THE QUALITY OF LEARNING IN NIGERIAN PRIMARY EDUCATION.

THE UPE PROGRAMME 1 9 7 6 - 1 9 8 2 GEORGE KELLY and PETER LASSA

Abstrac!- The speed with which UPE was introduced to Nigeria has meant enormous problems of both a logistical and educational nature. After six years many have proved all but impossible to overcome. While generalising may be wrong, it is questionable whether the government's objectives for UPE can be achieved. Vast regional discrepancies of implementation have meant that the reduction in the previous imbalance of opportunity is unlikely. A high rate of unemployment and disaffection among terminal primary leavers will offset the concept of UPE as an investment. Grassroots support will weaken if primary schooling offers no tangible returns. A further problem is present. The curriculum of UPE has been inappropriate for a system which is terminal for the majority. Basic skills are often unlearned. The national curriculum has not been sufficiently localised and, with staff and material shortages, has been impossible to teach. In current conditions it is academic and certificate-orientated. There is an urgent need to review the structure of primary education before it is too late. A community base might be considered in the face of weakening government funding but the redesign of the curriculum is an essential prerequisite. The content and quality of education is as important as the logistics of its provision. Zusammenfassung-Die Schnelligkeit, mit der der weltweite Ausbau des Primarschulwesens in Nigerien eingefiihrt worden ist, hat enorme Probleme sowohl logistischer als auch pfidagogischer Art mit sich gebracht. Nach sechs Jahren haben sich viele als alles andere als uniaberwindbare Harden erwiesen. W~ihrend es unangebracht w~ire, Verallgemeinerungen anzustellen, bleibt es fraglich, ob die Ziele der Regierungen in Hinblick auf den weltweiten Ausbau des Primarschulwesens erreicht werden kOnnen. Riesige regionale Diskrepanzen in der Durchftihrung bedeuteten, dab die Verminderung der bisherigen Chancenungleichheit unwahrscheinlich ist. Eine hohe Arbeitslosenquote und die Unzufriedenheit unter den Schulabg~ingern mit abgeschlossener Primarschulbildung werden das Konzept des ~veltweiten Ausbaus des Primarschulwesens ausgleichen. Unterstiitzung yon der Basis wird schw~cher werden, wenn die Primarschule keine greifbaren Gegenleistungen bietet. Es besteht ein weiteres Problem. Das Curriculum der Primarerziehung far alle hat sich fiar ein System, das von der Mehrheit erftillt werden kann, als ungeeignet erwiesen. Grundkenntnisse werden oft nicht erlernt. Das nationale Curriculum ist noch nicht weit genug verbreitet worden. Verbunden mit Personal- und Materialmangel ist es so bisher unmOglich gewesen, nach ihm zu unterrichten. Unter den jetzigen Bedingungen bleibt es akademisch und diplomorientiert. Es ist dringend erforderlich, die Struktur der Primarerziehung zu t~berpriafen, bevor es zu sp~it ist. Eine Gemeinwesenebene mag erwogen werden in Hinblick auf die schw~tcher werdende Finanzierung seitens der Regierung, doch

Ir.ternational Review o f Education-lnternationale Zeitschrift f a r Erziehungswissens c h a f t - R e v u e bTternationale de Pddagogie X X I X (1983), 231 243. All rights reserved. Copyright © by Unesco Institute f o r Education, Hamburg and Martinus N i j h o f f Publishers,

