University of Nigeria Research Publications

Aut

hor

AGBO, Denis C.

PG/MED/06/40801

Title

Modalities for Improving Local Government

Education Authorities Participation in the Funding of Primary Schools in Enugu State

Facu

lty

Education

Dep

artm

ent

Educational Foundations

Dat

e September, 2007

Sign

atur

e

MODALITIES FOR IMPROVING LOCAL GOVERNMENT EDUCATION AUTHORITIES PARTICIPATION IN THE FUNDING OF PRIMARY SCHOOLS IN ENUGU STATE

AGBO, DENIS C. (REV. FR.) PG / M.ED / 06 140801

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATIONS

(EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND PLANNING)

UNIVERSITY O F NIGERIA, NSUKU

SEPTEMBER, 2007.

TITLE PAGE

MODALITIES FOR IMPROVING LOCAL GOVERNMENT EDUCATION AUTHORITIES PARTICIPATION IN THE FUNDING OF PRIMARY SCHOOLS IN ENUGU STATE

A RESEARCH PROJECT PRESENTED TO THE DEPARTMENT

OF EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATIONS

UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA, NSUKXA

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE

A WARD OF MASTER DEGREE IN EDUCATION

AGBO, DENIS C. {REV. FR.} PG I M.ED 106 140801

SEPTEMBER, 2007

APPROVAL PAGE

This thesis has approved for the Department of Educational Foundations, University of Nigeria, Nsukka.

SUPERVISOR

Prof. G.C. Unachukwu EXTERNAL EXAMJNER

Dr. J.C. Omeje INTERNAL EXAMINER

Prof. fihkdzikiwe ( W R ) HEAD OF DEPARTMENT

Prof- * -G gg);,",",ion Dean, Faculty o

CERTIFICATION

AGBO, DENIS CHUKWUJIEKWU {REV. FR.) a post graduate student in the Department of Educational Foundation with registration number PGI M.ED/ 061 40801 has satisfactorily completed the requirments for course and research work for the degree of Masters' in Education.

This work embodied in this project is original and has not been submitted in part or full for any other diploma or degree of this or any other university.

Agbo ~ e n i $ (Rev. Fr.} -------- Prof.

--

STUDENT SUPERVISOR

TO ALL WHO ARE CONCERNED

ABOUT THE CONDITION I N

OUR PRIMARY SCHOOLS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I thank God first and foremost, for His goodness to me, without whom I can do nothing. My appreciation goes to my Local Ordinary, Most Rev. Dr. F.E.O. Okobo, Bishop of Nsukka Catholic Diocese, for offering me the opportunity to study. He is simply a Father in the real sense of it.

My thanks and gratitude go to my supervisor, Prof. N. 0 . Ogbonnaya who was always composed, cheerful and ready to listen to me and solve my difficulties in the course of this research work. I find him a dedicated, understanding and inspiring supervisor.

I am very grateful to the presbyterium of Nsukka Catholic Diocese for their brotherly encouragement, advice, understanding and solidarity shown throughout the period of this study more especially my parish priest Very Rev. Fr. Dr. G. U. Dine who is the brain behind this programme. He took it prime among many other scales of preference. Fr. IK. Anieke, Fr. L. Nnaji are also remembered for supplying me with necessary and required environment. They are loving.

I thank my colleagues for their mutual cooperation, solidarity and support which facilitated this research.

I sincerely thank my parents, brothers and sisters for their spectacular inspiration.

Finally, to all whose names are not mentioned here, I say thank you, be blessed in the Name of the Lord. Amen.

Denis Agbo Chukwujiekwu (Rev. Fr.) Department of Educational Foundations University Of Nigeria, Nsukka.

TABLE OF CONTENTS Pages

Title Page ---

Approval Page ---

Certification --

Dedication ---

Acknowledgement

Table of Contents

List of Tables

Abstract

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

Statement of the Problem

Purpose of the Study ---

Significance of the Study

Scope of the Study ---

Research Questions ---

Hypotheses ---

i

ii

iii

iv

v

vi

ix

X

1

1

7

8

9

10

11

11

CHAPTER 11: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE --- --- 13 Conceptual Framework --- --- --- --- --- --- 14

Concept and Ownership of Primary Education --- --- --- 14

Importance and Objectives of Primary Education --- --- --- 17

Historical Background of primary Education in Nigeria --- --- 18

Management of Primary Education --- --- --- --- --- 20

Funding of Primary Education --- --- --- --- --- 23

Sources of Fund for Primary Education --- --- --- --- 28

Provision and Management of Infrastructure, Facilities and Equipment 33

Modalities for Improving Local Government Participation in the Funding

of Primary Schools --- --- --- ---

Review of Empirical Studies --- --- ---

Summary of Literature Review --- ---

CHAPTER 11 1: RESEARCH METHOD ---

Design of the Study --- ---

Area of the Study --- ---

Population of the Study --- ---

Sample and Sampling Technique

Instrument for Data Collection ---

Validation of the Instrument ---

Reliability of the Instrument ---

Method of Data Collection ---

Method of DataAnalysis --- ---

CHAPTER FOUR: PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA

Research Question One --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Research Question Two --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

vii

Research Question Three

Research Question Four

Hypothesis One ---

Hypothesis Two ---

Hypothesis Three ---

Summary of the Findings

CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS

Conclusion --- --- --- ---

Implication of the Study --- --- ---

Recommendations --- --- --- ---

Limitations of the Study --- --- ---

Suggestions for Further Study --- ---

Summary of the Study --- --- --- ---

REFERENCES --- --- --- ---

APPENDICES

A Letter of introduction to respondents

The Questionnaire --- --- ---

Budgetary Allocation to Education ---

Validation --- --- ---

Computation of Z - Test for H01 ---

Computation of Z - Test for H02 ---

Computation of Z - Test for H03 ---

... Vlll

LIST OF TABLES

Mean ratings of teachers, and supervisors and education secretaries on the extent of fulfillment of their statutory roles..45

Means ratings of teachers, and supervisor and education secreaties on constrains to local government education authorities participation in the funding of primary schools.. .... .47

111. Mean ratings of teachers and supervisorsleducation secretaries on how identified constraints affect effective local government education authorities participation in the funding of primary education.. ................................................................................. 48

IV. Mean ratings of teachers and supervisorsleducation secretaries on strategies to be adopted to iprove local government education

......... authorities participation in funding of primary schools.. .50

V. Summary of Z-test analysis of hypothesis 1 .............................. 51

VI. Summary of Z-test analysis of hypothesis ............................... 52

VII. .Summary of Z-test analysis of hypothesis 3 ............................. 53

Abstract This study investigated modalities for improving local government

education authorities participation in the funding of primary schools in

Enugu State. Four research questions and three null hypotheses were

formulated for the study. A 32 - item questionnaire was developed and

administered to 524 subjects (300 primary school teachers and 224

supervisors and education secretaries) in Enugu State. The data collected

were analyzed using mean scores. Z - test statistic was employed in

testing the null hypothesis. The study found out that the statutory role of

the local government education authorities such as submitting estimates,

annual and monthly returns to SUBEB are being fulfilled in Enugu State.

Inadequate funding, misappropriation of fund, poor statistical data, lack

of stable policies and politicization of education sector constituted

constraints to LGEAs participation in the funding of primary schools in

Enugu State. Identified constraints such as placing of wrong persons in

professional function, lack of initiative and creativity and poor education

achievement in education are some of the adverse effects of ineffective

LGEAs participation in the funding of primary schools in Enugu State. In

the light of the findings, the researcher recommended that funds should

be generated through rates, endowment funds, property taxes, and that

funds allocated to education should be used properly as ways of

improving LGEAs participation in funding primary schools in Enugu

State.

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

Education is a public good that calls for greater support from the

three tiers of Government (Federal, State, Local Government), corporate

organizations, and individuals. Public good, according to Ekeocha and

Fonta (2007) is that aspect of education one benefits from even haven't

paid and does not diminish the amount available for the next person. It is

an investment in human beings because it yields economic and social

benefits to both the individual in particular and to the society in general.

