The Problems of Educational Policy Implementation and Its Influence on the Welfare of Teacher Labor Market in Nigeria ()
1. Introduction
Important structural features of the teacher labor market, such as recruitment and selection processes and terms of employment, shape the teaching workforce and, consequently, have potentially strong implications for the quality and equity of education (OECD, 2019) [1]. Understanding the teacher labor market, including the factors shaping teacher demand and supply, teachers’ responsiveness to incentives, the trade-offs governments face in defining the number of teachers needed, and the mechanisms that assign teachers to institutions. In schooling, the demand for teachers depends on a range of factors such as the age structure of the school-age population, enrolment rates, starting and ending the age of compulsory education, average class size, and the teaching load of teachers. Teacher education, employment and working conditions and job opportunities outside schooling influence supply. Some countries face diversity (gender and ethnic) issues that can undermine children’s development. Other countries face teacher shortages due to aging staff; to address these and increase the quality of the teaching force, countries are now seeking more flexible approaches to entry into the profession. Vocational education and training in some countries similarly need to find ways to compensate for a shortage of teachers and trainers as the current workforce approaches retirement age. As in schooling, flexible entry requirements and alternative pathways may help solve this problem. On the other hand, school systems in various countries have a significant oversupply of qualified teachers, which raises its challenges.
A 2005 report statement by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD, 2005) [2] revealed a point of agreement among the various studies that many important aspects of teacher quality are not captured by the vastly used indicators such as qualifications, and tests of academic ability and experience. Further stating that the teacher characteristics that are harder to measure but are very vital to student learning and academic achievement include the ability to;
・ create effective learning environments for different types of students;
・ convey ideas in clear and convincing ways;
・ be enthusiastic and creative;
・ foster productive teacher-student relationships;
・ and to work effectively with colleagues and parents.
However, teacher policy needs to ensure an adequate supply of teachers that matches demand and that the best available candidates are selected for employment. Individual institutions, including those in disadvantaged areas, have the teachers they need. These are challenging tasks considering the size of the teaching workforce. Ensuring that effective teachers stay in the profession and removing ineffective teachers through transparent and accepted procedures are further concerns to providing a high-quality workforce. Terms of employment and working conditions, including possibilities for career advancement, play a crucial role here. Teaching is often characterized as a “flat” career with few opportunities for career progression. While countries may seek to diversify teachers’ jobs, career structures can also be counterproductive if the most experienced teachers are promoted out of the classroom (OECD, 2016 [3]; 2019 [1]; 2011 [4]).
2. The Nigerian Education System: A Recap of the Foundation of Education during the Colonial Era
One of the founding fathers of Nigeria’s national educational policy framework defines education as the “processes by which a child or an adult learner develops the abilities, attitudes, and other forms of behavior that are of positive value to society they live. That is to say, education is a process of disseminating knowledge either to ensure social control or to guarantee the rational direction of the society or both” (Fafunwa, 1987) [5]. This means that, regardless of tribe, race or family background, every child has the right to a sound and quality education in the society where they live, as education contributes to the growth and development of societies in Nigeria and the globe at large (FRN, 2007) [6]. However, a study carried out by Okoroma (2006) [7] opines that the issue of falling standard of education and the inability of the Nigerian educational system to meet its desired goals and standards becomes a matter of distress to every reasonable citizen. Over the years, the gap between national educational policies and goal attainment has been due to inadequate implementation policies, which has become a great concern to many observers. Okoroma (2003) [8] also comments that education is a distinctive way society induces its young generation into full membership or involvement. Every society needs well-structured educational policies and implementation plans to guide it in the process of such initiation. The three levels of Nigeria’s education sector have passed through different stages with various goals and objectives.
The Portuguese traders and early missionaries introduced education in Nigeria to convert to their religions and make Nigerians understand their language to facilitate their trades. The colonial government later developed an interest in the education of the citizens out of the necessity to train law enforcement agents, interpreters, clerical officers, messengers, cooks, stewards, servants, typists, and invariably refined enslaved people (Oke & Odetokun, 2000) [9]. Many efforts have been put in place to develop education, especially the tertiary sector in Nigeria since her independence in 1960. Various policies in the interest of promoting education for the country’s development have also been formulated; unfortunately, little or no desired effect has been produced from these efforts. Before the return of civil/democratic rule in 1999, the Human Development Index of Nigeria, especially its educational indicators, ranked poor (Federal Ministry of Education, 2003) [10]. Most Nigerians expected that democratic rule would improve key growth indicators, including poverty reduction, low mortality, good governance, and high-quality education (Suraj and Olusola, 2011) [11].