232 bleibt die Neufassung des Curriculums eine notwendige Voraussetzung. Die inhaltliche Qualit~it des Erziehungswesens ist genauso wichtig wie seine infrastrukturelle Mal3nahmen. R6sum6-La rapidit6 avec laquelle I'EPU a 6t6 introduit au Nig6ria a entraln~ de graves probl~mes de nature ~ la fois p6dagogique et logistique. Apr~s six ans d'efforts un grand nombre d'entre eux se r6v~lent presque impossibles A r~soudre. Bien qu'il soit incorrect de g~n6raliser, on peut se demander si les objectifs du Gouvernement relatifs A I'EPU pourront ~tre atteints. De profonds d6saccords r6gionaux rendent improbable une r6duction du d6s6quilibre qui subsiste toujours. Le taux 61ev~ du ch6mage et le d6sabusement chez les 61~ves sortants des classes terminales du primaire d6pouille le concept de I'EPU de sa valeur d'investissement. Les soutiens populaires vont aller en diminuant si l'enseignement primaire n'offre rien de tangible en retour. Un probl~me additionnel se pr~sente: le curriculum de I'EPU est inappropri6 ~ un syst~me qui, pour la majorit~ des 61~ves, est terminal. Les connaissances 616mentaires sont souvent inassimil6es. Le curriculum national n'a pas ~t~ suffisamment localis~ et, du fair de la p6nurie en personnel et en materiel p6dagogique, il a 6t6 impossible ~ enseigner. Dans les conditions actuelles, le curriculum a une orientation toute acad6mique et l'obtention de dipl6mes est sa finalit6. I1 est urgent de revoir la structure de l'enseignement primalre avant qu'il ne soit trop tard. On pourrait envisager une base collective pour pailler l'amenuisement du financement gouvernemental mais la restructuration du curriculum est une condition pr6alable indispensable. La qualit6 du contenu de l'~ducation est aussi importante que la logistique de ses prestations. The data and arguments in this paper derive from the work undertaken by both George Kelly and Peter Lassa. George Kelly is responsible for the final drafting of the article and Peter Lassa for that of the Note on the Teaching of Mathematics which follows it. This paper is concerned with the quality o f learning in Nigeria's scheme o f mass education. It is the sort o f p r o g r a m m e that inevitably attracts a lot o f attention, t h o u g h u n f o r t u n a t e l y m u c h o f the published w o r k falls into the category loosely called 'logistics'. M a n y observers have been d o m i n a t e d by the daunting problems o f implementation and the result has invariably meant a concern for the number o f learners rather than with what they are learning. Six years after the launching o f U P E , we can say with certainty that there are a great n u m b e r o f p r i m a r y schools in Nigeria, but what goes on inside them remains largely u n k n o w n .

The Background In 1976 Nigeria was ruled by a military government and it was under military rule that U P E was launched. 1 Its inception was certainly precipitous. A c c o r d i n g to one report, n o w universally accepted as official, the first a n n o u n c e m e n t on the subject was m a d e in S o k o t o in J a n u a r y 1974

233 by the then President, Yakubu Gowan. Apparently he had intended to launch the programme in April of the following year. In the event it was delayed until September 1976, thus allowing a little over two years for planning Africa's largest and most ambitious programme of educational development. The country over which the soldiers ruled was the most populous in Africa. Figures vary, but it is now reliably estimated that there are certainly no fewer than eighty million Nigerians, of whom about 47 per cent are under the age of fourteen. 2 The problem of numbers was exacerbated by the lack of reliable statistics or no statistics at all. The planners were working blind, basing their projected enrolments on a 1963 census which bore little hope of indicating the number of six year olds in 1976. Inevitably they got it wrong. Large numbers of children who, in theory, should not have existed, arrived to enrol. 3 There were too many children competing for too few resources. Yet lack of adequate resources is a definitive factor in mass education: this cannot be overemphasised. The one thing there seemed to be no lack of was money. In 1976, Nigeria - in comparison with most Africa countries - was extremely rich, but her wealth was based on crude oil and her economy was largely dependent on it. The consequent neglect of her agricultural sector meant that wealth was not being generated at the local level. Should the Federal Government find itself incapable of continuing to finance UPE, then the scheme would be in severe trouble. To a very large extent this is what has happened. The muchvaunted wealth that launched U P E was not only illusory, it was two-edged. It created the expectation of a soundly financed Primary system while it eroded the local financial base upon which it could be sustained. At this point it is important to note that UPE was but one of many reforms and developments taking place in the country at the time. It was also significant that the first UPE cycle of six years was to straddle two National Development Plans - the Third and the Fourth. Each emphasised different priorities. Whereas UPE was the priority of the Third Plan, agriculture is the primary concern of the Fourth. The present Plan has thus off-loaded fiscal responsibility for the scheme from the Federal Government onto the States, and they in turn onto the Local Government Areas, many of which were only created in 1980. 4 The fight to finance Primary Education in the face of competition from other sectors has been fierce, and all the indications are that it is becoming fiercer still. 5 Financially, then, the scheme was inherently weak from the beginning and predestined to run into serious problems of funding. Moreover, the rapidity of implementation precluded any real planning of an either economic or educational nature. Indeed, the recommendations of the official Implementation Committee, the so-called 'Blueprint', were submit-