The National Policy on Education (FRN, 2004:14), sharing this view

maintains that "through education the individual acquires appropriate

skills and competences that enable him to contribute to the development

of the society". The level of education spending overtime (with particular

reference to primary education) in Nigeria remains low. For instance in

2002 the Federal government allocated these percentages to the various

levels of institutions: Universities 51.2%, Polytechnics 16.0%, Colleges

of Education 9.7, Secondary schools 15.6% and Primary 7.5% ( W W .

fmf. gov. ng; WWW. Budgetoffice. gov. ng).

Education is the life wire and indeed the bedrock of any nation. Primary

education is the foundation of all levels of education hence it cannot be

ignored. This is because the foundation of all levels of education starts

from the primary school. Primary education is the education given in an

institution for children aged 6 to 11 plus (FRN, 2004:14). Obanya (1989)

observed that primary school is the first stage of formal education. In the

words of Fafanwa (1989:9), "primary education is the core of African

development even though many African educators would rather give

priority to secondary, technical and university education". Primary school

is very essential because it is a place where the proper tomorrow of any

individual can and must be built (Ukeje 1989). According to the National

Policy on Education (FRN 2004), it moulds the character of a child in all

its ramification.

In view of its importance, many governments would like primary

education to be free and compulsory for all. With that reason in mind, the

then Western region Minister of education, presented a comprehensive

proposal for the introduction of a free, universal and compulsory

education known as Universal Primary Education (UPE). The scheme

was introduced on 17 January 1955 in the region. In January 1957, the

Universal Primary Education scheme was launched in the Eastern region.

The Northern Region was unable to enter the race principally for

financial reasons compounded by the enormity of the number of children

of school age resident in the region (Fahwa, 1982).

The then Federal Military Government of Nigeria under the

leadership of General Olusegun Obasanjo in September 1976 made

primary education free and universal by launchg a national Universal

Primary Education ( W E ) programme. With the launching of the scheme

for the whole nation, Nigeria aimed at, perhaps a gigantic milestone in the

area of organized education. But at the same time Federal Military

Government set in motion, unwittingly, series of crisis in the educational

system. There were many crises lrke crisis of supply and demand, the

crisis of administration and administrative structures, the crisis of

community support and confidence, the crisis of equality of educational

opportunities, and the crisis of relevance and realities (Ukeje 1989).

During the implementation of the (UPE) programme, enrolment of pupils

reached its apex (Fafunwa 1982). For instance, the primary school

population rose from 457,000 in 1954 to 811,000 in 1955 that is an

increase of 77%. Again primary school enrolment skyrocketed from

775,000 pupils in 1956 to 1.2 million in 1957. This represented an

increase of children in school from 48 percent in 1956 to 73 percent in

1957. Again in the year 1964 the total primary school enrolment in

Nigeria was 2,849,488. This stood at 5,950,296 by the 1975/76 school

year, representing an increase of about 108% within a decade. Primary

school enrolment skyrocketed to 8,242,060 during the 1976/77 school

year because of the (UPE), an increase of 38.35% within a year.

By the 1977/78 school year, the enrolment had jumped to

10,104,670 and by the 1982/83 session it exceeded 15,000,000. This

represents over 400% increase within two decades. In the statistical

information on Basic Education in Nigeria, primary schools pupils in

Nigeria stand thus: 1999 she has 17,907,008, in 2000 - 19,158,541, in

2001 - 19,263,534, 2002 - 19,861,654, and in 2003 - 25,765969. There

has been an increase in enrolment as the years goes by. In 2005 Enugu

State has 281710 pupil in her primary schools, and when summed up with

other states it shows an increase (SUBEB 2005). In view of this,

everything connected with education, apart from the pupils themselves,

was lacking and it is still lacking. For example, school building

classrooms, teachers, teaching materials and textbooks.

Today the primary school system in Nigeria is grossly neglected.

The buildings are dilapidated, dirty environment, irregular payment of

teacher's salaries, lack of facilities and equipment, irregular inspection

among others. SUBEB (2005) observed that funding of primary education

in the early 1900's was as much of a problem as it is today. Government

funds were limited. Contributions of people were very minimal because

people seem too poor to make some extra donations towards education

development. Education is never free because somebody always has to

pay for it. Ezeocha (1989) maintained that primary education should be

financed as a shared responsibility among the Federal, State and Local

Government. The federal government welcomes parents and local

communities to contribute to the funding of education at different levels

of education (FRN, 2004).

By Decree 96 of 1993, the government established the State

Primary Education Board (SPEB) which is today known as State

Universal Basic Education Board (SUBEB) (UBE Blue Print, 2000). This

board participates fully in management and fimding of primary schools in

the state. Government has been responsible for the payment of all

categories of primary school teachers, maintenance of school buildings,

and the provision of teaching materials. Today government funding is

dwindling, indicating that it cannot shoulder the responsibility of h d i n g

primary education effectively. This is because of the increase in pupil's

enrolment culminating in problems of inadequacy of school facilities,

tack of personnel etc.

The Local Government Education Authorities (LGEAs)

responsibilites include: submission of annual estimates, annual acounts

and monthly returns, payment of salaries, allowances and benefits to all

the teaching and non - teaching staff, acquisition and distribution of

materials and equipment to all public primary schools, undertaking

general maintenance of school buildings and infrastructure and

stimulating, promoting and encouraging community participation in the

running of primary schools in its area of jurisdiction (SUBEB 2005).

Each local government councils in the federation therefore contributes

some percentage in the funding of primary school in their areas of

jurisdiction. Following World Bank (2003) funds for primary education

service were provided by each tier of government in 1999; however,

about 86 percent of the funds for primary education came fiom the local

governments' allocation derived fiom the Federation Account while most

of this fund was for teachers' salaries. Federal government provides only

small amounts, while the state government contributions appear to have

been around 10 to 12 percent (World Bank, 2003).

The policy makers of this nation are conscious of the importance of

primary level of education as the first stage where the foundation of

education is laid. This is why they brought the administration of primary

education at the grassroots. Thus the LGEAs are responsible for the

administration of primary schools at the local government level.

From the foregoing, the situation for modalities for improving

local government participation in the funding of primary schools is

eminent since one of the goals of creating local government councils is to

bring development to every nook and cranny of the nation. The local

government councils seem not to be living up to expectations towards the

primary level of education; hence this has necessitated the researcher to

find out modalities for improving local government participation in

funding of primary schools in Enugu State.

Statement of the Problem

The Nigerian education system has witnessed a great deal of

transformation in recent time. As the aims and objectives for setting up

educational institutions have continued to widen, new subjects have been

enlarged to reflect the critical needs of Nigerian society. This expansion

implies rise in cost to both the government and the general public. High

premium is placed on funding of education, because the success of any

project depends, to a large extent, on the availability of funds for the

project. The primary level of education, especially, and other levels of

education have problem of inadequate funding. And one has expected the

local government councils to be up and doing with regard to the funding

of primary education but the primary schools are in comfortable ruts.

The situation is not different in Enugu State. The primary schools

in the state, suffer accommodation problems due to lack of funds, lack

teaching materials, such as instructional materials like textbooks due to

Cack of funds, lack furniture such as tables, chairs and desks due to lack of

funds, do not have enough qualified teachers because of lack of funds, are

not effectively supervised due to lack of funds and have salaries and

allowances of their teachers delayed because of diversion of money

meant for their salaries to other sectors.

By Decree 3 of 1991, the local government councils are entrusted with

the management and control of primary schools in their areas. But this

arrangement rather than helping matters worsened the situation. This is

because most of the chairmen of these councils have little or no

knowledge of the educational system. Even the replacement of Decree 3

of 1991 with Decree 96 of 1993, which established the State Primary

Education Board (SPEB) now called State Universal Basic Education

Board (SUBEB) did not change the situation positively. This is because

of the fact that chairmen who are in - charge of the Board at both the

state and local government levels are political appointees who may not

have any knowledge of educational management. The implication is that

they are not bothered much about the state of the primary schools hence

they divert or embezzle the money meant for the sector.

