ABSTRACT
The study explored the perceived influence of academic staff work output on students academic performance in public universities in South East, Nigeria. It had the objective of carrying out relative analysis of the academic staff teaching effectiveness, commitment, productivity, the students’ academic performance, level of discipline, moral development of students, examination malpractice among others. Eight research questions and hypotheses respectively were raised to guide the study at 0.05 level of significance. The study employed Descriptive design. The population of the study was the entire academic staff and students in 2015/2016 academic session in the universities in South East which was 4437 in number which includes 1285 academic staff and 3152 students of the chosen universities. A sample size of 1440 was drawn using the Taro Yamen sampling technique. The method of data collection was the structured questionnaire of the Likert type Scale. The items on the questionnaire were developed and validated by three experts. The researcher adopted face validity to ensure that there is no typographical error. The face validity of the instrument was improved based on the supervisors input, correction and suggestion. In content validity, the researcher gave to three expects in the department of Measurement and Evaluation of Michael Okpara University of Agriculture Umudike, Abia State. The reliability estimate of the instrument was established through Cronbach Alpha reliability method. The reliability of instrument was determined on subscales of the instrument. The reliability index for the entire instrument is 0.81. The statistical tools for the analysis of data collected for this research work included, mean and standard deviation used to answer the research questions and ‘t’ statistic which was used for testing and drawing conclusion on the null hypotheses. Based on the findings, the researcher recommended among others that Government should live up to its billing, by increased funding, increased intellectual work-force and increased university intake.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title
Page i
Declaration ii
Certification iii
Dedication iv
Acknowledgements v
Table
of Contents vii
List
of Tables xii
Abstract xiv
CHAPTER 1:
INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background to the Study 1
1.2 Statement of the Problem 12
1.3 Purpose of the Study 14
1.4 Research Questions 15
1.5 Hypotheses 16
1.6 Significance of the Study 17
1.7 Scope
of the Study 18
CHAPTER 2:
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
2.1 Conceptual Framework 19
2.1.1 Strike actions 19
2.1.2 Perceived influence of academic staff work
output: nature, frequency 22
and motivations
2.1.3 Trade union as aspect of academic staff
union of Nigeria universities 28
2.1.4 Philosophical
and educational basis for academic conflict and strike actions 30
in universities
2.1.5 Perceived influence of academic staff work
output and staff teaching 34
effectiveness
2.1.6 Perceived influence of academic staff work
output and staff commitment 48
2.1.7 Perceived influence of academic staff work
output and indiscipline 50
among students
2.1.8 Moral decadence and Perceived influence of
academic staff work output 55
2.1.9 Perceived influence of academic staff work
output and students’ alcoholism 58
2.1.10 Perceived influence of academic staff work
output and students 58
examination malpractice
2.1.11 Perceived influence of academic staff work
output and students academic 59
performance
2.2 Theoretical framework 63
2.2.1 Asymmetrical information of industrial
conflict (Beth Hayes, 1984) 63
2.2.2 Pluralist-actor model of democratic
decision-making in organization 64
2.2.3 Social learning theory (Bandura Albert,
1925) 65
2.3 Empirical Studies 66
2.4 Summary of literature review 77
CHAPTER 3:
METHODOLOGY
3.1 Design of the study 79
3.2 Area of the Study 80
3.3 Population of the Study 82
3.4 Sample and Sampling Technique 82
3.5 Instrument for Data Collection 84
3.6 Validation of the Instrument 85
3.7 Reliability of the Instrument 86
3.8 Method of Data Collection 87
3.9 Method of Data Analysis 87
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 88
4.1 Results 88
4.2 Discussion
on research questions
4.2.1 Research
question one 88
4.2.2 Research
question two 90
4.2.3 Research
question three 91
4.2.4 Research
question four 92
4.2.5 Research
question five 93
4.2.6 Research
question six 94
4.2.7 Research
question seven 95
4.2.8 Research
question eight 96
4.3 Test of
Hypotheses
4.3.1 Hypotheses testing one 97
4.3.2 Hypotheses testing two 98
4.3.3 Hypotheses testing three 98
