In response to the recent directive from the Minister of Education, Prof Tahir Mamman, regarding the age requirement for university admissions, the Concerned Parents and Educators (CPE) group took the initiative to organize a comprehensive webinar.
This virtual gathering brought together a diverse group of educators, school owners, parents, students, and other stakeholders to discuss the potential impact of the directive and the appropriate age for university entry.
Although the directive has since been rescinded, the CPE found it imperative to address the topic, aiming to enlighten stakeholders about admission age limits and to examine how schools often violate existing government policies.
Yinka Ogunde, CEO of Edumark Consult, coordinated the webinar, which featured esteemed educators who shared their insights on the controversial directive and the broader debate surrounding the appropriate age for university admission.
The session attracted over 300 participants, underscoring the importance of the issue.
During the webinar, Angela Ajala, a school owner from Abuja, expressed her concern over the government’s approach. “The fire brigade approach is typical of Nigerians,” she remarked, referring to the abrupt announcement. Ajala highlighted the directive’s intention to create a level playing field for students, ensuring they are mature enough to handle university pressures. However, she emphasized that “the broader implications of the decision” were overlooked.
Ajala criticized the lack of consultation with stakeholders, questioning, “Who were the stakeholders consulted to agree on the directive?”
She advocated for a phased implementation process, suggesting that the government convene all relevant parties to develop a strategic plan.
Ajala emphasized, “Implementing such a policy requires a gradual process. Commitment from all stakeholders is crucial to ensure successful implementation, which should begin with early childhood education and include pilot testing to assess its effectiveness.”
Adding to the discussion, Samira Jubril, President of the National Association of Proprietors of Private Schools (NAPPS), pointed out that the law on admission age had existed but was poorly implemented. “It was well packaged and developed,” she said, yet faced challenges in execution.
Jubril emphasized the importance of aligning a student’s age with their cognitive development, criticizing parents who rush their children’s education. “Parents push, stress, and rush their children,” she lamented.
Dr. Bukola Dosumu considered the directive as a chance for reflection among stakeholders about their contribution to education.
She expressed concern over the trend of primary schools accelerating students beyond their capacity and overemphasizing grades and scores.
She stated, “School owners need to engage in self-assessment. For example, the practice of using textbooks intended for higher grades is concerning.”
She further elaborated, “Many primary schools complete their curriculum by primary 5, pushing children beyond their natural learning capacity and placing undue emphasis on grades and scores.”
Alex Onyia viewed the directive as a distraction amid economic challenges, advocating for a review before implementation.
He suggested that universities introduce a compulsory pre-degree programme for students under 18, ensuring they reach the appropriate admission age.
He asserted, “Even if this is an existing law, it requires careful review before implementation, as there may be new elements to consider.” He suggested more strategic approaches, proposing, “The federal government could mandate all higher institutions to establish a compulsory pre-degree program. This would ensure that students graduating below the age of 18 are adequately prepared and reach the appropriate age for university admission.”
Canadian-based professor Yomi Fawehinmi advised Nigerians to dismiss the pronouncement, citing a lack of seriousness from the minister.
He reminded participants that university senates have the authority to set admission age requirements and criticized the directive for potentially infringing on students’ rights.
He remarked, “Given his position, one would expect a high level of preparedness. However, his approach seemed more like a game with Nigerians, lacking any constitutional references or evidence of seriousness.”
He further explained, “Under Nigerian law, only the university senate has the authority to set age requirements for admission. Additionally, Nigeria possesses a robust educational framework, with numerous laws and policies that govern age and duration at each educational level.”
Helen Essien criticized parents who push children into higher education prematurely, highlighting the challenges immature students face, such as handling sexual harassment and rental agreements.
“What do parents truly hope to achieve by pushing their children to rush through education? I recognize the risks of sending an emotionally immature child to university,” Essien remarked.
“Moreover, they encounter difficulties with lease agreements, as landlords are often unwilling to rent to them.”
Yemisi Akindele, a UK-based educator, argued that exceptionally intelligent students should not be held back, advocating for government-facilitated apprenticeship programmes and urging parents to adhere to government guidelines.
“A programme is typically established in developed countries, such as the United Kingdom, to safeguard gifted students under the age of 18,” the UK-based educator noted.
Public speaker Johnson Abbaly raised concerns about unsupervised youth potentially turning to crime if not engaged in structured activities. He criticized schools for focusing on grades rather than preparing students for future careers, noting that the policy fails to address these issues.
“It is a commendable policy suggestion for students to take examinations at 18, but if those younger than that are left unsupervised, they will be faced with numerous distractions on the streets,” he said.
Abbaly continued, “Not all parents can afford gap programs to keep their children engaged, and we are witnessing a rise in cult activities.”
“Moreover, schools are not adequately preparing students, whether they graduate at 16 or 18, to effectively utilize community resources and contribute to local economic growth.”
He added, “Many schools prioritize grades and scores for marketing purposes rather than preparing students for the future workforce. Consequently, this policy does not address the underlying issues.”
From the students’ perspective, Eworitse Wilbert and Bryan Ebbi expressed their views.
Eworitse Wilbert stressed that “age and intellect aren’t connected,” advocating for flexibility in the policy.
Bryan Ebbi pointed out the financial burden gap programs place on families, warning that many youth might end up on the streets due to the policy.
Overall, the webinar highlighted diverse perspectives on the age requirement issue, emphasizing the need for careful consideration and collaboration among stakeholders to formulate a balanced approach that supports the educational and developmental needs of Nigerian students.
