Psychologist Knocks Minister Tahir Mamman’s Misguided Educational Policy: It Marginalizes Teen Prodigies, Distresses Parents, and Fails to Support Progressive University Leaders -By John Egbeazien Oshodi

Minister Tahir Mamman’s Misguided, Pathetic and Backward Policy: Disenfranchising Advanced Academic Teenagers, Inciting Anger Among Affected Parents, and Prompting Progressive University Heads to Defend Educational Progression. There is a Strong Need for Advocating Legal Action in Nigeria and International Forums

In a significant development for the Nigerian education sector, Minister of Education, Professor Tahir Mamman, recently issued a directive during the 2024 Policy Meeting on Admissions into Tertiary Institutions in Abuja. This directive mandates that all tertiary institutions under the purview of the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB) admit only candidates who have reached the age of 18 years or above. This decision was met with immediate backlash and discontent among stakeholders present at the meeting, including vice-chancellors, registrars of universities, polytechnics, colleges of education, and officials from JAMB and monotechnics.

Critics have denounced Minister Mamman’s directive as deeply backward, archaic, and out of touch with modern educational practices. They argue that this decision reflects an old-fashioned and misguided approach to education, one that fails to align with the progressive needs of contemporary society. The criticism underscores a broader sentiment that just because Nigeria is in Africa does not necessitate clinging to stagnant and regressive educational policies.

Minister Mamman’s insistence on age-based admissions overlooks global trends where educational systems are evolving to accommodate diverse learning styles and accelerate the development of young talent. This rigid stance reflects a lack of understanding or willingness to adapt to global best practices, where many countries are embracing flexible admissions policies that prioritize merit and readiness over arbitrary age criteria. By clinging to this outdated approach, Mamman risks stifling innovation and competitiveness in Nigeria’s educational system, depriving young Nigerians of opportunities for intellectual growth and development.

In light of the minister’s directive, it is crucial to emphasize that exceptionally talented teenagers should be encouraged, not discouraged, from pursuing higher education. These students, often displaying a level of academic prowess and maturity beyond their years, could serve as models of excellence for their peers. In a humorous yet realistic twist, one might imagine students of this age or at the secondary school level staging mass protests across the nation, advocating for their right to be judged by their abilities rather than their age. Such a movement would not only highlight the absurdity of the age restriction but also underscore the determination and capability of these young scholars.

Furthermore, critics argue that Mamman’s directive fails to recognize the nuanced differences in maturity and preparedness among students. By treating age as the sole determinant of readiness for higher education, Mamman perpetuates a one-size-fits-all approach that ignores the potential of academically gifted teenagers who may be well-prepared for university at a younger age. This narrow view not only limits the educational prospects of talented youth but also reinforces systemic inequalities within Nigeria’s educational framework. It is essential for policymakers to consider a more inclusive and merit-based approach that allows all students, regardless of age, to pursue their academic aspirations.

Minister Mamman’s stance on the age of university applicants can be paraphrased in a way that highlights the absurdity and potential shame of his position: “Another observation concerns the age of university applicants. Some are remarkably young. We must address this as they may lack comprehension of university education’s demands, contributing to challenges witnessed in universities. This stage marks their transition from a regulated environment to self-governance. Inadequate maturity may hinder effective management.”

In a follow-up, he reiterated his stance on the age of admission:

“We’ll revisit this issue. University entry age should be 18. Yet, students as young as 15 or 16 appear for these exams. This isn’t conducive. Parents must avoid pressuring their children.”

Minister Mamman’s directive exemplifies a regressive mindset that undermines Nigeria’s aspirations for educational excellence and global competitiveness. By embracing outdated policies, Mamman risks alienating progressive voices within academia and hindering the nation’s ability to nurture its brightest minds. The urgent need for educational reform that embraces inclusivity, meritocracy, and forward-thinking approaches has never been more apparent, as Nigeria strives to empower its youth and secure a prosperous future.

Advanced academic teenagers, who have often been celebrated for their exceptional intellectual capabilities and early university admissions, are now facing an unexpected roadblock. These young scholars, many of whom have demonstrated remarkable academic achievements at a tender age, see the directive as a hindrance to their educational progress.

For many of them and their families, the directive represents a formidable barrier to their ongoing academic advancement and personal growth. Parents, who have actively fostered and supported their children’s accelerated academic journeys, express profound discontent. They argue vehemently that the directive undermines the achievements of students who have clearly demonstrated their preparedness for higher education, regardless of their chronological age. There is widespread concern that such a policy may dishearten gifted students and disrupt meticulously planned educational trajectories.

Progressive university leaders, staunch advocates of flexible and inclusive admission policies, voice resolute opposition. They assert that Minister Mamman’s directive disregards the varied levels of maturity among students and stifles innovation and excellence by imposing inflexible age criteria for admissions. Psychologically, this shortsighted directive can be seen as undermining the intrinsic motivation and academic drive of talented young individuals, reducing their opportunities to flourish in a supportive educational environment.

Minister Mamman defended his directive by citing concerns about underage students causing issues within Nigerian universities. Following the Unified Tertiary Matriculation Examination (UTME) in Abuja, he stated that some applicants were notably young, lacking the maturity to fully comprehend and manage the rigors of university education. He emphasized that this age group often transitions from a sheltered, controlled environment to one where they are expected to manage their affairs independently. He reiterated the legal age requirement of 18 for university admission and expressed concern over parents pushing their underage children into academic pursuits prematurely.

As a psychologist, it is evident that Minister Mamman’s reasoning is apparently fundamentally flawed and lacks a deep understanding of educational psychology and the developmental needs of gifted students. Instead of imposing blanket age restrictions, a more constructive approach would involve implementing supportive measures within universities. These measures should include robust student services such as counseling centers tailored to meet the unique needs of gifted teenagers. Specialized counseling programs, involving parents, can help address the psychological and emotional challenges these students may face during their transition to higher education.

Universities must prioritize the establishment and enhancement of robust student services that cater specifically to the needs of young, academically gifted students. These services, particularly specialized counseling centers, play a pivotal role in providing tailored support for personal, academic, and social challenges that these students may encounter. By creating a supportive environment, universities can empower these students to navigate the complexities of university life with confidence and resilience.

Effective mentorship programs are indispensable for younger students entering university. Pairing them with experienced peers or faculty members not only offers practical guidance in academic matters but also fosters a sense of belonging and personal growth. Mentorship relationships provide invaluable support networks that help students develop critical skills and strategies for success, ensuring they thrive both academically and personally during their university journey.

Comprehensive academic support services, including tutoring and study groups, are essential tools for ensuring that age does not impede young students’ academic progress. These services offer targeted assistance tailored to their developmental needs, helping them to excel in their studies and fully realize their intellectual potential. By bolstering academic support, universities can create inclusive learning environments where all students, regardless of age, have equal opportunities for academic achievement.

Universities should proactively develop initiatives that integrate young students into the broader university community. Social clubs, extracurricular activities, and orientation programs play a crucial role in fostering social connections and a sense of community among students. These initiatives not only enhance the overall university experience but also contribute to students’ personal and social development, equipping them with the skills and networks they need to thrive beyond academia.

Active parental involvement is key to supporting the holistic development and success of young students in higher education. Encouraging parents to engage actively in their children’s academic and social lives strengthens the support network around students, providing them with crucial guidance and encouragement. This collaborative approach between universities and parents ensures that students receive comprehensive support, enhancing their academic journey and overall well-being.

Continuous monitoring and evaluation of students’ academic progress and well-being are fundamental practices for supporting young, gifted students throughout their university experience. By regularly assessing their development and addressing any challenges early on, universities can provide timely interventions and adjustments to support mechanisms. This proactive approach ensures that students receive the necessary support to thrive academically and personally, fostering a nurturing environment conducive to their long-term success.

Furthermore, it is imperative to involve parents in initiatives aimed at safeguarding young students against bullying, abuse, and other challenges they may face. Universities should collaborate closely with parents to implement policies and programs that promote a safe and inclusive environment for all students. Monitoring student interactions and promptly addressing any instances of misconduct ensures a supportive and respectful atmosphere where students can focus on their academic goals without undue distractions or concerns. This comprehensive approach not only protects students’ well-being but also reinforces the commitment to fostering a positive educational experience that values their growth and potential. Minister Mamman could benefit significantly from an understanding of global best practices in education, particularly those related to the early admission of academically advanced students:

Dual Enrollment Programs: Many developed countries allow high-achieving secondary school students to enroll in university courses while completing their secondary education. These programs acknowledge that some students possess the intellectual capacity to handle college-level work before reaching the traditional age of 18.

Early College Admission: Exceptionally talented students are admitted to universities at a young age through rigorous assessment processes that evaluate their academic abilities and emotional maturity. These early admissions demonstrate that academic readiness is determined by intellectual capability and personal maturity, not merely chronological age.

Distinguishing Mental and Physical Age: It is crucial to differentiate between a student’s chronological age and their cognitive development. Assessing a student’s academic readiness should consider their mental and emotional maturity, factors that play a more significant role in their ability to thrive in higher education.

Joint Programs Between Secondary Schools and Higher Education Institutions: Collaborative programs between secondary schools and universities facilitate a seamless transition for advanced students. These programs, which often include advanced placement courses, enable students to earn college credits while still in secondary school, bridging the gap between secondary and higher education.

International Examples: Countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia have documented cases of young university graduates who have made significant contributions to their respective fields. These examples underscore the positive outcomes associated with early admission to higher education, benefiting both individuals and society as a whole.

Flexibility in Education Systems: Educational systems should be flexible enough to accommodate students with diverse needs and abilities. A flexible approach ensures that educational policies support the success and development of all students, particularly those demonstrating exceptional academic promise at a young age.

By presenting Minister Mamman with these insights and examples, stakeholders can facilitate a nuanced discussion on tertiary institution admissions policies in Nigeria. The objective is to establish a system that recognizes and nurtures talent while providing adequate support for students to excel in their academic pursuits. This approach aligns Nigeria’s education policies with global best practices, fostering opportunities for all students irrespective of their age.

The controversy surrounding Minister Mamman’s directive highlights the complex nature of educational policy-making in Nigeria. It underscores the need for policies that are legally robust and responsive to the diverse needs and aspirations of Nigerian youth. As stakeholders continue to scrutinize and challenge these directives, the focus remains on crafting educational policies that promote inclusivity, equity, and innovation in higher education.

Minister Tahir Mamman’s directive on age-based admissions sparks critical reflections on the intersection of legal mandates and educational imperatives in Nigeria. The ensuing debate underscores broader issues surrounding educational equity, pedagogical innovation, and the imperative to nurture and empower young talent. As stakeholders navigate this directive’s implications, it becomes evident that policymakers like Professor Mamman must continually update their knowledge and understanding of contemporary educational challenges and opportunities. Failure to embrace progressive educational practices risks hindering Nigeria’s educational advancement and perpetuating societal inequities, ultimately stunting national development.

If this policy is not changed, parents must recognize it as a severe violation of human rights, undermining the intellectual potential of young Nigerians. By enforcing arbitrary age restrictions, Minister Mamman not only impedes educational access based on merit but also perpetuates a system that treats African Nigerians as intellectually inferior. Such a stance disregards the diverse capabilities and readiness levels of students, thereby perpetuating inequality and hindering the country’s ability to harness its full human capital potential.

Parents should be prepared to take legal action both within Nigerian courts and international forums to challenge these discriminatory practices. They must assert that denying young, academically advanced students the opportunity to pursue higher education based on their age constitutes a fundamental injustice and a violation of their right to education. Such legal challenges are crucial not only for safeguarding individual educational opportunities but also for advocating for a fairer, more inclusive educational system that values talent and merit above bureaucratic constraints.

Minister Tahir Mamman’s directive on age-based admissions provokes profound reflection on the intersection of legal mandates and educational imperatives in Nigeria. This contentious issue exposes fundamental challenges regarding educational equity, pedagogical innovation, and the imperative to cultivate and empower young talent.

As stakeholders grapple with the implications of this directive, it becomes unmistakably clear that policymakers like Professor Mamman must continuously update their understanding of contemporary educational dynamics and opportunities. Failing to adopt progressive educational practices not only threatens Nigeria’s educational progress but also perpetuates deep-seated societal inequalities, potentially stifling the nation’s overall development.

