Quota System, Federal Character Principle and Admission to Federal Unity Schools: Barriers to Learning in Nigeria

Abstract

While the quota system came into being prior to Nigeria‘s independence in 1960, the federal character principle became officially recognised in the 1979 constitution. These policies were aimed at addressing the issues of ethnic representation in the public sector. The implication of these was that issues of admission, recruitment, promotion and appointment became based on these principles. In other words, advancement in the country‘s public institutions, which ought to be the drivers of development, is neither based on merit nor competence. Where these principles have played out visibly is in the admission system into Federal Unity Schools. With the adoption and analysis of secondary data, the paper observes that the inclusion of the quota system and federal character principle in the educational sector creates a scenario of discrimination against Nigerians in their own country by virtue of their ethnic identification, which is contrary to the provisions of the constitution. This paper therefore recommends, among others that Nigeria needs a review of her educational policies and an extensive educational infrastructural development to accommodate its growing student population. It concludes that the quota system and federal character principle have been the major barriers to learning in Nigeria.

Full text

International Journal of Interdisciplinary and Multidisciplinary Studies (IJIMS), 2014, Vol 2, No.2, 1-10. 1
Available online at http://www.ijims.com
ISSN: 2348 – 0343
Quota System, Federal Character Principle and Admission to Federal Unity Schools: Barriers
to Learning in Nigeria
Segun Joshua , Ronald E. Loromeke and Ilemobola P. Olanrewaju*
Department of Political Science and International Relations
Covenant University, P.B.M. 1023 Ota, Ogun State, Nigeria
*Corresponding author: Ilemobola P. Olanrewaju
Abstract
While the quota system came into being prior to Nigeria‘s independence in 1960, the federal character principle became
officially recognised in the 1979 constitution. These policies were aimed at addressing the issues of ethnic
representation in the public sector. The implication of these was that issues of admission, recruitment, promotion and
appointment became based on these principles. In other words, advancement in the country‘s public institutions, which
ought to be the drivers of development, is neither based on merit nor competence. Where these principles have played
out visibly is in the admission system into Federal Unity Schools. With the adoption and analysis of secondary data, the
paper observes that the inclusion of the quota system and federal character principle in the educational sector creates a
scenario of discrimination against Nigerians in their own country by virtue of their ethnic identification, which is
contrary to the provisions of the constitution. This paper therefore recommends, among others that Nigeria needs a
review of her educational policies and an extensive educational infrastructural development to accommodate its
growing student population. It concludes that the quota system and federal character principle have been the major
barriers to learning in Nigeria.
Keywords: quota system, federal character principle, federal unity schools, education, Nigeria
Introduction
The heterogeneous configuration of the Nigerian state has since inception generated series of issues that have continued
to engage the government in thinkering ways of preserving the existence of the system. These issues have divided the
country along ethnic, religious, majority-minority, advantaged-disadvantaged lines. Unfortunately, education has had its
fair share in the struggles resulting in an educationally imbalanced society, where the south is educationally advantaged
and the north is disadvantaged. In the light of this, the introduction of quota system and federal character principle in
education became pivotal in extinguishing the already looming class conflict, as they were aimed at fostering national
integration, sense of belonging and a wholesome development of the entire parts of the state.
Despite the immediate successes recorded by these policies in widening the opportunity of quality education to the
educationally disadvantaged states, merit and competence is being sacrificed on the altar of the twin policies.
However, this paper seeks to interrogate the adoption of quota system and federal character principle to the system of
education in Nigeria, with a particular focus on the admission process to the Federal Unity Schools. It also seeks to
examine the extent to which the policies have become barriers to learning in the country. Therefore, qualitative method
was adopted to collect data from texts, academic journals, conference proceedings and other relevant materials, while
descriptive approach was employed for analysis.

International Journal of Interdisciplinary and Multidisciplinary Studies (IJIMS), 2014, Vol 2, No.2, 1-10. 2
Conceptual Clarifications:
The Federal Character Principle
There appears to be a general agreement amongst scholars in respect to the origins of the Federal Character Principle.
