The National Board for Technical Education (NBTE) has disclosed its plan to outsource polytechnic accreditation to private consultants. Expectedly, the decision has attracted criticisms from the Academic Staff Union of Polytechnics (ASUP) and other stakeholders in the technical education sub-sector.
The union described the move as an attempt to commercialise the board’s core mandate and undermine the integrity of the accreditation process.
As it is characteristic of Nigerian public institutions to defend their policies and programmes, whether wrong or right, ill-conceived or selfishly motivated, the board’s management has rolled out its arsenal to justify the policy, which implies that it is a fait accompli.
The board said the outsourcing was limited to physical accreditation and only for institutions that lack the necessary Information Communication Technology (ICT) infrastructure to access its digital accreditation platform which remained the primary method for accreditation and quality assurance processes, fully under the board’s control.
NBTE said, “The outsourcing model applies only to institutions that are unable to log into our existing digital platform. It is structured to maintain transparency, prevent conflicts of interest, and uphold the integrity of the accreditation process.
“The proposed framework aims to address the growing challenge of regulating an increasing number of institutions (over 800 and counting) under NBTE’s jurisdiction, with fewer than 100 programme officers (NBTE staff)” the board said.
On face value, these reasons look plausible, but the looming consequences and the haste with which NBTE is pushing it, are too grave to be ignored.
If we may ask, why is the NBTE in a haste to force down the policy on the throat of the institutions and other stakeholders?
The fact that the minister of education has approved it, in the words of the board, does not make it right. It is possible that the originators, marketers and champions of the initiative misinformed and misled him.
The board’s claim that it is restricted to institutions that lack the required ICT infrastructure to log into its portal for a credible accreditation is neither tenable nor acceptable.
In this technology-driven age, any polytechnic seeking accreditation without the required ICT facilities has already failed the test and should not be considered at all.
We also disagree with NBTE that it lacks the human capital to handle the accreditation of the 800 polytechnic and other tech schools in the country. If the board does not have the human resources at its disposal to undertake this fundamental task, we do not think that the private consultants being considered for the job are better on that score.
Even with the current workforce of 100 programme officers, this newspaper believes that the NBTE can still undertake the task because not all the schools will be seeking accreditation at the same time.
It is also uneconomical to outsource the job to consultants who are likely to use fewer personnel and charge the board more than it currently pays its workers for the exercise.
If the board lacks the personnel, let the management engage more competent hands who abound in the country.
From the position of ASUP, it is clear that the union was never consulted by the board. Were its members involved in its conception, the plan would have been more robust and the current resistance avoided.
If polytechnics’ accreditation is taken out of the functions of the NBTE, what then remains of the board?
While we are not against reforms, innovation and ingenuity by public institutions, we consider the outsourcing of polytechnic accreditation too sensitive and important to be left in private hands, whose integrity cannot be guaranteed.
If the NBTE wants to settle political jobbers and hangers-on in the corridors of power, who may be flaunting the idea and mounting pressure on the management, it is certainly not the outsourcing of polytechnic accreditation. We advise that the idea should die a natural death.
Also, if the Bugaje-led board feels so strongly about the policy, let them submit the entire process to public scrutiny. They should let Nigerians know who these public vendors are, their competence and experience as well as what edge they have over the in-house personnel. The management should also disclose the cost implications and the selection process.
This newspaper insists that if the plan is implemented, as conceived now, it will be a recipe for disaster and a threat to the quality of polytechnic education in Nigeria.
Accreditation is a critical process and a responsibility that requires expertise, independence, and impartiality.
To outsource it to private consultants, the NBTE is bound to compromise the integrity of the exercise and endanger the quality of polytechnic education.
Private consultants are driven by profit motive; therefore, the consultants may not have the required expertise and restraints to be thorough and unbiased in their assessments. This could lead to a situation where substandard polytechnics are accredited, thereby compromising the quality of graduates produced by them.
The measure could also undermine the authority and credibility of the NBTE, which is the statutory body responsible for regulating and supervising polytechnic education in Nigeria.
We, therefore, challenge the NBTE to rather focus on strengthening its internal mechanism and capacity to conduct accreditation exercises. This will involve recruiting and training more staff, improving infrastructure, and developing a more robust and transparent accreditation process.
Against this backdrop, we appeal to the minister of education, the National Assembly, and other stakeholders to revisit the plan and review the activities of the NBTE to ensure that it does not go ahead with this ill-advised initiative.
