ENHANCING QUALITY ASSURANCE IN HIGHER EDUCATION IN SOUTH SOUTH NIGERIA: MANAGEMENT PERSPECTIVES

ENHANCING QUALITY ASSURANCE IN HIGHER EDUCATION IN

SOUTH SOUTH NIGERIA: MANAGEMENT PERSPECTIVES

Executive Summary

Nigerian higher education stakeholders are greatly concerned about the quality of education provided the citizens of the country. Concerns about the quality of education students receive from higher institutions, the quality of lecturers (teaching staff) employed to teach students, the quality of infrastructures and instructional facilities have always been of upmost interest. Additionally, higher institutions stakeholders are interested in the quality of health facilities for students/staff health services, quality of students’ hostels, quality of the overall institution environment, quality teaching and learning as well as quality support services from non-academic staff. E-management is a contemporary approach that seeks to convert the institutions’ operations from manual to electronic using IT in delivering administrative functions. E-management entails deploying ICTs to carry out various managerial functions such as planning, organizing, staffing, leading or directing, and controlling an organization for accomplishing organizational goals. The purpose of the study is to enhance the operation of quality assurance in higher education institutions in the South South Nigeria by: exploring stakeholders' engagement in the operation of QA processes, identifying key issues confronting stakeholders in the development of QA processes and exploring the stakeholders' perceptions and attitudes toward using e- management tools in the operation of QA processes. Correlational survey design will be adopted for the study. A total of 150 academic and 150 non-academic staff shall be used. Sample size shall be selected using proportionate random sampling technique. Data collected will be analyzed using Pearson Product Moment Correlation Statistics. This research is expected to cover a period of one year and eight months as per the budget attached, it is proposed that One million, seven hundred and thirty thousand (N1, 730,000) shall be used as the running cost of the project.

Introduction

Background to the Study

Nigerian higher education stakeholders are greatly concerned about the quality of education provided the citizens of the country. Concerns about the quality of education students receive from higher institutions, the quality of lecturers (teaching staff) employed to teach students, the quality of infrastructures and instructional facilities have always been of upmost interest. Additionally, higher institutions stakeholders are interested in the quality of health facilities for students/staff health services, quality of students’ hostels, quality of the overall institution environment, quality teaching and learning as well as quality support services from non-academic staff. Researchers have linked quality in higher education with student intake, academic programs, program designs, lecturers, teaching and learning, students’ experiences and academics as well as non academic support for the students (Baird, 2006; Fry, 1995; Nordvall & Braxton, 1996). Baird (2006) maintains that quality in higher education relates to development of intellectual independence. He recommended collaborative action research for quality assurance, improving quality, stressing that, institutions of higher learning must take the lead in fostering improvement in quality of education at all levels. The quality of knowledge which is generated in institutions of higher learning is critical to national competitiveness (Asiyai, 2005). She emphasized that, it is only quality education that can sharpen the minds of the individual and help transform the society economically, socially and politically.

Among the aims of higher education in Nigeria outlined by the Federal Ministry of Education (2004) and highlighted by Asiyai (2005) are:

•           Production of the much-needed high-level manpower essential for the nation’s growth and development.

•           They are centers of excellence in teaching, research and storehouses of knowledge for nurturing the manpower needs of the nation.

•           Promotion and encouragement of scholarship and community services.

The Federal Ministry of Education also stated that universities in Nigeria shall vigorously pursue these goals through:

•           Teaching

•           Research and development

•           Knowledge generation and dissemination and international cooperation

•           Dedicated services to the communities through extra-mural and consultancy services.

All these stated goals are closely related to quality education. Nigerian government both state and national level has considered quality higher education a veritable instrument for achieving radical social, economic and political development. Nigeria intend to use education as a vehicle for fostering development of all her citizens to their full potentials in the promotion of a strong, democratic, prosperous, indivisible and indissoluble sovereign nation (Ehigiamusoe, 2012). The attainment of this objective noted by Ehigimusoe necessitates that, the inputs into Nigerian higher education systems be of high standards since other levels of education depend on the University for the production of high level manpower to man the systems.