234 ted in 1978, a full two years after the p r o g r a m m e had begun. 6 Any policies concerning U P E were therefore expected to emerge during the scheme and not before it was launched.

The Need The Government of Nigeria embarked on the U P E scheme in 1976 because the military rulers were convinced of its importance: their commitment was witnessed by the fact that in the Third National Development Plan, after allocating 1'42.83 billion to defence, the largest recipient, they ear-marked an unbelievable I'42.5 billion for education. This was a staggering act of confidence for a military regime. The preamble to the Third National Development Plan, which launched UPE, stated: The guiding principle is the total commitment of the Federal Military Government to the provision of equal opportunities for all Nigerians regardless of the place of birth, origin or abode. 7 Education was seen as a quite definite means of achieving this end. It was 'the instrument par excellence for effecting national development 's. This 'national development' was conceived of as involving: 1. The inculcation of national consciousness and national unity. 2. The inculcation of the right type of values and attitudes for the survival of the individual and the Nigerian society. 3. The training of the mind in the understanding of the world around. 4. The acquisition of the appropriate skills, abilities and competences, both mental and physical, as equipment for the individual to live in and contribute to his society. 9 It would appear that two factors were present in the G o v e r n m e n t ' s thinking. The first and perhaps most important was anxiety over the divisions within Nigerian society. ~° In a country so ethnically and linguistically divided, inequality is a way of life. The Birom will not exert as much influence over national policy as the Yoruba. Hausa will be spoken by more people than Tiv. No educational innovation will change this. Yet the very survival of the nation is dependent on a delicate balance of power. While recognising that any analysis which attempts to divide Nigeria into ' n o r t h ' and 'south' is necessarily crude, we would suggest that in education and develop-

235 ment terms this distinction, for all its limitations, be retained. In terms of development, the North was - and still is - at a disadvantage to the South. Educationally, the situation was summed up in 1972 by the then Commissioner of Education: So wide is the gap that, roughly speaking, for every child in a primary school in the Northern States, there are four in the Southern StatesJ ~ In an ever-increasingly technological world, if one group is clearly at a disadvantage in its ability to control its own destiny within society, resentment will result. In 1975, then, education was seen as a tool for ensuring that there would be no repeat of the recent Biafran Civil War. L2Education would iron out the inequalities that were at the heart of the countries problems; it held the key to Nigeria's continuing existence as a nation state. The second important factor affecting official thinking on education was the need (crucial, as it was thought) to produce a skilled manpower base from which a strong and self-generating infrastructure could be created. In this context, it was believed that UPE would prove a very direct and practical instrument of development and a good investment in the future ~3. In the 1960's and 1970's, educationists and development planners were considerably preoccupied by the apparent lack of skilled manpower; it was assumed to be a major factor impeding rapid economic growth. UPE, from this point of view, was seen as a feeder for the secondary and vocational sectors. Primary education on its own could hardly offer any answer to the shortage of trained manpower, and indeed there was no serious thought of including vocational skills in the primary curriculum. But it would certainly be necessary to alter the structure of secondary and tertiary education. In government terms, then, UPE was not an end in itself, and the introduction of six years of primary education was to be followed by a three-year Junior and a three-year Senior Secondary system. This concentration on secondary and vocational education obviously worked to the detriment of the vast majority of children in primary school. At the most optimistic estimate, only 40 per cent of them could be affected by secondary education. ~a In manpower terms, what was to become of the remaining 60 per cent denied access to the wage-earning sector of Nigerian society? It could also mean that the weight of emphasis and, hence, allocation of resources would move from the primary to the secondary sectors. The concept of education as an investment could be inimical to UPE. A third and by no means insignificant pressure calling for UPE was that of the vox populi. A vast grass-roots demand for education ran parallel to government thinking. In the south of the country it was - and always had been - greater than in the north, but this is where care is needed when at-

