Higher Education vs Learning and Development in Nigeria

“Education is the passport to the future, for tomorrow belongs to those who prepare for it today.” — Malcolm X

Nigeria recognizes education as the major instrument for effecting national development. However, the quality and standard of Nigerian education do not support true and proper development. Despite the increase in our literacy rate from 51.1% in 2008 to 64% in 2018, the Nigerian youth cannot be said to be literate enough for the job market. This is one of the major causes of unemployment and underemployment. There is almost no link between what is taught in our higher institutions and what is required for gainful employment.

With a population that accounts for half of West Africa, and as the largest economy in the region, Nigeria has the potential to lead growth and development in the region. Nigeria needs competent hands to meet the rising demands of the 21st century and keep up with advances in technology such as artificial intelligence and blockchain.

After independence in 1960, Nigeria adopted the British curriculum of “6–5–2” basic to tertiary education system. The Nigerian “A” Level certificate was equivalent to a British certificate. 59 years later, Nigeria’s educational system encompasses 9 years of basic education, 3 years of senior secondary education, and 4–6 years of tertiary education. A historical look at the Nigerian educational system will show a system that has undergone changes, yet in somewhat insignificant areas.

Sadly, the wholistic quality of contemporary education in Nigeria has fallen, resulting in higher institutions churning out “illiterate graduates.” With outdated curriculums and traditional methods for teaching a hyper generation, it is getting harder for the new graduates to adjust to the demands of work-life. The gap between contemporary education and industry needs is widening at an alarming rate. Except for the few who attend elite universities, many Nigerian youths are unemployable due to lack of prerequisite soft and hard skills. This is where corporate Learning and Development (L&D) come in.

60 years ago, recruitment exercises usually involved long panel-based conversations. Gradually the chit-chat evolved to the use of aptitude and psychometric tests that were designed to ascertain an applicant’s intelligence quotient and performance potential. Today, it has further morphed into an assessment centre system that combines all previous methods and more hands-on tests to ascertain the candidate’s skill and competence.

To create a transition bridge, corporate learning and development have advanced to offer more deliberate learning initiatives under full corporate university structures. These corporate universities encompass graduate trainee programs to bridge the gap between the skills acquired in contemporary universities and the skills needed to excel at work. Corporate Universities have brought structure to the workplace learning culture. It has been 60 years since the first of its kind by General Electric (GE) and its advent can be credited to the many perceived candidate errors and diluted interviews that affected organisational output.

Although corporate organisations have taken the first step in bridging the gap, it is essential for the government to improve the educational sector and quality of education provided. Policymakers should also comprise of executives from the corporate world who advise the government on recent developments in their line of work. The government has a huge task ahead of them. However, it is essential to note that Industry can further improve on the measures implemented to bridge the knowledge gap.

We are now in a world where innovation is faster than the clock. Organisations who want to survive and ultimately lead must be ready to adapt to the times and create learning programs that would bring out the best in their people. Firms should investigate creating mobile yet practical courses that are customized to meet the needs of the employee. Organisations should focus on clear objectives, the development of relevant business curriculums, leverage competent facilitators at all levels of employment, sustain learning mechanisms to address scale and quality of training and training partners.

H.E. Luccock said, “No one can whistle a symphony. It takes a whole orchestra to play it.” This should serve as a reminder that neither government nor the corporate world can solve this problem on their own. Instead, both parties should work together to develop a system that will properly equip employees for growth and development.

• Digital Learning and Training team