QUALITY ASSURANCE AND SUSTAINABILITY

OF STANDARDS IN SOUTH-EAST

UNIVERSITIES IN NIGERIA
 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background to the study

The purpose of establishing the school as an institution is to ensure that

effective learning and teaching takes place. Learning plays a pivotal role in the

all-round development of an individual and the school is purposefully organized

to facilitate effective teaching and learning process by eliminating aversive

stimuli in the environment and increasing satisfying stimuli (Ezewu, cited in

Eriega, 2013). Kemjika (2015) posits that the school is an organized or formal

institution established for the purpose of transmitting formal education to

society; the school comes into existence when two basic components (the

learner and the teacher) come together for the purpose of giving and receiving

formal instruction. The school is basically established to transmit cherished

values, skills and attitude through teaching and learning which will culminate in

the total development of the learner and by extension the society. Consequently,

certain procedures are put in place to ensure the achievement of this stupendous

feat and to ensure that the processes leading to this achievement are not

compromised, else there will be fluctuations in the processes that will ensure

that the learner will be productive in the society, hence ‘quality assurance’.

Kpolovie (2013) described quality assurance as “a process centred approach

for certifying that an organization is providing the best possible products or

services; it focuses on enhancing and maintaining the processes that are used to

create the end result, rather than focusing on the result itself”. Quality assurance

is a term commonly used to describe the procedures that combine to assure the

client that the product will be consistently produced to the required condition,

such as quality management, quality policy and quality control (Obadara & Alaka,

2013). Uchendu, Akuegwe & Nwi-ne (2006) posited that quality is the magnitude

of excellence of a product or service, but quality assurance pertains to the

mechanism employed in ensuring that the quality of the product or service meets

the excellence or standard always. This means that a product must conform to

certain requirements or standards. More so, Ekong (cited in Okoyeocha, 2014)

opined that quality is a measure or degree of good or bad something is which is

based on the four principles for achieving sustainable development such as

learning to know, learning to do, learning to live together with other, and learning

to be . He further stated that quality builds knowledge, skills, perspectives,

attitudes and values. Quality assurance is a retroactive step used to ascertain the

quality of a product or system after processing during which wastages must have

occurred and what is left is to reject or correct the anomaly. The quality of every

human activity can always be evaluated by the extent it is able to meet targets

such as functionality, its productivity and its ability to solve problems. Quality

education is an essential factor that cannot be glossed over in pursuit of

technological, political and economic development in Nigeria. The Nigerian

Universities Commission (NUC) is saddled with the responsibility of achieving

quality in university education through its accreditation of academic programmes

and course content and admission amongst others. When quality education is

delivered high enough to meet set standards, the products of education should be

able to perform well in the world of work and in real life situations. World

Declaration on Education (cited in Asiyai, 2013) sees quality as a multi-

dimensional concept that embraces all activities institutions of higher learning

such as teaching, research, community-service, scholarship, students, staffing,

educational facilities, infrastructure and academic environment. Delivery of high

quality education is fundamental ingredient for effective productivity in the

educational enterprise; quality education is a mechanism and process of bringing

about national development.

Anugwom (2009), asserted that education acquired is only relevant to the extent it

makes profitable impact in the life of the in the individual and society. The quality

of tertiary education reflects in the performance or competence of its products;

those that have acquired education through it such as its graduates. To this end,

the school as an institution of learning, particularly higher institutions have been

the concern of the public as it is assumed to be an agent of influence and change

in the life of the students and society through its structure. Femsiek and Smith (as

cited in Voegeli, 2008) assert that “almost a third of a youth’s life is spent in

school; apart from the family the school is the most important influence to

youth in forming friendships, and in the attainment of successes or failures. The

period of schooling is a time of growth and development, a time for change, a

time to struggle with dependence and independence, and a time to make

mistakes and grow from them”. Due to the invaluable importance of the school

in our present society, it has been the target of criticism, scrutiny and social

research. Parents, teachers, educational administrators and researchers debate on

what the school should teach, how the school should be organized and how the

school might best impact students. That is, the school should offer a more

diverse range of classes designed to prepare young people for adulthood,

socially, emotionally and intellectually, and to enable them develop themselves

in the future and contribute to the development of the society where they find

themselves (Steinberg, 2011; Boyles and Contadino, 2010).

Education occupies a strategic position in the development of the manpower of

any nation; it is generally recognized as the bedrock of sustainable development

in every area of human enterprise. Education develops the skills, attitudes and

values relevant for the transformation of society (Jubril, cited in Mbiam, 2014).

The Communiqué for the Gender Budgeting Initiative (cited in Adebayo,

Oyenike & Adesuji (....) pointed out the importance of access to quality

education as both a basic need and strategic need. As a basic need, it is

necessary to the fulfilment of the individual person. While as a strategic need, it

is that which will yield access to other opportunities such as health, employment

and political awareness. It also viewed access to quality education by all

(irrespective of class or gender) as a critical element of development as

education helps to nurture democracy and promote peace. Hence, education

should be regarded as the bedrock of sustainable development in any nation and

Nigeria is not an exception. Developed nations and many developing nations

optimally desire quality education as it the pedestal on which every nation

moves from one level of development to another, consequently inestimable

value should be placed on how high quality education can be sustained.

Okpanachi & Opara (2014) asserted that the indispensable role of the school,

particularly the university, in the transmission of knowledge through the core

activities of teaching, learning, research and community outreach, has been

acclaimed to have propelled the ascendancy of developed nations and capable

of doing same for developing nations. This means that the acquisition of

education, especially university education is of immeasurable value to man and

the society. It is saddening that although many Nigerians are of the perception

that only university education or degree guarantees a more preferred future, the

processes that could prepare the pathway for that future is quickening with each

passing day, with proliferation of universities without proportionate resources to

fulfil this need. Therefore, the procedures put in place to ensure that the

products of universities meet required standard should be continuously

evaluated for sustainability purposes.

Sustainability in this context entails maintaining the process that brings about

quality assurance in the educational system, particularly in higher education. It

is also described as development or procedure that meets the needs of the

present educational system without compromising the ability of future

generations to meet their own educational needs (source). Universities must

develop processes that would enable them to meet the present manpower needs

of the country maintain such processes in a way that would allow future

manpower needs to be met. It is likened to testing the end product by testing a

sample to see that the desire quality is gotten and maintaining the process that

led to that quality. Kpolovie (2013) observed that concerns in quality assurance

process have become increasingly common in Europe, the United Kingdom and

Australia, and are gaining steady grounds in other parts of the Western world.

He further stated that “this development is anchored on the general realisation

that a well-educated workforce is essential for increased productivity and for

maintaining a competitive edge in a global economy; which has given increase

in public funding for higher education to guarantee greater accessibility”.

Sustainability of standards that guarantee quality will definitely bring about the

materialisation of the vision of the national policy on education. The National

Policy on Education highlights the goals of tertiary education to include:

 Acquire both physical and intellectual skills which would enable

individuals to be self-reliant and useful members of society.

  Develop the intellectual capacity of individuals to understand and

appreciate their local and external environment.

 To contribute to manpower development through high level relevant

manpower training.

 Develop and inculcate values for the survival of the individual and

society

 Promote and encourage scholarship and community service

 Promotion of national and international understanding/interaction

 Forging and cementing of national (source: National Policy on

Education, 2004).

When quality education is delivered in line with set standards, the product of

education should be able to perform well in the world of work in real life

situations. When quality is low performance will not guarantee the desired

results. Ibara (2015) affirms that Nigerian universities pursue the above goals

through teaching, staff development programmes, community service and

research. However, the universities have not been able to meet this stupendous

feat as it is evidenced in shortage of staff, inadequate funding, poor learning

environment, the fall in the moral standards of graduates, inefficiency in labour

market and poor scholastic performance (Babalola, 2011). From the foregoing,

it can be perceived that the quality of university education in Nigeria is falling

below set standards. Therefore, it is expedient to investigate the extent of

quality assurance and sustainability of standards in the South-East universities

in Nigeria.

