NUC’s core curriculum minimum academic standard: Baby or the bathwater? – Part 2

About the books. In no small measure, these have fuelled the allegation of the erosion of university autonomy. The perception: the CCMAS and the books as a total package; the CCMAS as a compulsory curriculum with its sets of compulsory books. Inextricably woven into this is the allegation of corruption: of the squandering of funds; of NUC officials syphoning funds to invest in the printing business….

I became involved in the CCMAS early enough: right from the initial review of the BMAS that ultimately led to the design of the CCMAS. I designed two programmes in the CCMAS: the BA Film Production; and the BSc Film and Multimedia. Also, I contributed a chapter to the NUC foundational book on Communication and Media Studies. Little, very little payment was made for the programme design—more like to cover expanses on data. No payment was made for contributing to the text. In other words, the call was to service: everything was done in the spirit of national service. Absolutely, no squandering of resources.

And, to the best of my knowledge, the books were intended no more than as a proto-type. In benchmarking global frontline universities in the design of the curriculum, it became expedient to obviate any allegation of the possible lack of texts to drive the curriculum: the logical assumption being that academics, on their own or in association with industry or TETFUND would then swing into action to ensure the availability of texts.

Granted, the personality of the Repertoire General rubbed off wrongly every which way. Day and night, rain or shine, the cascades of mails poured in: from him—and for quite some appreciable while, from his personal e-mail; not from the NUC. His chest-thumbing announcement of himself as the originator of the scheme did not in any way help matters.

By and large, he came to be seen as the ‘owner’, as distinct from the ‘driver’ of the scheme. The other consequence: to a vast section of his own constituency, he came across as a bully throwing his weight around.

However, as much as his panache stood in the way, no one can reasonably question his unstinting passion. His total commitment. His unquestionable savvy. His well-nigh infinite capacity for taking pains. I must confess that I came all too naturally to regard him highly for how he could, in one deft stroke, strike at the very heart of any matter, the intricacies notwithstanding.

I find it intriguing how Prof Omole has positioned the universities’ Directors of Academic Planning in this to-be-or-not-to-be battle of the CCMAS: ‘…. Unfortunately, many Directors of Academic Planning in our various universities are struggling to be the first to impose the scheme on their universities, in order to be in the good books of Abuja, for political patronage at the expense of the university system.’

I have worked directly with some DAPs; and I am privy to some documents on the CCMAS submitted by some DAPs. I can say with all boldness that the DAPs are, in fact, a crucial part of the problem with the CCMAS. Selling a product one does not understand cannot but backfire on the product. The stack reality is that the DAPs have carried their monumental misunderstanding of the CCMAS back to their universities. Perhaps, the DAPs have not been adequately briefed. Perhaps, they were not involved early enough in the planning process.

What I have been leading up to is simply this: the way the CCMAS has been sold to the Universities is, in the main, the very problem with the CCMAS. That is precisely why the right engagement with the programme is not being made. I have in mind that productive engagement that can result only from seeking answers to questions such as: Is the intent of the CCMAS in tandem with how Nigeria desires its manpower resources, industry, society and marketspaces to be in the 21st century? How has the intent of the CCMAS been achieved in the content; and can the content be realised?

In benchmarking top global institutions content, has the indigenous been adequately accommodated? What elasticity exists in the CCMAS for the unbundling of disciplines? (Note: Mass Communication is among the most far reaching innovations in the scheme; yet this is one area in which the discontent with the scheme has been scant. Prior to the scheme being on the drawing board, Mass Communication was unbundled into eight disciplines.

The CCMAS has deftly gathered these eight disciplines into a brand new faculty: the Faculty of Communication and Media Studies). And all the identified loose ends—loose ends that have arisen because the outlined process (assessment of the courses that make up the 30 per cent; training of key monitors/drivers for the scheme, etc.) for the adoption of the scheme was aborted: how to tighten those loose ends?

I am saying that what is lacking is, essentially, the constructive and concrete engagement with the scheme—and I have in mind that kind of assiduous engagement that sees reason not to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

In conclusion, I should reference Prof Omole’s situation report on Ibadan: ‘…the University of Ibadan Senate (has) eventually caved in from its earlier courageous stand in opposition to this anti-intellectual policy that is designed to further put the University system under perpetual slavery.’

It is not that Ibadan has finally seen any merit in the CCMAS. It is simply that Ibadan is slated for the mandatory NUC accreditation in the coming weeks. So, the University has simply adopted the much tested survival policy of once bitten, twice shy—recall the huge embarrassment when some of the University’s age-old programmes lost their accreditation status on account of the University’s opposition to the BMAS. No sensible VC or responsible Senate would elect to walk that route again…

The truth remains: the CCMAS remains the burning issue on which ASUU and universities’ management are in cahoots with each other.

Concluded
Ekwuazi, is Professor of Broadcasting and Film; taught at the University of Ibadan and Pan-Atlantic University; former Director, National Film Institute; former DG, Nigeria Film Corporation; lately, Ag VC, Dominican University, Ibadan. He can be reached via: hekwuazigmail.com and 0803 634 5055.