236 tempting 'crude' divisions between these two areas. The North as an entity was by no means antagonistic to the introduction of UPE, though for a variety of reasons - mainly religious - certain states showed less enthusiasm than others. What is certain, however, is that the demand for UPE formed a mighty political force within Nigeria, a force which any government, military or otherwise, would ignore at its peril. Without this grass-roots pressure UPE could never have existed. Equally, should - for any reason - public support for the scheme lessen, it will then be seriously threatened. From the outset a conflict can be discerned between the views of education held on the one hand by the government and on the other by the people who should receive that education. The parents expected education to lead to paid employment. This expectation originated in Nigeria's colonial past when education was synonymous with office work. The present and recent governments have done little to dispel this view. They have not dwelled on the fact that UPE will create vast unemployment, for one does not tempt children to school with the promise of nothing at the end of it. While paying lip service to the 'acquisition of appropriate s k i l l s . . , as equipment to live in and contribute to his society' and the 'inculcation of values and a t t i t u d e s . . , for s u r v i v a l . . , in Nigerian society', the UPE curriculum that is supposed to achieve these things is truly quite inimical to that purpose. The result could have greater ramifications than the possible failure of an educational scheme; as the Blueprint gloomily concludes: The problem facing the whole Federation now is what to do with 2.1 million primary school leavers in June 1982. Unless a drastic restructuring of the primary school curriculum is achieved which would make primary school-leavers not dissatisfied with the rural districts where they were brought up, the whole country is in for serious trouble, because, even with 40 per cent proceeding to junior secondary schools, 1.3 million of them would still be waiting to be catered for. 15

The Content of UPE Most educators would probably agree that, in general terms, any increase in the quantity of education provided will be accompanied by a fall in quality. The problem with the quality versus quantity argument, however, is that it often misses the point with mass education. Whether planned or not, the introduction of a successful scheme of U P E in Nigeria would have meant a small-scale social revolution. It would not, could not and should not have produced in greater mass the same type of pupil that existed before the introduction of UPE. A programme of U P E must be committed to the element of universality. If it is not, then it is but an expansion of

237 Primary Education, and that is a totally different concept of learning to that embodied in UPE. In Nigeria, for a range of reasons both logistical and otherwise, the p r o g r a m m e of Primary Education which was launched in 1976 fell between these two stools. The principal concern of the planners in 1976 was, quite understandably, to increase the numbers of schools to a c c o m m o d a t e an increased number of pupils. The emergency conditions at the time did not allow for too much discussion on what the pupils should learn in these schools. In any case who would teach them, and with what? Both teachers and textbooks were in short supply -- as indeed was everything else. Inevitably, standards dropped compared to what they had been before the p r o g r a m m e was introduced, but this was surely to be expected when measurements, previously developed for assessing standards within a restricted education, were used to determine quality in a p r o g r a m m e of mass education? As we have observed, from the date of publication of the Blueprint, policies were expected to emerge as the p r o g r a m m e progressed. Unfortunately they were too late. A curriculum based on a philosophy of education that was committed to universal primary education could not overtake the downward spiral of logistical shortcomings. The problem seemed to reduce to one simple question. What should be the function of Primary Education in a country such as Nigeria? As we have seen, there are two answers, depending on the respective points of view of ' d o n o r ' and 'recipient'. We are therefore faced with a rather complex dilemma. If the grass-roots demand for UPE is based on the understanding that U P E will produce an upward social mobility, and if the current state of the economy is such that primary education and the qualifications it produces are irrelevant to securing the sought-after wage earning place in that economy, then clearly something is very wrong with the economy or with the p r o g r a m m e of Primary Education. If the reality for UPE is that it will only work in conjunction with a system of universal secondary education, a serious setback could result, because USE is just not a feasible proposition for Nigeria at the moment. The answer, the only answer, would seem to lie in the degree of relevance that U P E has for the majority of children it is meant to cater for. Since agriculture is the occupation and source of living of the vast majority of Nigerians, it appears reasonable to assume that Primary Education must be relevant to the problems of agricultural families, and it is very good sense from a pedagogical point of view to set the teaching of all subjects in the context of the experience of learners. Yet great care must be taken in planning a p r o g r a m m e appropriate for rural pupils. In the first place, it might be seen by the recipients as an education for limited opportunities - a second class education for farmers. It would never succeed in these cir-

