By Bisi Olawunmi
Academic Staff Union of Universities has gone for broke with its declaration of indefinite strike, ending its roll-over strategy since its February 14, 2022 call out of lecturers in public universities. The union must have decided to force issues, considering that in recent times, momentum has been building up against the six-month-old strike by ASUU that has grounded academic activities in publicly owned universities across the nation.
The
lecturers are being backed to the wall as Federal Government negotiators, its
spokespersons and critics, mainly on social and print media,
project ASUU members as self-serving, overindulged and lacking empathy
for their students. The broadcast media are not left out as the ASUU strike has
been the subject of discussion and phone-in programmes on radio and television
stations.
Editorial writers and columnists are having a field day, pontificating on the face-off. The initial groundswell of support for ASUU is gradually giving way to a weariness-induced attitude of e don do (enough is enough) by a growing segment of the public. It is understandable. Those who have been largely parents, in absentia, are being compelled to be parents, in situ, for six continuous months and many are not finding it easy. It has occasioned frayed nerves at the family level.
Yet,
neither the Federal Government nor ASUU is yielding substantive ground.
Deadlock. Stalemate. Then, ASUU, apparently to bring issues to a head, decided
to declare a comprehensive, indefinite strike, apparently for issues to be
resolved, once and for all. It is a dare, a showdown—literally taunting the
Federal Government: bring ‘em on! Federal Government/ASUU are in a vice-grip,
as it were. What gives? Will it be a sledgehammer response from government or a
compromise?
Does
ASUU have a strong case and an appropriate strategy? Yes, ASUU has a strong
case but its strategy has come under attack. There is a general consensus that
ASUU’s agitation for better funding of universities is a laudable cause. What
has been largely contentious is the strategy. Retired Prof. Jide
Osuntokun, a distinguished academic and administrator, described a situation
where ASUU has continued to deploy the strike weapon, futilely, for decades as
“madness.” Prof. Funso Famuyiwa, a professor of medicine, in
an 11-item reaction to Osuntokun’s prognosis, pointed out that as of 2010, the
Federal Government owned 37 universities and many other tertiary institutions
but noted that (President Goodluck) “Jonathan went on to establish several more
as (the President, retired Major General Muhammadu) Buhari after he has
also done.”
“Isn’t
there some madness in all of this,” asked Prof. Famuyiwa. Of course, it is
madness to establish many more universities when you cannot properly fund
existing ones. And that is the crux of the matter—funding. So, it is ASUU
‘madness’ versus governments ‘madness’ because state governors, who also
frivolously establish new universities, are part of this ‘madness’. But
there is some rationality to ASUU’s’ madness’ of repetitive adoption of strike
action because it has never been a precipitate first option.
Over the
years, the Federal Government, starting from the Obasanjo military regime, has
avariciously gobbled many institutions, without the capacity to run them
effectively because, according to Prof Famuyiwa, “it wants to control
everything!” Yet, ministers of the Federal Government could still be
prancing around, in the public arena, in self-righteous indignation, trying to
demonise ASUU. Where is the sense of responsibility for the problem they, ab
initio, created? There is the laughable incitement attributed to the Minister
of Education, Adamu Adamu, that students should sue their lecturers for going
on strike! That is ‘alawada’ (comedian) talk.
Many,
like Prof. Osuntokun, have had sweeping condemnation of ASUU’s deployment
of strikes as a weapon of negotiation, implying it had been a failure. I think
that is specious, uncharitable and a spurious generalisation. First, it is not
the case that successive ASUU executives just wake up one day and precipitately
declare a strike. They first engage government in dialogue, sometimes
protracted dialogue.
It is when
dialogue is deadlocked, agreement reached but not signed or terms of agreement
not substantially implemented that strike becomes the last option. That has,
often, been the sequence. And, really, has successive Nigerian governments been
amenable to reason? To conclude that the strike option has been a failure is an
exercise in mischief. There have been gains. The tertiary education funding
agency, TETFUND, is a standout achievement from ASUU strikes as that
agency has been instrumental to the limited infrastructure development in
federal and state universities and academic manpower training through
scholarships for postgraduate studies and for research.
Still on
the contentious efficacy of the strike option, isn’t it the norm that
government officials often come into interaction/relationship/negotiation with
organisations and the people with bloated arrogance and condescension, as if
they are doing the people a favour? Strike or militancy, therefore, seems to be
the language to speak to government to get some understanding (apology to
President Buhari).
Why is ASUU’s
showdown with government, with its indefinite strike, justified? It is
justified on the basis of the tottering state of Nigeria’s education system, in
totality, from primary to tertiary level. It is a dilapidated house due for
reconstruction, sparing it outright demolition. This strike may be the
opportunity for such rebuilding. Now, let us look at a few indices of the
decadence in Nigeria’s education system.
Nigeria, the
giant of Africa, is conspicuously missing from the World Education
Forum’s list of the top 10 African countries with best education system in its
2022 report. That list has Seychelles as number one; South Africa, second;
Ghana 7th; Namibia 9th and war-torn Libya in 10th position! Nigeria is also not
on the list of the top 10 African countries with the highest literacy rate,
topped by Equatorial Guinea with 95.3%; South Africa, second with 94.3%
literacy rate; Libya, 5th at 91.00%; Zimbabwe, whose late president, Robert
Mugabe, Nigerian ill-informed commentators like to disparage, has 86.5%
literacy rate, placing it 8th in Africa. Nigeria’s literacy rate is put at 62%
but with 10.5 million out-of-school children, aged 5-14, the highest in Africa
and second highest in the world after India!
The cake is with university ranking that
justifies ASUU’s agitation. Nigeria is listed as having the highest number of
universities in Africa—262, followed by Tunisia, 204; Morocco, 153. Others in
the top 10 are Kenya, 129; South Africa, 123; Algeria, 104; Ethiopia 73; Egypt
70; Ghana 70 and Uganda 69.
However, while Nigeria has the highest number
of universities in Africa, in the Times Higher Education’s World University
Ranking 2022, it is only the University of Ibadan that is ranked among the top
10 universities in the continent and in the 10th position! South Africa,
which has less than half the number of Nigerian universities—123—has the top
three best universities in the continent (University of Cape Town, Stellenbosch
University and University of Witwatersrand). In fact, among the top
10, South Africa has five; the additional two being the 5th-placed University
of Kwazulu-Natal and Durban University of Technology at 9th. Ghana’s
University of Cape Coast is ranked 4th.
This graphically shows that for Nigeria,
university education is long in quantity but very short in quality. And this is
what the ASUU struggle is all about—restoring quality to university education
in Nigeria, particularly federal and state-owned universities.
*Dr Olawunmi is of the Department of Mass Communication, Adeleke University, Ede, Osun State. (olawunmibisi@yahoo.com; 0803 364 7571)
No comments:
Post a Comment