1.2 Statement of the problem

Quality assurance has become a subject of concern in the Nigerian educational

system, especially in the tertiary institutions. During the glory days of the

inception of universities in Nigeria, like university college Ibadan, 1948 tertiary

education was held in high esteem due to the ability of students to perform

creditably in scholastic tasks, staff man power in the world of work and a

conducive learning environment. The graduates of those days had high moral

standards and contributed to the development of society through efficiency in

the labour market, community service and exuding values that society held in

high esteem. Staff of university were adequate with a good knowledge of the

subject matter, they took their work seriously and were eager to motivate

students towards achieving excellence. That is, intrinsic motivation was

paramount above any other incentives; these teachers believed that teaching is a

God-ordained vocation. More so, the physical environment was intellectually

stimulating as it made students to have the desire to be in school always. It

should be noted that students spend a better part of their lives in the school
which serves as a preparatory ground for independence, and assumption of

responsibilities in future endeavours. Today, the case is difference as many

school environments are littered with inadequate class rooms, dilapidated

buildings, absence of modern instructional materials, shortage of teachers and

government insensitivity to the plight of the educational system in its entirety.

This is evidenced in the intermittent change of policies related to

duration/course content of academic programmes (especially at the graduate

level) by NUC and poor remuneration/funding of these institutions. No doubt

this as occasioned the falling standards in our educational system as many now

believe that university education guarantees a better future and the crave as lead

to different form of examination malpractice and ineptitude of teachers and non-

academic staffs.

Therefore, it is expedient that mechanism that will bring about quality in

university education manifested in the performance of graduate, and quality of

teachers course content, and infrastructure. This will contribute greatly to the

realisation of goals of the national policy of education which as its main aim of

education as been able to contribute to the growth of the individual and the

society. The inability to put this process in place will only lead to the perpetuity

of brain drain, capital flight and under development. Gradually the society will

take a retrograde step into anarchy, chaos and over dependence in foreign man

power and technology. It is also necessary for institution for higher learning
particularly universities to continually ensure that graduating students meet sex

standards that could enable them to serve as asset to society development. Thus,

Nigeria’s development will be accelerated. Therefore, the problem of this study

is to investigate in extent of quality assurance and sustainability of standard in

the south east universities of Nigeria.

1.3 Aim and Objectives of the Study

The aim of this study is to determine the extent of quality assurance and

sustainability of standards on the South-East universities in Nigeria .

Specifically, the study seeks to find out the following:

1. To assess the extent to which physical facilities in the South-East

universities are in conformity with NUC prescribed standards.

2. To ascertain the extent to which academic matters in the South-East

universities are in conformity with NUC prescribed standards.

3. To ascertain the extent to which staffing system in the South-East

universities are in conformity with NUC prescribed standards.

4. To outline the challenges facing quality and standards in the South-East

universities.

5. To ascertain the management strategies to achieve a sustainable quality

education in the South-East universities.

1.4 Research Questions

The following research questions will guide the study:

1. To what extent are physical facilities in the South-East universities in

conformity with NUC prescribed standards?

2. To what extent are academic matters in the South-East universities in

conformity with NUC prescribed standards?

3. To what extent is staffing system in the South-East universities in

conformity with NUC prescribed standards?

4. What are the challenges facing quality and standards in the South-East

universities?

5. What are the management strategies to achieve sustainable quality

education in the South-East universities?

1.5 Hypotheses

The following null hypotheses are formulated for this study and will be tested at

0.05 significant level:

1. There is no significant difference in the extent to which physical facilities

are in conformity with NUC prescribed standards among universities in

the South-East.
 2. The extent to which academic matters in South-East universities are in

conformity with NUC prescribed standards do not significantly differ

between the students and academic staff.

3. There is no significant difference between the responses of undergraduate

and postgraduate students in terms of the extent to which academic

matters in the South-East universities are in conformity with NUC

prescribed standards.

4. The extent to which staffing system is in conformity with NUC

prescribed standards does not differ significantly among universities

South-East.

5. The challenges facing quality and standards do not differ significantly

among universities in South-East.

6. The challenges facing quality and standards do not differ significantly

between undergraduate and postgraduate students in South-East

universities.

1.6 Significance of the Study

The purpose of every good research is to discover knowledge and

contribute to the advancement of society. As such this study will find out the

extent of quality assurance and sustainability of standards in the universities in

the South-East universities in Nigeria and bring these findings to the knowledge

of the public. Specifically, the findings of this study would enable the
management of universities to know their inadequacies and excesses, and how

they contribute to dwindling of quality in university education. In addition, the

study could provide useful information to the Nigerian Universities

Commission (NUC) which will serve as a guide for ensuring high quality in

universities in terms of staffing, course content, and physical facilities.

In addition, the study would be beneficial to teachers and non-academic

staff of universities as it will enable them to know how their actions as a group

or as an individual endangers or engenders the achievement of high quality in

university education and as such make adjustments where necessary. It would

also enable students, parents to know the factors that contribute to quality

university education and the challenges faced by universities in achieving this

stupendous feat. Furthermore, this study will serve as a reference point for

students and researchers who would have something to do with quality

assurance in education. Finally, the findings of the study would provide useful

information to the government and educational administrative bodies on the

nitty-gritty of quality education, the challenges concomitant with the pursuit of

this goal and the way forward. It would enable them formulate laws that will

curb the unnecessary issues that have led the difficulties faced by the Nigerian

educational system.

1.7 Scope of the Study

This study concerns the investigation of the extent of quality assurance and

sustainability of standards in the South-East universities in Nigeria. It will

examine variables such as staffing, academic matters and physical facilities.

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter concerns the review of related literature and it will be carried out

under the following sub-headings:

2.10 Conceptual Framework

2.20 Theoretical Framework

2.30. Empirical Review

2.40. Summary of Literature Review

2.0 Conceptual Review
2.1 Concept of Quality
Quality refers to the extent to which a product, service or phenomenon

conforms to an established standard, and which makes it to be relatively

superior to others; the standard of a phenomenon when compared to other things

like it in terms of good, poor, top quality or high standard (Obadara & Alaka,

2013). The British Standards Institute cited in Obiekezie, Ejemot-Nwadiaro and

Timothy (2016) defined quality as “the totality of features and characteristics of

a product or service that bears on its ability to satisfy needs.” That is the

component parts of a product or service that enables it to satisfy the need(s) for

which it was produced in the first place.

Furthermore, quality is the state of a product or service that differentiates it and

makes it users to seek for it (Olatunde, 2007). This implies that such product has

the capacity to meet the needs of its users to bring about satisfaction of purpose.

However, DuBring as cited in Asiyai (2013) posited that product that a good or

service that is deemed to be of good quality must conform to characteristics

such as expectation, excellence, value and avoidance of loss. These features

make such a product or service top among its equals and guarantees loyalty

from its customers. In relation to educational institutions, quality refers to a

measure of how good or bad the products of higher institutions (particularly

university products in Nigeria) are in terms of academic performance and

meeting globally established standards. That is the ability of universities to

conform to established standards and appropriateness, and the availability of

imputes to meet the needs of the society for which it was established (Alaka &

Obadara, 2013).

2.2 Concept of Quality Assurance

Quality assurance has been variously defined making it a multidimensional

process of arriving at established standards that culminate in fitness of purpose.

Be that as it may, Kpolovie (2013) described quality assurance as “a process

centred approach for certifying that an organization is providing the best

possible products or services; it focuses on enhancing and maintaining the

processes that are used to create the end result, rather than focusing on the result

itself”. It is the process of maintaining standards in products and services by

testing the sample in order to ascertain that it meets required standards (Ramson-

Yusuf cited in Asiyai, 2013). However, quality assurance in education is a

mechanism for ensuring that education received by individuals is for efficiency,

for use by the society and for developing inner self (Audu, 2005). Okebukola

(2010) opined that quality assurance is an umbrella term that embraces a spectrum

of activities that are intended to improve the quality of inputs, process and outputs

of the higher education system. Quality assurance in the university system implies

the ability of the institutions to meet the expectations of the users of manpower in

respect to the quality of skills acquired by their outputs. Kisailowska (2002) noted

that quality assurance principles are a certain form of naming and ordering the
actions that are necessary for assuring the quality, for instance of teaching, it is

internally measured and evaluated at a given university, and also externally,

during an accreditation process. As a result of this, quality assurance principles

are to be used as indicators to ensure compliance.