From the foregoing, it is clear that most of the problems

confi-onting the primary level of education, especially in Enugu State is

poor funding. Without adequate funding, the schools will remain in their

comfortable ruts, hence the researcher's interest to investigate modalities

for improving the local government participation in the funding of

primary schools in Enugu State.

Purpose of the Study

The main purpose of this study is to investigate the modalities for

improving local government participation in the funding of primary

schools in Enugu State. Specifically, this study intend to:

Find out the extent the local government education authorities fulfil

their statutory roles in funding of primary schools.

Investigate the constraints to local government education

authorities participation in the funding of primary schools.

Examine how the identified constraints affect effective local

government education authorities participation in the fundtng of

primary schools.

Determine strategies to be adopted to improve local government

education authorities participation in the funding of primary

schools.

Significance of the Study

The success of any establishment depends solely on proper

planning, adequate fimding and effective management. The education

sector is not an exception. The result of this study will be of tremendous

benefit towards finding a permanent solution to the problem of primary

education in Enugu state.

Local government education authorities will benefit from this in

the sense that they will see the ways and apppreciate on how to improve

their participation in fimding of primary schools.

The result will also benefit the pupils because when funding of

primary schools is improved the set objectives will be achieved then the

quality and quanity of primary school pupils will be what it is supposed

to be.

When there is improvement in funding of primary education,

payment of teachers' salaries and allowances, salaries of non - teaching

staff will be regular. This will motivate the staff for maximum

performance. Therefore both pupils and society in general will benefit

from it.

Parents will be of great benefical in that the result of what they

spend their hard earned resources will not be regretted. Their wards will

be useful to them especially with regards to their welfare.

When primary schools are improved with regards to funding,

pupils will achieve what they are meant to achieve, this will in-turn

improve our economy due to pupils' out - put.

Scope of the Study

The study is limited to primary schools in Enugu State. There are

six education zones and 1845 primary schools in the state.

Content coverage include: the extent to which local government

education authorities fulfil their statuatory roles, constraints to local

government education authorities participation in funding primary

education, effect of the identified constraints to effective participation in

Mding, and the strategies to be adopted to improve local government

participation in the funding of primary schools.

Research Questions

The following research questions were formulated to guide the

study.

To what extent do the local government education authorities firlfil

their statutory roles?

What are the constraints to local government education authorities

participation in the funding of primary schools?

What are the affect of the identified constraints to effective local

government education authorities participation in the funding of

primary schools?

What are the strategies to be adopted to improve local government

education authorities participation in the fimding of primary

schools?

Hypotheses

The following null hypotheses were formulated to guide the study

and will be tested at 0.05 level of significance.

1. There will be no significant difference between the mean ratings of

Teachers, and supervisors and Education secretaries on the extent

Imxd government education authorities fulfil their statutory roles in

funding of primary schools.

2 . There will be no significant difference between the mean ratings of

Teachers, and supervisors and Education secretaries on the

constraints to local government education authorities participation

in funding of primary education.

3 . There will be no significant difference between the mean ratings

of Teachers, and supervisors and Education secretaries on

strategies that can be adopted to improve local government

education authorities participation in funding of primary schools.

CHAPTER TWO

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

This review of related literature is presented under two major sub -

headings, the conceptual framework, and the empirical studies. There will

be a summary of the reviewed literature.

A. Conceptual frame work

1.

. . 11.

... 111.

iv.

v.

vi .

vii .

viii.

ix.

B.

Concept and ownership of Primary Education.

Importance and objectives of Primary Education.

Historical background of Primary Education in Nigeria.

Management of Primary Education.

Funding of Pnmary Education.

Sources of Fund for Primary Education.

Recruitment of Staff.

Provision and Management of Facilities.

Modalities for improving Local Government Funding of Primary

Education.

Review of empirical studies.

Summary of literature review.

Conceptual Framework

Concept and Ownership of Primary Education

Primary education is the education given in an institution for

children between the age of six and eleven plus (FRN, 2004). All other

education system builds on it; therefore it determines the success or

failure of the whole system of education and a nation in general.

According to Fafunwa (1989), primary schools are essential ingredients

for relevant and meaningfwl education.

The ownersliip of primary education, simply put, is the body or

organization controlling the management of primary education. The body

is also in - charge of regulating the activities and determining, to an

extent, the policies of primary education (Omenyi 1987). Organization or

groups such as the Federal government, the State government, the Local

government, the Missionaries or the Voluntary Agencies and Individuals

are owners of primary schools.

Tbe ownership of schools changed in Nigeria in 1970 when

government took over schools from the Voluntary Agencies and

individuals and later in 1976 introduced the Universal Primary Education

(WE). According to Ukeje (1992), the complete and total transfer of the

ownership and control of education in Nigeria froin Voluntary Agencies

io the government started with the then East - Central State Public

Education Edict, 1970. By that public Education Edict, 1970, the military

government of the then East Central State took over the ownership and

control of all primary and post - primary schools in the state. In other

words, by this Edict, the state governments took over schools from their

erstwhile owners and all the schools became government's own. The

transfer of schools to the state was legalized under section 2 sub - section

{ i f of the Edict in the following words "subject to the provisions of this

Edict: there shall, on the appointed day, be transferred to and vested in

the state by virtue of this Edict:

every property used Jor the purpose of a voluntary Agency or private school or firming part of such voluntary agency or private schools, being property held im m ediately before the appointed day by the proprietor of'that school or by the trustee for the purpose of that school, and; all right and liabilities to which any such proprietor or trustees were entitled or subject immediately before the appointed day; being rights and liabilities acquired or incurred solely for the purposes of managing such property as aforesaid or otherwise carrying on the business of the school or any part thereof" (East Central State Edict, 1970: 7).

After' the take over of schools by the state government, it re-named these

acquired schools 'community' or 'Central' Schools. Moreso, the

administration of schools was restructured as follows: The Teachers

Service Commission (T.S.C), the State School Board (S.S.B) and the

Divisional School Board (D.S.B). They were set up to supervise the

d o o l s and their personnel.

ill 1976, the local government reform Edict transferred the

functions of management and administration of primary education to the

local government. Thus in most states, with the exception of Bendei,

{now Delta and Edo states) the local government took over the

management of primary schools (Ukeje, 1992).

The Federal Military Government Promulgated Decree No 31 of

August 8, 1988 which set up the National Primary Education

Commission (NPEC). The Commission was authorized to prescribe

standard for primary education in Nigeria. The decree provided that

ownershp of primary education in Nigeria should be a joint responsibility

of the Federal, State and Local Government. However, the policy lasted

for three years and on January 1, 1991, the Federal Military Government

promulgated Decree No. 3, known as the Local Education Authority

Decree 3 of 1991. The Decree established LGEA and prescribed the

functions or duties assigned to the Local Government Education

Authority. These hc t ions and duties include:

i) management of primary schools in the Local Government Area and

2 ) recruitment, appointment, promotion and discipline of teaching and

non - teaching staff.

The formulation of various policies by the Federal Government on

ownership of primary education notwithstanding, it is disheartening that

despite ail the efforts of the federal government to pin down the

imnership and finding of primary education to the local government,

their active participation is in serious doubt and needs to be reviewed for

improvement. In view of this, it makes the present study relevant.

Importance and Objectives of Primary Education

The foundation of any educational system is the primary school, its

function is therefore so important in the educational system that the

Federal Republic of Nigeria in her National Policy on Education (FRN,

2004:14) has this to say, "the rest of the education system is built upon

the primary education. It is the key to the success or failure of the whole

system-'.

Crucial learning and the foundations in attitudes and habit is its

essence. Obanya (1989) stated that it is the foundation of all learning, the

first phase of life-long education. Hodenfield and Stinnet in Ukeje (1989)

observed that it provides a setting within which boys and girls can grow

intellectually. Primary education is very important because it is a place

where the proper tomorrow can and must be built. The curriculum

established at the primary school level is the foundation of secondary

education.

