Essay
By Prof Mike Ozekhome, SAN.
INTRODUCTION
IN the last episode of this piece, we examined the legal and administrative framework on the subject matter. We then considered the role of the judiciary in protecting educational right, followed by discussion on educational autonomy as well as the implications of the policy; its potential impact on our educational system, bottlenecks in academic progression, impact on student motivation and mental health, potential increase in drop-out rates, widening educational inequality and later suggested a way forward including merit-based admissions, discarding the policy entirely (and its demerits) and provisions for a gifted students. Enjoy.
THE LEGAL AND LEGISLATIVE DIMENSIONS
The debate over the Federal Government’s policy on minimum age for university admission extends beyond educational circles into the realm of legal interpretation and legislative authority. The policy raises significant questions about the extent of the government’s power to regulate educational practices and the potential infringement on individual rights and academic freedom.
CONSTITUTIONAL AND LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK
The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, as amended, outlines the division of powers between the federal and state governments, including matters related to education. Education is listed under the Concurrent Legislative List, which means both the National Assembly and State Assemblies have authority to make laws on educational matters. Specifically, Item 27 of the Concurrent Legislative List empowers the National Assembly to “make laws for the Federation or any part thereof with respect to university education.”
However, the imposition of a minimum age for university admission through an executive policy directive, rather than a formal legislative process, raises concerns about the proper exercise of this power. Legal scholars argue that while the National Assembly may have the authority to set educational standards, including age requirements, such regulations must be enacted through a law passed by the legislative body (NASS), not through a mere policy diktat from the executive branch. This is crucial to ensure that any such policy has the necessary legal backing and is subject to the checks and balances inherent in the legislative process.
Furthermore, the Child Rights Act, 2003, which has been domesticated in several states in Nigeria, emphasizes the right to education for every child. This Act, along with the Universal Basic Education (UBE) Act, 2004, mandates the provision of free, compulsory and universal basic education for every Nigerian child. The imposition of an age limit on university admission could therefore be seen as a potential infringement on these rights, particularly for students who are academically qualified to advance to higher education before the age of 18.
THE ROLE OF THE JUDICIARY IN PROTECTING EDUCATIONAL RIGHTS
The Judiciary plays a critical role in interpreting the Constitution and other laws to ensure that the rights of citizens are protected against arbitrary government actions. In the context of the minimum age policy, the judiciary could be called upon to determine the constitutionality of the policy and whether or not it infringes on the rights of young Nigerians to access education.
Legal challenges to the policy will likely focus on whether government’s directive aligns with the provisions of the Constitution and other relevant legislation. For instance, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), to which Nigeria is a signatory, asserts the right to education as a fundamental human right. Article 26 of the UDHR states that “everyone has the right to education” and that “education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality.” It did not place any age limit.
In this light, the policy could be challenged on grounds that it restricts access to education for younger students who are otherwise qualified, thereby limiting their opportunities for personal and intellectual development. The judiciary’s interpretation of these legal provisions will be crucial in determining the future of the policy and its impact on Nigeria’s educational landscape.
EDUCATIONAL AUTONOMY AND THE RIGHTS OF INSTITUTIONS TO ADMINISTER THEIR AFFAIRS
Another critical aspect of the debate is the issue of educational autonomy. Universities in Nigeria, particularly private institutions, have historically enjoyed a degree of autonomy in setting their admission standards, including age requirements. This autonomy is essential for maintaining the academic integrity and independence of these institutions.
The Chancellor of Afe Babalola University, Afe Babalola, SAN, has argued that the government’s policy infringes on this autonomy by imposing a blanket age restriction on all universities. He noted that university autonomy includes the discretion to admit students based on their academic qualifications and potential, regardless of age. Babalola’s stance highlights the importance of preserving the independence of educational institutions to make decisions that are in the best interests of their students and the broader academic community.
This view is supported by international best practices, where universities often have the flexibility to admit younger students who demonstrate exceptional academic abilities. For example, in the United States and the United Kingdom, students who excel academically are often allowed to enter university at a younger age, provided they meet the necessary qualifications. This approach recognizes that academic readiness and intellectual maturity are not solely determined by age and that students should be assessed on a case-by-case basis. I am a witness to this as all my children who schooled in tertiary institutions abroad did so at ages 16 or 17. They invariably graduated at 19 or 20. Some of them made First Class and others Second Class Upper. Thanks be to God.
IMPLICATIONS AND THE PATH FORWARD
The Federal Government’s policy on minimum age for university admission thus has far-reaching implications for Nigeria’s educational system, its legal framework, and the broader society. As the debate continues, it is essential to consider the potential consequences of the policy and explore alternative approaches that can better serve the interests of Nigerian students.
THE POTENTIAL IMPACT ON NIGERIA’S EDUCATION SYSTEM
One of the most significant concerns about the potential impact of the minimum age policy is its effect on the overall efficiency and accessibility of the Nigerian education system. The imposition of an arbitrary age limit risks creating a bottleneck in the academic progression of students, particularly those who have demonstrated the intellectual capacity to advance to higher education before reaching the age of 18.
BOTTLENECKS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESSION
By requiring students to wait until they are 18 before taking crucial examinations such as the SSCE and JAMB, the policy will inadvertently create a backlog of students who are ready to move forward but are forced to delay their educational journey. This could lead to overcrowding in secondary schools, as students who would otherwise have progressed to tertiary institutions remain in the system longer than necessary to while away the time. Such overcrowding could strain already limited resources, including classroom space, teaching staff and educational materials.