4.3.4 Hypotheses testing four 99
4.3.5 Hypotheses testing five 100
4.3.6 Hypotheses testing six 100
4.3.7 Hypotheses testing seven 101
4.3.8 Hypotheses testing eight 102
4.4 Discussion of Findings 102
4.4.1 Perceived influence of academic staff work
output and academic staff 102
teaching
effectiveness
4.4.2
Perceived influence of academic staff
work output and academic staff 104
work commitment
4.4.3 Perceived influence of academic staff work
output and academic staff 105
work productivity
4.4.4
Perceived influence of academic staff
work output and students’ 106
examination malpractice
4.4.5
Perceived influence of academic staff
work output and students’ level of 107
discipline
4.4.6
Perceived influence of academic staff
work output and students’ moral 110
development
4.4.7
Perceived influence of academic staff
work output and alcoholic habits of 112
students
4.4.8
Perceived influence of academic staff
work output and students’ 113
academic performance
CHAPTER 5:
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1
Summary of the Study 117
5.2
Conclusion 118
5.3
Recommendations 118
5.4
Suggestions for Further
Studies 119
References 121
Appendices 129
LIST OF TABLES
4.1 Mean and standard deviation of
respondents on the Perceived influence of 89
academic
staff work output on academic staff teaching effectiveness (N=1440)
4.2 Mean and standard deviation of
respondents on the Perceived influence of 90
academic
staff work output on academic staff work and commitment (N=1440)
4.3 Mean and standard deviation of
respondents on the Perceived influence of 91
academic
staff work output on academic staff work productivity (N=1440)
4.4 Mean and standard deviation of
respondents on the Perceived influence of 92
academic
staff work output on students’ examination malpractice (N=1440)
4.5 Mean and standard deviation of
respondents on the Perceived influence of 93
academic
staff work output on students’ level of discipline (N=1440)
4.6 Mean and standard deviation of
respondents on the Perceived influence of 94
academic
staff work output on students’ moral development (N=1440)
4.7 Mean and standard deviation of
respondents on the Perceived influence of 95
academic
staff work output on the alcoholic habits of students (N=1440)
4.8 Mean and standard deviation of
respondents on the Perceived influence of 96
academic
staff work output on students’ academic performance (N=1440)
4.9 Independent t-test analysis to compare
the mean ratings of academic staff 97
and
students on the Perceived influence of academic staff work output on
academic
staff teaching effectiveness (N=1440)
4.10 Independent t-test analysis to compare the
mean ratings of academic 97
staff
and students on the Perceived influence of academic staff work
output
on academic staff work commitment (N=1440)
4.11 Independent t-test analysis to compare the
mean ratings of academic 98
staff
and students on the Perceived influence of academic staff work
output
on academic staff work productivity (N=1440)
4.12 Independent t-test analysis to compare the
mean ratings of academic 99
staff
and students on the Perceived influence of academic staff work
output
on students’ examination malpractice (N=1440)
4.13 Independent t-test analysis to compare the
mean ratings of academic 99
staff
and students on the Perceived influence of academic staff work
output
on student’s level of discipline (N=1440)
4.14 Independent t-test analysis to compare the
mean ratings of academic 100
staff
and students on the influence of ASUU strike on student’s moral
development
(N=1440)
4.15 Independent t-test analysis to compare the
mean ratings of academic staff 101
and
students on the Perceived influence of academic staff work output on
alcoholic
habit of students (N=1440)
4.16 Independent t-test analysis to compare the
mean ratings of academic staff 101
and
students on the Perceived influence of academic staff work output on
student’s
academic performance (N=1440)
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY
Academic
staff work output can be perceived to have influence in the academic
performance of the students. This is achievable when the academic staff of a
given university engage in active involvement of production or productive
activities for a given period of time. Academic staff work effectiveness go a
long way to prove or manifest in the quality of grandaunts of the given
university in a given academic session.
Academic staff work commitment could reduce if there
is grievance or agitation over the irresponsibility of the state in the
management of university education. This could lead to complete phenomenon of
work hour cessation or avoidance of office work.