The objectives of primary education were stated in the National Policy on

Education (FRN, 2004). These were identified as:

inculcation of permanent literacy and numeracy, and ability to

communicate effectively;

Laying a sound basis for scientific and reflective thinking;

Giving citizenship education as a basis for effective participation in

and contribution to the life of the society;

Moulding the character and developing sound attitude and m o d s

in the child;

Developing in the child the ability to adapt to the child's changing

environment;

Giving the child opportunities for developing manipulative skills

that will enable the child function effectively in the society within

the limits of the child's capacity;

Providing the child with basic tools for further educational

advancement, including preparation for trades and crafts of the

locality.

The foundation of any qtlalitative education system therefore must

of importance be laid in the primary school.

Historical Background of Primary Education in Nigeria

The dates of introduction of primary education in Nigeria differ

from region to region. In western Nigeria, the fust time a formal school

was set up in any part of Nigeria dates back to 15 15 in the ancient Benin

rK2hg&m, when Portuguese Missionaries were allowed by the Oba of

Eenin to set up a school where the Oba's son and sons of other chiefs

were taught the rudiments of Christian faith. However, the educational

activities of the time were poorly documented and schools could not

prosper. It was only towards the end of the 18 '~ century that the

Missionaries made a fresh impact in the region. (Lewis in Ogbuagu,

2000). According to Freeman in Ogbuagu (2000), the first known primary

school in Nigeria was established in Badagry by Rev. Thomas Birch

Freeman and Mr. and Mrs. William de Graft of the Wesleyan Missionary

Society on the 24h day of September 1842. Tlus was followed by the

Church Missionary Society (CMS) through Mr. Henry Townsend at

ri'oeokuta in 1843. Methodist Church followed in April 1844, the

Anglicans in 1845, while Catholic Church came in 1867. The first

Catholic school in the whole of Nigeria was opened in Lagos on the 15"

day of February 1869 by Father Bouche.

&ginning of schools in the East was led by the Anglican

Communion when they arrived at Onitsha - East of the Niger in 1846 and

established a Mission and a school there. The Presbyterian through Rev.

Hope Waddel in the same year also arrived at Calabar in the South East

for the same purpose. On the 5th day of December 1885 the first of

Catholic Missionaries arrived Onitsha and they established schools and

Cnurches in 1886.

~i the Northern Nigeria, Islamic education existed about the 14"

Century (Ogbuagu 2000). All the Missionaries attempt to open school in

this region from 1901 to 1905 failed due to Muslim hostility. The first

school which did not belong to any Mission opened in 1905 by a

naturalized Hausa scholar and resident of Sokoto Province, Sir john

Burdon. In 1909 the first established government school was founded at

Nassarawa in then Kano state. In 1912 there were also two elementary

schools set up, one at Sokoto and the other at Katsina. The other schools

in the region were the Mohammedan schools run by the Alkalis and

Limans, the traditional Koranic schools run by Malams. There were

therefore concentrations of schools under Christian Missions in the non -

Moslem area.

It is remarkable that, education was seen by most Missionaries as

an essential part of evangelism and they established schools soon after

they arrived f Urch in Ogbuagu 2000). Echoing the same view Fahnwa

in Ogbuagu (2000) observed that the first general remark on the history

of education in Colonial African which Nigeria is one of them, is that

foreign missions (Christian or Islamic) with interest in Africa pioneered

and dominated educational sector for many years.

Management of Primary Education

In the view of Obi (2003), management is the process which is

designed to ensure the cooperation, participation, intervention andl

invoivement in the achievement of a given objective. Management of

primary school is the process of achieving educational objectives at the

primary school level through efficient utilization of available human and

material resources. It could also be said to be the power and authority to

manage primary education by individual or group of people. Thus the

manager must be one who clarifies issues in the organization to avoid

conflict and crisis within the system.

Missionaries dominated formal education in Nigeria from 1842 for

more than a decade. Ejiogu (1986), posited that the Christian Wssions by

1961 were controlling well over seventy - nine (79%) of primary schools

in Nigeria. The Missionary ownership of primary schools, therefore

continued until 1956 when the former local authority schools were

established and managed by the then local authorities. But the major

changes came really in the 1970s when at the end of the devasting

Nigeria civil war (1967 - 70) some fifty percent of the school buildings in

ibe war aflected areas of the East Central State were found to be either

compietely or badly damaged. Those still standing were in bad shape or

form. This state of affairs, plus the military regime, created the situation

and the atmosphere that warranted the drastic action as regards to the

naggmg problem of the control and management of educational

institutions in the country.

To redress these problems two Federal Government Commissions

w r e set up to advice the government on how to tackle the problems. The

commissions were headed by Babs F a h w a , and Onabamiro (Adesina

1990). The commissions came up with the following recommendations:

that the payment of teachers' salaries and allowances, salaries of

m n - teaching staff and administrative charges amounting to

i,233,700 million Naira should be met by the Federal Government

Account;

that the state government should bear the cost of instructional

materials amounting to about 162.54 million Naira;

that the cost of pupils7 learning materials, textbooks and so on

should be borne by individual parents; and that

The construction of new classroom blocks should be undertaken by

the Local governments, as well as the maintenance of existing

school buildings, which was estimated at about 20.32 million

A 1 - awaira, and also the provision of residential houses for teachers in

ma1 areas.

With the above recommendations it can be observed that the

Federal, State and Local Governments and parents are required to jointly

manage primary education in Nigeria, each contributing its share in

accordance with constitutional arrangements. In all these, the local

governments are expected to be mostly responsible for the management

of primary education since it is at their door step. The suspended

Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1979 provided that the

functions of local government council would include the participation in

the provision and maintenance of primary education. This participation of

the Local Government in the maintenance of primary education is the

focus of the study.

**dm SNGERI! Funding of Primary Education -*lm!.&mW

Funding of primary school education depends on who owns and

manages the school. For instance, Missionary Primary schools are funded

by Missionaries, private primary schools are funded by the proprietors

while the public primary schools are funded by the government, private

or co - operate individual, and the local community. In this work, focus is

on the last group of primary schools, that is, public primary schools.

Okpara and Mmuo (1991) observed that after the independence in

1960, Nigeria saw greater involvement of governments and a great

number of private groups in the fhding of primary education. The

Federal and state governments provided funds for teachersz salaries,

curriculum materials and some school equipment. Communities built and

maintained classroom blocks through labour and contributions. Parents

and guardians paid school fees, levies, provided school uniforms, books

&c. Age grades and cultural association provided classroom blocks,

equipment, and materials for the schools.

With the coming into force of the National Policy on Education

(FRN 2004), the federal government welcomes the contribution of

voluntary agencies, communities, and private individuals in the

establishment and management of primary schools alongside those

provided by the state and local governments. However they must meet the

minimum standards laid down by the Federal Government. The 1976

Local Government Reforms gave the three tier of government the onus

for provision and maintenance of primary education.

The constitutional responsibility of funding primary education in

the 1979 constitution rested with state governments with an

understanding that local governments would also participate in the

fi~nding. With this, the FederaI Government withdrew completely from

giving financial assistance to states for primary education, and this

resulted to the collapse of primary education in Nigeria. This gradual

coiiapse gingered them to come out with the National Primary Education

Commission Decree No. 31 of 1988. The Federal Government by that

Decree established the National Primary Education Fund called "National

F u n d whch is usually deducted directly fiom the Federal Government

Share of the Federation Accounts.

Since primary education is where foundation of all stages of

eciucation is built, its funding is a very important issue to the Federal,

State, and Local Governments. Hamza (1993) asserted that the iegai basis

of financing the primary education system as well as the demarcation of

the responsibilities of the various partners, are some what more complex.

Finance occupies a central place in every undertaking because without

finance nothing will be done, and no organization, according to Ozigi in

Ugwu (2005), can survive or carry out its functions effectively without

adequate financial resource at its disposal. This is because money, he

emphasized, is needed for payment of staff salaries, for maintaining

school plant, and for running the administration. Ogbonnaya (2005)

observed that education is not regarded as a fundamental human right in

the Nigeria Constitution. Rather, it is regarded as a political objective

geared towards the achievement of self - reliance, effective citizenshrp,

national consciousness, and national unity in a free and democratic

,society. Hamza (1993) noted that these have implications for the fundmg

of primary education. First of all, the government is not legally bound to

provide free and compulsory education for all primary school age

children.