Scholars are of the opinion that the principle was the creation of the Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC) that was
set up by the General Murtala Mohamed/Olusegun Obasanjo‘s military government in 1975. However, they also share
the view that the federal character officially became a constitutional matter after its inclusion in the 1979 Constitution
which stated that:
The composition of the Federal Government or any of its agencies and the conduct of their affairs shall be
carried out in such manner as to recognize the federal character of Nigeria and the need to promote national
unity and to command national loyalty. Accordingly, the predominance in that government or its agencies of
persons from a few ethnic or other sectional groups shall be avoided.1, 2, 3, 4
While there is unanimity with regards to the origin of the Federal Character Principle, a consensus however on the
definition of the concept itself remains elusive.
The Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC) conceptualized federal character as:
The distinctive desire of the peoples of Nigeria to promote national unity, foster national loyalty and give
every citizen of Nigeria a sense of belonging to the nation notwithstanding the diversities of ethnic origin,
culture, language or religion which may exist and which it is their desire to nourish, harness to the environment
of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.5, 4
Some scholars, however, seem not to agree with this definition. For instance, Gberevbie & Ibietan criticised the
definition of federal character by the Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC) as being ―very inadequate and suffers on
many counts‖.4 They further asserted that ―the desire to nourish‖ in the definition appears very ambiguous. In the same
vein, Afigbo stated that the federal character cannot be a desire. He however went ahead to assert that ―federal character
of Nigeria must be taken to mean the character of the Nigerian federation‖.1 Okpata defines the Federal character
principle in Nigeria as the democratization of the public bureaucracy through the principle of representation as
contained in the 1979 constitution of Nigeria.6
However a different approach in the perception of the principle was adopted by Obiyan & Akindele. They opined that
the federal character principle ―essentially refers to the recognition of the plural nature of the country in recruitment,
distribution of administrative and political offices and power as well as the resources of the country‖. For them, the
federal character principle was structured so as to address the challenges of imbalance and discrimination. In other
words, the Federal Character Principle is ―the attempt to eschew group imbalance in public institutions and affairs‖.7 In
this regard, Akpanabia sees the Federal character principle as ―a practice where every nationality is represented in all
government owned institutions‖. He further explains it as ―designed to ensure equity, fair-play and order among
different ethnic nationalities that make up Nigeria in the distribution of resources, so as to promote national harmony
and loyalty for economic development in the polity‖.8 Also in this respect, Ekeh posits that the federal character
principle sought to give ―opportunities in education and employment, usually at the point of entry, to disadvantaged
groups and areas to enable them compete and catch up with more advanced areas and sectors of the nation‖.9
For Ojo, the Federal character principle is ―an integrative mechanism‖; he defines it as ―fair and effective representation
of the various components of the Federation in the country‘s position of power, status and influence‖.10 The
introduction of federal character policies in Nigerian state is to foster unity, peace, equal access to state resources and
promote the integration of the less advantage states for better improvement and good conditions of living in the
country.11 Bello shares this integrative view and stipulated that the federal character principle was a constitutionally
guaranteed recipe for national integration.2 To buttress this point, Obiyan & Akindele affirmed that the principle is:

International Journal of Interdisciplinary and Multidisciplinary Studies (IJIMS), 2014, Vol 2, No.2, 1-10. 3
Premised on the ground that when national institutions and affairs are reflective, in composition and conduct,
of the pluralism of the country then, a sense of belonging is likely to be evoked from the citizenry. It is also
designed to mitigate, if not obviate, the bellicose political struggle that characterised previous Nigeria‘s
democratic systems.7
The Quota System
According to Chafe, the primary requirement for debating a thing is to first understand the actual thing being talked
about. More often than not, the quota system has been confused to be the same as the federal character principle.12, 13
This is an error that is easily committed due to the fact that both policies were responses to the challenges arising from a
multi-ethnic and multicultural entity like Nigeria. Quota system was purposed at facilitating equal representation of the
various ethnic groups in Nigeria‘s public service.14, 15 But confusion has been made by a number of scholars who stated
that the federal character principle ―was known by different nomenclatures such as zoning or quota system‖.16, 3 Others
submit that the quota system is the ―corollary‖ of the federal character.6
Nevertheless, certain scholars have attempted to distinguish the two concepts.9, 4 Ekeh argues that the federal character
principle ―demands far more‖ than the quota system in the sense that ―it switches emphasis from opportunities to
privileges and benefits‖. In other words, for him, while the quota system ―creates opportunities for disadvantaged
states‖, the federal character principle in addition creates ―soft landing for them‖.9 In the same vein, ―special