The recent explosion in the field of information technology which translates into new knowledge economy and new information technologies are altering the ground rules for effective information flow in every society. According to Thomas (2004), the relevance of using new technologies to provide information access is of great significance in the global economy. In other words, IT is the focal point of electronics, data processing and telecommunication.

            Tremendous technological advancement has occurred in the present twenty-first century which has culminated in far-reaching developments in university administrative systems, especially in the developed nations. Cost-effective technology and flexibility in learning and administrative activities are essential to enhance efficiency. One of the tasks in university administration experiencing a global information technology revolution is students’ management. Nwankwo (as cited in Oladejo, 2007, p. 9) observed that the functions of students personnel management include admission, registration, enrolment, students’ organization, classification, provision of essential services such as medical, sports, guidance and counseling services as well as the comprehension and development of activities, interests and needs of individual students. In essence, all the activities and services rendered to the students in the university are included in the students’ personnel management and appear to be the core of institutional administration.

The rising administrative costs of tertiary institutions, especially students’ personnel makes it imperative to devise an alternative management framework which will reduce these administrative costs in the long run, and at the same time, optimize the University’s objective function; hence, the need to embrace a technology-based approach to student management. The emergence of modern Information and Communications Technology (ICT), and the need for Nigerian universities to be viewed and ranked through the degree of their website functionality, network structure, and associated academic portal necessitated the adoption of e-management of students’ personnel functions.

Statement of the Problem

The importance of quality education in nation building cannot be over emphasized. There have been several calls on the educational managers on how to make the educational system to be more vibrant in the quality of its products after several quantity of mass failure and half baked products from our various educational institutions in the country. These over the years have generated a lot of debate and argument among Nigerians on the newspapers, radio and television programmed, including parents, religious bodies and nongovernmental organizations. They often expressed their concern about the manner in which the system is losing its confidence as regards to the effective and efficient nature of the system.

In the modern era of information technology, many human endeavors are now being carried out and managed electronically. E-management is a type of contemporary approach that seeks to convert the institutions’ operations from manual to electronic using information technology in delivering its administrative functions. The rising administrative costs of tertiary institutions, especially in students’ personnel administration, makes it imperative to develop an alternative management framework which will reduce these costs in the long run, and at the same time, optimize the University’s objective function. Hence the need to embrace a technology-based approach to student management. The extent to which e-management of students has facilitated university administration has to be continuously investigated.  However, this research work will work on how to Enhance the Operation of Quality Assurance Processes in Higher Education: in the South South Nigeria Educational Management and E-management Perspectives.

Objectives of the Study

The main purpose of the study is enhancing quality assurance in higher education institutions in South South Nigeria: management perspective by: exploring stakeholders' engagement in the operation of quality assurance processes, identifying the key issues confronting stakeholders in the development of quality assurance processes and exploring the stakeholders' perceptions and attitudes toward using e- management tools in the operation of quality assurance processes.

·         To determine how planning in management engender quality assurance in higher institutions  in South-South Nigeria.

·         To examine the relationship between staffing in management and the enhancement of quality assurance in higher education in South-South Nigeria.

·          To assess the influence of co-ordinating in management on the sustenance of quality assurance in higher education in South-South Nigeria.

·         To examine how reporting to management affect quality assurance in higher education in South-South Nigeria.

Scope of the Study

This research work is basically concerned with enhancing quality assurance in Higher Education in South South Nigeria: Management and E-management perspectives. The population of the study will comprise of internal and external stakeholders, employers of labour, educational institutions, non-governmental organizations, private sectors, firms and industries in Nigeria.

Significance of the Study

The research work will help to improve the quality of teaching and learning in Nigeria’s higher education through involvement in collaborative action research with employers of labour. Such research must have bearing with the needs of students and the society.

The research work will help in the attainment of quality which requires that students resume at their institutions at expected date, regularly attend their lectures so that they can learn and avoid issues of academic misconduct.