Furthermore, the policy may discourage academic excellence among younger students, as the incentive to excel and move on to university as soon as they are ready is diminished. Gifted students who are capable of completing their secondary education at a younger age may feel demotivated if they are forced to wait until they reach an arbitrary age threshold, regardless of their academic preparedness.
IMPACT ON STUDENT MOTIVATION AND MENTAL HEALTH
The enforced delay in progression to higher education could also have significant psychological effects on students. Being held back solely due to age, despite having the academic qualifications to advance, could lead to feelings of frustration and demotivation. For students who are particularly driven and focused on their academic goals, this policy could undermine their enthusiasm for learning and result in a decline in academic performance.
Moreover, the policy could have a broader impact on the mental health of students. Adolescence is already a challenging period for many young people, and adding an additional barrier to their educational progression could exacerbate stress, anxiety, and feelings of inadequacy. The policy may lead to a sense of stagnation among students who are forced to repeat courses or remain in an environment that no longer challenges them intellectually.
POTENTIAL INCREASE IN DROPOUT RATES
Another significant concern is the potential for an increase in dropout rates as a result of the policy. Students who are ready to advance but are forced to wait may become disillusioned with the education system and choose to leave school altogether. This is particularly woorrisome in a country like Nigeria, where dropout rates are already a pressing issue, particularly in regions where access to quality education is limited.
For students in rural or underserved areas where economic pressures often compel young people to seek employment or take on adult responsibilities at an early age, the delay in advancing to higher education could result in more students leaving the education system entirely. This would undermine efforts to improve educational attainment and reduce poverty in these communities.
WIDENING EDUCATIONAL INEQUALITY
The policy could also exacerbate existing inequalities within the Nigerian education system. Students from affluent backgrounds who attend private schools may be better equipped to cope with the enforced delay, as they have access to more resources, including extracurricular activities and specialized programs that can keep them engaged during the waiting period. In contrast, students from less privileged backgrounds may find it harder to remain motivated and engaged without the prospect of advancing to university.
This disparity could widen the educational gap between rich and poor students, further entrenching social inequalities. As former Nigerian Vice President Atiku Abubakar noted, “This policy belongs in the stone ages. It is a disincentive to scholarship and will only serve to deepen the divide between the haves and the have-nots in our society.”
THE PATH FORWARD: A CALL FOR HOLISTIC EDUCATIONAL REFORM
REPEALING THE MINIMUM AGE POLICY AND ITS IMPLICATIONS
Repealing the minimum age policy is a crucial first step in addressing the concerns raised by educational stakeholders, legal experts, and the public. This policy, while obviously well-intentioned, fails to account for the diversity of student backgrounds, experiences and capabilities. By removing this arbitrary age barrier, government can prevent the potential stagnation of academic progress and ensure that students who are ready for higher education can advance without needless delays.
The implications of repealing the policy extend beyond the immediate benefit to students. It would signal a commitment by the government to prioritize educational equity and meritocracy, ensuring that all students, regardless of their age, are evaluated based on their abilities and readiness for the next stage of their academic journey.
Repeal would also restore a degree of autonomy to universities, allowing them to make admission decisions that reflect the unique needs and potential of each student. This autonomy is essential for maintaining the integrity and diversity of the higher education system in Nigeria, enabling institutions to develop specialized programs for gifted students and those who may need additional support.
IMPLEMENTING A MERIT-BASED ADMISSION SYSTEM
A merit-based admission system offers a fairer and more effective approach to university admissions in Nigeria. By focusing on students’ academic performance and readiness for university, rather than their age, this system would encourage excellence and allow students to progress based on their abilities.
Such a system would require clear and transparent criteria for assessing students’ qualifications, including their performance in secondary school, standardized test scores, and other relevant factors such as extracurricular achievements and personal statements. Universities could also consider implementing interviews or entrance exams to further assess students’ readiness for higher education.
The implementation of a merit-based system would likely necessitate changes to the current admission processes, including the development of new guidelines and training for admission officers. However, these changes would ultimately benefit students by creating a more inclusive and supportive educational environment.
SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR GIFTED STUDENTS
Gifted students represent a unique group within the educational system, and their needs must be addressed to ensure they reach their full potential. Special provisions for these students could include early admission to university, access to advanced courses, or participation in accelerated learning programs.
Universities could establish talent identification programs that work with Secondary schools to identify and support gifted students from an early age. These programs could offer scholarships, mentoring, and opportunities for enrichment activities, such as research projects, internships, and participation in national and international competitions. (To be continued).
THOUGHT FOR THE WEEK
“I believe that education is the greatest equalizer; thus, I will continue to fight to equalize the playing field in an educational atmosphere that is not always level” – Erin Gruwell
LAST LINE
God bless my numerous global readers for always keeping faith with the Sunday Sermon on the Mount of the Nigerian Project, by humble me, Prof Mike Ozekhome, SAN, CON, OFR, FCIArb., LL.M, Ph.D, LL.D, D.Litt, D.Sc, DHL, DA. Kindly come with me to next week’s exciting dissertation.
A.I
Nov. 4, 2024
Tags: Prof Mike Ozekhome