consideration should be given to candidates from the Northern provinces and other areas where educational facilities
were more backward than elsewhere‖.17 To this extent, though the quota system and federal character seem alike; the
latter however covers wider scope than the former.13
Theoretical Framework
For the purpose of this paper, the Integration theory is adopted as an explanatory tool. The concepts of quota system and
federal character are best understood within the framework of the integration theory. This is because of the assumptions
of the theory. The presumption here is that there exists a multicultural and multi-ethnic society in which the various
groups are defined by their respective languages, or other self-conscious cultural qualities and that their interaction is
characterised by the tensions and discontinuities on the horizontal plane. Within this context, integration is used to refer
to the process of creating a homogeneous progressive reduction of cultural and regional territorial political
community.18 It is a process of inter-locking linkages where every hitherto dividing boundaries are deliberately
dismantled to allow for a more frequent contact, cooperation, consensus and community.19, 10
Integration therefore must be situated in this discourse as a careful and thorough understanding of the fundamentals of
the past, conceiving practical steps of what happens after, a disposition to be cohesive, subjected to a mutually agreed
programme.20, 10 Also, Leonard Binder describes integration as involving a high degree of comprehensiveness.21
This theory therefore bring the understanding of different attempts by the Nigerian government to create an harmonious
and cohesive society, culminating in the formulation of quota system and federal character principle with the intention
of conjuring nationwide development. This is to address the issue of developmental imbalance, fear of dominance and
suspicion between and among various ethnic groups.
Quota System and Federal Character Principle in Nigeria’s Educational System: A Historical
Overview
The structure and configuration of the Nigerian colonial state brought about imbalance in the representation of the
numerous ethnic groups in federal institutions, as colonialism favoured particular groups over the others. This gave rise

International Journal of Interdisciplinary and Multidisciplinary Studies (IJIMS), 2014, Vol 2, No.2, 1-10. 4
to the agitation for a system that will encourage equity and justice among the various entities. By 1958 a quota system
was introduced to quell this agitation for access into public service.4, 22 A quota of 50% was allotted to the North, while
25% each to the East and West.22 But despite the huge educational gap between the north and the south in the 1950s this
system of quota was not employed, as the International University Council (IUC) insisted on merit as pivotal for
academic excellence and admissions to the University College, Ibadan. This stance of merit over quota was maintained
by the post-colonial government of Alhaji Tafawa Balewa.15, 22
This policy continuity further widened the educational gap between the north and south, reflecting in serious socio-
economic disparity. By the 1970s, Northern leaders became more concerned with the extent to which the north has been
left behind in the area of western education, thereby intensifying the clamour for an inclusion of the quota system in
education.15 This issue of quota system aggravated fear and distrust in the country, while the south resisted the idea with
an argument that it negates international educational standards, the north insisted that the non-inclusion of this system
creates a barrier to the western educationally weak northerners to be educated and become as competitive as the
southerners.23, 15
Concerned about the already building up tension within the ethnic groups, as a result of the quota system subject with
the fact that the country recently ended a civil war in 1970, the Military Government of General Yakubu Gowon, in
1972 attempted the dismantling of academic barriers to Northern Nigeria. Though he was not in support of the idea of a
quota system, Gowon suggested that without playing down on merit, the primary and secondary school education in the
disadvantaged states—which are mostly situated in Northern Nigeria—should be strengthened by adopting a massive
education programme that provided increased educational facilities across the North to equate that of the South.15
Unfortunately, his government was overthrown by another military coup. On 6 September 1976, the General Olusegun
Obasanjo led government launched the Universal Free Primary Education to provide free and compulsory primary
education for all Nigerian child.24
In spite of government‘s efforts, the North expressed their dissatisfaction through a violent protest which crippled the
education sector and eventually forced the introduction of the quota system in education.25 See Table 1.
Table 1: Admission formula into federal tertiary institutions introduced by the Gen. Murtala/Obasanjo Military
Administration.
Criteria
Admission formula
Merit
40%
States Quota
30%
Catchment zone
20%
Discretion
10%
Source: 25, 26, 27
To build upon the achievements of the quota system, Obasanjo further introduced a Federal Character Principle to the
1979 constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, which was designed to give opportunities to disadvantaged groups
in education and employment, usually at the point of entry, so as to enhance their ability to compete with the
advantaged groups.3, 4
Quota System, Federal Character Principle and Admission to Federal Unity Schools in Nigeria
Having seen the history of quota system and federal character principle, it becomes necessary to analyse its applications
in the admission process into the unity schools. As stated before, the idea of quota system came to the fore because of
the multi-ethnic nature of the polity and imbalance in educational development of the various geo-political zones.