It is noteworthy that quality assurance principles regulate both the external and

internal activities of an educational institution. Assuring quality entails doing the

following with zeal and determination to get intended results:

• pointing to and naming the elements that are decisive to the evaluation of

an educational process or other assessable elements;

• defining the procedures for acting, appointing person and working out the

documents necessary for the correct execution of tasks relating to a given entity;

• setting quality indicators

• analysing quality on a regular basis with the use of appropriate tools.

This indicates that university education should enable the graduates of the system

contribute to the development of society through efficiency in any field of

endeavour they find themselves. Efficiency in this respect entails meeting set

goals; attainment in knowledge and learning skills, development of creativity and

skills, development of creativity and critical thinking, and achieving standards of

behaviour which includes participation in family and community life (Hawes cited

in Okoyeocha, 2014). The educational system in Nigerian has not been able to

achieve the above goal. In fact, the present educational system has been accused
of its ability to achieve the standard behaviour that would enable the family and

community develop beyond what they are at the moment (Ezeani, 2013).

Adebayo, Oyenika & Adesoji (2009) observed that there is a general feeling that

the quality of education imparted with curricula that are limited to parochial

concerns may no longer be adequate in the face of the prevailing global

situation. The curricula they contend have outlived their usefulness and thus

have little relevance to the needs, aspirations and values of today’s Nigeria and

her education system. Hence, quality factors for education are indispensable, as

excellence in education is required for the development of the human resource

base needed to catapult Nigeria into an enviable position in the comity of

nations.

Anugwom (2009) asserted that education acquired is only relevant to the extent it

makes profitable impact in the life of the in the individual and society. The quality

of tertiary education reflects in the performance or competence of its products;

those that have acquired education through it such as its graduates. To this end,

the school as an institution of learning, particularly higher institutions have been

the concern of the public as it is assumed to be an agent of influence and change

in the life of the students and society through its structure. Femsiek and Smith as

cited in Voegeli (2008) asserted that “almost a third of a youth’s life is spent in

school; apart from the family the school is the most important influence to

youth in forming friendships, and in the attainment of successes or failures. The

period of schooling is a time of growth and development, a time for change, a

time to struggle with dependence and independence, and a time to make

mistakes and grow from them”. Due to the invaluable importance of the school

in our present society, it has been the target of criticism, scrutiny and social

research. Parents, teachers, educational administrators and researchers debate on

what the school should teach, how the school should be organized and how the

school might best impact students. That is, the school should offer a more

diverse range of classes designed to prepare young people for adulthood,

socially, emotionally and intellectually, and to enable them develop themselves

in the future and contribute to the development of the society where they find

themselves (Steinberg, 2011; Boyles & Contadino, 2010). In other for the above

suggestions to become visible and aid in the rapid development of society the

Nigerian Universities Commission was set up.

2.3 The National Universities Commission and quality assurance

The National Universities Commission started as an advisory agency in the

Cabinet Office in 1962. However, in 1974, it was created a body corporate with

statutory functions and powers by virtue of the National Universities

Commission Act No. 1 of 1974. The extant enabling Act is now in Cap. N81

Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004. Under this Act, the Commission is

charged, among others, with the responsibility of:

 1. Advising the President and governors of states, through the minister, on

the creation of new universities and other degree-granting institutions in

Nigeria.

2. Recommendations for the establishment of new academic units in

existing universities or the approval or disapproval of proposals to

establish such academic units.

3. Making such other investigations relating to higher education as the

commission may consider necessary in the national interest.

4. Making such other recommendations to the Federal and State

Governments, relating to universities and other degree-awarding

institutions as the commission may consider to be in the national interest

and;

5. Carrying out such other activities as are conducive to the discharge of its

functions under the Act.

In addition to the above, the power to lay down minimum standards for all

universities and other institutions of higher learning in the federation and the

accreditation of their degrees and other academic awards is vested in the

National Universities Commission by virtue of section 10(1) of the Education

(National Minimum Standards and Establishment of Institutions) Act, Cap. E3,

Laws of the Federation, 2004 (formerly Section 10 of Act No. 16

of 1985). This Act vested in the NUC very wide and enormous powers with

respect to the supervision and regulation of university education in Nigeria.

Under Section 15, the NUC (which is the “appropriate authority” under Section

25 of the Act) is empowered to appoint inspectors to visit universities and report

on the sufficiency or otherwise of the instruction given and the examinations as

a result of which approved qualifications are attained and appropriate

certificates are awarded and any other matter relating to the institutions or

examinations as the NUC may direct. By Section 16, the NUC may, following

adverse report from the inspectors to the effect that the institution has infringed

the provisions of the Act or any subsidiary legislation, after due process,

withdraw recognition for any academic or other awards thereafter issued by the

institution.

Section 22 empowers the NUC, after due process, to close down any institution

established contrary to the provisions of Section 19, 20 or 21 of the Act. Section

24 also empowers the NUC to issue guidelines to universities on a number of

issues relating to university education. These provisions are all-embracing and

encompassing.

Pursuant to these powers, the NUC employed the services of various experts

including members of the Professional Regulatory Bodies to prepare the

Minimum Academic Standard (MAS) for the disciplines taught in Nigerian

universities in 1989. This provided the basis for accreditation of all degree

programmes including professional disciplines in the universities.

In 2004, the NUC reviewed the Minimum Academic Standard (MAS) also

using distinguished experts including members of the Professional Regulatory

Bodies and this exercise culminated in the evolution of Benchmarks Minimum

Academic Standard (BMAS) for the various disciplines in the Nigerian

University System and these documents are being used to conduct subsequent

accreditation exercises in the universities to date (Ehi-Oshio, 2013).

Adequacy of various inputs in the university system such as quality and quantity,

exercises tremendous influence in the quality assurance in the university system.

The justification for a qualitative university education need not be over

emphasized as universities contribute to the advancement of knowledge.

Consequently, they are expected to provide needed human capital with enhanced

skills that can stimulate technological development and high productivity in the

economy (Ibara, 2015). Society expects that higher education should be able to

bring about the needed development and productivity that she yearns for. Higher

education has been recognised as a fundamental instrument for the construction of

a knowledge economy and the development of human capital all over the world.

Peretomode (2007) asserted that higher education is the facilitator, the bedrock,

the power house and the driving force for the strong socio-economic, political,

cultural, healthier development of a nation as higher education institutions are key

mechanisms increasingly recognised as wealth and human capital producing

industries. Higher education is globally recognised as a centre of knowledge that

can be translated into solutions to human challenges. That is, the knowledge

gotten from the rigorous activity of research which is intended to address aching

issues in the society and add value to the life of humans. Higher education is
fundamental to mall developing countries if they are to prosper in a world

economy where knowledge is the essential tool for initiating economic growth and

advancement (World Bank cited in Asiyai, 2013). The essence of linking quality

assurance to education is to facilitate educational transformation and enhance

human productivity.

Despite the immense benefits of tertiary education to nation building enshrined in

the National Policy on Education, the achievement these trans-generational goals

have remained a herculean task. Any society that desires quality manpower for

rapid development and transformation must see quality education as a must do

affair. This is because quality education engenders dignity of labour, quality

leadership and committed citizenship, industrial harmony, polical stability,

religious tolerance, self-reliance and security. Olaleye (cited in Akubuilo &

Okorie, 2013) observed that higher education in Nigeria like other systems of

education especially in developing countries is going through a series of

challenges. The potential of higher education systems in developing countries

to fulfil its responsibility is frequently thwarted by long-standing problems.

These multi-faceted problems have inhibited goal attainment due to draw backs

in development and have created fear and doubt about the quality of tertiary

education in Nigeria (Saint, Strassner & Harnett ,2003).