Industrial labour dispute in Nigeria can be dated back
to the colonial period when the first trade union called the Railways Workers’
Union (RWU), was registered on the 17th of January, 1940 in Onwana, (1996).
The Academic Staff Union of Nigerian Universities (ASUU) has risen as a
militant trade organization to protect the interest of the university staff and
the university system at large. The contribution of the necessary enabling laws legalized workers collective bargaining rights,
and the economic implications of the developing post colonial state such as
Nigeria were obvious forces that gingered greater awareness among workers
especially university as the citadel of learning.
Strike action is a reaction against reckless political
leadership and the irresponsibility of the state in the management of
university education. It should be realized that strike action is not only
peculiar to universities, academic and non-academic staff, but also to other
industrial and administrative establishments. Today, strike actions organized
by academic institutions extend beyond academic staff of universities to
embrace the following:
(i)
The Non Academic Staff
Union (NASU)
(ii)
The National Association
of Nigeria Students (NANS)
(iii) The Colleges of Education
Academic Staff Union (COEASU)
(iv)
The Academic Staff Union
of Polytechnic (ASUP)
Work cessations by the Academic Staff Union of
Universities (ASUU) in Nigeria have had serious effects on the academic
performance of the students. ASUU which was formed in 1978, has since organised
nationwide strikes to challenge the military regimes of General Muhammad
Buhari, General Ibrahim Babangida and General Sani Abacha. The union has also
used strike actions to demand fair wages, university autonomy, funding of
Nigerian universities and so on.
Generally, ASUU uses work restrain as a means to force
the government to respect the demands of the union. Almost all heads of state
and presidents of Nigeria between 1988 and 2013, have been compelled by ASUU
through strike to meet their demands.
Disruptions in academic programme serve as
non-motivational factor to the students. It discourages them from learning. It
is not surprising therefore that during strike actions, most students are seen
involved in diverse activities such as sexual immorality, cyber scan, pool betting,
unnecessary gossips, habitual drinking of alcohol, watching of films instead of
reading their books. In the long run, they soon forget academics and are no
longer prepared for class activities and this negatively affect their learning
capability.
Concluding, Odubela (2012) said that an effective
learning or an enhanced academic performance is achieved by timely and
successful covering of the course outline, and before the examination. This is
rarely achieved with strike action in place. From the above observation
therefore, the researcher is of the view that disruption in academic programme
as cased by strike action breeds disappointment, frustration, emotional and
psychological trauma, drunkenness, waywardness, unpreparedness on the part of
the students and lack of motivation, which sum up to non conducive environment
for effective learning in Nigerian universities; a situation that dampens human
development Odubela (2012). This study intends to examine the series of ASUU
strikes and the direct influence they have on the students’ academic
performance.
Besides, organized work stoppages managed and
implemented by academic and non-academic staff of tertiary institutions, there
are other organized strikes, lock-outs and sits-in from industrial and administrative
institutions in Nigeria, such as: Nigerian Union of Teachers (NUT), Nigerian
Bar Association (NBA), Nigerian Medical Association (NMA), Nigerian Union of
Journalists (NUJ), Association of Principals of Nigerian Secondary Schools
(ANCOPS) and so on.
It must be emphasized that anti-government policy
decisions, corruptions, mismanagement, poor labour participation, poor salary,
unattractive work environments, underfunding and poor infrastructures are
fingered as essential factors that have nursed the feeling for many of the
restrictive and some of the generalized work stoppages in Nigeria since the
1940s. Indeed, on post civil war industrial relations in Nigeria since the
early 1970s, there are conflicts between government and academic employees
bordering on wages, allowances, poor financing, high handedness in
administrative decision and other poor conditions of employment nationwide.
Since Nigerian Universities workers are dehumanized by those whose business is
to provide for their welfare and wellbeing, industrial crisis therefore cannot
be ruled out given the context of differences in government’s ideals and
interest, vis-a-vis differences in employees needs, values and expectations.