Presently, Nigeria is made up of 36 states and admission into the unity schools in the country is not based on merit

International Journal of Interdisciplinary and Multidisciplinary Studies (IJIMS), 2014, Vol 2, No.2, 1-10. 5
alone but also on the principle of federal character and quota system with the aim of bringing about equalization of
opportunity of the various states in education. While the states in the north are said to be backward and educationally
disadvantaged, and thus, candidates in these states are given admission into the unity schools with low scores,
candidates from states in the south are said to be in a vantage position as far as education is concerned and their cut-off-
marks for admission into the unity schools are always very high. See Table 2 for the cut-off marks based on
state/locality in the 2013 National Common Entrance Examinations (NCEE).
Table 2: 2013 National Common Entrance Examinations Cut-off marks by state.
Region
Geo-
Political
Zone
States
NCEE Cut off
marks
Male
Female
Northern
Region
North
Central
Benue
111
111
Kogi
119
119
Kwara
123
123
Nasawara
75
75
Niger
93
93
Plateau
90
90
North
East
Adamawa
62
62
Bauchi
35
35
Gombe
58
58
Borno
45
45
Taraba
3
11
Yobe
2
27
North
West
Sokoto
9
13
Zamfara
4
2
Kebbi
9
20
Kaduna
91
91
Jigawa
44
44
Katsina
60
60
Southern
Region
South
East
Anambra
139
139
Enugu
134
134
Ebonyi
112
112
Imo
138
138
Abia
130
130
South
West
Lagos
133
133
Ogun
131
131
Oyo
127
127
Osun
127
127
Ondo
126
126
Ekiti
119
119
South
South
Edo
127
127
Delta
131
131
Rivers
118
118
Bayelsa
72
72
Cross
River
97
97
Akwa-
Ibom
123
123
Source: 28
From the above table, it can be inferred that, a pupil from Anambra State is expected to score at least 139 to gain
admission into the unity schools, while his counterpart from Yobe and Zamfara States is required to score only two

International Journal of Interdisciplinary and Multidisciplinary Studies (IJIMS), 2014, Vol 2, No.2, 1-10. 6
marks out of a possible 200. This denotes that while candidate with 138 points in Anambra may not be given admission,
candidate from Zamfara with just two points will be offered admission. It can also be observed that there is
discrimination between male and female candidates in some states. For example, while male candidates from Yobe,
Taraba and Kebbi States are required to score two, three and nine marks out of a possible 200, respectively, female
counterparts are expected to score 27, 11 and 20 marks out of a possible 200 respectively to qualify for admission into
the unity schools. A candidate of Lagos State origin is expected to score 133 before he or she could qualify for
admission, while those from Bornu State only need to score forty-five to be admitted. Candidate from Osun are
expected to score 127 to be admitted into a unity school.29 It was observed that in the 2012 examination into the unity
schools, out of the 6000 candidates that made the cut off mark, Anambra State had the lion share. If all the candidates
that merited admission should be given admission it was argued that, there will be no unity colleges.28
In the main, admission into unity schools is done through national merit, state of origin merit, catchment area and
educationally disadvantaged states modes. Suffice to say that after quota is drawn, each state is expected to fill its quota.