The research work will help the National University Commission (NUC), National Board for Technical Education (NBTE), and National Commission for Colleges of Education (NCCE) to regularly monitor the activities of universities, polytechnics and colleges of Education and conducts a need assessment exercise.

The study will help Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), Local Communities and Private Sector to intensify their contributions in educational reforms, school decision making, information access and in rebuilding of  schools across Nigeria through philanthropic donations of funds.

The research work will help parents as major stakeholders in the business of education to ensure that their children are provided with adequate materials needed for their academic activities. That adequate provision must be made for their wards in terms of buying their food stuff, early payment of tuition fees, provision of accommodation and provision of books. Parents could also play the roles of providing and counseling to ensure that their children stay in school, attend lectures, refrain from joining secret cults, develop good study habits and learn effectively.

The government of Federal Republic of Nigeria owns majority of higher institutions in the country. This research work will be of immense benefits to the Government and managers of these institutions by ensuring that relevant funding policy is established for proper funding of higher education in the country. Government must ensure that relevant curriculum is implemented in higher education and also see to it that such curriculum is constantly review in line with market demands.

Research Questions

·         How does planning in management affect quality assurance in tertiary education in South-South Nigeria?

·         To what extent does staffing in management engender quality assurance in tertiary education in South-South Nigeria?

·         What is the influence of co-ordinating on quality assurance in higher institutions in South-South Nigeria?

·         How does reporting in management affect quality assurance in higher institutions in South-South Nigeria?

Research Hypotheses

            The following research hypotheses were formulated and tested at the 0.05 level of significance in the study:

Ho₁:     There is no significant relationship between planning in management and enhancement of quality assurance in higher institutions in South-South Nigeria.

Ho₂:     Staffing in management does not significantly correlate with enhancement of quality assurance in tertiary education in South-South Nigeria.

Ho₃:     Quality assurance in tertiary education in South-South Nigeria is not significantly influence by co-ordinating in management.

Ho₄:     There is no significantly difference in quality assurance between higher institutions that emphasis reporting in management and those that do not emphasis.

Review of Related Literature

Theoretical issues in Quality Assurance

The need to assess quality in educational provision is now generally accepted as one of the tools of educational reforms.  There two widely used systems of quality assurance in higher education. The first is the system of certification of students by a renowned scholar in the field. The value of the credentials awarded, are assured by the reputation of the scholar as well as his place in the genealogical succession of established scholarship in the field of study. This brand of quality assurance has evolved into one of internal and external peer review of student performance and advancement of scholarship within the academia. The other system is the accreditation of institutions or professional programmes. The essence of accreditation system is that of meeting input standards in such areas as curriculum, library facilities, staff qualifications, students’ entry qualifications, duration of study etc. It should be noted that the two systems are mutually in-exclusive. The current tendency is for the two approaches to be grafted into one another (Miller,2002). 

Defining quality in higher education has proved to be a challenging task. Some scholars believe that 'education quality is a rather vague and controversial concept and that quality is a notoriously ambiguous term. At the broadest level, education quality can be viewed as a set of elements that constitute the input, process and output of the education system, which provides services that completely satisfy both internal and external strategic constituencies by meeting their explicit and implicit expectations (Pounder 1999; Cheng & Tam, 1997). If higher education is viewed as a system, then any quality management programme must therefore assess inputs, process and outputs.

Internal and external stakeholders have been identified in the quality management process in which current students and front line staff forms the internal constituents and employers, government bodies, institutional management, prospective students, and professional bodies are external.

These stakeholders might have disparate definitions of quality as well as different preferences for how quality is assessed. Hence Hughes (1988) suggests quality indicators may differ for internal and external stakeholders, and Cheng and Tam (1997) are of the opinion that expectations of the different constituencies may be not only different but contradictory.

