Proposed 12-4 Education Model: A cycle of frequent policy shifts

• Bad politics destroys lives of our youths, says Prof Daramola
• Provide infrastructure, better curriculum –parents
• Treat teachers well and education will heal itself’

The media landscape came alive recently with discussions surrounding a proposal put forward by the Minister of Education, Dr Tunji Alausa, to the National Council of Education. This proposal seeks to transform the current 6-3-3-4 educational framework into a 12-4 system. In this report, Isioma Madike, aggregate the opinions of stakeholders on the issue

Background

The proposal by Alausa to the highest policymaking authority in Nigeria’s educational sector, seeks to transform the current 6-3-3-4 educational framework into a 12-4 system.
Under this new model, it is expected that a child will spend a total of 12 years in basic education before advancing directly to tertiary education, where a minimum of four years will be required.
According to Alausa, “A 12-year basic education model will ensure a continuous, uninterrupted curriculum, promoting better standardisation and fostering quality assurance in the education system.
“It will also guarantee that students receive a more comprehensive and continuous learning experience, improve educational outcomes, and contribute to a more educated populace that drives Nigeria’s economic development.”
Under the proposed system, he said, the country would abolish the Junior Secondary School (JSS) and Senior Secondary School (SSS) levels, incorporating them into the basic education cycle.
This means students will undergo continuous education until the age of 16, without the usual interruptions that currently separate primary and secondary education.
The Minister explained that the new model is designed to facilitate smoother transitions for students while aligning Nigeria’s education system with global best practices.
The reform, he said, aims to reduce dropout rates by addressing financial and systemic challenges that currently hinder many students from completing their education.
If approved, this significant shift in policy could have far-reaching effects on the nation’s education system, as it will create a more accessible and streamlined path for students across the country. This move, according to Alausa, is part of the government’s broader efforts to modernise education and address long-standing challenges in the sector.
But the story changed almost immediately as the Minister denied the replacement of junior and senior secondary classes. He rather claimed that the new policy is just a proposal and not “an immediate policy change”.
He explained that the new policy would embrace a 12-year compulsory education system while retaining the previous 6-3-3 structure. His explanation, however, could not drown the debate about the new policy.