It is however, observed that a state may be given 250 slots for instance, in order to fill the slots, it is necessary to draw a
merit list from which candidates will be selected based on performance of its indigenes before other modes are
considered. However, there are years in which some of these states with low cut-off marks could not fill their quota, this
development often create opportunity for any indigenes of such a state to be offered admission automatically.29 This
policy is borne out the need to bring about equity in ethnic ratio in the education‘s sector. It is therefore, not a surprise
that Yoloye contends that the practice emanated from ‗reasoned compromise‘.23, 30 It is meant to bridge the age-long gap
in educational attainment between the geopolitical south and north.31 It is essential to note that the quota system
principle is not limited to admission into the unity schools in Nigeria (secondary schools) it is also extended to higher
institutions in the country. For instance Joint Admission and Matriculation Board (JAMB) now Unify Tertiary
Matriculation Examination (UTME) in charge of admission into the universities in the country first applied quota
system in 1983 even though admission based on quota system was not the original idea. Thus, admission into
universities that year followed these order merit (40%), locality (30%), educational less developed (ELD) (20%) and
discretion (10%) by the six oldest universities in the country. The universities were: the University of Ibadan, Obafemi
Awolowo University Ile-Ife and University of Lagos from (South-West), Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria (North-
West), University of Benin (South-South), and University of Nsukka (South-East). The guidelines for the second
generation universities (which are University of Calabar, (South-South) University of Ilorin (North-Central), University
of Jos (North-Central), University of Maiduguri (North-East), University of Port Harcourt (South-South) and Uthman
Dan Fodio University, Sokoto (North-West) were as follows: merit (30%), locality (30%), ELD (30%) and discretion
(10%). There was a scheme of inducement grants for compliance and penalty for non-compliance.32
All the states in Nigeria are grouped into catchment areas of each university. In most cases, the geographical and/or
socio-cultural areas are contiguous to the institution to which candidate apply. Students who fall within the catchment
areas of the university are given consideration for admission. Federally-owned universities normally have all the states
of the federation as their catchment areas, while state-owned institutions have all local government areas of their states
as their catchment area. Twenty per cent is strictly reserved for the educationally-less-developed states (ELDS) that is
indigenous secondary school graduates from the states that are often specially considered for admission with lower cut-
off marks on the JAMB examination.33 The formula for admission into federal universities, polytechnic and colleges of
education are as follows: merit 40%, states quota 30%, catchment zone 20% and discretion 10%.26 The educationally
less developed states are: Kaduna, Adamawa, Bauchi, Bayelsa, Benue, Borno, Cross River, Ebonyi, Gombe, Jigawa,
Kano, Katsina, Kebbi, Kogi, Kwara, Nasarawa, Niger, Plateau, Rivers Sokoto, Taraba, Yobe and Zamfara. Most of the
states listed above are from the northern part of the country.34

International Journal of Interdisciplinary and Multidisciplinary Studies (IJIMS), 2014, Vol 2, No.2, 1-10. 7
In 2000, the government cancelled the discretion criterion given to the Vice-Chancellor of universities on account of its
perceived abuse and the fact that it has aggravated violent cult activities in the universities. This led to the adoption of a
new quota system (see table 3).
Table 3: New Admission Quota Breakdown
Criteria
New Quota System Percentage
Merit
45%
Locality
35%
Educationally less developed (ELD)
20%
Source: 35
From the above it can be deduced that only 45% is based on merit the remaining 55% is based on some other factors.
The implication is that a potential candidate from south-west may score 260 in JAMB, and may still not be offered
admission in a southern university, while a northern candidate who scored 215 may receive offer of admission based on
quota system.
Thus:
The first variable and noticeable gulf between one geographical unit of our great and diverse country and the
other in the area of education and a glaring example is that of geographical north and south (...) Available
social statistics have shown that over the years since independence, it is an open secret that the north has
lagged and still lags behind the south in education at all levels.31
There seems to be no noticeable improvement in the standard of education in the north despite the quota system put in
place to bring about equalization in education. For example Anya lamented that:
Despite the utilization of the concept of educational disadvantaged states for a quarter of a century, for the
allocation of resources and admission into educational institutions, the so called disadvantaged state have
remained disadvantaged as they were in 1975 (...) (The quota and federal character for admission) were clearly
instruments of political manipulation which have proved ineffectual even for the purpose they were designed
for (...) They must therefore be discarded.36
The reason why the quota system and federal character principle have not improved the educational status of the north
is because the northern elite have not put in their best to change the attitudinal disposition of their youths towards the
viability of western education. Little wonder that Okobiah argued that assessment of data on educational imbalance is
staggering and that they convey devastating information.31 It is necessarily so because of the act of commission or
omission on the part of those that supposed to act, but chose sadly enough to watch the almost irreversible decline of the
education of the north. The elite in the north have been nonchalant, pursue individual and parochial interest.