Education is never free; somebody always has to pay for it. In the

case of primary education it should be financed as a shared responsibility

among the Federal, State and Local Government. The parents and local

wmmunities should also contribute. Funding of education has been a

chaiienge to the federal government who abandoned UPE first and now

shares the burden of funding primary education with the state and local

governments. As a result of this, education levies, development tax,

community and Parent Teachers' Association (PTA) levies in cash and

kind are now imposed by the state through the local govenunent. The

i999 constitution provided that it shall be the duty of every citizen to

make positive and useful contributions to the achievement, progress and

well being of the community where he resides. It implies that people's

participation in funding education is legitimate. According to Ogbonnaya

(2005) primary education is free of charge where funds are available, but

where funds are not, the law provides an escape route. The Federal

Government could not do much, as we have seen, to help the state

governments in their financial predicaments to fund primary education. It

is an obvious fact that no organization can survive or carry out its

hct ions effectively without adequate financial resources at its disposal.

in view of the fact that fund is unavoidable in the running of education,

including primaiy, different regimes in the state had approached it in

different ways to solve the problem of funding education in Enugu State.

The state government has transferred some financial burdens of primary

education to local governments, parents or guardians and the

communities. Ukeje, Fafunwa, Ezeocha (1989), Adesina

(1990), among others, supported the distribution of funding primary

education among the Federal, State, and Local Governments. Following

these recommendations salaries were paid to teachers regularly and on

time too. But recently, in 2003, everything changed and some problem

arose. Leave allowances of two years are owed primary school teachers;

and lack of instructional materials faces primary schools in the country,

including those in Enugu State (Obiatuegwu 2003). In 2004, the then

Minister of Education, Professor Fabian Osuji, announced and

implemented a joint account with the state and local governments, plus

teacher's allocation to be put together with the state accounts (Osuji

2004). This of course created more problems than what was existing

before then. For three months only one month salary was paid to teachers

and no leave allowance was paid, instructional materials were lacking.

Pupils were asked to supply virtually everythng for their lessons,

including chalk.

.In spite all these recommendations on funding primary education in

Enugu State, problem of funding still persist. Knowing fully well the

importance of funds in primary education, this study will try also to

examine modalities for improving local government participation in the

funding of primary education in Enugu State.

Sources of Fund for Primary Education

Funding of primary education has always been the responsibility

of the Federal, State, and Local Governments. In spite the huge sum of

money spent to fund education by different governments of the

federation, educational institutions still lack the adequate funds to

implement their various programmes (Ekeocha & Fonta, 2007).

Ogbonnaya (2005) observed that inadequate financial resources will

certainly have the effect of limiting educational development policy on

the federal, state and local governments. Following the fact that

governments cannot adequately fund the education sector, other sources

should be explored in funding educational programmes. The major

sources of fund for primary schools are: government subvention, school

fees, Parent Teachers Association levies, donations, community efforts,

internally generated revenue and external aids.

As it is the responsibility of the three tier of government to fimd

education, the federal government gave some form of grant - in - aid to

their states for the provision of education. Without the assistance from the

federal, the state government cannot shoulder the heavy burden imposed

by the education system. Okoro (1989) suggested that the grant - in - aid

given to each state should be based on the number of children enrolled in

primary schools in the state. State governments should supplement

federal grants with internally generated revenue. The local government

realizes little amount fiom internally generated revenue so that it depends

mainly on funds from the federal and state governments for their services.

Government sources of funds include; Education Tax Fund, Property

Tax, various forms of rates and Licenses that are imposed.

School fees constitute one of the major sources of funds for the

Nigeria educational system (Ogbonnaya 2005). School fees include

tuition fees, boarding fees, games fees, library fees, laboratory and studio

fees etc. For Okoro j1989) school fees are in form of taxation yielding

revenue or the provision of the social services - education.

Some headmasters and community leaders have introduced Parent

Teachers Association (PTA) to help in financing primary education.

These may not be different fiom school fees since the Parent Teachers

Association decides what each pupil should pay. Such levies are included

in the school fees and it varies fiom school to school.

Groups or individual donate money towards specific school projects

or for purchase of certain equipment such as science equipment,

provision of important instructional materials, construction of classroom

blocks etc.

Different communities do organize fund - raising activities at

different time of the year such as be during festive period or ordinary

time. With the money realized they set up schools or provide other

materials and equipment necessary for effective running of the schools

located / sited in their communities.

Internally generated Revenue is another source of fund for funding

our educational institutions. It could come through sales of farm products

from school farms, sales of hand crafts, sales of stationery, textbooks,

school uniform, and school drama etc. Primary school Heads do sell

products of hand crafts lrke brooms, baskets, handkerchiefs etc. in order

to raise fund for the school.

External aids refers to the assistance given to educational

institutions by foreign nation or Foundations (Ogbonnaya 2005). Such

organizations include World Bank, the World Health Organisation

(WHO), the International Labour Organisation (ILO), the United Nations

Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO), UNICEF

ETC. They render assistance through supply of school equipment,

teachers, fund for building, and renovation of schools, workshops or

training programmes.

Recruitment of Staff

Every institution of learning must have a purpose or a goal. And

the plans for and decisions about personnel need for the achievement of

such purposes and goals must be made. On this Omenyi (1987) stated that

the positions within the institution that the staff occupy form the

organisational structure of the institution. These positions within the

organizational structure m ust be staffed with personnel who have the

knowledge, skills and motivation to perform the roles effectively. The

process of staffing an organization / institution is referred to as

recruitment. According to Oboegbulem (2003); recruitment is concerned

with the selection of the required number of people to be screened for a

job, measuring their quality and attempting to predict their future

behaviour. Omenyi (1987) defined recruitment of teachers as attracting

the right quality of personnel to achieve educational goals. Recruitment

of staff has both long - tenn and short - tenn purposes and implications.

The short - term plan guarantees a continuous flow of qualified staff into

the school system, while long - term plan seeks to fill vacancies created

by retirement, resignation, promotion, dismissal and death.

With these in mind, it implies that in every school there is the need for the

recruitment, selection and appointment of staff from time to time because

without the staff, teaching and learning will not take place as it should.

Adesina (1990) observed that in the education system the overall goal of

those in charge is to recruit adequate and qualified staff, develop and

maintain the staff so that they would be able to render effective and

efficient educational services to the pupils \ learners. The goal takes

cognizance of the quantitative and qualitative qualification for teachers at

the primary level, a large proportion of the teachers do not possess this

minimum qualification. According to statistics, 76,862 teachers operate

with certificate below TC 11 while 144,698 have qualifications less than

the NCE (Tahir 2005).

The need for adequate supply of qualified teachers in the primary

schools was also recognized by the 3rd National Development Plan (1975

- 1980) which stated that the quality of teaching staff is probably the

most important determinant of educational standard at all levels. Ejiogu

and Ajeyalemi (1987:46) observed on the factor affecting teachers in

Nigeria, that

the refusal to accord desired recognition and pride of place to the primary school teachers and constant rejection and maltreatment of teachers by boih the government and the general public have no doubt contributed signijicantly to low morale and poor productivity, and consequently the mess in which the Nigerian primary school system has found itselJ

They further maintained that since the era of missionary till now,

govemment or public primary school teachers have always been poorly

treated and denied recognition. This has made them to abandon their

teaching jobs for greener past~u-es.

In spite of teacher's relevance in the education system they are still

being neglected with regards to adequate funding as exemplified by

irregular or non - payment of salaries and other incentives which has

forced teachers to embark on incessant strike actions, and lack of interest,

and Iack of devotion to duty on part of teachers. This is one of the factors

responsible for the fallen standard of education in the state. These

problems linger on inspite of government's effort to give her citizen at

least qualitative and quantitative primary education. This study intends,

among other things, to find out modalities for improving funding of

primary schools by Local Government in the state in order to improve the

standard.