According to Cullen, Joyce, Hassall and Broadbent (2003), the challenge is to produce a performance evaluation framework that permits the equal expression of legitimate voices, though they may conflict or compete in some ways. Harvey and Knight (1996) suggest that quality can be broken down into five different but related dimensions: quality as exceptional (e.g. high standards), quality as consistency (e.g. zero defects), quality as fitness for purpose (fitting customer specifications), quality as value for money, and quality as transformative (an ongoing process that includes empowerment and enhancement of the customer satisfaction). While the authors advise that quality as transformative incorporates the other dimensions to some extent, it can also be argued that different stakeholders are likely to prioritise the importance of these different dimensions of quality according to their motivations and interest (Owlia & Aspinwall, 1996). In some quality initiatives therefore, there may be a preference for the monitoring of some quality dimensions at the expense of others.

What is apparent from this discussion is that the concept of quality in higher education is complex and dependent upon different stakeholder perspectives. While Pounder (1999) suggests that we should be looking for another more appropriate concept than quality to benchmark performance in higher education, in reality quality remains the key focus for higher education provision and shall continue to be assessed in a number of different ways by different stakeholders.

Traditionally external stakeholders have been associated with quality assurance procedures. Quality assurance refers to the 'planned and systematic actions [deemed] as necessary to provide adequate confidence that a product or service will satisfy given requirements for quality' (Borahan & Ziarati, 2002). For higher education institutions this requires them to demonstrate responsible actions in their professional practices, be accountable for public funds received and demonstrate the results they achieve with the available resources (Jackson, 1998). Elton (1992) refers to these as the quality 'A's: Accountability, Audit, and Assessment' and suggests these are concerned with the control of quality and the people who control quality. The particular mechanisms for assurance are usually imposed by external bodies, such as university management and most commonly include accreditation, external examiners and quality audits (McKay & Kember, 1999). As a control tool therefore, the focus is predominantly on the extent to which the procedures and conditions that are perceived to result in appropriate levels of quality are followed within institutions or programmes and are effective in meeting their purpose (Jackson, 1996, p. 39). Prioritised dimensions of quality therefore include quality as consistency, quality as fitness for purpose, and quality as value for money. As these external stakeholders also assure that a minimum threshold of quality is maintained, quality as exceptional is also a relevant dimension. To this extent, external quality assurance mechanisms have a pertinent role to play in quality assessment practices for a number of stakeholders. However, the processes adopted are by nature summative providing only a snapshot of 'quality' and therefore McKay and Kember (1999) argue that quality control measures in isolation may have limited impact if not accompanied by appropriate educational development initiatives. In addition, the legitimacy of these approaches for quality enhancement purposes has been questioned as the use of external change agents does not imbed quality into the culture of programmes (Roffe, 1998).

Theoretical issues in Selected E-Management Variables and University Administration 

According to Christiana (2008), e-management plays a vital role in supporting powerful, efficient management and administration in the education sector because technology can be used right from student administration to various administrative areas in an education institution. Hossein (2008) lends credence to Christiana’s view that e-management provides several possibilities for educational administrators to do their tasks and one of these tasks is the student admission process. The integration of ICT enhances the overall admission activities of higher education institutions by making it more accessible to many (Thomas, 2004).

The transition from manual to online applications, registration, scoring of scripts, and collating and disseminating of results improves the efficiency, accuracy and reliability of admission procedures (Nosiri, 2005). Mbakwem and Okeke (2007) stated that such a transition guarantees safety, security and efficiency in handing large volumes of scores over a very short period.

Online registration is a recent technology in school administration via e-management. Before the advent of on-line registration, students were faced with a monotonous task of manual registration of courses where they were faced with all manner of intimidation and wrong attitude from staff who are supposed to sign such forms. Ajayi (2004) noted that this method was cumbersome and time wasting. The idea of online registration is however in line with the world’s latest trend of information technology prior to the advent of e-management in Nigerian universities.

The online registration system allows students, to register through the internet, and drop or add courses online within the registration period. The students are expected to go into a cybercafé or any available internet facility and log into the school web site and register courses for the semester/session. Ashish and Arun (2005) and Ajayi (2004) stated that on-line registration has put an end to all manners of complaints by students about the nonchalant attitude of some staff in signing course forms as experienced in manual registration, and also allows quicker response. In the same vein, Chaoes (2006) also noted that a well-conceived and implemented automated student record system can reduce the cost of handling the paper work associated with record keeping.