Quality education is that education that is relevant and adaptable to the changing

needs of society; such needs in health, growth and physical survival in a complex
and globalised world. This means a pattern of education that is worthwhile and

empowers its recipients with relevant knowledge, attitude, skills and values that

will enable him to make informed decision and become self-reliant. In view of the

above, quality in higher education refers to the worth of the inputs into

educational system such as lecturers, instructional materials, and evaluation

procedures which translate to the output. The output can be inferred from

disciplined behaviour, hard work, improved cultural heritage and mutual respect

with and outside the school community. It is manifested in the ability of the

graduates to perform according to expected standards and compete favourably in

with their counterparts all over the world; it is the education that produces a

complete person. Complete in the sense that the person is intellectually, morally,

physically, emotionally and socially developed. Thus education without quality

can even be dangerous than no education; education without quality is has no

value (Asiyai, 2013 and Akinpelu, 2000).

2.4 Features of Quality Assurance in Higher Education System

1. Quality of Human Capital: the quality of education to a large extent depends

on the quality of teachers. There must be enough teachers who will bring about

the desired pedagogical know-how that would create a template for students to

utilise what is taught outside the classroom. Teachers must be adequate to match

the teaming population of students, adequately educated, professionally prepared

and motivated. Obanya (2002). Oliver (2001), observed that most universities

today are grappling with issues associated with up skilling their staff to enable

them to make efficient use of new technologies in their teaching. In today’s

technology driven world, high quality teachers with knowledge of information

and communication technology must be maintained in order to produce quality

graduates.

2. Quality of Content: the quality of curriculum and academic programs in the

nation’s tertiary education system should be made to meet the changing needs

of the society that consume its products. Instructional materials must be user

friendly and qualitatively adequate. Duchastel (1997) pointed out that there are

changes that are now flowing through education systems worldwide in

response to a growing awareness and understanding of how learning occurs.

These changes include:

- Move away from specified content to learn to specified learning

outcomes.

- An acceptance of diversity in outcomes among learners rather than the

goal of common results.

- A focus on the process of learning as well as the product.

- Evaluation of outcomes in practical contexts and in terms of tasks as

distinct from discrete knowledge.

- An acceptance of the role of social cognition in learning.

3. Quality of Process: the quality of learning/teaching process is vital to the

overall quality of education. Ali & Akubue (cited in Oladipo, 2009), found that

teachers dominate in lessons and pose few open-ended questions. Group work

which encourages discussion is rarely encountered, and only 10% of teachers used

continuous assessment. More so, Babatunde & Adefabi (2005) asserted that the

pattern of education received by most Nigerians is not of high quality as evident in

its failure to produce desired results. The poor quality delivery is no doubt

responsible for the abysmal poor performance in public examination by many

students, the alarming incidents of exam malpractice and the continuous fall of

prosocial behaviour.

Oliver (2001) posits that effective tertiary teaching and learning setting should

support and encourage the following:

 High levels of students’ activity and encouragement.

 Forms of collaboration and cooperation among learners.

 Situations where learners are exposed to a variety of different

perspectives.

 Assessment that forms integral part of the learning process and is

sensitive to the intended uses of the learning outside the classroom.

4. Quality of Output: the output of an educational system is the graduates of

that system. Quality of output has two dimensions; internal and external. The

internal consists of the test scores, pass rates and general performance of
students before graduation. The external manifestation of output quality is found

in their performances and achievements

on the job outside the school system. As pointed out by Mosha as cited in

Oladipo (2009), quality of education is measured by the extent to which the

training received from an institution enables the recipient to think clearly,

independently and analytically to solve relevant societal problems in any given

environment. Quality education is the function of quality input and quality process

which will be reflected in the output.

To ensure quality of output, the following measures are necessary:

i. Admission into tertiary institution should be based on merit and not on

quota.

ii. Course content should meet labour market demands.

iii. Minimum academic standard should be met before progression.

iv. Institutions should invest in information and communication

technology as a means of providing learning resources to teachers and

students using web based technologies. Oliver (2000) identified four

categories of learning resources and strategies for web-based learning

environment.

2.5 Challenges of Quality Assurance and Sustainability of Standards

The following are challenges of quality assurance and sustainability of

standards facing universities, They include:

1. Inadequate teaching staff /poor quality of teaching staff

A big challenge to the attainment of quality higher education in Nigeria is the

lack of academic staff. According to Coombs (1970), teachers are the hub of

any educational system. Teachers determine the quality of education because

they transmit educational policies into practice and action. As rightly pointed

out by Ukeje, (1996) without adequate number of inspiring, well-informed

teachers, fully prepared to meet their responsibilities in our schools, we cannot

have good education and without good education, we cannot hope for long to

meet successfully, the challenges of a changing world. Ajayi (2007) seems to

concur with the above when he noted that good teachers are needed for good

education which in turn is indispensable for social change, social transformation

and national development. The importance of teachers cannot be over

emphasized. Despite the importance of teachers in the attainment of good

education, institutions of higher learning in Nigeria are short of lecturers to

adequately handle teaching and learning activities. The institutions because of

inadequate funding are not able to employ additional lecturers. The few

available lecturers are seriously overworked. Even in some institutions of higher

learning in the country, because of

shortage of lecturers their programmes are not accredited by the accreditation

agencies. Attainment of good quality in higher education requires teaching staff

of adequate quantity and quality. Bamiro, (2012) attributed the problem of

deintellectualization of the academia to low quality of staff of some institutions

of higher learning in Nigeria. Where there is inadequate teaching staff and poor
quality of lecturers, the attainment of good quality in higher education will be

difficult.

2. Lack of Resources

Quality higher education is dependent on the quality and quantity of human and

material resources put in place in institutions of higher learning. The lack of

infrastructures such as science laboratories, workshops, students’ hostels,

libraries and electricity will affect the quality of education. For good quality

delivery, these facilities must meet the minimum standard specified by the

National Universities Commission (NUC), the National Board for Technical

Education (NBTE) and National Council for Colleges of Education (NCCE).

For quality teaching and learning, the class size must be small for effective

students-teacher interaction.

Unfortunately, most institutions of higher learning in Nigeria, the lecture halls

are

overcrowded with majority of the students standing at the corridors during

lectures. Besides, the libraries in most institutions of higher learning in the

country are stocked with obsolete text books, with current journals and text

books lacking. In the opinion of Kamm (1980;34), the library is at the heart of

the academic effort in a college or university. For an institution to be strong

academically, it must have a formidable library put in place. This explains why

the top universities of the world (Harward, Cambridge, Tokyo and university of

California) are academically of high strength and quality. The acute shortage of
educational facilities in institutions of higher learning in Nigeria has led to

decline in the quality of higher education in the country. For example, in most

universities and colleges, the science laboratory and vocational and technical

education workshops are empty, lacking the equipment needed for effective

teaching and learning. It is not uncommon to see a student graduating from

chemistry department without handling volumetric analysis apparatus. The

undesirable conditions of institutions of higher learning in Nigeria have been

worrisome to many scholars (Asiyai, 2005 & Odetunde, 2004). Students of

institutions of higher learning in Nigeria are learning in dilapidated buildings

which are poorly ventilated, illuminated, furnished and environmentally

depressing and disabling situations. Even many lecturers share small offices.

Worried about the poor quality of graduates of higher education institutions in

Nigeria, the national universities commission carried out a need assessment

survey which was reported by Okebukola, (2005) and highlighted the following:

 Only about 30% of Nigerian students’ population has adequate access to

classrooms, workshop, lecture halls, laboratories and libraries.

 Deficient libraries in terms of currency and number of books, journals,

and electronic support facilities.

 Inadequate academic calendar resulting from staff unions’ industrial

action premised on low salary, wages/welfare and students strikes often

time related to inadequate facilities.

  Lack of practical experience, often times resulting from deficient

facilities.

These factors above are all threats to quality attainment in higher education in

Nigeria.