Reactions
Chukwuma Anyanwu PhD, (Associate Professor) and Senior Lecturer in the Department of Theatre Arts, Delta State University, Abraka, is of the opinion that the government has displayed its lackluster attitude in the educational system.
He questioned the rationale behind the policy in a country whose “children are studying under deplorable conditions, dilapidated roofs, no chairs, no facilities, and teachers poorly remunerated. To be pursuing the difference between six and half a dozen is to say the least, laughable.
“Indeed, it’s not about the number of years one spends in school but the quality of education one gets. What’s their grouse with the present system? The budget they would be projecting for this proposed ridiculous programme would be better utilised in doing some projects in the primary school even if it’s building pews.
“Treat teachers well and education would heal itself. It’s not the number of years spent but the quality of education given. What’s the difference between 6-3-3 and 12? Who did examinations hurt that would warrant negating exams for a straight 12 year system?
“And it’s not just getting rid of the examinations; I hope they should study without holidays as well? Those of us that went through 6 years of primary school and 5 years of secondary, what did we lose?”
Anyanwu recalled what the biblical Pharaoh said about the people of Israel before increasing their burden. Pharaoh, he said, believed the Israelites were idle, which was why they wanted to go and serve their God. This government, he added, has displayed its lackluster attitude in the educational system.
For Professor Adeyemi Daramola of Dennis Osadebay University, Asaba, Delta State, the weakest point of the proposal is that many Nigerian children are ready for tertiary institutions at the age of 16. Such a policy is supportive of some parents’ beliefs that even some children are ready to begin a university education at the age of 14 years.
Education, he said, prepares a man for a good life; “he’s easy to lead and impossible to enslave.
“So, when the Federal Government through the Minister of Education, Dr Tunji Alausa, proposed a 12-year compulsory basic education policy, Nigerians must be looking forward as it were, to the good lives that their children rightly deserve through education.
“The main crux of the matter is that the new mode of education will provide an uninterrupted 12-year education system that will allow smart pupils to procure admission into universities and colleges at the age of 16 years.”
The professor enumerated the advantages in the proposal and said many people would applaud him (Alausa) because it is apparently better than the proposal of the erstwhile Minister of Education, Professor Tahir Mamman.
Mamman had recommended that pupils would be admitted into the universities at the age of 18 years.
He said: “As a teacher of over three decades in universities and an educationalist, I prefer Professor Tahir Mamman’s proposed policy pronouncement. I actually detest the current Minister of Education, Dr Tunji Alausa’s proposal because the 16 year admission of pupils into tertiary institutions has counterproductive and productive effects on the pupils.
“Many of the people who opposed Professor Mamman’s proposal of 18 years were women who would prefer, incredibly, to send their unborn babies to school from their wombs. Many of them believe that all their children are gifted ones who should complete their Bachelor’s degree courses at the age of 10.
“This ugly habit should have been checked thoroughly by Professor Mamman’s policy. This is because he did not deny the fact that a few exceptionally brilliant children exist but may be catered for within his educational plan. Many parents have destroyed their children’s lives by sending them to the universities too early.
“Such parents request for accelerated promotions from one class to another in both the primary and secondary schools. When some of us see such children who should be in their third year in the Junior Secondary School system in the universities, we become worried.
“Simply because many of them are immature enough to have minds of their own, the returning students seize the opportunity to recruit them into various male and female cults in the universities.
“I once called a student who passed by my office to confirm if she was a student in the university because I expected her to be still in the senior secondary school.
“Not only did she confirm that she was in the university but in the second level in the Political Science Department. Then, I asked her to tell me two of the reasons that she was in the university. Her response was shocking – ‘I don’t know but my mother told me to come’.
“Why on earth would the Federal Government jettison the very old system of six years (South Western Nigeria) or seven years (Northern Nigeria) of primary, five years of secondary and two years Higher School Certificate courses of 1950s to 1970s? That system enabled mature candidates to enjoy their universities’ careers.
“This system is still being practised in many of the Commonwealth countries. A situation where the Federal Government brings bad politics to destroy the lives of our youths is very bad, indeed!”

Policy inconsistency
A statement from the Resource Centre for Human Rights and Civic Education (CHRICED), signed by its Executive Director, Comrade Ibrahim M. Zikirullahi, viewed the recent proposal by the Honourable Minister as little more than superficial “policy window-dressing” that fails to address the core issues plaguing Nigeria’s education system.
The statement reads in part: “This initiative, while perhaps well-intentioned, represents a significant misallocation of priorities at a time when the educational landscape in Nigeria is in dire need of comprehensive reform.
“The current state of Nigeria’s education system demands far more than a mere adjustment in the duration that students spend at various educational levels.
“What is truly essential is a holistic overhaul of the entire educational framework to effectively confront the pressing challenges that have long been undermining the quality and accessibility to education in the country.
“Among these challenges are the alarming decline in educational standards, the obsolescence of the curriculum, and the chronic shortage of instructional materials that hinder effective teaching and learning.
“Moreover, the issue of inadequate funding for educational institutions remains a critical barrier to progress. The persistent corruption and mismanagement within the sector further exacerbate these problems, diverting much-needed resources away from schools and into the hands of a few.
“This has led to a significant brain drain, as qualified educators and professionals seek better opportunities abroad, leaving behind a vacuum that is detrimental to the future of education in Nigeria.
“Additionally, we cannot overlook the staggering number of out-of-school children who roam the streets, deprived of the fundamental right to education. This situation not only represents a moral failure but also poses a significant threat to the socio-economic development of the nation.
“Instead of addressing these fundamental causes and implementing strategies that would lead to meaningful change, the Minister’s proposal appears to focus solely on scratching the problem on the surface, neglecting the deeper systemic issues that require urgent attention.”
It added: “Our policymakers tend to replicate policies that have proven effective in other contexts, neglecting the specific characteristics of the Nigerian landscape, such as our diverse ethnic groups, varying levels of economic development, and the unique challenges posed by infrastructure deficits.
“This unreflective method of policy development has led to ongoing failures, a pattern that has persisted in Nigeria since gaining Independence. Each new administration often brings a new set of policies, which can lead to confusion and instability within the educational system.
“Moreover, the lack of a coherent long-term vision for education in Nigeria has resulted in a fragmented system that struggles to meet the needs of its population.
“Teachers are often left without adequate training or resources to implement these imported policies effectively, leading to a disconnect between policy and practice.
“This situation is exacerbated by the fact that many of these foreign models do not take into account the socio-economic realities of Nigerian families, where access to education can be hindered by poverty, cultural expectations, and inadequate infrastructure.
“To break this cycle, it is imperative for Nigerian policymakers to engage in a more reflective and context-sensitive approach to education reform. This involves conducting thorough research to understand the unique challenges facing our education.
“It is imperative that we shift our focus to the root causes of the challenges facing Nigeria’s education system. A genuine commitment to reform must prioritise the enhancement of educational quality, the modernisation of curricula, the provision of adequate resources, and the establishment of transparent and accountable governance structures.
“Only then can we hope to create an education system that truly serves the needs of all Nigerians and paves the way for a brighter future.
“The Federal Government should abandon the proposal and instead focus on essential reforms that will enable Nigeria’s education system to meet the nation’s developmental requirements and cultivate a workforce that is both efficient and globally competitive.
“It is time to move beyond superficial policy changes and inconsistencies; we need decisive policies and actions that will urgently address the deterioration of Nigeria’s education system.”