Indeed, between 1999 and 2015, successive Nigerian governments introduced a series of policies and programmes to improve governance in general, including policies and programmes relevant to the six objectives of the Education for All (EFA) programme. The Collaboration between the Nigeria Federal Ministry of Education (FME) and other line ministries like Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) and International Development Partners (IDPs) in response to global education reforms brought some successes in enhancing enrolment at the pre-primary and primary education levels. However, the conditions of education in Nigeria are still wretched. Nigeria is known as the great giant of Africa in terms of resourcefulness as a significant oil and gas producer. However, most Nigerians live below the poverty line of one dollar per day. Ordinarily, Nigerian leaders want the country to stand out best in everything, including education. However, political will has been lacking. Perhaps this is a result of the instability of governments or lack of continuity. Between 1960 and 2022, the country has had several governments (Table 1).
In 62 years, Nigeria has had fifteen heads of State, out of which one was named by the Colonial monarch president and only five democratically elected. Others came through military groups, which show that most Nigerian heads of state had never had time to draw up plans of action before drafting themselves or were drafted into leadership. Therefore, they have been ill-prepared for any development efforts, whether in education or other spheres. Most of their actions have not national patriots but for personal aggrandizement (Hodges, 2001) [13]. Hodges (2001) went further in the final analysis, stating that Nigeria’s development failures have sprung from the lack of success in achieving an effective governance model. So, various governments formulated educational policies, but political instability discouraged the political will to implement such policies. As new governments came in succession, continuity in policies implementation is not guaranteed; this has affected educational policy implementation in Nigeria.
3. The Problem
The formulation of each educational policy level sets the stage for its implementation, which, according to Ukeje (1986) [14], is perhaps the most crucial aspect of planning. Unfortunately, educational policies and goal attainment in Nigeria have been irreconcilable due to implementation problems, which have caused significant constraints on the welfare of the teacher labour market. Perhaps this
![]()
Table 1. Overview of past head of states since independent (1960-2022).
Tablesourced from the office of the secretary to the government of the federation (OSGF, 2022) [12].
clarifies the observation made by Governor Oyakhilome of Rivers State in an address sent to the Nigerian Association for Educational Administration and Planning Convention in 1986 when He expressed his utmost concern about the problem of policy implementation, stating: We know it is challenging to realize planned objectives one hundred percent. However, the experience in planning education in the country indicates an alarming gap between planned objectives and attained outcomes. As professionals in the sector of education, it is imperative to identify whether those critical gaps are brought about by the results of faulty planning or faulty implementation (Oyakhilome 1986: 2) [15].
The gaps between policy formulation and implementation arouse investigations to identify factors that constrain the effective implementation of educational policies in Nigeria and its implications on the teaching workforce. The problem of policy implementation is attributable to the planning stage, which comes immediately after policy formulation. However, every good planning will ensure effective implementation and positive outcomes. Good planning that can facilitate effective implementation should consider factors such as the planning environment, political environment, social environment, and financial and statistical problems. The plan must consider the needs of the society; the political, socio-cultural, economic, military, scientific, and technological realities of the environments that are also fundamental to its survival. Similarly, despite the creditable objectives and structure of education in Nigeria, all indications point to the fact that the Nigerian system of education failures is on a yearly increase which has been majorly attributed to problems of policy implementation. This review is carried out to indicate the factors constituting problems of policy implementations in the Nigerian educational system and its influence on the welfare of the teacher labour market through an extensive discussion and review of literature on Nigeria’s education policy implementation.