238 cumstances and would fuel the accusations of hypocrisy made against 'elite' educationists. In the second place it is always questionable as to how much an apparently appropriate curriculum can offer in the way of solving the major problems of farming communities. A recent ILO report states: Neither literacy nor an agriculturally orientated curriculum can bring about an agricultural revolution unless the structure of agriculture becomes more viable. Countless studies i n Africa have pointed to the futility of trying to change agriculture t h r o u g h . . , curriculum reforms alone.16 So what can primary school do? Certainly it can play its part in helping to change childrens' attitudes towards agriculture, though these derive largely from parents and theirs in turn, are shaped by the returns which agriculture has to offer. Certainly, the integration of Primary Education with rural development programmes must be beneficial. The increase of knowledge and skills in food production remains a valuable goal in a country where most families - whatever else they do - are farmers. But the school can effect no transformation nor does the official curriculum apparently expect it to do so. Referring once again to the Blueprint, we cannot share the optimism of its hope that 'a drastic restructuring of the primary school curr i c u l u m . . , would make primary school leavers not dissatisfied with the rural districts where they are brought up'.17 Is, in any case, the function of education to make people satisfied with the status quo? UPE will not provide quick solutions to major economic problems in Nigeria. Nowhere in the world today can we expect Primary Education to do this. But we may reasonably expect it to meet the needs of the child. Apart from not being able to condition a child into permanent rural happiness, has the present content of UPE been orientated towards such needs? The subject-headings suggested by Blueprint to comprise the national primary curriculum in Nigeria are as follows: a. Language Arts - language of the immediate community; English; b. Mathematics; c. Social Studies; d. Elementary Science; e. Cultural Arts; f. Health Education and Physical Training; g. Religious and Moral Instruction; and h. Agriculture and Home Economics. It was originally intended that evaluation should be by continuous assessment. -

These were essentially intended only as a guide: local emphases and variations were to be added by the states, though for many reasons this has not

239 happened. The national curriculum is therefore that in use in all nineteen states. The first reaction of anyone who has visited a U P E school, on looking at this curriculum, might be astonishment at the range of disciplines which are supposed to be taught. Astonishment, mingled perhaps with a little incredulity. Clearly there must be some disparity between the ideal of teaching this curriculum and what actually goes on at the U P E chalk-face. Anyone visiting a U P E school with a copy of the curriculum in his hand might be forgiven for wondering if 'both the administrator and university lecturer responsible for planning unwittingly allowed their comprehension of the needs of society to be coloured by their own needs and those of the urban areas where they live'. 18Such a curriculum as this might be possible to implement in the great cities of Nigeria. It might be of some relevance to the more sophisticated city child. But in the remote areas it is impossible to teach, and much of it is probably irrelevant. Having said this, we must not be too harsh on the planners. What, after all, do we really mean by a relevant curriculum in Nigeria? Usually, it is one geared to the needs of the Nigerian child, whatever those are deemed to be. The major accusation against the curriculum used in Nigeria, however, is that it is too European (i.e., Western) in concept. This is not altogether true of the curriculum of UPE. Conceptually, it is not totally alien to Nigeria and could act as a base upon which local initiative might flourish. The major accusation against the national curriculum is that it does not take into account the very basic fact that, for a lot of very obvious reasons, local curriculum development and accompanying made-to-measure materials would not, and could not, be forthcoming. Let us briefly look at one of the 'subjects' to see how this works in practice. In 1980, the Federal Government brought out a Core Curriculum for Primary Science with the specific aim of defining 'the minimum content of what science should be taught in all Nigerian schools'. 19 Taking one lesson at random from Class 2, consider the following in a rural UPE school:

Topic Further activities with water

Activities Let children make charts with appropriate cuttings from magazines and news papers. Transfer water from a smaller container to a bigger one. Use straw or plastic tube to move water up and down the tube.