Parent, school proprietors speak
The owner of Eagle Primary/Secondary School, Magboro, Ogun State, Mrs Esther Osadume, told this reporter that if the new policy means equipping students with better skills for the future, she will support it.
“In any case, I think the focus of the policy should be more on vocational training, and digital literacy. Emphasis has been on certificates for too long. If approved, the proposal should be deliberate about changing this situation so that our children can compete in the global world
Another school owner, who prefers to be anonymous, also said: “If the new system will promote skills acquisition at the grassroots, then preparing students for an uninterrupted learning won’t be a problem. My only fear, however, is the Nigerian factor. The 6-3-3-4 system was good but badly implemented.”
For a parent, who identified himself only as Adewale, “the intention is commendable; my only worry is whether it will genuinely improve learning standards.
“For it to be meaningful, areas like quality teaching, learning resources and student engagement should be given prominence. Teacher training, infrastructure and better curriculum are the other areas that can boost quality education.”
Okem Okeise, who has four children in a secondary school, told Saturday Telegraph that he is for the proposed policy if it can change the present learning curriculum, teacher training and administrative restructuring.
“Aside from that, it’s important to consult widely with stakeholders: School owners, teachers and parents, so that everyone is carried along to make the implementation seamless.”

Why previous 6-3-3-4 failed
The 6-3-3-4 education policy is widely considered to have failed primarily due to poor implementation, inadequate funding, and lack of qualified teachers. Others have also pointed to insufficient infrastructure, and a lack of political will to properly execute the policy’s objectives as a major setback for the 6-3-3-4 system.
Findings have also revealed that inadequate guidance and counseling procedure, and absence of legislation were the bane of the implementation of the previous education policies in Nigeria.
Some internal factors such as epileptic power supply, lack of adequate home grown technology, lack of adequate skilled manpower to see the students through the vocational training, and corruption are others.
The new proposal would mark the 4th educational model adopted by the country since Independence in 1960. Firstly, the 6-5-4 system was implemented, which required six years of primary education, followed by five years of secondary education, and then a minimum of four years in a tertiary institution.
In 1983, this system was succeeded by the 6-3-3-4 model, but did not take off until 1987, which was later replaced by the 9-3-4 system in 2006 that was not implemented; and the current proposal for the 12-4 model.
According to most Nigerians, it is disturbing that Nigeria has continued to engage in the trial and error of various foreign models that do not adequately address the country’s unique requirements.
This unreflective method of policy development has led to ongoing failures and a cycle of frequent policy shifts. Each new administration often brings a new set of policies, which leads to confusion and instability within the educational system.

Related