Analysis Of Universal Basic Education

Data Analysis, Modelling and Forecasting with Reference to the Universal Basic Education (UBE) Policy.

Background:
The introduction of the Universal Basic education (UBE) policy/program is a classic example of the positive response taken by the Nigerian gorvenemet toward the attainment of the Jontein Declaration of Education for all by the year 2000. This move is predicated on the believe that Nigeria’s development will be accelerated through the inherent value, education brings. Substantiating this, Preece (2006) supported the point that education is a proven means to reduce poverty. Furthermore, evidence indicates that basic education supports sustainable lifelong learning because of value added as per numeracy, writing and reading skills
However, the quantitative expansion of UBE program came at the expense of educational quality (Adarnaechi and Romaine, 2000). Nevertheless, the overarching challenge is how to determine the most effective and efficient means of achieving these outcomes (quality & access) simultaneously, through the least associated cost. What this means is that certain techniques must be applied in order to identify programs with the least costs and the greatest positive impact. The cost-benefit analysis (CBA) is a veritable tool to achieve this. CBA involves a systematic appraisal of the magnitude of a cost and the advantage in an investment situation, in order to gain its economic profitability. Likewise, CBA can be described as a management tool which involves adding up the benefits of a course of action, and then comparing it with the costs associated with it.The data used in this discuss, is the retrospective data from the implementation of the education assistance (EA) project launched in 2007 in the federal capital territory, with the aim of improving the school enrolment to provide quality six year primary school education based on the UBE policy. There is provision in the EA project for scholarship award, amounting to 5,000 Naira for each child which includes the cost of school bags, uniforms, bags, instructional materials and the
Crime reduction.
Schooling increases voting and reduces alienation. Social cohesion.
More education increases contraceptive efficiency. Desired family size.
More education reduces cost of search, increases mobility. Job search efficiency.
More education increases life expectancy. Improved health.
Improved teachers job satisfaction. Better quality coaching.
Source: Based on and adapted from Wolfe and Zuvekas (1997)
Table 3: Performance of the EA Project in the FCT in 2008.
Indicator Figure
Completion rate in primary education(six year) Male 75%, Female 25%
Student teacher ratio 36:1
Source: Computed by CSEA based on data from Federal Ministry of Education, 2005.

From table 2, above it will cost the government approximately 35,000,000 Naira to assist 7,000 pupils have access to education in the FCT through the EA project, while the benefit cost of running the program amounts to 2,100,000 Naira. If this intervention is not a social investment, the payback time can be calculated as shown below: 35,000,000 N/ 2,100,000N = 16.6 of a year, or approximately 16 months. Taken at face value, this would imply that education should be privately provided and in fact, need not be subsidized at all. Nevertheless, the fact that the EA project went ahead anyway with public funding may have been the right policy decision. Though, this clearly shows that the decision did not arise from the quantitative