3. Inadequate funding

Inadequate funding is the most critical challenge that has threatened the

attainment of good quality higher education in Nigeria. The problem of

inadequate funding of education has been a bane to educational development in

the country. Onokerrhoraye (1995) maintained that a major constraint to

attaining academic excellence in Nigerian universities is financial constraints

which made many academics and non-academics to be working under difficult

circumstances. Many institutions of higher learning in Nigeria were unable to

build lecture halls, students’ hostels, equip laboratories and workshops and

payment of staff salaries, research grants, allowances and medical bills (Ivara

and Mbanefo cited in Asiyai 2005). Even the FGN/ASUU Re-negotiation

Committee (2009) realized as widely acknowledged that the key to the survival

of Nigeria in the 21st century lies in the country’s ability to produce applied and

theoretical knowledge in science, technology and humanities and hence the

Renegotiation Committee arrived at a consensus on the need for a rational and

scientific procedure for determining the funding requirements to begin the

revitalizing theNigerian university system. Despites all efforts made the

Nigerian government have not showed enough commitment towards adequate

funding of higher education.

4. Frequent Labour Disputes and Closures of Universities

A big challenge to quality higher education in Nigeria is the incessant staff

union disputes and subsequent closures of the institutions. Closure of the

institutions affects staff productivity and the realization of educational aim and

objectives. Asiyai (2005) provided a catalogue of strikes by the Academic Staff

Union of Universities (ASUU) and the Senior Staff Association of Nigerian

Universities (SSANU) within fourteen years. She revealed that they were too

many strikes, some of which lasted up to six months. Asiyai (2006) identified

the variables inducing the frequent trade union disputes as poor conditions of

service of staff, non-implementation of ASUU/FGN or SSANU/FGN

agreements, lack of autonomy and academic freedom and poor funding. The

universities in Nigeria are presently closed down since July 2 2013 as a result of

failure of the federal government to implement the agreement reached with the

academic staff union of universities since 2009, despite all assurances and

memorandum of understanding between the two parties. The disruption of

academic programmes of institutions of higher learning affects students learning

outcomes, since lecturers find it difficult to complete the course work. The

frequent disputes and strike galore by university staff and students leave

students with little or no time to complete both their theoretical and practical

work. In most cases a semester’s course work is sandwiched to few weeks

during which lectures are rushed to accommodate the time lost to strike. This

type of academic rush is a big threat to attainment of quality in higher education

in Nigeria. Adeboye, (2003) in his study noted that the higher the level of crisis,

disruptions and hostility, the lower the level of productivity, standard and

quality of the products of the system.

5. Lack of Information Communication Technology Facilities

Another challenge to quality attainment in higher education in Nigeria is lack of

information communication technology facilities in institutions of higher

learning. As part of her education reform effort Nigerian government adopted

information communication technologies in all levels of education since

information communication technology integration in educational practices is

meant to improve teaching and learning, enhance higher education research,

enhance collaboration among peers and improve quality of education.

Unfortunately, most institutions of higher learning in the country, there is acute

short of computers, multi-media projectors, electronic white boards, and

automation of lecture halls and lecturers offices. Even majority of the

institutions are not linked with functional internet connectivity. According to

Resnick, (1998) these new digital technologies make possible a learning

revolution in education. As rightly noted by Onuma, (2007) information and

communication technologies could be used to prepare lesson plan, collect data

and analyze students’ achievement. Curriculum content could be enriched

through search from the internet by teachers. Through such internet search,
information and relevant school practices which are unknown to teachers and

students and which cannot be found in textbooks, can easily be downloaded for

use.

Information and communication technology in education has been continuously

linked to higher efficiency, higher productivity and higher educational

outcomes,

including quality of cognitive, creative, and innovative thinking (Olatoye,

2011).

Despite the role of information communication technologies in enhancing

teaching and learning, researches abound in support of lack of information

communication technology tools in institutions of higher learning in the country

(Akomolafe, 2008; Onwumere, 2008; Sulaiman, 2008; Asiyai, 2010).

6. Lack of Vibrant Staff Development Programmes

Most institutions of higher learning in Nigeria lack staff development

programme for training and re-training of staff. Vibrant staff development

programme on a

continuous basis will help academics and non-academics to clarify and modify

their behaviour, attitude, value, skills and competencies. In this way, they grow

and develop in their knowledge and thus become more effective and efficient in

the performance of tasks. Staff development is paramount because knowledge

of today is only sufficient for today. In this era of knowledge explosion and

emergent knowledge based economy, staff development should be the priority

of any nation. Peretomode (2008) argued that the weakness of post graduate

programmes of some institutions of higher learning in Nigeria required a strong

staff development programme for staff. He maintained that universities are

staffed by lecturers who are not familiar with the topography of educational

landscape and have never been expected to formulate their own philosophies of

education or their own views about teaching and learning. Again to buttress this

point, Aboyade, (1976: 10) noted that given the increasing number of pseudo

scholars in Nigerian higher education institutions in the wake of enormous rapid

expansion of higher education, it is clearly seen that the doctorate degree is not

sufficient for true scholarship.

Peretomode and Chukwuma (2007) in their study revealed that a significant

relationship existed between manpower development and lecturers’

productivity. In addition, Asiyai and Oghuvbu (2009) reported that lack of staff

development programmes accounted for the decline in quality of tertiary

education in Nigeria. Similarly, Adeogun, (2006) noted that an employee who is

not trained and exposed to continuous retraining in the modern methods and

new discoveries in his or her field will soon become irrelevant to the

organization. Due to lack of opportunity for retraining and mentoring of junior

lecturers by professors, the junior lecturers are not exposed to new ideas, facts,

theories and research findings in higher education. Various scholars have

reported the deficiency of teacher education programme in Nigeria (Okeke,

2001; Falayayo, 2004; Ajayi, 2007). This calls for addition training of teachers

if quality in higher education is to be attained in the country.

7. Poor leadership

Poor leadership both at the government level and at the institution level have

been a big challenge to quality in higher education in Nigeria. Since the

nineties, the

government of the country has not shown enough commitment to higher

education development in Nigeria. One of the several indices for properly

evaluating government commitment to educational development in any country

is budgetary allocation and disbursement to education. UNESCO had

recommended 26% budgetary allocation to education based on GNP but the

amount allocated to education by Nigerian government has continued to be

smaller when compared to other African countries. For example, budgetary

allocation to education as percentage of GNP was 0.7%, South Africa was

7.9%, Ghana was 4.2%, Kenya was 6.5% and Sub-Sahara 4.2% in 2005

(Uhunmwuangbo, 2005). A World Bank Report cited by the Academic Staff

Union of Universities (ASUU, 2013) noted that in 2012 Nigeria’s GDP was

262.2 billion USD while allocation to education was 1.96 billion USD, the

amount spent by Nigeria for the entire education sector being less than what

individual universities spend on education in some countries. It is clear that the

government of the country is not committed to quality education. Additionally,

poor leadership of some Nigerian university administrators has been a bane to

the attainment of quality in higher education in Nigeria. Institutions of higher

learning in Nigeria exist because they are goals to be attained. These goals can

be effectively attained when the human resources within the institutions are

properly managed for their positive impacts on productivity. This is the place of

leadership in the institutions of higher learning. The duty of leadership is to

reduce problems within the system in order to enhance efficiency. But research

has shown that most staff disputes in Nigerian institutions of higher learning

since the nineteen eighties were attributed to the high handedness and tyranny

of some administrators of the institutions (Obiegbu, 1994; ASUU, 1994, 1997).

Accordingly, Osiebe (1995) argued that poor leadership of some university

administrators by not involving staff union members in decision making while

Iyayi, (2002) argued that dismissal of some academics without following due

process were indication of poor governance which made many academic staff

de-motivated to serious academic pursuit. Additionally, Bamiro, (2012)

maintained that the unfavourable governance which lead to series of strikes

resulting to closure of some institutions for up to 177days since 1993 to the

present day accounted for low quality in higher education in Nigeria. This

unhealthy situation could lead to strained relations between university staff

unions and management, increased hostility and aggression and increased

mutual suspicion which are all threats to mutual co-existence for the attainment

of good quality in institutions of higher learning.

