Stakeholders’ perspectives on “miracle examination centres” in Nigeria

IF 1.5 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH QUALITY ASSURANCE IN EDUCATION Pub Date : 2022-07-28 DOI:10.1108/qae-12-2021-0193
Prince Agwu, A. Odii, T. Orjiakor, Pallavi Roy, C. Nzeadibe, Chinyere E. Onalu, U. Okoye, O. Onwujekwe
{"title":"Stakeholders’ perspectives on “miracle examination centres” in Nigeria","authors":"Prince Agwu, A. Odii, T. Orjiakor, Pallavi Roy, C. Nzeadibe, Chinyere E. Onalu, U. Okoye, O. Onwujekwe","doi":"10.1108/qae-12-2021-0193","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThe purpose of this study is to describe the nature and operations of schools commonly regarded as “Miracle Examination Centres (MECs)” in Nigeria, through the lens of stakeholders in education. This study also assessed stakeholders’ perspectives on the possible solutions to the problem of MECs.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThe study design was a stakeholders’ approach involving 39 key actors within the examination system from northern and southern Nigeria. The stakeholders comprised people from the Ministries of Education (MoE), Examination Councils (EC), school owners and teachers, security agencies and Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) who were invited to interact, interrogate and debate the subject of MECs in Nigeria. Using thematic analysis, recurrent themes were identified from the data and used for a narrative synthesis of the findings.\n\n\nFindings\nMECs may attempt to circumvent quality assurance and regulatory requirements and may find support from prominent leaders and members of the communities through a wider informal economy. Interventions against MECs might only yield incremental results and must involve various groups like CSOs, anti-corruption agencies, EC and faith- and community-based groups. These interventions will be even more effective if the MoE will strengthen its integrity and improve its monitoring and regulatory functions without political interference.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThis paper revealed that improving examination integrity and building a solid and reliable secondary educational level in Nigeria will be achieved through the combination of horizontal and vertical approaches that involve local actors and those in authority.\n","PeriodicalId":46734,"journal":{"name":"QUALITY ASSURANCE IN EDUCATION","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"QUALITY ASSURANCE IN EDUCATION","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/qae-12-2021-0193","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this study is to describe the nature and operations of schools commonly regarded as “Miracle Examination Centres (MECs)” in Nigeria, through the lens of stakeholders in education. This study also assessed stakeholders’ perspectives on the possible solutions to the problem of MECs. Design/methodology/approach The study design was a stakeholders’ approach involving 39 key actors within the examination system from northern and southern Nigeria. The stakeholders comprised people from the Ministries of Education (MoE), Examination Councils (EC), school owners and teachers, security agencies and Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) who were invited to interact, interrogate and debate the subject of MECs in Nigeria. Using thematic analysis, recurrent themes were identified from the data and used for a narrative synthesis of the findings. Findings MECs may attempt to circumvent quality assurance and regulatory requirements and may find support from prominent leaders and members of the communities through a wider informal economy. Interventions against MECs might only yield incremental results and must involve various groups like CSOs, anti-corruption agencies, EC and faith- and community-based groups. These interventions will be even more effective if the MoE will strengthen its integrity and improve its monitoring and regulatory functions without political interference. Originality/value This paper revealed that improving examination integrity and building a solid and reliable secondary educational level in Nigeria will be achieved through the combination of horizontal and vertical approaches that involve local actors and those in authority.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
利益相关者对尼日利亚“奇迹检查中心”的看法
本研究的目的是通过教育利益相关者的视角,描述尼日利亚通常被视为“奇迹考试中心(MECs)”的学校的性质和运作。本研究还评估了利益相关者对mec问题可能解决方案的看法。设计/方法/方法研究设计采用利益相关者方法,涉及尼日利亚北部和南部考试系统内的39个关键行为者。利益相关者包括来自教育部(MoE),考试委员会(EC),学校所有者和教师,安全机构和民间社会组织(cso)的人员,他们被邀请参与互动,询问和辩论尼日利亚的mec主题。通过专题分析,从数据中确定了反复出现的主题,并将其用于对调查结果的叙述性综合。中小企业可能试图绕过质量保证和监管要求,并可能通过更广泛的非正式经济获得杰出领导人和社区成员的支持。针对mec的干预措施可能只会产生渐进式的结果,并且必须涉及各种团体,如公民社会组织、反腐败机构、欧共体以及信仰和社区团体。如果教育部在不受政治干预的情况下加强其诚信,改善其监测和监管职能,这些干预措施将更加有效。原创性/价值本文揭示,在尼日利亚,提高考试的完整性和建立坚实可靠的中等教育水平将通过涉及地方行动者和权威人士的横向和纵向方法的结合来实现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
QUALITY ASSURANCE IN EDUCATION
QUALITY ASSURANCE IN EDUCATION EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
20.00%
发文量
47
期刊介绍: QAE publishes original empirical or theoretical articles on Quality Assurance issues, including dimensions and indicators of Quality and Quality Improvement, as applicable to education at all levels, including pre-primary, primary, secondary, higher and professional education. Periodically, QAE also publishes systematic reviews, research syntheses and assessment policy articles on topics of current significance. As an international journal, QAE seeks submissions on topics that have global relevance. Article submissions could pertain to the following areas integral to QAE''s mission: -organizational or program development, change and improvement -educational testing or assessment programs -evaluation of educational innovations, programs and projects -school efficiency assessments -standards, reforms, accountability, accreditation, and audits in education -tools, criteria and methods for examining or assuring quality
期刊最新文献
The impact of gamification on meaningful learning and student performance in an undergraduate online engineering course Generative AI: hopes, controversies and the future of faculty roles in education AI-enhanced education: exploring the impact of AI literacy on generation Z’s academic performance in Northern India Stakeholders’ involvement in economics and management programs quality assurance Experimental evidence for the efficacy of generative AI in improving students’ writing skills
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1