
areas of TETFund intervention in the last 20 years. The executive secretary
told us in clear and unambiguous terms that there is no hindrance to what we
can do in order to find out the positive and negative impacts of TETFund
interventions in the last 20 years.
 After developing the
instrument, and in line with international best standard, we are using what is
called a tool by World Bank, IMF, African Development Bank and by all
international agencies.
We have 37 teams; each team composed of a team leader and a
research assistant who will guide the team leader. We have other members of
TACIA who will serve as quality control experts in order to provide something
like a check to what the two leaders and research assistants are doing because
we want to undertake a job that is thoroughly objective.
 The team and research
assistant will carry out the administration of the questionnaire being
undertaken by the focus group discussion and undertake the interview with all
relevant stakeholders. And the quality control expert who is a member of the
technical advisory committee is not involved in such activities, but will be
able to follow the checklist of the activities of the team leader and research assistant
so that they do what is right and to our stated criteria.  Now in order to provide proper objectivity we
administer a method using a tablet. And that is supposed to take picture of
every single project.  It is aligned to
Google account and server so that you can see the projects in real term online;
the time they are doing the work, what is the location, the day, the hour and
the minute so that there is authenticity that projects are on ground.
The 37 teams, including FCT, were able to conduct over 15730
interviews, focus group discussions and question sessions with relevant
stakeholders with all the beneficiary institutions, boards of universities,
polytechnics and colleges of education. We even have liaison with student union
representatives and academic and non academic staff of beneficiary institutions
and even immediate communities within the environments.
At the end of the day we have one-on-one relationship
with each and every single beneficiary institutions and stakeholders.
 There is the need to assess
various social returns on investment associated with the various aspects of the
interventions. Because if you site an institution the benefits do not stop at
the community it is sited because of the  
positive multiplier effects associated with the projects.
We are also trying to measure to what extent has the funding of
TETfund and the reinvigoration of the institutions has created positive
externalities of the immediate communities and as such being able to improve
their life.
Now the 37 different teams have conducted their activities from
September 3 to December 18. And it took almost two weeks to write their report.
We have composed another team to look at each of the report and find out what
are the specific data gaps that we may need to fill before writing the final.
We take each and every report of beneficiary institution and
request for data gap that we found on those representatives, and thereafter we
will have a team of four eminent professors of English who will look at the
report and edit it thoroughly before making a final submission.
Do you think it is possible to carry out your assignments without
interference?
  During the inauguration the
executive secretary of TETfund promised us non-interference, and to the best of
my ability, he has never in any way either he or board member or directors
interfered in any of our activities and the day the interference comes, I will
tender my resignation and leave.  So let
me say in clear and unequivocal terms that the executive secretary, his
directors, board  members and the acting
chairman of the board, Professor 
Abubakar Rasheed,   have never in
any way interfered in our work. That is why we have free hand to interact with
beneficiary institutions, vice chancellors, rectors and provosts of colleges of
education.
We are in course to a qualitative report that will give a value for
money orientation associated with hundreds of billions or trillions that have
been spent.  Today almost three trillions
have been sunk into various beneficiary institutions in the last 20 years of
TETFund interventions.
Why is the building of physical infrastructure still ongoing in
public higher institutions after the executive secretary had promised that
TETFund was going pay more attention to research and development?
The reality is that the current carrying capacity of     our various institutions is extremely low
relative to number of applicants. In as much as we want to concentrate more on
research and development to attain a knowledge-driven economy, we cannot
abandon infrastructure component altogether, rather more attention will be
given to research and development. Candidates who apply to our universities are
over 1.5 million and the total carrying capacity for all private and public
institutions in Nigeria is less than one million, approximately five to six
hundred thousand. You can see that you cannot stop the physical infrastructure
aspect of the intervention. That is why in 2020 TETFund is increasing money for
research and development from 5 billion 
to 7.5 billion.
Is it possible for Nigerian universities to attract foreign
academics in view of the differences in exchange rates between Nigeria and
other countries?     
   You know every country has
an ambition and works in the context of the ambition. This is an ambition
initiated by the executive secretary of National Universities Commission (NUC),
Professor Abubakar Rasheed. And the reality is that in the early 70’s and
80’s,   because of the exchange of our
naira to other convertible currencies, we were able to attract a lot of foreign
scholars.  Beyond this there are specific
strategies you can adopt to attract international scholars, particularly within
the context of visiting scholarship.
Visiting scholars cannot come to your universities without minimal
infrastructure and standard. What TETfund is doing is to be able to upgrade the
standard for research and teaching in line with international practice so as to
attract, at least in a short term, visiting scholars that can complement our
local intellectuals and scholarship. And secondly, the issue of developing the
universities to be in line with international benchmark is an ambition that
every single Nigerian, particularly those of us working in the university
system, should work towards achieving. And that achievement is a function of
multidimensional criteria and part of that criteria is the issue of funding
and  international recognition of your
scholars, possibly the number of Nobel prize winners we are able to have and
the number of lecturers-students ratio, the quality of your laboratories and
number of students that have access to quality library material and online
journals and a lot of other criteria that satisfy the basis for ranking
customarily. Unfortunately the actual public expenditure in education in
Nigeria is one of the lowest when you compare it with other emerging economies.
You could imagine what tertiary institutions would have been in the absence of
TETfund intervention. Therefore, the intervention will go a long way to achieving
those criteria.
Why do state executives establish universities and shift
responsibility to TETfund?
I am using this opportunity to tell state executives not to just
establish universities but provide complementary funding for them so that they
will not just rely on TETfund funding. With federal universities we need to
have a realistic discussion, for even if all the money budgeted for education
is given to them they may not be enough to meet the criteria. So we need to
start talking around public private funding of university education. The
reality is that most students that are able to get admission into universities
went through private schools or coaching that cost money. Averagely it can’t be
less than 50 to 100 thousand per year. 
Now if you ask students to pay an equivalent of 500 dollars per year, it
will go a long way to assist universities have a lot of resources in order to
provide expanded facilities. At the same time everybody wants to have quality
education, but quality education have a cost. That cost can’t be fully provided
by the government alone.
Do you think it is important to extend TETfund intervention to
private institutions?
It is a complete selfishness on the part of any private university
to ask for funding from TETFund. TETFund is funded by taxpayers money with two
percent of accessible tax of all private companies operating in Nigeria.
Private universities are operated not on the basis of social responsibility but
profit. We cannot use taxpayers’ money to fund private businesses. I don’t
support it and I will never support it.
How does TETfund intervene in more than one university in one
state?
  The board of TETFund in its
wisdom has criteria for funding state universities, polytechnics and colleges
of education because of the opportunistic proliferation of institutions by
state governments. There are criteria for selective funding of state
universities based on availability of resources.  
Spread the love

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *