Outsourcing polytechnic accreditation: A risk to quality education
The National Board for Technical Education (NBTE) has announced its decision to outsource polytechnic accreditation to private consultants—a move that has already drawn criticism from the Academic Staff Union of Polytechnics (ASUP) and other stakeholders in Nigeria’s technical education sector.
ASUP has strongly condemned the decision, describing it as an attempt to commercialise the core functions of the NBTE, thereby undermining the integrity of the accreditation process.
Their concerns are not unfounded. The introduction of this policy raises critical questions about the future of polytechnic accreditation in Nigeria. Will this move genuinely benefit the sector, or will it lead to unintended consequences that compromise the quality of technical education?
The NBTE has justified the outsourcing by pointing to the increasing number of institutions under its jurisdiction—now exceeding 800—and the lack of sufficient manpower, with fewer than 100 programme officers available to manage the accreditation process.
According to the board, the outsourcing will be limited to physical accreditation for institutions that lack the necessary Information and Communication Technology (ICT) infrastructure to access the board’s digital accreditation platform.
At first glance, these reasons may seem reasonable. The scale of the task is undeniably vast, and digital infrastructure may not yet be accessible to every institution.
However, the speed with which the NBTE is implementing this policy raises serious concerns. The central question remains: why the rush to outsource such a crucial process?
The NBTE’s claim that outsourcing will only apply to institutions without adequate ICT capabilities is difficult to accept.
In an era where technology is deeply embedded in every sector, any polytechnic seeking accreditation without the requisite ICT infrastructure should already be considered as failing basic standards. If an institution lacks the capacity for digital engagement, it is difficult to believe that it is capable of meeting the rigorous requirements of a valid accreditation process.
Furthermore, the argument that the NBTE lacks sufficient personnel to manage accreditation is equally problematic. The board’s current workforce of 100 programme officers may seem inadequate given the number of institutions under its purview, but accreditation is not a continuous, simultaneous process across all institutions.
Handing over this responsibility to private consultants—who may operate with even fewer personnel and charge higher fees—does not appear to be an economically sound solution. If the NBTE truly lacks the capacity, a more logical approach would be to invest in expanding its workforce and infrastructure rather than delegating such a sensitive process to private contractors.
The apparent lack of involvement of ASUP and other relevant stakeholders in the development of this policy raises further concerns.
The NBTE’s unilateral decision to implement this policy without consulting key players in the sector suggests a troubling lack of transparency and collaboration. Had the union’s concerns been taken into account, a more balanced and well-thought-out plan might have emerged—one that could have prevented the current backlash.
Outsourcing the accreditation process to private consultants presents multiple risks.
First and foremost, the integrity and quality of polytechnic education in Nigeria could be compromised if profit-driven entities are placed in charge of the process.
Private consultants, primarily motivated by financial gain, may lack the necessary impartiality and expertise to conduct thorough and unbiased assessments. This could result in substandard polytechnics being accredited, which would, in turn, degrade the quality of graduates these institutions produce.
Moreover, outsourcing would significantly undermine the authority and credibility of the NBTE itself. As the principal regulatory body for polytechnic education in Nigeria, the NBTE is responsible for upholding quality and consistency in accreditation.
By delegating this core function to private consultants, the board risks diminishing its own role and eroding public trust in its processes. Institutions and the general public must have confidence that accreditation is carried out by a competent and impartial regulatory body—not by contractors whose motivations may not align with the public interest.
Rather than outsourcing, the NBTE should focus on strengthening its internal capacity.
This would involve recruiting more qualified personnel, improving ICT infrastructure, and ensuring that accreditation remains a transparent, robust, and fair process.
Additionally, the NBTE must commit to continuous staff training and development to equip its workforce with the skills necessary to handle the increasing demands of accreditation in the modern educational landscape.
The Minister of Education, the National Assembly, and other key stakeholders must take a closer look at this policy.
The accreditation of polytechnics is far too critical a process to be handed over to private consultants whose interests may not align with the public good. Instead of hastily implementing an outsourcing policy, the NBTE should engage in meaningful dialogue with ASUP and other stakeholders to find sustainable solutions that will strengthen, rather than jeopardise, the accreditation process.
While innovation and reform are necessary for the advancement of Nigeria’s education system, outsourcing polytechnic accreditation could prove to be a regressive step.
The NBTE must reconsider its approach, focusing on enhancing its internal systems and processes to ensure that the integrity of polytechnic education remains intact.
The quality of technical education in Nigeria is at stake, and this is not a decision to be taken lightly.