Employer-employee’s needs-value differences are endemic forces that ginger up
the formation of Nigerian Union of Teachers (NUT) since 1941 and Academic Staff
Union of Nigerian Universities, since the 1970s. The common needs of workers
and the dire need to protect and strengthen them from unjust government
policies explains in part the cause of the 1945 general strike in Nigeria for
the first time Ejiofor, (1989) and Eze, (2007)
Strike action as a manifestation of open labour
dispute or labour conflict arising from the technicalities of defining and
interpreting industrial relations which is linked with employment status,
non-employment, or employment and physical conditions of work (Trade Union
Decree, Now Trade Union Act, No. 7, 1976). Work stoppage is a final stage in industrial
dispute between employees and employer, in which case the varied forms of
non-violent approach to the disputation had failed. In most cases, work
stoppage between employer and employees arises when all avenues for dialogue,
collective bargaining and peaceful settlement of the dispute had actually failed.
Labour unrest is a last resort to enforce some
essential demands or vital labour interests such as obtaining fair wages and
salaries, to promote and protect environment of the job itself. It was observed
by Nwaogu (2012) that workers in the 1963 strike led by Imodu were governed by
great expectations of both the senior and junior staff of working happily
together as members of the same community guided by their working performance.
Since the 1970s, there were rampant cases of
industrial conflict such as labour disputes occurring at the university levels
expedient for useful purposes. In the first place, labour unrest, such as that
leading to work stoppage is a kind of conflict that is inevitable in an
organization as a social system made up of the relations of employees (workers)
and employer (government). It is bye product of social and organizational
interactions as an open social system Katz and Kahn, (2000). The phenomenon of
conflict at university work places is therefore an aspect of misunderstanding
among and between parties such as lecturers, administrative staff and
government authorities.
From theoretical angle, industrial work stoppage could
as well arise from the theory of scarcity of resources Hirsch, (1994) and
Mitchell, (1995). However, Coser (2004) had theorized that conflict within
these theoretical assumptions is a unique social and organizational phenomenon.
Conflict is a product of human interaction and relations and is considered as a
fact of life Ige, Adeyeye and Aina (2011). Within social groups, or within
organization, various persons that form a particular social group or
organization had differences in values, goals, perceptions and expectations
that tend to differ with those values, goals, perceptions and expectations set
up by the organization such as university. In our present circumstance, the
goal and the interest of academic staff could be defined in terms of freedom
from exploitation, negligence and under payment and so on which could differ
with those objectives defined by organizations.
For a particular social system such as the university,
the academic staff may set up common beliefs, values, goals and expectations
that diverged in some ways from those beliefs, goals and expectations of their
employers (Public or Government). Seen in this way, industrial conflict is an
organized action that involves struggles, competitions, and threats between
persons or groups, so as to counteract or, neutralize at best, the rival needs,
ideals, beliefs, values, and expectations of their opponents Russell, (1990).
Looking back across time and space, most scholars such as Durkheim (1993),
Drucker (2000), and Kontz and O’Donnel (2008), believed that conflict is
functional and inevitable in a human society, but would only be managed to
reduce or overcome the ugly effects of the conflict on persons, students,
employers, employees, productions and social institution.
On a general note especially considering present and
past work stoppage in Nigeria, strike action that would involve work stoppage in
Nigerian universities since 1970s could be identified to arise within three
categories of interests such as:
(a) Conflict
of interests between government or the political class and academic staff.
(b) Conflict
over claims or rights between government or the political class and academic
staff.
(c) Conflict
over funding infrastructures and autonomy (coalition to save education in
Nigeria, 2013).
Concerning the first brand of conflict (conflict of
interests), it is a labour dispute over misinterpreted priorities or needs,
such as that which would have involved collective participation in decision and
planning. The second cadre of conflict
(conflict over claims of rights) is a dispute precipitated by allegation of
abuse or negligence of responsibility over staff basic rights of claims at work
place. Conflict of this sort emerged from undue violations of terms of engagement or employment contract while the
third type of conflict (conflict over funding, autonomy and infrastructure)
involves disputations as to whether a satisfying work environment is provided
by the employer so as to perform a satisfactory and efficient task Ayodele, (2014).