Equipment Newspaper, magazines, scissors, gum/glue, cardboard sheets. Plastic beaker, plastic bowl, plastic straw, plastic tube (transparant).

If we remember that the language of instruction for Classes 1 to 3 is not

240 English 2°, and bear in mind the almost total unavailability of the equipment and material suggested, we can hardly be surprised that a recent survey showed that science was, as far as teachers were concerned, the most difficult subject to teach. El We can deduce that it is either not taught or taught so badly as to render the subject incomprehensible. The point about the primary science curriculum is not that it is a bad curriculum in itself. Indeed, a lot of hard work and original thought has clearly gone into its design. It is not inimical to Nigeria; the problem is that it just cannot be used throughout the whole country. As a curriculum, it contains many excellent ideas, but if they were to be taught universally and the same performance objectives achieved, the curriculum would have to be localised and here the problems begin. Attempts to localise programmes and materials - or to discuss alternatives in differing contexts - are rare, and if they do take place, they are poorly funded. The concept of a curriculum which offers alternative units to meet similar goals does not exist. The planners of NERC 22 therefore find themselves designing a curriculum which is taken so literally that in many schools it is impossible to teach. Notwithstanding the alienation of the planners from the grass-roots realities or the break-neck speed with which the programme was introduced, one of the major problems facing the UPE curriculum is that it has to serve too many masters. The interests of the nation-state in supplying education are not always compatible with what are seen as educational needs in the purest sense. Nor are the interests of the nation always identical with the interests of the individual. Language policy within the curriculum is a perfect example of this problem. On the one hand, national unity would call for a common language, acceptable to all ethnic groups - in this case English. Usage of the mother tongue, however, is now widely accepted as being the most viable and permanent method of learning. The curriculum opts for a compromise and the result is that neither is learned effectively. 23 So the old dilemma remains unsolved. The formal school is, by definition, a Western innovation, and UPE means formal schooling. For historical reasons, the school is synonymous with 'clean hand' jobs, and UPE set out to democratise a system of education that was traditionally based on a colonial ethos. The curriculum reflects this, but it is difficult to see what else it could do. Given the vast and countless variations in Nigerian society, the only lowest denominator possible is to have a general goal. No one authority can really say how this may be attained to the satisfaction of all. Under the particular conditions in which UPE was introduced, it was safest to opt for the familiar - and thus we have a quasi prescriptive national curriculum being taught with syllabuses designed in and for another age: a curriculum designed for the masses with a minority in mind. There is thus a critical urgency to review the whole programme of Primary -

241 Education in Nigeria before there is a vote with the feet on its provisions. 24 Private education will almost certainly be the next step for frustrated and more affluent parents. Can the formal - and above all, government school find a compromise that will both allow easy access (if required) to the technological world and engender an acceptance - or at least, a tolerance - of the agrarian life-style?

The Future -

An Alternative Education?

If we were asked in this sixth year of U P E to offer an opinion on the success or failure of the scheme, we would be hard-pressed to give an answer which would be applicable to the whole of Nigeria. There will be discrepancies in the fortunes of UPE not just between States but within States, and indeed within Local Government Areas. Criteria for assessing success at this early stage must by necessity be rough and ready but clearly they would include such factors as attendance, retention of pupils, presence of minimum materials and, we would suspect, a reasonable rate of transition to the secondary sector. Our preliminary survey has shown - as indeed we would expect it to show - that the good health of a school is often dependent on the attitude of the local community, and that therefore while contributing to a school's 'success', community involvement can also be used as a criterion for assessing that 'success'. As a programme to eliminate the imbalance of opportunity in Nigeria, UPE has probably failed. Only a minority will benefit, albeit a minority composed of many who would have nothing, had it not been for U P E in the first place. What about the great majority excluded from Secondary Education? What can be done for them at the primary level which will offer them some hope and opportunity in a changing society? One alternative that has been strongly mooted is to make the curriculum much more vocationally oriented. Presumably this would increase employment opportunities of those for whom Primary Education was terminal. There are, however, so many flaws in this approach that it is not, at the present time, really deserving of too much consideration. Not least among those flaws is the fact that good vocational education invariably costs more than its academic equivalent. Moreover, pedagogically the current primary age-range is too young for it to be effective. In any case, by Nigerian labour laws, a twelve-year-old is too young to work. The age-range of Primary Education would have to be raised and this would either mean a revision of the 6-3-3-4 system or the creation of a two-tier primary programme. Neither option is currently viable. One of the major factors dogging the planners is that no one really has