It is chagrin to discover that the people of the north seem not to understand the fact that religious education through
Quranic/Islamic schools cannot be a substitute for western education. The northern people seem to give more attention
to Islamic education, thereby, playing down on western education. This has in fact, contributed to low level of literacy
in the area. Some scholars have however, pointed out the good side of quota system and federal character principle and
as such they see reasons why it should be continued. For example, quota system and federal character principle have
brought about unity, encourage learning and pursuit of academic endeavour by the states which have been discovered to
have little passion for such.37 The aforementioned principles ensure equitable admission into federal universities, it
provides scheme to redress imbalances, real or imagined, it protects the interest of the minority and that it has helped to
douse the centripetal agitations.38 Others have pointed out their grave implications. For instance it can be extrapolated
from the work of Moti that the quota system and federal character principle has led to the rejection of many brilliant
candidates and the admission of weak ones because federally-owned institutions are compelled to give equal
opportunities to all applicants.34

International Journal of Interdisciplinary and Multidisciplinary Studies (IJIMS), 2014, Vol 2, No.2, 1-10. 8
Quota System and Federal Character Principle: Barriers to Learning in Nigeria
One of the grave implications of these principles is that in the course of bridging the gap between the educationally
disadvantaged states and educationally advantaged states is that it is detrimental to the interest of the educationally
advantaged states. This is because meritocracy tend to be subverted and as such, less qualified people are admitted.33
For God sake, why should brilliant students from the south be denied admission in order to give room for candidates
from the north who may not apply to even fill their quota? Slots are reserved for candidates from educationally
disadvantaged states, when these slots are not filled as they as they always are not, they become wasted in that academic
year when in actual facts thousands of qualified candidates were denied admission for the fact that they were from
educationally advantaged states.37 The quota system and federal character principle are great barriers to learning in the
sense that there is nothing like equality of states which the aforementioned mechanisms seem to address. ―There is no
greater inequality than the equal treatment of unequal‖.39
Moti has also pointed out the evil in the quota system by saying that by the quota system, a candidate in southern states,
considered to be educationally advantaged, who scores 300 out of 400, may not gain admission into the university,
while his or her counterpart in the north who scores less may get admission. He stated further that although it is good to
encouraged the educationally disadvantaged, it should not be at the detriment of others.34
Kanyip submits that inability of a candidate to gain admission to college or university based on his or her state origin is
unjustifiable.33 Using the quota system as an instrument to regulate access to university education is fraught with
inequitable implication of reducing the opportunities of admission for highly qualified applicants.
Onwubiko sees it as gross injustice for the federal government to use the collective resources to run the educational
institutions only to deny the brilliant and serious minded candidates of admission into higher institutions to actualize
their dreams. He sees it as an indirect way of sowing violent revolution in the future as there is a limit of tolerance by
youths denied opportunity to acquire higher education which can translate to better standard of living in the future.40 It
is even sadder to discover that much of the resources in running the affairs of the country come from the south who
suffer most from the application of quota system. Besides, the system does not give room for competition.
Recommendations
At the time of introduction of the quota system and federal character principle, 1958 and 1979 respectively, they
appeared to be the ideal responses to the challenges created by the heterogeneity of the Nigerian state. However, as our
analysis has shown, these policies can no longer be applauded in the light of contemporary realities. These actualities
form the basis of our recommendations.
First of all, there is the need to review these policies. In the quest to encourage the educationally disadvantaged states,
the implementation of policies should not be done at the expense of the other states. To this extent, the sanctity of the
educational system shouldn‘t be sacrifice on the altar of ethnic representation. Put succinctly, merit must remain the
major criterion for educational advancement.
Also, this study suggests the revisiting and enforcing of the policy of free and compulsory education that was
introduced during the Obasanjo administration in 1976. This suggestion finds credence on the basis that series of efforts
that were made to boost the education in the north have yielded insignificantly. These attempts include the introduction
of nomadic education which practically took education to the cattle grazing fields in order to accommodate the nomadic
culture of the Northern people. In addition, total sponsorship and financial and other incentives were given to Northern
students desiring education. These packages include free tuition, free books, free meals, monthly allowances. Despite
these efforts by the government, the north has not been able to exhaustively utilize its allocated quota. This has created

International Journal of Interdisciplinary and Multidisciplinary Studies (IJIMS), 2014, Vol 2, No.2, 1-10. 9
a scenario of under-utilisation of educational facilities and opportunities in the North and over-utilisation of same in the
south. Furthermore, this study stresses the need for extensive educational infrastructural development in order to
accommodate the growing population of eligible students in the country.