However, in Nigerian academic and non-academic staff union of universities,
strikes leading to work stoppage had taken a characteristic of these three
basic motivations for work stoppages since the 1990s. ASUU strikes can be dated
back to 1994 which lasted for six months (appendix xii). ASUU embarks on
constant strikes for various reasons ranging from fair wages and university
autonomous status and so on (appendix v).
Strike actions arise from within the matrix of factors
causing frustrations, deprivations such that many workers are fast losing their
sanity and quietness due to distress of work environment. For example, the
worry expressed by academic staff that decreased funding of universities by
government will induce poor academic infrastructure such as library,
classrooms, micro teaching laboratories, technical and scientific laboratories which
should at least be apt enough. Apart from that, poor academic infrastructure is
found to influence poor learning and account for about sixty percent of all
possible causes of poor students’ academic performance (appendix ix and x).
Indeed, the nicknaming of Nigerian graduate as “unemployable” may be linked to
poor academic achievement at the facets of cognitive, affective and psychomotor
learning objectives. Where there is an
evidence of brazen act of mismanagement on the part of educational planners and
educational policy makers, it becomes a very strong rallying point for academic
staff to call for strike action so as to create room for collective bargaining
of vested common interest that will promote academic interest. Strike action
therefore becomes a realistic approach to redress conditions that make students
improve their learning condition and also to remove other varieties of
obstacles that could arise from irresponsibility of those who had been in
charge of superintending staff and academic affairs.
ASUU
unrest in Nigeria universities is borne out of these unfulfilled agreements
that:
i.
the cause of the strike
was the refusal of the Federal Government to implement Agreement it entered
into with ASUU in 2009.
ii.
it took five years
(2004-2009) of tough and painstaking negotiation between the two parties (ASUU
and the Federal Government) to arrive at the Agreement.
iii.
out of the 8 points
(issues) in the agreement, the Federal Government has implemented only one,
i.e., raising the retirement age of professor from 65 to 70 years, while it has
simply dumped the rest.
iv.
prior to the on-going
strike, ASUU has written 52 letters (reminders) drawing the attention of
Government on the agreement, met the Senate and the House of Representatives
Committees on Education and even embarked upon a one-week warning strike, all
to no avail.
v.
ASUU strike is in the
interest of University Education in Nigeria; in particular, it is in the best
interest of students who study under inhuman conditions on our campuses.
Classrooms, hostels, laboratories, libraries are either non-existent, grossly
inadequate or in a very serious state of dilapidation. (see Appendix xi).
vi.
ASUU goes on strike
because our lecturers are tired of being party to producing graduates who cannot
hold their own, who cannot help themselves or help the nation, because their
training and education simply do not measure up.
Contrary to the insinuations of the uniformed and
mischief makers ASUU cares deeply about university education, hence over the
years it has been involved in struggles for better and qualitative education in
Nigeria. The struggles of ASUU have borne fruits in so many respects.
It is in line with the qualitative education in
Nigeria that ASUU tries to enhance staff teaching effectiveness. The ability
and extent of the teaching and learning processes to attain desired results has
been hindered during strike actions. During strike actions, most of the students’
and teachers’ based educational activities are suspended with no connection to
evaluation and assessment activities.
There are many compelling reasons being made for
teacher to assess their own level of performance and those of learners’
productivity vis-à-vis their environment. For example, the appraisal of
teachers is aimed at, determining the degree to which teachers’ orientations and
classroom instructions contribute effectively towards the achievement of
educational goals and thereby becoming very helpful and profitable. Eferakeya, (1998).
It is the responsibility of employers to continually
promote the motivation of teachers through various means including constant
monitoring of the morale of teachers and its impact on teaching and learning
process. Low teachers’ morale leads to poor teachers’ performance and therefore
poor learning by learners. The negative effects of strike, as it pertains to
loss of productivity per head in the organization are better appreciated
considering the fact that work disputes induce actual atmosphere for oriented
product.