242 much idea of what the Nigeria of the near future will be like. This unpredictability makes devising a relevant curriculum very difficult because it is virtually impossible to identify what the learning needs of Nigerian children are and will be. Commonsense brings us, with an evergrowing number of educationalists, to conclude that the element of flexibility might be the most useful skill that a curriculum can impart. The concept of an 'education for life' is not in itself a novel idea in Nigeria. The National Policy on Education states: 'Lifelong education will be the basis for the nation's educational policies.' But working this out in practice is, of course, easier said than done. Central to the idea of lifelong education is the concept of giving a learner basic competencies which he can then apply both to learn more and to organise his life. The UPE curriculum does not do this. It is examinationorientated and in many rural areas fails even to inculcate basic literacy skills. Clearly, much thought will have to be put into identifying the immediate and long-term needs of the Nigerian child. Equally clearly, much research needs to be done on the best way of designing a learning programme which will be both relevant and acceptable. Yet a great deal can be done if we make a serious attempt to match the curriculum more closely with the culture of learners, as our example from mathematics suggests (pp. 2 4 5 - 246, below). That some form of community involvement will play a part is certain. There are two basic reasons for this happening in the Nigeria of the eighties. The first is that community involvement makes schools work better. Indeed, in 1976 there were many observers who said that the UPE programme should be community-based. The second reason is that financial realism precludes the element of choice. In fiscal terms the Federal Government has washed its hands of Primary Education. In its Outline of the Fourth National Development Plan it says, 'A significant distinction between the proposed programme and the preceding Third Plan, is the complete absence of Federal iflvestment in Primary Education. '-'-~ State and Local Governments are now responsible for paying for UPE and there are already clear signs that the arrangement is not working. The financial spotlight is turning to the Secondary sector. Primary schools may find that if they are to continue to exist they will have to rely more and more heavily on the communities around them. Whether we shall see the formation of community schools teaching basic skills will, of course, depend very much on the spirit of the community concerned, its desire for education and its interpretation of the educational needs of its children. What we will not see is an end to the formal subjectbased curriculum, however. It is too firmly ingrained in Nigeria and for certain areas and groups it serves its purpose well, however unimaginatively.

243 Another suggestion might be to take the present curriculum and cut out the inessentials. We are, after all, dealing with an emergency situation and in such a case, drastic measures are justified. The present curriculum is nothing short of luxurious in its range of subjects. There are too m a n y for them all to be taught effectively. Would it not be possible to select the most important on a criteria of lifelong skills and train teachers in those subjects only? English, whatever the arguments on language policy, is a prime candidate. So too is mathematics. The quality of teaching has to increase along with standards achieved. 26The curriculum range can be increased later, once the concept of U P E gets a solid hold on parents. Key subjects would, of course, be examined nationally, thereby introducing a certain degree of uniformity. Rural schools would not feel left out and the access to national certificates would reduce fears of a second class, low-status education. Yet another alternative might be to dovetail the school into the 'Green Revolution'. The integrated rural development projects at present underway could encompass Primary Education with the ultimate objective of making farming more attractive to the school-leaver. It could also teach the key subj ects, mentioned above, thus creating increased flexibility of opportunity for today and for the undefined tomorrow. Whatever the solution - or combination of solutions, a new attitude to education in Nigeria is called for. So long as Nigerians remain static in their concept of the school being the passport to a white-collar job, Primary Education is unlikely to be universal. The divides in the country will deepen, as one section of society emphasises education while the other ignores it. Education is not the instrument par excellence for effecting national development. It works in conjunction with other factors, some of which engender the demand for wider education while others are produced as a result of that widening of learning opportunities. In the last resort, all the curriculum reform and planning will count for nothing if society does not value education for its own sake and perceive of its availability as a h u m a n right.

