There is this saying that what is worth doing at all is worth doing well. What this means is that if a task has real value; that is, if it means something important to you, then, you should put in all your efforts – proper time and care – to execute it diligently and to the best of your ability. Not “how for do”, like my Grandma would say, or comme ci, comme sa, as the French would say. “Anyhow” is another word for it.
In my Ogho (Owo) mother tongue, anything given under that condition is described as “Gba, ma pa mi je!” Something you do for someone or give just for you to get rid of that person and earn your peace. I hope that is not what is happening in the case of the conversion of the Rufus Giwa Polytechnic, Owo into a university! If it is, it will, sorry to say, amount, in the final analysis, to a waste of precious time and efforts and poor utilization of scarce resources.
Philip Dormer Stanhope, the 4th Earl of Chesterfield, England, is recorded as the originator of the proverb “anything worth doing is worth doing well.” In a letter he reportedly wrote to his son in 1774, two years before the famous American Declaration of Independence (1776), Stanhope impressed upon his son the need to pay attention to detail. That is one side of the coin.
Interestingly, on the flip side is G. K. Chesterton, an English Christian apologist, who stood Stanhope on his head when he posited that “Anything worth doing is worth doing badly!” You think he did not know what he was saying? Of course, he did! He meant that waiting for perfection before acting could lead to procrastination, which is said to be the thief of time. Better, then, to start small, even amateurishly, than not act at all; taking action, however faulty the action, is better than not taking any at all while waiting for perfection.
Each of these arguments has its strengths and weaknesses. In the case of the Rufus Giwa Polytechnic that is mutating towards a university, I am of the opinion that both sides of the coin should be taken into consideration so we can get it right from the very beginning. That is the most profitable thing to do.
Just like we said here two weeks ago, a public hearing on the conversion has been held by the Ondo State House of Assembly. The Executive Bill sent to the House by the government is said to have proposed “Rufus Giwa University of Agriculture, Science and Technology.” This decision is largely political.
Yanking off the name of Rufus Giwa from Owo while leaving Adekunle Ajasin at Akungba university and Olusegun Agagu at the Okitipupa university may come with serious political and, indeed, ethnic backlash. As reported here penultimate week, evidence of simmering Owo/Akoko rumbling has become evident.
However, the arguments against retaining the name are equally intimidating if, indeed, we seek to make a success of the new endeavour. What is the point in running away from a lion only to meet a bear on the way?
What the experts recommended
So today, let’s consider two informed opinions that will further throw some light on grey areas and help us plot the way forward. The first is from Femi Agagu, erstwhile Chief of Staff to Gov. Olusegun Agagu as well as former Commissioner for Education in Ondo state.
Titled “Proposed Ondo State University: Academic Development Plan”, the document Agagu forwarded to me listed “Proposed take-off Faculties, Departments and programmes” as follows:
1). Faculty of Agriculture and Environmental Management with the following Departments: Crop Production and Protection; Animal Science and Production; Agricultural Extension and Rural Development; Food Science and Technology; Fine and Applied Arts and Design; Quantity Surveying; Estate Management; Surveying and Geoinformatics and Urban and Regional Planning.
2). Faculty of Arts, Social Science and Communication Science with the following Departments: Communication and Media Studies; Literary Studies and Information Science; Political Science and International Relations; Music and Dramatic Arts/Music and Instrument Science/Technology; and Psychology and Intelligence Science.
3). The Faculty of Basic and Allied Health Sciences has the following Departments: Biological Sciences; Physical Sciences; Chemical Sciences; Mathematical Sciences; Science Laboratory Technology; and Human Nutrition, Dietetics and Consumer Service.
The fourth is the Faculty of Engineering and Technology and it has the following Departments: Agricultural and Environmental Engineering; Civil Engineering; Computer and Digital Engineering; Electrical and Electronics Engineering; and Mechanical, Robotics and Mechatronics Engineering.
5). The Faculty of Management Sciences has the following Departments: Management and Accounting; Project and Public Administration; Local Government Studies; and Marketing and Entrepreneurship.”
Faculties and other academic units at maturity (25 years) were listed as follows: Faculty of Agriculture, Faculty of Allied Health Sciences, Faculty of Arts and Creative Industry; Faculty of Computing and Digital Technology; Faculty of Education, Faculty of Engineering and Technology, Faculty of Environmental Science, Faculty of Law, Faculty of Management Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Faculty of Natural and Applied Sciences, Faculty of Social Science, General Studies Unit, Centre for Open and Distance Learning, and School of Postgraduate Studies.
Phases and Faculties were then listed as follows: Phase 1 (Year 1-5): Faculty of Agriculture and Environmental Management; Faculty of Arts, Social and Communication Sciences; Faculty of Engineering and Technology; Faculty of Management Sciences; and General Studies Unit.
Phase 2 (Year 6-10): Faculty of Agriculture; Faculty of Allied Health Sciences; Faculty of Arts and Creative Industry; Faculty of Computing and Digital Technology; Faculty of Environmental Sciences; Faculty of Law; Faculty of Natural and Applied Sciences; Faculty of Social Sciences; Centre for Open and Distance eLearning (CODE); and School of Postgraduate Studies.
Phase 3 (Year 11 – 15): Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry; and Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences. Phase 4 (Year 16-20): Faculty of Education; and Phase 5 (Year 21-25): Consolidation of Faculties and programmes.