Positive relationships exist between use of strike,
and aggregate productivity Lacroix, (1996). Sincerely, Harrison and Stewart
(2006) could not see any meaningful association between strike durations and
productivity.
Apart from this negative effect of strike, one
greatest worry to strike is the issue of indisciplinary conduct or moral decadence
among students. Indiscipline for example gives room for emergence of cultism
among students. Besides, academic staff union of universities strikes could
also exacerbate brain-drain’ in this context. Brain-drain relates to bit by bit
withdrawal of well qualified Nigerian academicians, and authors from active
work engagement in preference to oversea university work engagements for
increased welfare packages, and perhaps for attractive salaries. The negative
effect of both brain and students’ moral decadence will further result into
poor instructions and poor students’ performance. Thus, the negative effect of
work stoppage among university academic staff for Nigeria students’ will be
gradual withdrawal of the very fabric and principles that sustain the so called
universities motto of “worthy in character and in learning”.
One of the greatest problems facing Nigerian education
system today is that of moral values Azenabor, (2011). Another manifestation of
in-disciplinary conducts among university students arises in form of
examination malpractices. Examination malpractice is an indecent action as it
violates the normal rules defining academic excellence. Azenabor further opined
that examination malpractice is any act perpetuated to contravene stipulated rules
and regulations governing examination. In
his own report, Otu (2008) asserted that students’ malpractice occurs, and
exists in varieties such as copying, impersonation, leakage and cheating. He
equally added that examination malpractice is number one in-disciplinary
conduct that is endemic and has become an academic cankerworm. The causal
factors to examination malpractice by students could be traced to teachers’ lukewarm
attitude to work, and to classroom teaching occasioned by strike actions. The
use of examination malpractice as a “coping mechanism” to pass has invariably
questioned the credibility of “Nigerian Universities” certificates not only in
Nigerian, but outside leading to the so called statement that “the Nigerian
graduates are not employable”. This is because during work stoppage, academic
activities leading to teaching, evaluation, scoring and grading are adversely
affected by strike actions. During strike, teaching activities suffer a
neglect, and students develop laxity which they could not quickly recover from
during resumption making poor students achievement very inevitable in the post
strike semester period. This is strongly supported by Aremu, et. al. (2015), that
incessant strike actions among academic staff union is one of the prominent
factors that could explain the causes of poor students’ performance and the
“unemployable nature” of Nigerian graduates especially those of them that were
turned out during periods of incessant industrial strike-actions.
The findings of Edinyang and Ubi (2013) correlated
with the findings of Osuorji and David (2014) who carried out a study to find
out if strike actions influence academic achievement of Business Education
students at Ahmadu Bello University Zaria. The study using descriptive survey design
revealed that rampant work stoppages among lecturers actually interfere with
academic achievement of students in Business Education Department of Ahmadu
Bello University Zaria.
Strike situations create carefree attitudes on the
part of the educators and government as educational planners which in turn
cause students to learn or be exposed to immoral behaviours.
The study on Perceived Influence of Academic Staff
work output is of strategic relevance in the literature of strike actions. It
must be remarked that earlier literature is on occupational and industrial
conflicts. However, little attention is given to the influence of ASUU constant
strike actions on the academic performance of students in universities in South
East, Nigeria. This study therefore intends to examine the series of Perceived
Influence of Academic Staff work output on the students’ academic performance.
1.2
STATEMENT
OF THE PROBLEM
The Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU), as an
umbrella that houses the activities of the academic staff of universities in
both federal and state universities, has always aimed at improving the
infrastructural facilities of universities, increase in level of funding and
achievement of university autonomy. ASUU was formed in 1978 to succeed the
Nigerian Association of University Teachers (NAUT), formed in 1965. Its main
objectives are: to organize the Academic Staff engaged by universities, who are
qualified for membership; to regulate relations between Academic staff and
employers and between members; establishment and maintenance of a high standard
of academic performance and professional practice; establishment and
maintenance of just and proper conditions of service for its members. Other
objectives include the advancement of the education and training of its
members; provision of benefits and their assistance to the members as provided
in the constitution; encouragement of participation of its members in the
affairs of the university system and of the nation, and finally protection and
advancement of the socio-economic and cultural interest of the nation.