 8. Cultism and other vices

A big challenge to quality in higher education in institutions of higher learning

in Nigeria is the increasing activities of secret cult groups, kidnappers and other

vices. The higher education institutions in Nigeria are under siege barded and

almost ruined by secret cults (Onoyase & Onoyase 2005). As a result of the

activities of cult groups and kidnappers’ majority of students, lecturers and their

families live in perpetual fear. Some of these cult groups indulge in arm

robbery, rape, assassination and infrastructure destruction. They cheat in the

examination openly and threaten lecturers when caught. While academic and

senior staff of universities in the country are being hunted by kidnappers and

those kidnapped are made to pay huge sum of money as ransom before they are

released. The tensions induced on members of higher education institution

communities as a result of the activities of these secret cult groups and

kidnappers tend to generate negative impacts on quality of higher education in

Nigeria. Another big challenge to administrators of institutions of higher

learning in Nigeria is students’ uprising. Handling demonstration and strikes by

students in protest of their rights or government insensitivity to demands by the

civil society.

9. Brain drain

A big challenge to the quality of higher education in Nigeria is the problem of

brain drain. Over the past decades, there has been mass exodus of brilliant and

most talented lecturers to other sectors of the economy. Some of the lecturers
left Nigerian universities to join the business world, some joined politics while

others left Nigeria for better services. As succinctly put by Alli, (2000) many

experienced and young lecturers are fleeing Nigeria from the frustration of

university life into more rewarding and more challenging sectors of the

economy and even to overseas countries. There is diminishing scope of

mentoring junior researchers by seasoned and senior lecturers in Nigeria due to

brain drain. Brain drain has led to decline in research outputs from institutions

of higher learning in Nigeria vis-à-vis the disappearance of research centres in

Nigerian universities. Research brings about improvement in teaching and

learning but, when there is exodus of brilliant and seasoned academics from

institutions of higher learning, the quality of education delivery is threatened

(Asiyai 2009).

10.Poor policy implementation

Poor policy implementation is a challenge to quality delivery in education. The

poor quality delivery is responsible for the abysmal low performance of

graduates of institutions of higher learning in Nigeria in their world of work and

the alarming incidence of examination malpractice. Anyakoha, (1994) and

Obebe, (1983) argued that our policies are written by knowledgeable writers

who have foresight and believe strongly in what they write for the future but the

problem comes when it comes to translating theory into practice by

implementers. However, several factors could be adduced as inhibitors to

smooth implementation of educational policies and thereby resulting to poor

quality delivery. Such factors as government underfunding of education and

injudicious utilization of available funds by implementation agencies vice-

chancellors, rectors, provosts, deans of faculties, heads of department etc. When

funds meant to deliver quality education is misappropriated or embezzled, the

education which learners receive becomes worthless. Okoroma, (2001) noted

that money the government votes for running the institution does not get to the

institutions and the little that gets there is normally wasted by education

managers. Additionally, in Nigerian institutions of higher learning little

attention is paid to teaching effectiveness of academic staff. The “publish or

perish” syndrome which places more emphasis on research makes lecturers to

be more committed to research. Akinmusuru, (2009) attributed the low quality

of Nigerian universities graduates to little attention given to teaching

effectiveness, stressing that institutional policies are not geared towards making

students learning a priority.

2.20 Theoretical Framework

Provus’ Summative Evaluation Model

The purpose of every evaluation is to pass value judgment on the merit and

worth of a program. It will be worthwhile to state the meaning of evaluation

research before delving into the model to be used. Kpolovie (2012) defined

evaluation of educational program as the systematic collection of information

2.3 Review of Empirical Studies

The awareness of academic staff in South West Nigerian on quality assurance

measures as well as constraints to these measures. Descriptive research of the

survey type was used with a study sample of 600 academic staff selected from

four universities in the southwest geopolitical zone. Multi-stage, stratified,

purposive and simple random sampling techniques were used to select the

sample and the universities. The universities were stratified along the variable

of ownership (that is, Federal and State universities). An instrument tagged

Quality Assurance Questionnaire (QAQ) was used to collect data from the

subjects. The reliability coefficient of QAQ was 0.86 and the data collected

were analysed using frequency counts, percentages, means, standard deviation

and t-test statistics. The result of the study indicated that academic staff in these

universities were aware of quality assurance measures. The study also revealed
that ownership did not significantly influence constraints to quality assurance

measures in these universities.

Akpan & Etor (2016) studied the relationship between accreditation of

academic programmes and quality university education. The study area was

South-South Nigeria. Two research questions and two hypotheses were

formulated to guide the study. Simple random and accidental sampling

techniques were used to sample 4 federal universities, 400 academic staff, 300

final year students and 200 employers for the study. Three types of instrument

titled: Adequacy of Requirements for Accreditation of Academic Programmes

Questionnaire (ARAAPQ), Quality University Education Questionnaire

(QUEQ) and Employers Rating of quality University Graduates questionnaire

(ERQUGQ) were used for data collection. All the items on the three instruments

were weighted on a 4-point response type scale. Each of the three instruments

had a reliability coefficient of 0.82, 0.77 and 0.80 respectively, using Cronbach

Alpha reliability method. The data collected were analyzed using descriptive

(means and standard deviations), Pearson Product moment correlation and

independent t-test statistics. The finding of the study revealed that the level of

adequacy of requirements for accreditation of academic programmes was

moderately adequate and the quality of university graduates was rated as being

moderate. There was a significant relationship between accreditation of

academic programmes and quality university education in terms of quality

inputs and quality processes. There was also a significant difference between

lecturers and students in their perception of quality university education.

More so, Obikezie, et. al (2016) examined the perception of lecturers on

variables important to quality assurance in Nigerian universities. The study

adopted an explanatory survey design. Five hundred lecturers from public

universities in the South-South geopolitical zone responded to a 25-item survey

from an instrument titled “Quality Assurance Variable Survey (QAVS). Five

research questions were framed and descriptive statistics were used in analysing

and presenting the data. Simple descriptive statistics was used to analyse the

data collected. The result showed that lecturers perceived availability of

adequate number of qualified staff, students’ attitude to study, early publication

of students’ examination results, availability of well-equipped laboratories and

workshops, and funding of tertiary education as the most important variables in

academic quality assurance.

Similarly, Obadara & Alaka (2013), examined the impact of accreditation on

quality assurance in Nigerian universities. Descriptive survey design was used for the

study. A sample of 74 universities out of 124 universities in Nigeria presently (22

federal owned and 22 state owned, and 30 private universities} was drawn using

proportionate stratified random sampling technique. Also, simple random sampling

was used to select 20 respondents (including teaching and non-teaching staff, who are

in charge of the data needed for the study) were selected from each university, which

amounted to 1480 staff. The study developed and used two sets of questionnaire
tagged “Accreditation Procedures and Minimum Academic Standard Questionnaire

(APMASQ), and Quality Assurance Questionnaire (QAQ)” with correlation

coefficient (r) of 0.73 and 0.69 respectively and complimented with secondary data

from NUC records. Pearson product moment correlation coefficient (r) was employed

to analyse the data. While the null hypotheses developed for the study were tested

at .05 level of significance. The findings revealed that there is significant relationship

between accreditation and resource input into Nigerian universities, quality of output,

quality of process, and no significant relationship between accreditation and quality of

academic content.

2.40 Summary of literature

This chapter reviewed literature relevant including conceptual, theoretical and

empirical. It examined various concepts of quality and quality assurance as it

relates to university education and explored the purpose and benefits of quality

assurance. It also examined some of the harbingers of quality assurance in our

educational system. This chapter also examined some theories related to the

evaluation of quality assurance. However, the study is anchored on Provus’

summative evaluation model. Empirical studies on quality assurance were also

reviewed and they all point to the fact that high quality education is dwindling

and needs to be given focused attention.

 CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter concerns the following research procedures, namely research

design, population of the study, sample and sampling techniques, instrument for

data collection, validity of the instrument, reliability of the instrument,

administration of the instrument and method of data analysis.

3.1 Research Design

This study will employ an analytic descriptive survey design. Analytic

descriptive survey is a type of descriptive survey that not only describes certain

characteristics of the sample as they are at the time of study but, goes further to

compare for the various strata of the sample through the use of hypothesis

(Nwankwo, 2016). Though unlike the analytic design, the ordinary descriptive

survey makes use of research questions only. According to Ukwuije and

Obowu-Adutchay (2012) descriptive survey also employ the use of samples to

represent the entire population and it uses data collection techniques such as

questionnaire, tests, interview etc. In summary, survey research refers to any

developmental study that systematically collects, analyzes and synthesizes

quantitative data on a large representative sample of a given population for

accurate inference or generalizations to be made on the study population

(Kpolovie, 2010).

