By Ahmad Shuaibu
Isa
ahmadeesir214@gmail.com
In the evolving narrative of Nigeria’s higher education, the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) has consistently occupied the position of an unwavering yet frequently misunderstood actor. Despite systemic neglect, official indifference, and public apathy, ASUU has maintained its role as a steadfast advocate for academic integrity and the protection of educational standards. This prompts a critical question: how has the responsibility of defending public education in Africa’s most populous country come to rest predominantly upon the shoulders of a single trade union?
Established in 1978, ASUU has
transformed into far more than a conventional labour organisation. It now
represents the moral and intellectual conscience of Nigeria’s university
system. Its consistent demands, which include improved funding, fair and competitive
remuneration, institutional autonomy, and infrastructural renewal, are not
limited to the interests of its members. Rather, they are reflective of wider
societal imperatives such as social justice, equitable access to knowledge, and
national development.
From a sociological perspective,
ASUU’s advocacy resonates strongly with Emile Durkheim’s notion of moral
education. Durkheim contended that educational institutions are central to the
development of collective consciousness and the reinforcement of societal
cohesion. When these institutions are allowed to deteriorate, the consequences
extend beyond academic decline to include weakened civic values, diminished
critical thought, and the erosion of national identity. In this regard, ASUU’s
industrial actions should not be perceived solely as disputes over wages or
benefits. Instead, they are symptomatic of deeper institutional dysfunctions
and serve as a protest against what Max Weber might characterise as
bureaucratic irrationality, wherein state structures prioritise transient
political gain over long term societal investment.
Despite the union’s enduring
commitment to higher education reform, ASUU remains frequently isolated in its
efforts. Students, paradoxically the primary beneficiaries of its struggle,
often express resentment or indifference. Repeated disruptions to the academic
calendar have generated a psychological detachment frequently referred to as
strike fatigue. This condition, however, reflects a more fundamental problem:
the absence of political education and civic awareness among the youth. Antonio
Gramsci’s theory of cultural hegemony provides a useful lens for understanding
this phenomenon. By framing ASUU as an impediment rather than an advocate for
progress, the state sustains ideological control and suppresses collective
resistance. The lack of effective communication strategies by the union has
enabled such misrepresentations to persist, limiting the potential for public
solidarity. Nonetheless, the responsibility for reforming Nigeria’s educational
system must be shared. Students, parents, civil society organisations, and
university administrators all possess a critical role in this process.
The approach adopted by the
Nigerian government towards ASUU has been largely reactive and lacking in
strategic vision. Successive administrations have consistently failed to engage
in meaningful dialogue or to honour previously negotiated agreements. Instead,
they have relied on delay, deflection, and superficial gestures. This approach
is emblematic of a broader postcolonial governance crisis characterised by
institutional fragility, clientelism, and an absence of developmental
foresight. Public education, rather than being treated as a cornerstone of
national progress, has been relegated to the margins of political
consideration. While public universities remain grossly underfunded and
structurally weakened, private institutions have flourished, thereby
reinforcing class divisions and perpetuating educational inequality.
An analysis rooted in political
economy provides further insight into this structural crisis. The deterioration
of Nigeria’s public universities is not simply the consequence of fiscal
mismanagement or policy neglect. It is also a byproduct of the neoliberal
restructuring of African states which began in the 1980s with the
implementation of Structural Adjustment Programmes. These programmes, promoted
by international financial institutions, imposed austerity measures, encouraged
deregulation, and significantly reduced public expenditure on education and
other social services. ASUU’s resistance can thus be understood as a form of
counter hegemony, challenging the commodification of education and the erosion
of public responsibility.
At a global level, the challenges
facing Nigeria’s higher education sector are reflective of wider structural
inequalities between the Global South and the Global North. The trend popularly
referred to in Nigeria as the Japa syndrome, involving the mass emigration of
academics and skilled professionals, underscores the global imbalance in
institutional capacity and opportunity. The continuous outflow of talent in
search of better research facilities, career advancement, and working
conditions further deprives Nigeria’s universities of the human capital
necessary for meaningful transformation. This creates a vicious cycle of
underdevelopment and dependency.
ASUU’s demand for the
revitalisation of the Nigerian University System is therefore both legitimate
and urgent. The union has consistently called for improvements in physical
infrastructure, modern laboratory facilities, increased funding for research, manageable
student to staff ratios, and the restoration of conducive working conditions.
These demands are fundamental to the proper functioning of a modern university
and essential for positioning Nigerian institutions within the global academic
landscape.
Nevertheless, it is imperative
for ASUU to engage in critical self assessment. Although its objectives are
commendable, the union’s operational strategies require recalibration. The
movement must transcend its current posture of institutional insularity and
adopt a broader coalition building approach. By forging alliances with student
unions, parents, civil society actors, and sympathetic voices within the
private sector, ASUU can enhance its legitimacy and bargaining power while
amplifying the urgency of its message.
In conclusion, the question is
not whether ASUU’s demands are reasonable; they are. The deeper question
concerns why the union has been left to pursue this struggle in isolation.
Nigeria’s future is inextricably linked to the quality of its education system.
A nation that fails to invest in intellectual development, research, and human
capital imperils its capacity for innovation, governance, and sustainable
growth. It is time for the Nigerian government and society more broadly to
reconsider education not as an expenditure but as a critical investment in the
survival, stability, and advancement of the nation.