Though ASUU was established for the welfare of
academic staff of universities and the maintenance of high standard of academic
performance for the students, it does appear that over the last thirty years in
Nigeria, the university system has witnessed an unprecedented labour unrest and
so many official assaults than other social institutions.
It is like several negative effects of work stoppage
by Nigerian universities staff on academic progress of students have been
identified since 2009 nationwide ASUU strike-action which lingered for more
than 6 months. There is hardly a full academic session that students and staff
crises will not result in loss of studies, delayed graduation for students and
economic waste for students, parents and the country as a whole. Strike actions
may likely manifest in producing half educated citizens popularly known as
“half baked graduates”. Apart from that, there may be many hours, weeks and
months lost without any meaningful work to show by the staff. Again, should the
strike-actions be quantified in terms of what is to be actually produced and measured
along the lines of extent of monetary values, skills, and knowledge that would
have been transferred to the students, between 1990s and 2016, several billions
of naira are likely to have been lost. In the case of the march 2013 general
university academic staff strike, that ended in early January, 2014, it gave
rise to loss of an average of 270 days of active work, or 2,430 hours lost
(appendix xii). The extent of the duration of hours and months lost to academic
strike in Nigeria most likely increased the conditions for poor students
learning and poor academic performance.
This is one of the basic problems confronting academic
excellence, discipline, transparent moral rectitude of our teaming students
from universities in Nigeria, is frequent insurgence of organized university
strike. In the past, government of Nigeria had reasoned that lecturers were
ambitious, lazy and intolerant to the expectations of government. Workers in
the universities also perceived their employers as politicizing and exploiting
them and excluding them from effective university administration and
management. It is this difference in values, goals and interests that
explained some sources of virulent
conflicts in the relationship of government and university staff. Until
recently, the industrial strike at the university level has been complicated by
factors such as politics, misallocation of priorities, underfunding,
corruption, lack of academic freedom and autonomy. Apart from financial
material wastages that arise from those open industrial conflicts, Nigerian
students also could have been poorly taught and educated to acquire necessary
and relevant skills, methods, morals, discipline and knowledge to enable them
turn into productive and disciplined citizens of the society. Therefore, work
stoppages and strikes interferences over active working and teaching are
crucial variables to be examined in any empirical research to identify causes
of academic performance of students, poor moral development, indisciplinary
conducts and delinquent characters. Where lecturers lost a great deal of hours,
weeks, and months from disengaging from active teaching, it could properly
interact to constitute a menace to some of the causal variables leading to the
production of the so called “half graduates”, “half baked”, unskilled and
immoral members of the society as they are direct beneficiaries of
dysfunctional educational system.
However, it seems that little attention have been
given to the influence of ASUU constant strikes on the academic performance of
students in universities in South-East, Nigeria. This study therefore intends
to examine the perceived influence of academic work output on students’
academic performance in universities in South East, Nigeria.
1.3 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this study is to determine the
perceived influence of academic staff work output on students’ academic
performance in universities in South-East, Nigeria. Specifically the objectives
are to:
(i)
ascertain the perceived influence
of Academic Staff work output on academic staff teaching effectiveness.
(ii)
ascertain perceived influence
of Academic Staff work output on academic staff work commitment.
(iii) Ascertain
perceived influence of Academic Staff work output on academic staff work
productivity.
(iv) assess
the extent perceived influence of Academic Staff work output on students’ level
of discipline.
(v)
examine whether perceived
influence of Academic Staff work output on students’ moral development.
(vi) Determine
the perceive influence of Academic Staff work output on students’ examination
malpractice
(vii) Determine
the perceived influence of Academic Staff work output on alcoholic habits among
the students.
(viii) find
out if there is perceived influence of Academic Staff work output on students’
academic performance.
1.4 RESEARCH QUESTIONS
The following research questions are posed to guide
the study:
1.