Conclusion
This study has examined the quota system and federal character principles in educational sector with particular focus on
federal unity schools. The study acknowledges that while these twin policies may have addressed the issue of
representation at the national level, they however have been serious barriers to learning in Nigeria. Based on the above
submission, some recommendations were made which include the need to review the policies in a way that will bring
about improvement in the educational status of the educationally disadvantaged states, while on the other hand not
injurious to those in vantage position as far as education is concerned in the country.
References
1. Afigbo AE. Federal character: its meaning and history. In: Ekeh PP, Osaghae EE. (eds.) Federal character and federalism in Nigeria.
Ibadan, Nigeria: Heinemann Educational Books; 1989. p. 3-18.
2. Bello ML. Federal Character as a Recipe for National Integration: The Nigerian Paradox, International Journal of Politics and Good
Governance, 2012; 3(3): 1-17.
3. Adeosun AB. Federal Character Principle and National Integration: A Critical Appraisal, International Journal of Politics and Good
Governance, 2011; 2(2.4): 1-13.
4. Gberevbie D and Ibietan J. Federal Character Principle and administrative effectiveness in the Nigerian public service: Challenges
and prospects for sustainable development, 1999-2012, Journal of Sustainable Development in Africa, 2013; 15(6): 46-61.
5. Constitution Drafting Committee. Report of the Constitution Drafting Committee. Vol. 1. Lagos, Nigeria: Federal Ministry of
Information, Printing Division; 1977.
6. Okpata FO. Politics of staff recruitment and development in Nigerian public service. In: Onwe SO, Okpata FO, Duru GJC. (eds.)
Readings in Modern Public Administration. Enugu, Nigeria: Jones Communications Publishers; 2011.
7. Obiyan AS and Akindele ST. The Federal Character Principle and Gender Representation in Nigeria, Journal of Social Sciences,
2002; 6(4): 241-246.
8. Akpanabia NH. Federal Character Principle as a Pitfall for National Development in Nigeria: A Historical Perspective, Elixir Human
Resource Management, 2012; 47A: 9155-9158.
9. Ekeh PP. The structure and meaning of federal character in the Nigerian political system. In: Ekeh PP, Osaghae EE. (eds.) Federal
Character and Federalism in Nigeria. Ibadan, Nigeria: Heinemann Educational Books; 1989. p. 19-44.
10. Ojo E. Federalism and the Search for National Integration in Nigeria, African Journal of Political Science and International
Relations, 2009; 3(9): 384-395.
11. Ugoh SC and Ukpere WI. Policy of the Federal Character Principle and Conflict Management in Nigerian Federalism, African
Journal of Business Management, 2012; 6(23): 6771-6780.
12. Chafe KS. The Problematic of African Democracy: Experiences from the Political Transition in Nigeria, Africa Zamani, 1994; 2:
127-143.
13. Duruji MM, Segun J, Olanrewaju IP, et al. Ethnicization of University Education and National Development: The Nigerian
Experience. 8th International Technology, Education and Development Conference (INTED 2014), Valencia, Spain; 2014.
14. Tonwe DA and Oghator EO. The federal character principle and democratic stability in Nigeria. In: Ola RF, Tonwe DA. (eds.)
Nigerian Public Administration. Lagos, Nigeria: Amfitop Books; 2009. p. 230-256.
15. Anyanwu O. Experiment with Mass University Education in Post-Civil War Nigeria, 1970-1979, Journal of Nigeria Studies, 2010;
Vol. 1, No. 1, 1-36.
16. Ekundayo HT and Adedokun MO. The Unresolved Issue of University Autonomy and Academic Freedom in Nigeria University,
Humanity and Social Science Journal, 2009; 4(1): 61-67.
17. Gboyega A. The public service and federal character. In: Ekeh, P.P.; Osaghae, E.E. eds. Federal Character and Federalism in Nigeria.
Ibadan, Nigeria: Heinemann Educational Books; 1989. p. 164-185.
18. Bamisaiye OA. Political parties and national integration in Nigeria 1960-1983. In: Eleazu UO. (ed.) Nigeria: The First 25 Years.
Lagos: Infodata Limited; 2003.

International Journal of Interdisciplinary and Multidisciplinary Studies (IJIMS), 2014, Vol 2, No.2, 1-10. 10
19. Morrison DG, Mitchell RC, Paden JN, et al. Black Africa: A Comparative Handbook. New York: Free Press; 1972.
20. Jacob PE and Tenue H. The integrative process: guidelines for analysis of the bases of political community. In: Jacob PE, Toscano
JV. (eds.) The Integration of Political Communities. Philadelphia: Lippincott; 1964. p. 1-45.