The present study is an analytic descriptive survey because the researcher

will collect data from a large sample of students and staff from public

universities in the South-East of Nigeria and employed research questions and

hypotheses to arrive at result of the study.

3.2 Population of the Study

The population of the study consists of students and staff in public

universities in South-East of Nigeria. The population of student is …… and

academic staff is …….

3.3 Sample and Sampling Technique

A sample of ….. academic staff and …. students were selected from four

universities in the southeast geopolitical zone. Multi-stage, stratified, purposive

and simple random sampling techniques were used to select the sample and the

universities. The universities were stratified along the variable of ownership

(that is, Federal and State universities).

3.4 Instrument for Data Collection

The research instrument for this study is the Quality Assurance and

Sustainability of University Education Questionnaire (QASUEQ). The

QASUEQ is a self-developed, non-cognitive multivariate instrument made up of

two parts. Part A explains the purpose of the study and the personal data of

respondents, while Part B consist of 53 items, which are prescribed NUC

standards to ensure quality and sustainability in the university system. The items

of the instrument are responded on a 4-point Likert scale of Strongly Agree

(SA), Agreed (A), Disagree (D), and Strongly Disagree (SD).

3.5 Validity of Instrument

To ensure face and content validity of the instrument, copies of the QASUE

questionnaire were given to the researcher’s supervisor and experts in

measurement and evaluation and senior lecturers of the department of

educational Foundation of the University. The experts examined the instrument,

removed items that were not suitable and suggested other items that need to be

added. After the retrieval instruments from the experts, the research affected the

corrections that were pointed out by the experts and the modified copy was

acknowledged by the researcher’s supervisor.

Therefore, the instrument has face and content validity that is suitable for the

study.
3.6 Reliability of the Instrument

The reliability of the QASUEQ instruments will be determined through

the Cronbach alpha method for measuring internal constancy, simple random

sampling will be used to draw a sample of 20 respondents outside the target

population for the reliability test and copies of the instrument will be

administered to them. The data obtained from the instruments will be subjected

to Cronbach alpha analysis. The coefficient values that will be obtained will

used to guarantee the use of the instrument as a reliable one for this study.

3.7 Administration of the Instrument

The instrument will be directly administered to the students and staff of

the sampled university by the researcher, with the help of research assistance

because of the large sample. After the instrument has been duly responded to,

the researcher will retrieve them from the students.

3.8 Method of Data Analysis

Data from the study will be analyzed using mean ( x ) and standard deviation to

answer the research questions while independent t-test and One-way ANOVA

will be used to test the hypotheses at 0.05 level of significance.

REFERENCES
Okoyeoch, A.C. (2014). Quality assurance for quality higher education. African
Journal of Higher Education Studies and Development, 2,75-81.

Audu, U. F. (2005) The role of information and communications technology in

maintaining quality education in Nigeria. Nigerian Journal of
Curriculum Studies. 15(3), 26.

Okebukola, P.A.O. (2010). Fifty years of higher education in Nigeria: Trends in

quality assurance. Presented at the International Conference on the
contribution of Nigerian Universities to the 50th Independence
Anniversary of Nigeria.

Kisilowska, M. (2002). Quality assurance in higher education in the field of

library and information science. Retrived 2/4/2018 at
http://ebib.oss.wroc.pl/english/grant/kisilowska.php

Ajayi, I. A. and Akindutire, I. O. (2007). The unresolved issues of quality

assurance in Nigerian universities. Journal of Sociology and Education in
Africa, 6(1), 1-11.
Asiyai, R. I. (2013). Challenges of higher education in Nigeria in the 21 st
century. International Journal of Educational Planning &
Administration, 3(2),159-172.

Ibara, E.C. (2015). Developing quality assurance culture for sustainable

university education in Nigeria. Journal of education and practice, 6(29),
264-321.

Federal Republic of Nigeria (2004). National policy on education. Lagos:

NERDC Press.

Obiekezie, E.O; Ejemot-Nwadiaro, R.I. & Timothy, A.E. (2016). Academic

quality assurance variables in Nigerian universities; exploring lecturers’
perception. International Education Studies, 9(5).

Oyebade, S.A., Oladipo, S.A., & Adetoro, J.A. (2007). Determinants and
strategies for quality assurance in Nigerian university education system.
East African Journal of Educational Research and policy, 2,63-80.

Ehi-Oshio, P. (2013). Reform of the legal framework for quality assurance in

Nigerian universities. Retrieved 25/3/18 from https//quality assurance-
legal framework/36745.

Saint, W., Harnett, T.A & Strassner, E. (2003): Higher Education in Nigeria: A
status Report. Higher Education Policy, 259-281

Peretomode, V.F. & Chukwuma, R.A. (2007). Manpower development and

lecturers’ productivity in tertiary institutions in Nigeria. Journal of
Education Studies, English Edition Poland, 5-11.

Peretomode, V.F. (2008). What is higher in higher education. Benin-City:

Justice
Jecko press and publishers Ltd.

Resnick, M. (1998). Rethinking education in digital age. Educational

technology
research and development, 46(4),12.

Okebukola, P.A. (2005). Labour market expectations of Nigerian graduates: A

National university graduates’ employer needs assessment survey.
Ibadan:
Heinemann educational books Nigeria Plc.
Obebe, B.J. (1993). In making our education culture based. Daily Times
October
10th.

Federal Ministry of Education (2004). National Policy on Education. Lagos:

Education research and development council.

Bamiro, O. (2012) The Nigerian university system and the challenges of

relevance. Convocation Lecture University of Lagos, Akoka-Lagos
January 12th.

Asiyai, R.I. (2010). The role of information communication in management of

secondary education for sustainable development in Delta state, Nigeria.
Journal of Sociology and Education in Africa, 9 (1),157-168.

Asiyai, R.I. & Oghuvbu, E.P. (2009). An empirical analysis of the causes and
possible solutions to decline in quality of tertiary education in Delta state,
Nigeria. Journal of Sociology and Education in Africa, 8(2),1-13.

Akinmusuru, J.O. (2009). The curriculum as a living document for achieving

education for sustainable development. In: Proceeding of the 12th general
conference on sustainable Development in Africa: The Role of Higher
Education, Abuja Nigeria 4-9 May.

Ajayi, K. (2007). Emergent Issues in teacher education and professionalization

of teaching in Nigeria. African Journal of Historical Science in
Education 3(1), 22-28.

Adeogun, A.A. (2006). Training and experience as predictors of teachers

productivity in secondary school. International Journal of Educational
Management, 4(1),38-49.

Adeboyeje, T., (2003) Disruption, violence and productivity in Nigerian

universities. Nigerian Journal of Educational Administration and
Planning, 4(1), 21-25.

Academic Staff Union of Universities (1994). The bare-fact of the university of

Abuja crisis at a glance Abuja: ASUU Abuja Branch.

Asiyai, R.I (2006) Variables inducing trade union disputes in Nigerian

universities. Nigerian Journal of Guidance and Counseling, 11(1),146-
154.
Ukeje, B.O. (1996). In: Lassa P.N. (ed.) Teacher education-An imperative for
national development. Kaduna: NCCE

Babalola, J.B. (2011). Quality assurance in education: Input, process and

output. African Journal of Educational Research and development,
4(2),1-20.

Akpan, C.P. & Etor, C.R. (2016). Accreditation of academic programmes and
quality university education in South-South universities. International
Journal of Educationa Studies, 13(2), 37-40.

Okpanachi, S. & Opara, C.A. (2014). Quality assurance and sustainability of

qualitative education in Nigerian universities in the twenty-first century.
Global Educational Research Journal, 32-36.

Onokorheraye, A.G. (1995). Our march to academic excellence. Benin-City:

Uniben press limited.

Coombs, P.H. (1970). World educational crisis: A system approach. New York:
Oxford university press.

Steingberg, L. (2011). Adolescence (9th ed) New York. McGraw-Hill.