Provision and Management of Infrastructure, Facilities and

Equipment

There has not been adequate funding of education in this

country,with regard to infrastructure, facilities and equipments, which

help in implementing educational programmes are lacking. Some of our

political leaders do not know the role a healthy learning environment and

well constructed school buildings play in learning. Sub - standard

structures called schools built by some state governments, learning under

trees for lack of seats, writing on laps for lack of desk etc. militate against

effective learning. Such unhealthy environment leaves the pupils at the

mercy of hostile climatic conditions. How could education prosper in an

adverse condition. Ogbomaya (1997) observed that, this kind of situation

does not augur well for effective teaching and learning process.

Appreciating the essence of infrastnicture in our primary schools the

National Policy on Education (FRN 200437) stated that "Government

shall therefore provide basic infrastructure and training for the realization

of these goals at the primary school level". These facilitate learning.

Castaldi (1997) posits that educational facilities are those things available

to education which enable a skilled teacher to achieve a level of

instructional effectiveness that exceeds what is possible when they are not

provided. Ani in Ndu, Ocho and Okeke (eds.) (1997) states that

infrastructure, facilities and equipment are the expressions of the

existence of school, the quality and quantity contribute in part to the

nature and level of the tone of the school. Education objectives cannot be

achieved without facilities. Nwogu in Agbo (2005) asserted that no

matter the strength of manpower resources in the system, educational

process must required conducive physical accommodation, libraries,

furniture and playground. When these instructional facilities are lacking,

teachers are hardly effective in their instruction to students. Onwurah

(2003) observed that educational facilities are needed for developing

cognitive area of knowledge, ability and skills which are prerequisites for

academic achievement. They are essential for developing values,

commitment, positive emotions, and social interaction in learners.

Akinwale (2004) observed that lack of facilities make learning difficult

and atimes impossible.

In the past, the infrastructure was adequate to the extent of sharing

some books and writing materials to pupils. This condition provides the

maximum. concentration required by students for 1earning.Today people

do not need to talk about facilities, because under the present economic

situation, no government can claim to be providing even a quarter of the

needs of its schools. According to Durn (1997), it is observable that most

Nigerian primary schools lack basic infrastructure, facilities and

equipment for quality education. Since no programme of education can

be effectively implemented without the provision of adequate

infrastructure, facilities and equipment, head of educational institutions

continually call on the government to improve the provision of facilities

in our schools especially in Enugu State. It is in this vain that this study

intends to determine modalities for improving local government h d i n g

of the provision of infrastructure, facilities and equipment in the primary

schools in Enugu State of Nigeria.

Modalities for Improving Local Government Participation in the Funding of Primary Schools

It is no longer news that education has not been enjoying the best of

attention in Nigeria and indeed Ahca generally. Our governments are

still in the habit of allocating paltry sum to the education sector.

Implementing the UNESCO recommendation of allotting 26% of the total

budget allocation to education is still a mere wish as far as Nigeria is

En the past, the infrastructure was adequate to the extent of sharing

some books and writing materials to pupils. This condition provides the

maximum concentration required by students for 1earning.Today people

do not need to talk about facilities, because under the present economic

situation, no government can claim to be providing even a quarter of the

needs of its schools. According to D u n (1997), it is observable that most

Nigerian primary schools lack basic infrastructure, facilities and

equipment for quality education. Since no programme of education can

be effectively implemented without the provision of adequate

infrastructure, facilities and equipment, head of educational institutions

continually call on the government to improve the provision of facilities

in o w schools especially in Enugu State. It is in this vain that this study

intends to determine modalities for improving local government funding

of the provision of infrastructure, facilities and equipment in the primary

scl~ools in Enugu State of Nigeria.

Modalities for Improving Local Government Participation in the Funding of Primary Schools

It is no longer news that education has not been enjoying the best of

attention in Nigeria and indeed Africa generally. Ow governments are

still in the habit of allocating paltry sum to the education sector.

Implementing the UNESCO recommendation of allotting 26% of the total

budget allocation to education is still a mere wish as far as Nigeria is

concerned. "The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural

Organisation (UNESCO) specifies that 26% of each nation's yearly

budget should be committed to the funding of education so as to eliminate

illiteracy from the face of the earth" (Oyewale 2004:41).

If Nigeria's allocation to education is compared with those of other

countries in Africa, the picture becomes more discouraging.

At a close look at appendix 11 1 one will observe the need for improving

funding of education in Nigeria. This should start from somewhere; we

are looking at modalities for improving local government participation in

funding of primary schools in Enugu State.

Review of Empirical Studies

Ugwu (2005) did a study on the extent of local government

participation in the administration of primary schools in Enugu Education

zone. She used one h~lndred and twenty - three head masters and twenty

- three education supervisors. The main instrument for the study was

questionnaire. The researcher used mean scores to analyse the data and

answer the research questions and the Z - test statistics to test the null

hypotheses.

Among other things, the researcher found out that the Local

Government Councils:

-!- Do not provide fund for the construction of classroom blocks.

I Do not releases over-head cost to headmasters for the smooth

ninning of primary schools.

4- Do not stimulate and encourage communities to participate in

funding primary education.

-4 Do not help in construction and maintenance of primary school

buildings, furniture and other infrastructure.

1- Do not provide money to enable Education Officers to organize

workshops and seminars for teachers.

Mgbo (2003) undertook a study on the system of management and

funding of primary education in Enugu Education Zone. She made use of

one hundred and twenty subjects made up of one hundred Head Teachers,

twelve supervisors and eight Education secretaries. Questionnaire was

the main instnlment used to elicit information from the subjects. The

data collected were analysed using mean scores while the null hypotheses

were tested using z-test statistics.

The researcher found out that some problems militate against

effective management of schools. These include

- 1 Poor and inadequate accoinmodation for the growing enrolment

due to poor funding.

-4 Insufficient supply of instructional materials due to lack of funds.

-4 Diversion of h d s meant for education to other sectors.

-I Inadequate supervision/inspection of schools due to inadequate

funding.

Aguodoh (1995) carried out a research study on Administrative

problems encountered by the primary school head teachers in Enugu

Education Zone. He used a total of seventy-two Head Teachers in the

five local government areas in Enugu Education Zone. The major

instrument used to elicit information fiom the subjects was the

questionnaire. The data collected were analysed using percentages.

The researcher found that:

Finance militates against administrative effectiveness.

Infrastructures, libraries and equipment are lacking due to poor

funding.

With the population explosion they cannot meet up with the school

facilities because of lack of funds.

Eneh (1989) undertook a research work on management problems

of the state primary education board and their implications for primary

school administration in Anambra State. He used two hundred and ten

senior staff of the primary school board and two hundred and twenty-nine

Head Teachers. The main instrument for the study was questionnaire.

The researcher used mean scores to analyse the data and the t-test

statistics to test the null hypotheses.

Among other things, the researcher found out that:

-i Pupils are asked to pay levies due to poor funding.

Facilities for supervision are inadequate and irregular due to lack

of funds.

4 Infiastructural facilities are inadequate due to lack of funds.

SUMMARY OF LITERATURE REVIEW

The review of literature was undertaken to highlight the views of

other researchers, professionals, authors and writers on topics related to

the present study. The following areas were reviewed.

Concept and ownership of primary education; importance and

objectives of primary education; historical background of primary

education in Nigeria; management of primary education; funding of

primary education; source of funds for primary education; and provision

and management of facilities.

Primary education is seen as the education given in an institution

for children between the age of six and eleven plus. Ownership of

primary education, is the body or organization controlling the

management of primary education. This level of education is the first

stage where pupils are built intellectually. It aims at training the child to

develop sound moral character and attitudes, inculcating permanent

literacy and effective communication skill, training the child to develop

and acquire manipulative skills and providing basic tools for further

educational advancement. The management of primary school is the

process of achieving educational objectives through efficient utilization

of available human and material resources. Funding of primary school is

the onus of their proper owner, even though government, private or

Corporate bodies, individuals, and the local community in one way or the

other are still involved in the funding. Sources of fund for primary

education include the following: government subvention, school fees,

Parent Teachers Association levies, donations etc.