4. Framework of Educational Policy and Implementations
Educational policies are the principles or formulated laws and rules that govern the operation of every educational system at all levels. Education occurs in many different forms for many purposes and through many institutions. Thus, an educational policy can directly affect the education of the people engaged at all levels of education. According to Thomas, Emilie and Wayne (2018) [16], educational policy analysis is the scholarly study of educational policy that seeks to answer questions about the purpose of education, the objectives that are designed to be attained, the methods for attaining them, and the tools for measuring their success or failure. According to Okoroma (2001) [17], educational policies are initiatives primarily by governments that determine the direction of an educational system. According to UNESCO (2015) [18], educational policy consists of the principles and government policies in the educational sphere and the collection of laws and rules that govern the operation of education systems. From the above definitions, the researchers believe that every modern society needs some educational policies to guide it in such initiation towards achieving the purpose and objectives for which educational institutions were established.
Implementation is defined as the act of executing a plan, a policy or an assignment. Ogbonnaya (2003) [19] views implementation as the process of carrying out objectives or a plan. It is the process of performing a task, activity or objective. Nweke (2015) [20] defined implementation as the ability to put law or policy is also a tool or means of making something that has been officially decided to start to happen or be used. According to Ibiam (2011) [21], implementation means putting into use or practicing the government or organization’s policy as applicable. It is the realization of an application, plan, ideas, model, design, specification, standard, or policy (Rouse, 2007) [22]. The action must follow any preliminary thinking in order for something to happen. Hrebiniak (2006) [23] asserted that the failure of many implementation processes often stems from the lack of accurate planning and coordination in the beginning stages of the project due to inadequate resources or unforeseen problems that may arise. Implementation, therefore, connotes the activities of transforming ideas and policy into an identified objective.
Education policy can be understood as the actions taken by governments concerning educational practices and how the governments address the production and delivery of education in each given system. Admittedly, some promote a more comprehensive understanding of education policy ?i.e., acknowledging that private actors or other institutions such as international and non-governmental organizations can originate educational policies (Espinoza, 2009) [24]. Education policies cover a wide range of issues such as those targeting equity, the overall quality of learning outcomes and school and learning environments, the capacity of the system to prepare students for the future, funding, effective governance or evaluation and assessment mechanisms, among others (OECD, 2015) [25].
An interesting question is whether the education policy implemented is the same as the one formulated by policymakers. The following distinction drawn in Adams, Kee and Lin (2001) allows for some reflection: “Rhetorical policy refers to broad statements of educational goals often found in national addresses of senior political leaders. Enacted policies are the authoritative statements, decrees, or laws that give explicit standards and direction to the education sector. Implemented policies are the enacted policies, modified or unmodified, as they are translated into actions through systemic, programmatic, and project-level changes.” (2001, p. 222) [26]
If the “implemented policies” correspond to “enacted policies, modified or unmodified”, then the implementation process can hardly be limited to executing a decision.
5. Conceptualization of Framework
The theoretical background of this conceptual study framework is built on four dimensions for effective educational policy implementation (smart policy design, inclusive stakeholder engagement, conducive context, and coherent implementation strategy) (OECD, 2017) [27]. This framework was proposed for an implementation advisor or policymakers who would intervene when an education policy must be implemented at the national or regional level. It can be used as a threshold for support and analysis in launching and implementing an education policy. Smart policy design: in analyzing the smart policy design, OECD, (2017) [27] stated that a policy that offers a logical and feasible solution to the educational policy problem would determine whether and how it can be implemented. For instance, if a new school curriculum requires the use of high technology equipment that is not affordable by schools, the policy may fail to be implemented unless some budget is available at the national or local level. Inclusive stakeholder engagement: the process stakeholders’ recognition and inclusion in the implementation process is crucial to its effectiveness. For example, engaging teacher unions in discussions early in the policy process will benefit long-term. Conducive institutional, policy and societal context: An effective policy implementation process recognizes the influence of the existing policy environment, educational governance, institutional settings, and external context. Implementation is more likely to take effect when the context is acknowledged. Coherent implementation strategy to reach schools: This strategy outlines concrete measures that bring all the determinants together in a coherent manner to make the policy operational at the school level.
As shown in Figure 1, the coherent implementation strategy in the centre is surrounded by the determinants that influence and shape the implementation processes. It is a central tool to stir the implementation process, but a well-designed strategy is not sufficient to guarantee effective implementation. The process is piloted by a group of actors close with or mandated by policymakers to reach specific objectives. However, actors can influence it at various education system points, such as schools, parents, local or regional education authorities. It must also be noted that education policy implementation is embedded in the structures of a given education system at a given time, with particular actors, and around a specific educational policy (OECD, 2017) [27]. The central role of context shows that “there is no one-size-fits-all model” for implementing education policy. One must thus pay attention to the specificity of the policy, stakeholders and local context to analyze or make recommendations about the process. However, a common framework can help to structure the analysis and guide the implementation process.
6. Major Factors that Constrain the Effective Implementation of Education Policies in Nigeria
6.1. Funds and Corruption
If anything has significantly contributed to Nigeria’s stagnation of corporate development, it is this virus called “corruption” (Okoroma, 2006) [7]. It is found in
![]()
Figure 1. Policy implementation framework adopted from OECD education working paper No. 162 (2017) [27].
almost all aspects of human endeavor in Nigeria. Corruption has contributed to stagnating the development of education in Nigeria. Section 8, paragraphs 69a & b of the 4th edition of NPE (FRN, 2004) [28]; and section 5, paragraphs 91 a & b of the 6th edition of the policy (FRN, 2013) [29] addressed tertiary education, stating: 1) A sizeable proportion of national expenditure on university education shall be devoted to Science and Technology domain, while 2) not less than 60% shall be allocated conventional universities offering science and science-oriented courses and not less than 80% in the universities of technology and agriculture. It should be noticed that the above claims are lofty, but this policy contradicts what is on the field. Some good educational policies have been sabotaged at the implementation stage due to several reasons: firstly, lawmakers often pass the budgets for the implementation of the policies with personal strings attached to them. Secondly, even when the budgets are passed, the executive arm of government is often reluctant to release the funds to facilitate implementation. Lastly, the inadequate funds often released to the operators of the education system are not honestly and fully utilized to promote the cause of education. Many corruptly divert much of the available educational resources to serve personal interests. This is supported by the findings of Aghenta (1984) [30] with the following claims: The money available is not carefully used, as they do not get to the schools, and the little that gets there is typically wasted by those whose responsibility is to manage the schools. The UNESCO standard of allocation to education for all nations of the world is 26% of the national budget. During the dictatorship (military government) in Nigeria, education received as much as 13%. Nevertheless, the present democratic government in Nigeria has fallen short of this policy. For example, in 2001, it only allocated 8% to education. In 2006, the Federal Government’s provision for education was a dismal 10.4% of the budget. More disturbing is, in 2021, only 5.6% allocation of the national budget was given to education, the lowest percentage allocation since 2011 (FME, 2021) [31]. The National Association of Nigerian Students (NANS, 2021) [32] described the allocation of 5.6% of the 2021 budget to education under President Muhammadu Buhari’s government as the worst in the last decade and a neglect of the education sector in the 2021 budget.
Theses inadequate funding is the most critical challenge that has threatened policy implementation and the attainment of good quality tertiary education in Nigeria. Inadequate funding of education has been a scourge to educational development in the country. Onokorheraye (1995) [33], as Asiyai (2013) [34] quoted, maintained that a significant constraint to attaining academic excellence in Nigerian universities is financial constraints, making many academics and non-academics work under challenging circumstances. Many tertiary education institutions in Nigeria could not build lecture halls or equip laboratories and students’ hostels. Improper facilitation of workshops and massive slag in payment of academic staff salaries, allowances, research grants and medical bills. (Ivara and Mbanefo cited in Asiyai 2005 [30], 2013 [35]). Even the federal government of Nigeria (FGN) and the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) Re-negotiation Committee (2009) widely acknowledged that the key to the progress of Nigeria in the 21st century lies in the country’s ability to train and produce applied Theoretical knowledge in science, technology and humanities. The Renegotiation Committee arrived at a consensus on the need for a rational and scientific procedure for determining the funding requirements to revitalize the Nigerian university system. Despite all efforts made, the Nigerian government has not shown enough commitment toward adequate funding for higher education.