What is the perceived
influence of Academic staff work output on academic staff teaching
effectiveness?
2.
What is the perceived
influence of Academic staff work output on academic staff work commitment?
3.
What is the perceived
influence of Academic staff work output on academic staff work productivity?
4.
What is the perceived
influence of Academic staff work output on students’ level of discipline?
5.
What is the perceived
influence of Academic staff work output on students’ moral development?
6.
What is the perceived
influence of Academic staff work output on the alcoholic habits of students?
7.
What is the perceived
influence of Academic staff work output on students’ examination malpractice?
8.
What is the perceived
influence of Academic staff work output on students’ academic performance?
1.5 HYPOTHESES
The following null hypotheses were formulated to guide
the study and were tested at 0.05 alpha level:
Ho1: There is no significant difference between
the mean responses of Academic staff and students and the perceived influence
of Academic staff work output on academic staff teaching effectiveness.
Ho2: There is no significant difference between the
mean responses of Academic staff and students and the perceived influence of Academic
staff work output on academic staff work commitment.
Ho3: There is no significant difference between the
mean responses of Academic staff and students and the perceived influence of Academic
staff work output on academic staff work productivity.
Ho4: There is no significant difference between the
mean responses of Academic staff and students and the perceived influence of Academic
staff work output on students’ academic performance.
Ho5: There is no significant difference between the
mean responses of Academic staff and students and the perceived influence of Academic
staff work output on students’ level of discipline.
Ho6: There is no significant difference between the
mean responses of Academic staff and students and the perceived influence of Academic
staff work output on students’ moral development.
Ho7: There is no significant difference between the
mean responses of Academic staff and students and the perceived influence of Academic
staff work output on alcoholic habits of students.
Ho8: There is no significant difference between the
mean responses of Academic staff and students and the perceived influence of Academic
staff work output on students’ examination malpractice.
1.6 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
The findings of this study will be beneficial to the
government, the academic staff of tertiary institutions and students.
The government and its agencies such as the National
University Commission (NUC), the educational administrators and planners, may
have renewed interests to investigate certain education policies which may lead
to negative attitudes toward active teaching and learning programmes. This they
will do by taking into cognizance, the basic findings of the strike action
variables of poor funding, lack of university autonomy, inadequate university
infrastructure and lack of necessary information about university management.
The use of collective bargaining is a positive
approach in resolving disagreements just as the pluralist theory of industrial
conflict depicts it. The findings of this study will be beneficial to the
academic staff of tertiary institutions. Lecturers need to be aware of the
menace of strike actions and so relevant research results from this study would
be utilized by them to take necessary precautions to protect themselves from
unnecessary exposure to strike actions.
This may sensitize them on what to do in handling lack
of productive teaching hours due to strike actions. This is why the researcher
used Hayes theoretical postulation to bridge the misperception and loss of
equal valued information about the actors in conflict.
Students will benefit from the findings as they
constitute the most vulnerable group to industrial actions. The researcher
opined that through Bandura’s Learning Theory, we can rightly infer that
students’ actual or real attitudes to life, objects, events, situations and
persons are modeled by imitating their teachers.
1.7 SCOPE OF THE STUDY
The study is delimited to academic staff and students of
universities as primary units of analysis. The researcher also delimited the
study to public universities in South East, Nigeria. By period of study, the researcher
considered subjects of the research as provided by 2015/2016 academic session
as population and sample of the study. By variables of the study, the research
focused on ASUU strike actions as independent variables of the study which have
no sub-variables but rather used as synonym with sit-in, lock-outs, and
outright cessation of work or work restrain leading to avoidance of office
work.
The independent variables have sub-variables such as
staff teaching effectiveness, staff commitment, staff productivity, students’
level of discipline, student’s moral development, students’ alcoholism and
students’ examination malpractice and students’ academic performance which are
all treated as sub-variables of the dependent variables of the study.
Click “DOWNLOAD NOW” below to get the complete Projects
FOR QUICK HELP CHAT WITH US NOW!
+(234) 0814 780 1594
Login To Comment