From the literature reviewed, research works have been done in

several areas of primary school administration including funding,

personnel, supervision and general administration. However no known

work has been done on how to improve local Government participation

the funding of primary schools in Enugu state hence the necessity for this

study.

CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHOD

This chapter presents the design of the study, the area of the study,

the population of the study, sample and sampling technique, the

instrument for data collection, validation of the instrument, reliability of

the instrument, methods of data collection, and method of data analysis.

Design of the Study

The design for this study is descriptive survey which aims at

investigating modalities for improving local government participation in

funding of primary schools in Enugu State of Nigeria.

A descriptive survey design seeks to document and describe what exists

or the present status of existence or absence of what is being investigated

(Ali, 1996).

Area of the Study

The study was conducted in primary schools in Enugu State. There

are six education zones in Enugu State; Agbani, Agwu, Enugu, Nsukka,

Obollo - Afor and Udi. The use of Enugu state is for the fact that Enugu

state would provide data on the on the topic of study.

Population of the Study

The population of the study comprised all the primary school

teachers, supervisors and Education Secretaries in Enugu State.

Etlugu State has a total of one thousand eight hundred and forty - five

primary schoois, thirteen thousand five hundred and seventy - five

Teachers and two hundred and twenty - four supervisors and Education

Secretaries. {Source: State Universal Basic Education Board 2005

Annual Report).

Sample and Sampling Technique

Thee hundred teachers were selected through a simple random

sampling ie. fifty teachers from each education zone and all the two

hundred and twenty - four supervisors and education secretaries made up

of one hundred and sixty eight supervisors and fifty - six education

secretary were used for the study. These are personnel directly involved

in administration of primary scl~ools in the State.

Instrument for Data Collection

Questionnaire was used to collect data for this study. The

instrument used for the study is a questionnaire titled: Questionnaire for

Teachers, supervisors and education secretaries on modalities for

improving local government participation in funding of primary schools

QTSEMlLGPFPSE questionnaire. See appendixll for details.

The questionnaire is considered appropriate for this study because it

merely seeks the opinion of respondents on an already established and

existing issues. It comprised 3 1 items built in four clusters A, B, C and D

on a modified Likert - type scale of Very Great Extent (VGE), Great

Extent {GE), Little Extent (LE), Not At All (NA), and Strongly

Disagree (SD), Disagree (D), Agree (A), Strongly Agree (SA) rated

1,2,3 and 4 respectively.

Validation of the Instrument

The instrument for data collection was face validated by four

experts of the Faculty of education, University of Nigeria Nsukka, three

in Educational Administration and Planning, and one in Measurement and

Evaluation. These experts were requested to study the items, assess the

suitability of the language, adequacy and relevance of the items in

addressing the research questions bearing in mind the purpose of the

study. Their corrections and coinments were used to modify the

questionnaire. The modifications gave rise to the final draft which was

produced, trial - tested and administered on the respondents. (see

Appendix 1V)

Reliability of the Instrument

The reliability of the instrument was determined by a trail - testing

exercise carried out with ten teachers and ten supervisors and Education

secretaries in Kogi state which is outside the area under study.

Using the Cronbach alpha statistical method the internal

consistency was computed for each of the clusters of the instrument

which yielded 0.88, 0.81, 0.76, 0.78. A coefficient reliability of 0.87 was

obtained which is indicative that the instrument is reliable was obtained.

Method of Data Collection

The direct delivery and retrieval method was applied in the administration

of the questionnaire on the respondents. The researcher used three trained

research assistants to administer the copies of the questionnaire.

Method of Data Analysis

Mein scores (Rj and standard deviation were used to analyse the

data collected to provide answers to the research questions formulated for

the study. The degree of agreement or disagreement was determined by

finding the mean of the nominal values assigned to the options. A

criterion mean of 2.50 was adopted. Consequently, any mean that range

from 2.50 and above was regarded as accepted, while below 2.50 was

regarded as rejected. The three null hypotheses was tested using the Z -

test statistic.

CHAPTER FOUR

PRESENTATION OF DATA AND ANALYSIS

This chapter deals with the data analysis. The analysis was done with

reference to the four research questions and three null hypotheses

formulated to guide the study.

Research Question one:

To what extent do the Local Government Education Authorities fulfill their statutory roles in funding primary education?

The data for answering the above research question are presented

on table 1 below.

Table 1:Mean ratings of teachers and supervisors 1 Education secretaries on the extent of fulfillment their statutory roles.

r 1 Teachers I Supervisors/Edu.

Submitting estimate, annual account 1 3.22 and monthlv return to SUBEB I Paying salaries, allowances, and 1 2.98 other benefits Procuring and distributing materials 2.64 and equipment for teaching and I

infrastructures

Providing hnds for overhead cost to 2.56 Headmasters Providing funds for the construction 2.51 of classrooms, and administrative blocks Providing hnds for the construction 2.23 of libraries I Providing furniture in the primary 1 2.78 schools Cluster mean and SD 2.70

Tabie 1 Shows the mean ratings of the teachers, and supervisors and

education secretaries on the extent do the LGEAs fulfill their statutory

roles in fimding primary education.

Looking at the table, we can see that items 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, & 9

are rated 3.22,2.98,2.64,2.64,2.56,2.51 & 2.78 with standard deviation

of 0.68, 1.08, 1.06, 1.06, 1.10, 0.98 & 0.96 respectively by the teachers.

These items are also rated 2.94, 2.88, 2.72, 2.76, 2.61, 2.54, & 2.64 with

standard deviation of 0.92, 1.84, 0.94, 1.02, 0.98, 1.08 and 1.06

respectively by the supervisors and education secretaries. It shows that all

the items except item 7, requiring teachers and supervisors and education

secretaries' opinions on provision of funds for construction of library, has

mean scores below the cut-off mark of 2.50. The cluster has cluster

means of 2.70 and SD of 1 .OO (for teachers) and 2.69 and SD of 0.97 (For

supervisors and education secretaries). This implies that Local

Government Education Authorities fiilfill their statutory role in funding

primary education by submitting estimates and annual return to S D E B ,

paying salaries and allowances, providing overhead costs, procuring and

distributing materials and equipment for teaching and learning,

undertaking general maintenance of school buildings and infrastructure,

providing fimds for the construction of classroom and administrative

blocks, library and fiwnitwe in the school.

Research Question Two:

What are the constraints to local government education authorities participation in the funding of primary schools?

The data for answering the above research question are presented

on table 2 below

Table 2: Mean ratings of teachers and supervisors/education secretaries on constraints to local education authorities participation in the funding of primary schools.

1 I Teachers I Supervisors/Edu. - - ..

a S/N 1 .

2.

3.

Item Inadequate funding of the education system Politicization of the SUBEB and

4.

'2

I / Cluster mean and SD 1 3.37 1 0.84 1 VGE 1 3.37 1 0.69

LEGAs Misappropriation of funds meant for

5. 6. 7.

8.

Dee. VGE

VGE

VGE

VGE GE GE VGE

VGE

VGE

3.66

the LEGAs Poor statistical data

Table 2 shows the mean ratings of teachers and supervisors and

education secretaries on the constraints to Local Government Education

Authorities participation in funding of primary schools.

Table 2 shows that teachers responded great extent to only item 6

(2.84 with SD of 1.02), and very great extent to items 1, 2, 3,4, 5, 7 & 8

with mean score of 3.64, 3.06, 3.12,3.06, 3.44 3.81 and SD of 0.88,0.84,

0.72, 0.73, 0.78 and 1.02 respectively. This is an indication that the

- X 3.64

3.12

Undue influence by SUBEB Method of disbursing funds Lack of stable education policies in Nigeria Sole dependence on government for hndinn of education

Dec. VGE

SD 0.88

0.84

3.41

0.72

3.06 2.84 3.44

3.81

3.74

VGE

0.72

SD 0.44

VGE

0.73 1.02 0.78

1.02

3.46

VGE

0.68

3.24

VGE GE VGE

VGE

0.72

3.58 0.68 2.82 2.71 3.52

3.88

1.06 1.06 0.56

0.34

constraints to local government education authorities participation in the

funding of primary schools include: inadequate funding of the education

system, politicization of the SUBEB and LGEAs, misappropriation of

hnds meant for the LGEAs, poor statistical data, undue influence by

SUBEB, method of disbursing funds, lack of stable policies in Nigeria,

and sole dependence on government for fimding education.