If this policy remains unchanged, parents must vehemently denounce it as a flagrant violation of human rights, egregiously undermining the intellectual potential of Nigeria’s youth. Minister Mamman’s insistence on enforcing arbitrary age restrictions not only unjustly blocks access to education based on merit but also perpetuates a systemic bias that unjustly portrays African Nigerians as intellectually inferior. This regressive stance dismisses the varied capabilities and readiness levels of students, exacerbating inequality and severely impeding the nation’s ability to harness its full human capital.

Parents are urged to prepare resolutely for legal action, rallying within Nigerian courts and international forums to challenge these discriminatory practices. They must assert that denying young, academically advanced students the opportunity to pursue higher education based solely on age is an egregious injustice and a blatant violation of their fundamental right to education. Such legal challenges are indispensable not just for safeguarding individual educational opportunities but also for advocating a more equitable educational system that prioritizes talent and merit over bureaucratic rigidity.

In the spirit of protest and advocacy, students could rally behind a message that encapsulates their dissatisfaction with Minister Mamman’s age-centric policies. They might hold up signs or distribute flyers with a simple yet powerful statement: “Minister Mamman, wake up! The world has left your age-centric policies in the dust. It’s time to recognize that academic potential knows no age. Your refusal to do so is a disservice to Nigeria’s brightest young minds. Let’s move forward, not backward, in education.” This message, whether chanted in unison or displayed on placards, would serve as a clear and unified call for a more inclusive educational system that values talent over age.

In conclusion, the discourse surrounding Minister Mamman’s directive illuminates the pressing necessity for Nigeria to embrace educational policies that prioritize fairness, equity, and the comprehensive development of students. It underscores the pivotal role of progressive educational practices in furthering national aspirations and ensuring that every Nigerian student has the opportunity to thrive academically and contribute significantly to society.

Given the Education Minister’s and other policymakers’ apparent lack of understanding regarding gifted students and programs, it is crucial for them to enhance their knowledge in this area. Stakeholders must actively seek legal remedies against policies that hinder progress, advocating tirelessly within Nigeria’s legal framework and utilizing international platforms to maintain educational excellence and uphold human rights principles.

By holding policymakers to account and championing inclusive educational policies, stakeholders can drive Nigeria towards a future where educational opportunities are equitable and aligned with global standards, thereby protecting the rights and potential of all students.

Minister Tahir Mamman’s rich experience in law and university administration has undoubtedly provided him with a broad perspective on educational governance and policy. His leadership role in Nigeria’s education sector is a reflection of his professional accomplishments and the confidence vested in him to guide the nation’s educational direction. Yet, the intricate realm of education, especially the specialized domain of gifted education, demands a level of expertise that transcends the knowledge typically gained through legal and administrative channels.

The strategy employed by developed countries, where educational leaders with specialized training in education are appointed, offers a compelling model. These leaders are adept in contemporary educational theories and practices, including those pertinent to gifted education. This approach results in policies and programs that are not only evidence-based but also designed to cater to the varied needs of all students, including those with exceptional talents.

While Minister Mamman’s professional background is laudable, the distinctive challenges of nurturing academically gifted teenagers call for a more profound engagement with the field of gifted education. Such engagement would facilitate the creation of educational initiatives that are not only comprehensive but also attuned to the unique needs of gifted students, ultimately fostering an educational environment that is both inclusive and enriching for all.

It is time for Minister Mamman to awaken to the reality that the world has evolved beyond his age-centric policies. Academic prowess is not bound by age, and failing to acknowledge this is not merely anachronistic but a disservice to Nigeria’s most promising young talents. Let us embrace progress in education, not regress.

Professor John Egbeazien Oshodi, born in Uromi, Edo State, Nigeria, is an American-based police and prison scientist, forensic psychologist, public policy psychologist, and legal psychologist. He’s a government advisor on forensic-clinical psychological services in the USA and the founder of the Dr. John Egbeazien Oshodi Foundation for Psychological Health. With a significant role in introducing forensic psychology to Nigeria through N.U.C. and Nasarawa State University, he’s also a former Secretary-General of the Nigeria Psychological Association. He’s taught at esteemed institutions like Florida Memorial University, Florida International University, Nova Southeastern University, and more, and is currently an online faculty member at Weldios University, Nexus International University, and Walden University. John.Oshodi@mail.waldenu.edu