These claims also correlate with Aigheyisi & Obhiosa (2014) [36] findings in their investigation of the functionality of Nigeria’s tertiary education system, which argues that the system has been predominantly non-functional and identified some factors responsible for the problem. These problems are the weak commitment of the Nigerian government to the nation’s tertiary education system, manifested in inadequate funding of the nation’s higher institutions of learning; incessant strikes; poor implementation of educational policies by relevant authorities; inadequate skilled, qualified and experienced teachers in several departments in the institutions; the prevalence of corrupt practices in the higher institutions; weak educational foundation (at the primary and post-primary level), Etc. The empirical analysis involved the ordinary least squares (OLS) estimation technique which finds no evidence of a significant relationship between tertiary enrolment and real GDP (RGDP). However, it finds a significant positive relationship between several universities and the RGDP. The paper stated that the non-functionality of Nigeria’s tertiary education system constitutes a clog in the country’s wheel of economic progress. It calls for urgent reforms in the system to enhance its contribution to human and national development. Recommendations for policy consideration include a firm commitment of government (by way of improved funding) to strengthening the nation’s higher institutions by making them more functional.
What would have been a significant turnaround for the Nigerian education sector was the launch of the Community Accountability and Transparency Initiative (CATI). Whose objective was to get community development associations, town unions, Faith-Based Organizations (FBOs), NGOs involved in monitoring deployment, and public funds in schools. When fully operational, all disbursements to the institutions under the EPA funding mechanism would be published and made available to communities to ascertain if funds have been used for the purposes. For a start, CATI led to the publication of the capital and recurrent expenditure of institutions in 2005 and 2006. Unfortunately, the initiative was scrapped the moment that the Minister who championed its establishment left office. The same Minister attempted to restructure the parastatal and departments under the Ministry of Education to eliminate corruption and wastages. Moreover, to establish an autonomous inspectorate service unit as envisaged by the NPE (2004) [28]. Once the Minister left office, it was back to business as usual. This is yet another good policy but was caught up in the politics of poor implementation where an incoming new Minister reverses what his/her predecessor has put in place.
6.2. Accountability, Management and Governance
As analyzed in the conceptual framework earlier, accountability and management are amongst other determinants of Coherent implementation strategy a concrete measure to make policy operational at the school level. Chineze and Olele (2011) [37], in their study of Academic Accountability, Quality and Assessment of Higher Education in Nigeria, concluded that academic accountability, in terms of the quality of inputs and outputs, was low. Conversely, lack of political will to develop the education sector, low students’ learning readiness, and non-utilization of research findings affected the institutions’ academic accountability. Aina (2007) [38] posited that in Nigeria, responsibility for institutional policy making and decisions resides with a University Council whose membership is generally drawn from the government, the University and organizations from the private sector. Academic affairs are managed by the University Senate, which possesses full responsibility for this. According to Clark (2001) [39], this feature of the University is its relatively fragmented organizational structure run through committee systems. In Nigeria, administrative policies define the university administration’s responsibilities, including legal obligations and legislative requirements for the governing boards. They ensure that all institutional staff members are aware of the nature of their duties and responsibilities. For example, at Obafemi Awolowo University, the central administrative management department is the directorate of personnel affairs.
The directorate is divided into four sections:
1) Junior staff establishment (JSE);
2) Administrative and technical staff establishment (ATSE);
3) Academic staff establishment (ACSE) and;
4) Staff training and development unit (STD).
Provosts, Deans, and Heads of Departments/Units have to deal with their personnel management functions such as appointments, leave, promotion, regrading, training, and disciplines within these units. (Erero, 2008) [40]. Recognizing the importance of the concept of shared governance and re-balancing of university governance in Nigeria, Okebukola (2002) [41] confirmed that the National Universities Commission (NUC) took steps in 2001 to promote more professional and institutional management by encouraging institutional strategic planning (an instrument of participatory governance and institution renewal). It organized annual management training workshops for senior administrators and established a uniform accounting code for the University system. Although the National Universities Commission (NUC) is doing a good job, the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) believes it is usurping the legitimate functions of the Senate and is involved in many activities that derogate from the functions of university authorities. This implies that its centralized and unified approach stifles experimentation and initiative at the level of individual Universities (Erero, 2008) [40]. The emergence of a more responsive University management is slow. Clark (2001) [39] attributes this to the limits on government funding capability combined with rigid internal organizational structures. Currently, University administration is based on a participatory system of Senate and various committees, but their agendas and practices are increasingly old-fashioned. Therefore, there is a need for a strategic reorientation of these bodies to change national circumstances. This lack of adaptability in the light of changing circumstances may hinder Nigerian Universities from competing effectively in an increasingly competitive and globalizing world (Ogbogu, 2011) [42].
Additionally, the poor leadership of some Nigerian university administrators has been a bane to the attainment of quality tertiary education in Nigeria (Asiyai, 2017) [43]. The goals of these universities can be effectively attained when the human resources within the institutions are properly managed and maintained for their positive impacts on productivity. Leadership has to reduce problems within the system in order to enhance efficiency. However, 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. (Adesina, 1977 [44]; Adesina, 1988 [45]; ASUU, 1994 [46]). Accordingly, Okebukola, 1998 [47] argued that some university administrators’ poor leadership did not involve staff union members in decision-making. While Iyayi (2002) [48], cited by Asiyai (2017) [43], argued that the dismissal of some academics without following due process indicated poor governance, much academic staff were de-motivated to serious academic pursuit. Additionally, Bamiro (2012) [49] maintained that the unfavorable governance leading to a series of strikes resulting in the closure of some institutions for up to 177 days accounted for the low quality of tertiary education in Nigeria. This unfavorable 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 tertiary education in Nigeria.
6.3. Lack of Continuity of Education Policies
The change in governance is not problematic to the education system but, the lack of continuity of policy practiced by the government causes major disruption to educational goal attainment. So, various governments formulated educational policies, but political instability discouraged the political will to implement such policies. As new governments came in succession, continuity in policy implementation is not guaranteed; this has affected educational policy implementation in Nigeria. Teachers and school management are also made to go through a change of actions in line with newly formulated policies.
The constant change in educational policies characterizes the Nigerian education system. Educational policies have been changed repeatedly, even by the same leader in power. They have not always been given time to mature before their termination. The political climate in Nigeria has not been conducive enough to give room for continuity of good educational plans and policies because every successive political leader (civilian or military) wanted to be identified with new policies, thereby suspending the existing ones. According to Odukoya (2006) [50], constant Changes in Policies tend to negatively affect the implementation of the National Policy on Education and consequently the standard of education.
7. Implications on Welfare of Teacher Labor Market in Nigeria
7.1. The Image and Status of Teaching -- Teachers Often Feel that Their Work Is Undervalued
Successful implementation of any formulated education policy great depends on the cooperation of school management and classroom teachers. Thus, it makes perfect sense to involve teachers in policy formulation planning and development to facilitate successful implementation, thereby improving the standard of education. However, unfortunately, according to (VSO, 2006 [51]; Oloruntegbe, 2011 [52]; Dike, Ngwuchukwu & Anyim, 2020 [53]), Teachers are often drafted in classroom implementation of curriculum reforms but are seldom involved in the development and how best to implement such reforms. Teachers feel ill-informed on new policies on education, particularly in rural areas, and they are expected to implement them with no prior notice and without the proper information. Without prior notice or consultation, policies are put in place, while communication is slow and inconsistent. Teachers and headteachers are often unfamiliar with all the new policies and reforms; this severely impacts teachers’ motivation levels and commitment to work. Klein (1999) [54] argued, “Teachers have the power to make happen or break decisions advocated at any education level. The author further stressed that if teachers are allowed to be a part of decision-making processes that affect their educational practice, they may be more inclined to implement classroom policies. Involving teachers to participate in the decision-making process prepares teachers to be better policymakers and contributes to policy decisions that strengthen schools and improve the quality and standard of education in Nigeria.
