1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
One of the principles of equity states “Equality before the law”;
means that no one is above the law; everyone is equal before the law. On
this premise, the distribution of amenities by the government to the
people should be shared equitably. A particular group of people should
not be more favored than the other, what is good for the goose is good
for the gander. In other for equity goal to be achieved, equal
distribution of resources in a country is paramount (Tawney, 1952). The
opposite of this seems to be the case in Nigeria as the majority group
in the country tends to receive more attention from the government than
the minorities. Le Grand 1982 in one of his works asserted that in the
United Kingdom (UK), public amenities like health, education,
transportation, etc are mostly enjoyed by the middle class and the rich,
relegating the poor in the society.
Distributional bias is very prevalent in developing countries of the
world; a good example is Nigeria where public spending on education
discourages children from poor homes from going to school. Those who
have tried to attend primary school have the challenge of going for
higher education because of finance (World Bank 2003, Chapters 2 and 7).
This problem is particular to Latin America and Africa, with cases of
uneven allocation of revenue within the populace. Of which if the
government took care of the education expenditures (tuition fees and
learning materials), free education can be offered.
Consequently, there is an obvious distributional bias in public
spending on education. Geographic location of schools in Nigeria
contributes to distributional bias of public education, as some good
quality schools are located where the rich dwell; for instance in Lagos
state, well structured and equipped schools are situated in lekki being
where the bourgeoisies reside. The issue of distributional bias of
public education can be tied to how weak or strong the government is.
Malaysia is one country that has the lowest rate of distributional bias
in public education, while Mozambique acts the reverse of the story
coupled with their violation of the rule of law.
This study is out to identify the causes and consequences of distributional bias of public education.
1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
Most often in Nigeria, public funding of education is not evenly
distributed, thus affecting youth’s access to education. Some Nigerian
youths of poor parents are deprived of quality education because of the
cost of education. These have pushed a lot of youths into the streets
that some are seen hawking during school hours instead of being in
school, others have been lured to join bad groups causing havoc in the
These are the ample effects of distributional bias of public education in Nigeria.
In addition, the government is the main brain behind distributional
bias of public education; with a weak and corrupt government, such
discrepancy is inevitable.
1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The major objective of this study is the distributional bias of public education: causes and consequences.
Other specific objectives include:
a) To examine the effect of distributional bias of public education on economic growth.
b) To examine the significant relationship between distributional bias of public education and the performance of student.
c) To identify ways of improving the equitable distribution of public education.
1.4 RESEARCH QUESTIONS
The following research questions are generated to guide this study:
a) What are the causes and consequences of distributional bias of public education?
b) What are the effects of distributional bias of public education on economic growth?
c) Is there a significant relationship between distributional bias of public education and the performance of student?
d) What are the ways of improving equitable distribution of public education?
1.5 RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS
H0: There are no causes and consequences of distributional bias of public education.
H1: There are causes and consequences of distributional bias of public education.
1.6 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
This study is meant to inform and educate the general public, but
most especially the government on the consequences of distributional
bias of public education.
It is meant to draw to the attention of the government the need to
evenly distribute public education, in other to improve the educational
system of Nigeria, by extension its economy.
This study will be of immense benefit to other researchers who intend
to know more on this topic and can also be used by non-researchers to
build more on their work. This study contributes to knowledge and could
serve as a guide for other work or study.
1.7 SCOPE OF THE STUDY/LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
This study is restricted to the risk, resources and education- public and private financing of higher education in Nigeria.
Limitations of study
- 1. Financial constraint-
Insufficient fund tends to impede the efficiency of the researcher in
sourcing for the relevant materials, literature or information and in
the process of data collection (internet, questionnaire and interview).
- 2. Time constraint- The
researcher will simultaneously engage in this study with other academic
work. This consequently will cut down on the time devoted for the
1.9 DEFINITION OF TERMS
- DISTRIBUTIONAL: The process of marketing and merchandising goods. Also, the way in which wealth or goods or services are allotted.
- BIAS: This is an inclination or prejudice for or against one person or group, especially in a way considered to be unfair.
- PUBLIC EDUCATION: This is a state school (public school), a tuition-free school, funded and operated by the government
- CAUSE: This is a thing that gives rise to an action, phenomenon, or condition.
- CONSEQUENCE: This is a result or effect, typically one that is unwelcome or unpleasant.
Tawney, R.H. 1952. Equality London: George Allen and Unwin.
Le Grand, J. 1982. The Strategy of Equality: Redistribution and the Social Services. London: George Allen and Unwin.
World Bank. 2003. World Development Report, 2004, Making Services
Work for Poor People. Washington, D.C.: A co publication with of the
World Bank and Oxford University Press.