Curriculum review: We carried universities along, NUC replies ASUU

The National Universities Commission (NUC) has reacted to opposition of the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) to the latest curriculum review by the commission. 

The commission recently developed core curriculum minimum academic standards (CCMAS) for universities across the country.

The CCMAS — usually prepared by the NUC, universities, and relevant education stakeholders — stipulates the minimum academic requirements for the training of undergraduates in various programmes.

The initiative replaced the benchmark minimum academic standards (BMAS) as the curriculum guide for Nigerian universities in 2022.

On Friday, ASUU faulted the review of the BMAS and the implementation of CCMAS. The union accused the commission of sidelining universities while developing it.

ASUU also lamented that the NUC had 70 per cent input in the curriculum while universities — who are statutorily responsible for academic programme development — contributed only 30 per cent.

But in a statement by Noel Biodum Saliu, its deputy executive secretary (academics), the NUC described ASUU’s narrative as misleading.

The NUC said universities were carried along while developing the CCMAS, adding that the 70 to 30 per cent arrangement was a unanimous agreement with vice-chancellors across the country.

“That assertion that there was no official communication from NUC to the Universities on the review of the BMAS is not correct. Vice-Chancellors can attest to the fact that the Commission has been communicating with them on the issue over the last five years,” the statement reads.

“In addition, several virtual and on-site meetings were held to intimate them of the curriculum review, and provide them with updates from time to time (Recordings of these meetings are available).

“The claim that there is no evidence to show that the Universities were involved in the true sense of revision of the BMAS development and the subsequent implementation of the CCMAS in the NUS is also far from the truth.

“The curriculum review process started in 2018 with the subject area experts in Nigerian Universities producing draft documents, which were forwarded to experts in other Nigerian Universities for their comments.

“Comments received from Universities that responded formed part of the working documents forwarded to the various curriculum review panels. It is important to note that when the initial drafts of the CCMAS were ready, they were also circulated amongst Nigerian academics.

“A huge number of comments were received, which were synthesised and incorporated into the respective programmes. How else would one get the universities involved in an exercise of this nature? Needless to say that the practice of getting and incorporating inputs from Nigerian Universities has been the tradition of NUC, from 1989 to date.

“On the components of programmes purported to have been left out, the NUC wishes to state categorically that it informed Nigerian Universities from the beginning of the review exercise that the Commission would provide for 70% of the minimum course requirements for graduation in Nigerian universities, while the Universities would make up the remaining 30%.

“The National Universities Commission wishes to conclude that there is no basis for the attack on the Commission’s process of coordinating the review of the Curriculum of Nigerian Universities.

“This has been done strictly in compliance with the mandate conferred on it by the Education (National Minimum Standard and Establishment of Institutions) Act No. E3 L.F.N. 2004.

“Furthermore, the efforts of the Commission in the development of the CCMAS have been acclaimed by Nigerian Universities, the private sector and, indeed, all stakeholders of university education as well as the international community.

“We believe that hundreds of professors and other credible academics who have been participating in the ongoing curriculum re-engineering exercise are members of the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU)!”.

The commission also dismissed claim that it engaged external consultants to review the curriculum.