According to VSO (2006) [51] in their report on teachers’ voice: a policy research report on teachers’ motivation and perceptions of their profession in Nigeria; teachers expressed a high level of dissatisfaction with problems upgrading teachers, no bonuses or incentives, Salary rise subjected to federal schools and it should be universal to all states, Lack of inspections and monitoring by the federal state to see if policies have come into play, Curriculum changed every one or two years, Federal government neglects teachers, Unfair promotions, Lack of promotion and poor implementation of promotions, amongst other mentioned dissatisfying factors. Ogunyinka, Okeke & Adedoyin (2015) [55] depicted that Despite the various recommendations and reforms that targeted repositioning teacher education in the country for optimal performance, the challenges facing teacher education in Nigeria are still numerous. While some of these emerged with changing socio-economic and political conditions, others evolved due to government neglect of the education sector. Especially as it concerns keeping pace with emerging realities, such as servicing Nigeria’s growing population, education demand and needs with a matching supply of education services and facilities.
7.2. Impact of Poor Working Environments on Job Satisfaction and Teaching Effectiveness
Adequate planning for implementing education policy is vital for achieving educational objectives. According to Corkery, Land, and Bossuyt (1995) [56], a lack of attention to implementation strategies during policy formulation results in shortages of required resources or an underestimation of the complexity of the policy. According to Egonmwan (1991) [57], policy formulation, implementation and monitoring are complex in a situation where the policies and strategies for the implementation and monitoring are empirically not sound. The lack of instructional materials that can facilitate good educational outcomes and a conducive learning environment that will make teaching and learning attractive to both the teachers and the students are evidence of improper planning for implementing education policy. Research studies have shown that the availability of instructional materials and a good and conducive school environment are essential for the proper implementation of education policy and, consequently, the high academic achievement of students (Akinfe, Olofinniyi and Fashiku, 2012 [58]; Akinsolu, 2010 [59]). These scarcities will constrain the educational system from responding more fully to new demands. In Nigeria, the poor school environment, which has resulted from poor funding for education, has been one of the significant problems in achieving the goals and objectives of education. According to Akinditure, Ayodele and Osiki (2011) [60], funding of education programmes was not only found to be inadequate but was also based on the priority of the ruling government. Gbenu (2012) [61] listed that Inadequate provision of infrastructural facilities, teaching aids and instructional materials in schools, Poor remuneration of teachers, and poor conditions of service reduces teachers’ commitment to teaching.
7.3. Limited Connections between Teacher Education, Teachers’ In-Service Professional Development, and School Needs
Most institutions of tertiary education in Nigeria lack a sound staff development programme for training and retraining of staff. A good staff professional development programme will continuously help academics and non-academics clarify and modify their behaviour, attitude, value, skills, and competencies (Seniwoliba & Yakubu, 2015) [62]. In this era of emergent knowledge-based economy, staff development should prioritize any nation. Peretomode (2008) [63] argued that the weakness of postgraduate programmes in some institutions of education in Nigeria required a strong staff professional development programme. He further stated that universities are staffed by lecturers who are not familiar with the topography of the educational landscape and have never been expected to formulate their philosophies of education or their views about teaching and learning. Likewise, Chukwuma & Peretomode (2007) [64], in their study, revealed that a significant relationship existed between human resources development and lecturer’s productivity. Additionally, Asiyai and Oghuvbu (2009) [65] reported that the lack of staff professional development programmes accounted for the severe decline in the quality of institutes of tertiary education in Nigeria.
Similarly, Adeogun (2006) [66] pointed out that an employee who is not trained and exposed to continuous retraining in the modern methods and discoveries in his or her field would soon become irrelevant to the organization. Due to the lack of opportunity for retraining and non-mentoring of junior lecturers by professors, the junior lecturers are not widely exposed to new ideas, facts, theories and research findings in the field. Several scholars have reported the deficiency of teacher professional education programmes in Nigeria (Okorafor, 2002 [67]; Falayayo, 2004 [68]; Ajayi, 2007 [69]). This calls for additional training of teachers if quality in the education system of Nigeria is to be attained.