Notes

1. Military rule in Nigeria lasted from 1966- 1979. A return to civilian politics had been promised for 1976 but was postponed. It was this which gave rise to rumours that UPE was a political ploy to soften reaction to an unfulfilled expectation of democracy. 2. Based on the 1963 census. The census of 1973 was abandoned. Population figures are often a source of considerable acrimony in Nigeria. 3. Totalenrolments throughout Nigeria came to 2.99 million which was 31 percent more than the expected 2.29 million. Some states miscalculated more than others. In Benue, for example, they expected approximately 100,000 enrolments but tookjust over 276,000 - 276 per cent more than the number estimated. The strain on already stretched resources can be imagined.

244 4. At the time of writing, the Federal Government is about to announce the creation of more States and hence, presumably, more Local Government Areas. This will severely affect the administration of Primary Education within the altered boundaries. 5. The introduction of the new system of Junior Secondary Education will redirect funds from the primary sector. 6. Federal Republic of Nigeria. Blueprint of the Implementation Committee for the NationalPolicy on Education. Lagos, 1978. The Blueprint actually stated that the focus of its recommendation 'is on the actual experience with Universal Primary Education beginning 1976/77 and, in the light of this experience, to chart the way ahead' (p. 12). 7. Federal Republic of Nigeria. Third National Development Plan. Lagos, 1975. 8. Federal Ministry of Information. National Policy on Education. Lagos, 1977. 9. Ibid. 10. The country is composed of more than 200 ethnic groups with as many individual languages. Probably just over half the population is Muslim, with the remainder predominantly Christian. Nigeria is also a country of towns, though three quarters of the population are dependent on agriculture. In development terms, the Muslim North has not received as much Western-style education as the South. 11. Quoted in West Africa, 8 January, 1973. 12.An attempt by the Igbo-speaking population to secede from the Federation resulted in civil war between 1966 and 1970. Many observers blamed the imbalance of opportunities as the root cause of the conflict. 13. UPE had been attempted before in Nigeria during the 1950's and 1960's, but it was confined to what was then the former Western and Eastern Regions of the country. The lessons and failures of the experiments were well known (see Blueprint, op. cit., pp. 4 7 - 50) but seem not to have been taken as a guide in planning the current scheme. For the most comprehensive analysis of these early attempts, see David B. Abernethy. The Political Dilemma of Popular Education. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1969. 14.Blueprint, op. cir., pp. 6 2 - 6 3 . 15.Blueprint, op. cit., p. 50. 16. ILO. First Things First: Meeting the Basic Needs of the People of Nigeria. Addis Ababa, 1981, p. 175. 17. Blueprint, p. 14. 18. A.E. Afigbo. 'Policy and research in education'. In ILO, op. cit., p. 176. 19. Federal Ministry of Education. Core Curriculum for Primary Science. Lagos, 1980. 20. English as the language of instruction was to begin in Class 4. 21. Conducted in Plateau State in May 1982. Of seventy primary school teachers and headmasters who responded, every single one also stated that a chronic lack of materials impeded teaching. 22. Nigerian Educational Research Council. 23. In some schools in Plateau State, three languages are used in Classes 1 to 3. Sometimes English is not used at all in Classes 4 to 6 and illiteracy is not uncommon in Class 6. 24. Drop-out rates for the first six years of UPE still have to be computed, but all the indications are that they are high. This also happened in the early UPE programmes in the West and East. 25. Federal Republic of Nigeria. Outline of the Fourth National Development Plan. Lagos, 1981. 26. In many rural areas the staffing problems are still chronic. Devolution of responsibility for Primary Education has led to non-payment of salaries. Untrained teachers are common and morale is very low.