21. Folarin S, Olanrewaju IP, Ajayi LY. Cultural Plurality, National Integration and the Security Dilemma in Nigeria, Covenant
University Journal of Politics and International Affairs, 2014; 2(1): 81-92.
22. Mustapha AF. Ethnic structure, inequality and governance of the public sector in Nigeria. UNRISD programme on democracy,
governance and human rights. Paper Number: 24, 2006.
23. Yoloye EA. Federal character and institutions of higher learning. In: Ekeh PP, Osaghae EE. (eds.) Federal Character and Federalism
in Nigeria. Ibadan, Nigeria: Heinemann; 1989.
24. Duze CO. Educational Policies/Programmes‘ Effect on Attrition Rates in Primary Schools in Nigeria. In: International Journal of
Education Administration and Policy Studies, 2012; 4(2): 38-44. doi: 10.5897/IJEAPS10.040.
25. Adamu AU. Educational Reforms in Nigeria [Online]
Available from: http://www.kanoonline.com/publications/educational_reform_in_nigeria.htm
[Accessed January 2014]; n.d.
26. Nwagwu CC. The Environment of Crises in the Nigerian Education System, Comparative Education, 1997; 33(1): 87-95.
27. Ojerinde D. Using Assessment for the Improvement of Tertiary Education in Nigeria: The Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board
(Jamb) Role. 35th IAEA Conference, Brisbane, Australia; 2009.
28. Orakpo E, Abayomi A, Adesulu D. Why Government Should Revisit Admission Quota System. Vanguard [Online]
Available from: http://www.vanguardngr.com/2013/06/why-govt-should-revisit-admission-quota- system/
[Accessed 14/2/2014]; June 13, 2013.
29. Olugbile S. Unity schools: stakeholders seek abolition of federal character. The Punch [Online]
Available from: http://www.punchng.com/education/unity-schools-stakeholders-seek-abolition-of- federal
[Accessed February 2014]; June 21, 2013.
30. Okoroma NS. Admission Policies and Quality of University Education in Nigeria, Education Research Quarterly, 2008; 31(3) 3-24.
31. Okobiah OS. The educational imbalance between the northern and southern states of Nigeria: a re-direction of educational policies
[Online]
Available from: http://www.nuc.edu.ng/nucsite/File/ILS%202002/ILS-60.pdf
[Accessed February 2014]; 2002.
32. Egwaikhide FO, Isumonah VA, Ayodele SO. Federal Presence in Nigeria the ―Sung‖ and ―Unsung‖. Senegal: CODESRIA; 2009.
33. Kanyip BP. Admission crisis in Nigerian universities: the challenges youth and parents face in seeking admission [PhD thesis].
Seoton Hall University; 2013.
34. Moti UG. The Challenges of Access to University Education in Nigeria, DSM Business Review, 2008; 2(2): 27-56.
35. Salim BA. Problems of Assessment and Selection into Tertiary Institutions in Nigeria. 21st Annual Conference of AEAA, Cape
Town, South Africa; 2003.
36. Anya A. Re-educating Nigerians for the 21st Century. 40th Anniversary Lecture of the Inner Circle, University of Ibadan, Ibadan,
Nigeria; 1998.
37. Alao M. Federal character blessing or curse? [Online]
Available from: http://john-emmanuel.blogspot-com/2010/08federal-character-blessing-or-curse-htm
[Accessed February 2014]; 2010.
38. Edigin LU. Federal Character and National Stability in Nigeria, 1979-2010, Journal of Research in National Development, 2010;
8(2): 1-6. doi: 10.4314/jorind.v8i2.66799.
39. Ayoade JAA. The federal character principle and the search for national integration. In: Amuwo K, Agbaje A, Suberu R T, Herault
G. (eds.) Federalism and Political Restructuring in Nigeria. Ibadan, Nigeria: Spectrum Books; 1989. p. 101-120.
40. Onwubiko P. Perish admissions quota, federal character. Daily Newswatch [Online]
Available from: http://www.mydailynewswatchng.com/2013/10/17/perish-admissions-quota-federal-character/
[Accessed February 2014]; February 11, 2014.