The document then listed the various degrees that will be awarded to those graduating in each of the courses listed above, based on the National Universities Commission (NUC) regulations.
Agagu said the above “was the proposal we submitted to Aketi (the then Gov. Oluwarotimi Odunayo Akeredolu, now late) when I was the Commissioner for Education. Unfortunately, he couldn’t act on it before he passed on. Professors Faborode and Ogunbodede worked with me to produce this. We also received inputs from Prof. Bamiro and a few others who have cognate experience in university administration. I was surprised, too, when I heard it is now the University of Agric.”
Merits of starting on a clean slate
One person mentioned by Agagu is Professor Tope Ogunbodede, immediate past vice-chancellor of the Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife. Fortunately, he, too, felt the compelling need to shed some light on the matter. His rejoinder is printed below:
“Thank you for your thoughtful and illuminating intervention. I particularly appreciate your historical perspective on the evolution of the institution and the reasons why the name “Rufus Giwa” came to be associated with the Polytechnic. While I agree that it is necessary to preserve the memory or legacy of Chief Rufus Giwa, I strongly object to making his name the identity of a new university with a fundamentally different mandate.
“A polytechnic and a university are different types of institutions with different mandates, expectations, and responsibilities. A university’s name should communicate its identity and mission. Retaining “Rufus Giwa” risks creating the impression that the university is merely the polytechnic upgraded or renamed, rather than a new institution with its own academic identity, research obligations, and aspirations. This is why I find the proposed “University of Agriculture, Science and Technology, Owo (UNASTO)” particularly compelling.
“The name immediately indicates that the university is new, and also communicates what it is intended to be, its academic orientation and its geographical identity. It also aligns the institution with the agricultural, scientific and technological development priorities of the Ondo State government.
“There is no need to lose the Rufus Giwa legacy in the process. The enabling law can expressly recognise the university as the successor-institution to Rufus Giwa Polytechnic, while Rufus Giwa’s name can be perpetuated through a faculty, library, lecture complex, institute, scholarship or endowed professorial chair. That, in my view, would honour his memory without making the entire university carry the identity of its predecessor.
“The name of a university must be part of a broader academic and institutional plan, rather than an incidental choice. Hence, the recommendations of the three committees earlier constituted to undertake the conversion of the polytechnic deserve considerable weight. I served on the first (Faborode) and last (Ajibefun) committees and I am aware that none of the three committees recommended the retention of Rufus Giwa.
“We must remember that giving thorough consideration to the name at this founding stage is also preferable to having to revisit the issue later, when certificates, accreditation records, seals, agreements and the university’s identity would already have been established.
“There are useful precedents within Nigeria. The establishment of the Lagos State University of Education (LASUED) following the merger/transformation of Adeniran Ogunsanya College of Education and Michael Otedola College of Primary Education demonstrates that a new university emerging from legacy institutions can appropriately adopt a new name reflecting its broader institutional purpose while the histories of the predecessor-institutions remain preserved.
“Ultimately, heritage and institutional identity are not necessarily the same thing. Rufus Giwa’s memory can and should be honoured, perhaps through the naming of a major structure, such as a Faculty, Library or other significant academic facility, after him in the new university. However, for the overall benefit and future development of the university, it should be allowed to establish its own distinct identity.
“The new university deserves the opportunity to build its own name, character and legacy and the name “University of Agriculture, Science and Technology, Owo (UNASTO)” recommended by the Ajibefun Committee adequately serves that purpose. In my respectful view, it would be counterproductive to saddle the new university with the institutional identity and historical encumbrances of its predecessor.”
A radical departure from the past
We can glean from the above two responses that much time, effort, and resources have been expended on the conversion project; yet, three issues remain in contention, the first of which is the name. After more careful consideration, I now propose, for uniformity sake, that the names of Adekunle Ajasin, Rufus Giwa, and Olusegun Agagu be removed from the Akungba, Owo and Okitipupa universities respectively. I align with the suggestion that some structures within the institutions be named after Ajasin, Giwa and Agagu. We should stop naming public institutions after anyone.
Two: I align more with the comprehensive list of Faculties, Departments and Units listed in the first response by Femi Agagu. Any strictly Agriculture-based university anywhere in Nigeria of today is dead on arrival.
Thirdly, to put an end to duplication of efforts and waste of resources, I propose that we collapse the four Ondo state universities into one standard university to be known and called the Ondo State University, with a single administrative structure. Degree-awarding Campuses, Colleges, Schools, and Institutes of the university should spread across Akungba, Owo, Ondo town, Okitipupa, etc.
I will understand if these suggestions irk many! Radical changes capable of bearing bountiful harvests are seldom popular!
But tell me, has Ondo State the capacity to effectively fund four universities? If it does, has it satisfactorily done so? I was aghast when I learnt, recently, that Ondo state does not give running costs to its secondary schools! Can that be true? How, then, do the schools run? Of course, old students’ associations and Parents-Teachers Association (PTA) everywhere that I know bear the brunt – and some principals cut corners!
Even in Lagos state where principals receive N250,000.00 (Two Hundred and Fifty Thousand Naira) monthly as running costs, the measly amount is grossly inadequate in view of prevailing realities. Think, then, of a place where principals receive nothing!