Vogeli, M.S. (2008). Academic Underachievement: Understanding and
Implications for Educators. Retrieved 8/11/2015 from
htp/www.google.com.ng/uwstout.edu/content/lib/thesis/2008

Adebayo, O, Oyenike, A. & Adesuji, O. (2009). Quality assurance and

sustainable university education in Nigeria. Retrieved 20/3/2018 from
www.adcice.hiroshima.u/research/paper-109/pdf

Oliver, R. (2001). Developing and sustaining technology-based learning in

higher Education: The way ahead. Retrived 2/03/2018 from
www.citeseerx.1st.psu.edu/viewdoc

Anugwom, E. E. (2009). Women, education and work in Nigeria. Educational

Research and Review, 4(4), 127-134.

Ibiam, N. (2014). Quality management of university education in Nigeria: an

appraisal. International Multidisciplinary Journal, 8(3), 201-213.

Okeke, B.S. (2001). Quality Management and National Growth and Attainment
in Education. The case of Nigeria. An Inaugural lecture series No. 28 of
University of Port Harcourt, Port Harcourt.
Akubuilo, F. & Okorie, E.U. (2013). Sustainability of Tertiary Education
through Quality Assurance and Development in Nigeria. Journal of
Education and Practice, 4(15), 140-144.

Oladipo. A., Adeosun. O. & Oni. A. (2009). Quality assurance and sustainable
university education in Nigeria. Retrieved 25/3/18 from
www.adcice.hiroshima.u/research/paper-109/pdf.

Dachastel, P. (1997). A web-based model for university instruction. Journal of

Educational Technology Systems, 25( 3), 221-228.

Babatude, M.A. & Adefabi, R.A. (2005). Long run relationship between
education and economic growth in Nigeria. Paper presented at the
regional conference on education in West Africa.

Obanya, P. (2002). Revitalizing education in Africa. Ibadan: Sterling Hores.

Ezeani, E. (2013). Philosophy of education for African Nations’ recovery.

VERITAS Lumen Publishers.

Uhunmwuangho, S.O. (2005). Problems of financing higher education in

Nigeria. Nigerian Academic Forum, 9(4), 54-63.

Olatunde, T. O. (2007). Factors for educational advancement in Nigeria. In

Makunjuola, T.D & Olaniyi, S. H. Essential of quality assurance in
Nigeria’s Educational system. Ibadan: Sadawa Publishers limited.

Kamm, R.B. (1980). Significant elements of a University. Oklahoma State

alumnus, 4 January 8.

Boyles, N.S. & Contadino, D. (2010). The learning differences Sourcebook. Los
Angleles: Lowell House Inc.

Eriega, E.G. (2013). Psychological foundations of human learning. Port

Harcourt: Abe Publishers Limited.

Kpolovie, P.J. (2012). Lumosity Training and Brain Boosting food on Learning.
International Research Journal 2(6), 222.

Uchendu, C.C., Akuegwu, B.A & Nwi-Ue, F.D. (2006). Quality assurance in
the
management of federal and state owned tertiary institutions in Imo State.
 Nigeria Journal of Education Administration and Planning (NAEAP),
6(1),74.

Kemijika, O.G (2015). School and Society. In Okeke, E.C. (Ed). Sociology of
education; concepts and Applications. Owerri: Springfield.

Obadara, O. E. & Alaka, A. A. (2013). Accreditation and quality assurance in

Nigerian universities. Journal of Education and Practice, 4, 13-41.

Obiegbu, J.N. (1994). Sources of internal conflicts in Nigerian universities

1960-
1990. Proceeding of the 8th general assembly of social science council of
Nigeria, Ibadan: Social science council of Nigeria.

Odetunde, C. (2004). The state of higher education in Nigeria. Retrieved

23/3/2018 from http://www.nigerdeltacongress.com/sertive/state of
higher education.
 QUESTIONNAIRE
QUALITY ASSURANCE AND SUSTAINABILITY OF UNIVERSITY
EDUCATION QUESTIONNAIRE (QASUEQ)

Dear Respondents,

This questionnaire aims at investigating the extent of “Quality Assurance and

Sustainability of Standards on the South-East Universities in Nigeria.” It is
designed to obtain data for my Doctoral thesis. Your view as student will be of
immense help.
Please respond honestly to the questions contained in this questionnaire. I assure
you that the information supplied will be treated as strictly confidential and used
for the purpose of the research work only.
Yours faithfully,

Ezeh Stella C.
Researcher

SECTION A {PERSONAL DATA}

Name of University: …………………………………………………………

Faculty: ………………………………………………………………………
Department: ...…………………………………………………………..........
Gender: Male Female
Status: Student Academic staff Non-academic
Student level: Undergraduate Postgraduate

QUALITY ASSURANCE AND SUSTAINABILITY OF UNIVERSITY EDUCATION

QUESTIONNAIRE (QASUEQ)

Please tick at the appropriate response on the extent you agree that physical facilities
in the South- East universities conform to NUC standards. Responses are Strongly
Agree(SA), Agree(A), Disagree(D) and Strongly Disagree(SD).

S/N ITEMS SA A D SD

1 Availability of spacious classrooms

2 Accessibility of ICT facilities by students

3 Adequate sitting arrangement in classrooms

4 Availability and accessibility of study materials

5 State-of-the-art library

6 Accessible and functional laboratory

7 Conducive office space for staff

8 Availability of instructional materials

9 Well-equipped classrooms

10 Tolerable teacher-student ratio

11 Absence of dilapidated classrooms

12. Spacious, well-equipped hostel accommodation

13 School environment is free from cult-related attacks

Please tick at the appropriate response on the extent you agree that the status of
academic matters in the South- East universities conform to NUC standards.

S/N ITEMS SA A D SD

14 Academic programmes are in line with the objectives of

the National policy on education

15 Curriculum is rich in content

16 Curriculum meets individual and societal needs

17 Curriculum is adaptable to the changing needs of life

18 Admission is based on the potential to do well upon entry

19 Admission process considers students cognitive,

psychomotor and affective domains

20 Students’ regularity and punctuality to class form part of

assessment.

21 Examination questions are vetted

22 Assignments and tests as part of continuous assessment

23 Final exams are externally moderated

24 Results are published two weeks after examinations

25 Marking scheme is vetted

26 Often, results are marked in conference

27 There are no hitches to academic calendar

28 Examination malpractices are dealt with severely

30 Originality of project, thesis and dissertation is not

compromised

Please tick at the appropriate response on the extent you agree that staffing system in
the South- East universities conform to NUC standards.

S/N ITEMS SA A D SD
 31 Adequate academic staff (with higher qualifications)

32 Competent (knowledge of subject matter) academic staff

33 Highly motivated non-academic staff

34 Adequate non-academic staff

35 Academic staff with lower qualifications pursue higher

degrees

36 Attendance of seminars, workshops and conferences by

academic staff

37 Training and retraining of non-academic staff

38 Incentives for conferences, workshops, etc

39 Periodic promotion exercise

Please tick at the appropriate response on the extent you agree that the following are
challenges facing quality and sustainability in the South- East universities.

S/N ITEMS SA A D SD

31 Political/ government interferences

32 Bureaucratic bottlenecks

33 Inadequate funding

34 Inconsistency of policies

35 Inadequate teaching staff

36 Lack of instructional materials

37 Overcrowded classrooms/laboratories, etc

38 Poor determination and evaluation of learning outcomes

39 Absence of incentives for staff

 40 Poor monitoring by educational administrative bodies

41 Poor administration by universities

42 Incessant strikes

Please tick at the appropriate response on the extent you agree that the following are
management strategies in achieving a sustainable quality education in the South- East
universities.

S/N ITEMS SA A D SD

43 Little or no interference by government/politics

44 Bureaucratic bottlenecks should be limited

45 There should be adequate funding

46 Policies should be consistent

47 Provision of adequate teaching staff

48 Provision of adequate instructional materials

49 Provision of adequate and spacious

classrooms/laboratories, etc

50 Learning outcomes should be carefully determined and

properly evaluated

51 Incentives should be provided for staff

52 Objective/purpose-driven monitoring by educational

administrative bodies

53 University management should improve their

administrative strategies to embrace all facets of their
institution