7.4. Brain Drains of Qualified Lectures/Scholars
A big challenge to the quality of education in Nigeria is the problem of brain drain caused by low standards of teacher welfare and a lack of high investment in education. Over the past decades now, there has been a massive exodus of brilliant and most talented lecturers and scholars to other sectors of the economy (Yaro et al., 2015) [70]. A lecture given by The Director, Centre for Open, Distance and e-Learning reviewed that over five thousand qualified lectures and scholars leave Nigeria yearly for other countries. Some of the lecturers left the tertiary institutions to join the business world, and some joined politics while others left Nigeria for other countries. As said by Ali (2000) [71], lots of brilliant young lecturers are fleeing Nigeria into more rewarding and more challenging sectors of the economy. There is a diminishing scope of mentoring junior researchers by seasoned and senior lecturers in Nigeria due to brain drain. This issue of brain drain has also led to a very disturbing decline in research outputs from institutions of tertiary education in Nigeria and a decrease in the existence of research bodies in Nigerian universities. Importantly, Research brings about improvement in teaching and learning (Asiyai 2009) [72], but when there is an exodus of brilliant and seasoned academics from tertiary education institutions, the quality of education delivery is threatened.
8. Measures to Improve Welfare of the Teacher Labor Market
1) Launch of proper implementation of the national teacher education policy. The federal government should work hand in hand with the Federal Ministry of Education to improve the quality of the teaching profession in Nigeria to review, relaunch and implement the rigid National Teacher Education Policy, which should be maintained or enhanced for the development of education. This policy should be held at a minimum level even when a new government is in place. Implementing change in teacher education policy should be carefully done and evaluated by qualified education policymakers and not elite in the government.
2) Policy implementation that prioritizes Teacher Education welfare through concrete professional development programs that support teacher acquisition and development of current knowledge of their professions should be carried out.
3) Policy implementation that prioritizes teachers’ welfare through the provision of conducive learning Atmos firm, appropriate housing allowance, early payment of teachers’ wages, and provision of incentives and research grants for teachers should be implemented.
4) Full constitutional rights to change teacher education policies should be handed over to institutions such as the national teacher’s Institute (NTI) and the teacher’s Registration Council of Nigeria (TRCN) since they are qualified elites in teacher education policy formulations.
5) Finally, educational policies should not be revised based on political sentiments; the federal government of Nigeria should place premium importance on education by meeting the UNESCO recommended standard of 26% national budget allocation to education.
9. Conclusions
Monitoring and maintaining minimum standards will not work in an atmosphere of non-payment of teachers and other staff in the education sector. Sometimes, universities and secondary schools are shut down for several months due to strike actions, and no learning occurs. Essential education for emancipation is given haphazardly when teachers eventually resume work, and maintaining standards becomes impossible. These factors are also responsible for the high level of brain drain in Nigeria, as financially able students, lecturers, and scholars always opt to study abroad and later develop no interest in returning to Nigeria. Additionally, several education sectors have overlapping functions and responsibilities, making it very difficult to have a clear-cut demarcation of who does what (Akanbi & Jekayinfa, 2019) [73]. Ajulor (2018) [74] advocated the need for governments to 1) devote more money to the education sector, 2) curb corruption, ensure transparency and accountability in the education sector, 3) restructure the sector to ensure that the functions and responsibilities of various government agencies are clearly established 4) consider the critical role played by private providers in the education delivery system; 5) ensure that the policy formulation process is participatory; and 6) decrease the politicization of education ministry roles and a level of involvement in the education delivery system; The high turnover of the Federal Ministry of Education’s leadership for successful implementation and continuity of policies.
This paper concludes that the lack of successful implementation of educational policy in Nigeria’s institutions of education, majorly caused by insufficient funding, has led to the inability to meet desirable educational standards, goals and objectives even in the 21 century. It is thus recommended that the federal government of Nigeria should work hand in hand with expertise in the formulation and analysis of educational policy to re-assess both past and current factors that constrain effective education policy implementation and how negatively it affects the welfare of the teacher labour market in Nigeria. Then, reinforce positive change. It is also recommended that newly formulated policies resulting in a change of government should not be forced on people without proper consultation. As Borko & Putnam (1995) [75] rightful postulated that the most critical factor contributing to students’ academic achievement is the quality of teaching received. The importance of the epistemic community and the masses’ influence on policy cannot be overemphasized. Thus, the interest of these groups cannot be taken for granted. A question to bear in mind is, “if interest is contrary to the benefit of the target group or the supposed beneficiary of the formulated policy, what happens”?