Research Question Three

To what extent do the identified constraints affect effective 10~2% government education authorities participation in the funding of primary schools?

The data for answering the above research question are presented

on table 3 below.

Table 3: Mean ratings of teachers and supervisors and education secretaries on how identified constraints affect effective local government education authorities participation in the funding of primary education.

I materials

2.

3.

1 6. 1 Delay in payment of salaries and 1 3.46 1 0.86 I VGE 1 3.31 1 0.84 1 VGE 1

S/N 1.

~upervisorsl ~ d u . I see. !.

facilities and equipment Placing of wrong persons in charge of professional knctions Inadequate facilities and instructional

1 4 i / 5

Item Poor provision of infrastmcture,

Teachers

3.86 3i 3.86

3.13

3.26

Insufficient provisions of pupils supportive services Lack of initiative and creativity

7. 8.

SD 0.84

sector Cluster mean and SD

Dec. VGE 1

SD 0.31

0.74

0.74

3.1 1

3.23

allowances Poor achievement in education Poor state of affairs in the education

Dec. VGE

3.26

VGE

VGE

0.62

0.79

2.84

0.71

3 .04

3.18

1 VGE

VGE

0.96 3.22 1 0.69

VGE

0.94

0.72

2.86

3.28

GE

VGE

VGE

VGE

3.16

1.02

0.56

2.63

GE

VGE

3-18

0.84

1.04

VGE

GE 0.74 VGE

Table 3 shows the mean ratings of teachers, and supervisors and

education secretaries on the effect of the identified constraints to effective

LGEAs participation in fimding of primary schools.

From the data presented above, the respondents indicated that the

identified constraints affect effective local government education

authorities participation in fimding of primary schools. In their response

to items 1, 2, 3,4,5,6 and 8 (teachers had means score and standard

deviations of 3.86 & 0.31, 3.13 & 0.74, 3.26 & 0.74, 3.11 & 0.62, 3.23&

0.79, 3.46 & 0.86 & 3.22 & 0.69 respectively, and supervisors and

education secretaries has means score and standard deviations of 3.86 &

0.84, 3.04 & 0.94,3.18 & 0.72,3.28 & 0.56,3.31 & 0.84 and 3.18 & 0.74

respective] y.

However, item 7 received the same responses fioin both teachers

and supervisors and education secretaries as they agreed to great extent in

poor achievement in education. By implication the identified constraints

affect effective local government education authorities participation in

providing finds in primary schools. The areas in which these effects

occur, are in the poor and inadequate provision of infrastructure, facilities

and equipment; placing wrong persons in charge of professional

functions; insufficient provision of pupils supportive services; lack of

falitiative and creativity; delay in payment of salaries and allowances;

poor achievement in education and poor state of affairs in the education

sector.

Research Question Four

What strateDes are to be adopted to improve local government education authorities participation in funding of primary schools?

The data for answering the above research question are presented

on table 4 below.

Table 4: Mean ratings of teachers and supervisors \ education secretaries on strategies to be adopted to improve local government education authorities ~artici~ation in fundin rima schools.

1 SIN 1.

Item Generating hnds through rate

1 4. 1 Making appropriate use of funds

' 2. 3.

I ] allocated to education Using Education Trust Fund in funding orimarv schools

Establishing endowment hnds Collecting and using property taxes

Teachers 1 Supervisors I Edu. j

6.

Sec. x - SD Dec. X SD Dec. 3.32 0.70 SA 3.86 0.84 SA

Active participation of the private sector in the administration of primary schools

Table 4 shows the mean ratings of teachers, and supervisors and

education secretaries on how to improve LGEAs' participation in funding

of primary schools.

Planning for primary school system 1 :# 1 with accurate data Appointing only professional educators into SUBEB

1 , Cluster mean and SD

From table 4, the mean scores of the teachers, and supervisors and

education secretaries regarding what strategres to be adopted to improve

Tcxd government education authorities participation in funding primary

schools range from 2.24 to 3.86 with cluster mean scores of 3.27,and

standard deviations of 0.85 (for teachers) and 3.24, and 0.84 (for

supervisors and education secretaries) respectively. This is indicative of

the respondent's strong opinion that strategies to be adopted to improve

heal government education authorities participation in funding of

primary schoois include: generating funds through rates, endowment

funds, property taxes and Education Tnlst Fund, making appropriate use

of funds allocated to the education sector, active participation of the

private sector in the primary school administration, planning for primary

school system with accurate data, and appointing only professional

educators into SUBEB .

Hypothesis One

There will be no significant difference between the mean ratings of

teachers, and supervisors and education secretaries on the extent local

government education authorities fulfill their statutory roles in fimding of

primary education.

Table 5 shows the summary of the Z test analysis of Ho.

Table 5: Summary of Z-test analysis of Hol Prob. Level 0.05

Subjects

Teachers Supervisors and education secretaries

SD

1.00 0.97

Cal-Z -value 0.12

DF

522

N

300 224

- X

2.70 2.69

Crit-2- value 1.96

Decision

Accepted

Tite calculated Z-test value at 522 degree of fieedom and 0.05 level

or' significance is 0.12. Since the calculated value of 0.12 is less than the

critical table value of 1.96, the null hypothesis is accepted. This is to say

that there is no significant difference between the opinions of the

teachers, and those of the supervisorsand education secretaries regarding

the extent which local government education authorities fulfill their

statutory roles in fimding primary education.

Hypothesis Two

There will be no significant difference between the mean ratings of

teachcrs, and supervisors and educations secretaries on the constraints to

local government education authorities participation in fimding of

primary education.

Crit-Z- I Decision 1 Table 6: Summa~y of 2-test analysis of Ho2

value '.I Subjects Teachers Supervisors and education secretaries

The calculated 2-Value at 522 degree of fieedom and 0.05 level of

significance is 0. Since the calculated value of 0 is less than the critical

table value of 1.96, the null hypothesis is accepted. This is to say that

there is no significant difference between the opinions of teachers, and

those of the supervisors and education secretaries regarding the

N

300 224

X

3.37 3 . 3 7

SD

0.84 0.69

DF

522

Prob. Level 0.05

Cal-Z -value 0

t

Summary of the Findings

The study found out that:

*:* Statutory roles of the local government education authorities

such as submitting estimates, annual and monthly return to

SUBEB are being fulfilled

*3 Payment of salaries, allowances and other benefits are not

carried out sometimes as at and when due

Q To a little extent do they provide infrastructure, facilities

and instructional materials

*:* Inadequate fimding, misappropriation of funds, poor

statistical data, lack of stable policies, and politicization of

the sector are some of the constraints to the LGEAs

participation in funding of primary education.

*:* Placing of wrong persons in professional function, lack of

initiative and creativity, and poor achievement in education

includes the effect of the constraints.

*3 Funds should be generated through rates, endowment funds,

property taxes, etc. while funds allocated to education should

be judiciously used.

CHAPTER FIVE

DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS

This chapter present the discussion of the findings, implications,

recommendations, limitations of the study, suggestions for further

research, summary and conclusion.

Discussion of Findings

'with reference to research question one teachers, and supel-visors

and education secretaries reported that the provision of fumrture,

provision of filnds for construction of classrooms and administrative

blocks, for overhead cost for headmasters, and procuring and distribution

of materials and equipments for teaching and learning, payment of

salaries, allowances and other benefits are carried out to a great extent by

the LEGEAs. There are however, a noticeable disagreement between the

teachers, and supervisors and education secretaries on submission of

estimated annual account, and monthly return to SUBEB. While teachers

to very gre