Another very important service delivered by the Student Affairs Unit has to do with the arrangement for hostel accommodation. Onyeagbako (2002) maintained that manual method of managing and administering hostels in institutions is obviously not effective as it is attributed to drawbacks like human error, low security, difficulty in data update, and difficulty in record keeping.  Kola (2014) then submitted that the easiest way to address the drawbacks of the manual scheduling methods and ensures data integrity especially in a thick populated institution is to make access to accommodation electronic and online.

Methodology

            Correlational survey design will be adopted for the study. This is because the study will seek to ascertain the relationship between the variables using data gotten from responses from survey instrument such as questionnaire and interviews. Data collected will be analyzed using a correlational statistics – Pearson Product Moment Correlation Statistics.

Population of the Study

            The population of this study will comprise of stakeholders (lecturers) in the tertiary institutions in the South-South geopolitical zone of Nigeria – comprising of Akwa Ibom State, River State, Cross River State, Bayelsa State and Edo State.

Population/Sample

            The actual sample population to be used for the study will be 300 staff randomly selected in the region. Out of this number, 150 academic staff and 150 nonacademic staff shall be used for this study. 

Sample frame

Social indexes	Akwa Ibom	Bayelsa	Cross River	Edo	Delta	Rivers	Total
Academic staff	25	25	25	25	25	25	150
Non Academic staff	25		25	25	25	25	150
Total	50	50	50	50	50	50	300

Instrumentation

Two researchers made instruments title Education and E-management Questionnaire (EEMQ) and Quality Assurance Questionnaire (QAQ) shall be used for data collection.

Validity and Reliability of the Instrument

Copies of the above instrument will be given to some senior colleagues in Measurement and Evaluation department for content, construct and face validity.

Method of Data Analysis

Data obtain will be subjected to inferential statistical hypotheses testing. Specifically, the three null hypotheses will be tested using Pearson Product-Moment Correlation Coefficient (PPMC) at the .05 level of significance. The need to use this statistical tool is not unconnected with the fact that the study sought relationship between each of the sub-independent variables and the dependent variable (e-management and quality assurance processes). Both the independent variables and the dependent variable are continuous variables.

Results

The expected result/output will enhance quality assurance in Higher Education in South South Nigeria through good management.

Work Plan/Time Frame

S/N	TASK	MONTHS
		1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12
1	Pre-tour for sensitization in the six states	√
2	Sensitization/appointment of research assistance in the six states		√
3	Development of instrument			√
4	Review of related literature				√
5	Selected of sample/administration and retrieval of the instrument in Akwa Ibom State					√
6	Selected of sample/administration and retrieval of instrument in Bayelsa State						√
7	Selected of sample/administration and retrieval of instrument in Cross River State							√
8	Selected of sample/administration and retrieval of instrument in Edo State								√
9	Selected of sample/administration and retrieval of instrument in Delta State									√
10	Selected of sample/administration and retrieval of instrument in River State										√
11	Analysis of Result											√
12	Publication of Results												√

BUDGET

	DESCRIPTION OF ITEMS	TETFUND IBR	INSTITUTION	OTHER	TOTAL
1
1.0	Personal Cost/Allowance
1.1	Principal Researcher	150,000			150,000
1.2	Team Members	120,000			120,000
1.3	Technical Support	76,000			76,000
1.4	Others	50,000			50,000
	Sub-Total (not ˃ 20%)	396,000			396,000
2.0	Equipment (list & specify)
2.1	Hiring of laptop and accessories	100,000			100,000
2.2	Camera for video/audio recording	110,000			110,000
2.3	Sub-Total (not ˃ 25%)	364,600			364,600
3.0	Supplies/consumables
3.1	Fuel and lubricant	120,000			120,000
3.2	Stationeries	80,000			80,000
	Sub-Total	200,000			200,000
4.0	Data collection & Analysis
4.1	Research Assistants	60,000			60,000
4.2	Research informants	50,000			50,000
4.3	Technical Assistants	70,000			70,000
4.4	Collection of instrument	50,000			50,000
4.5	Data Analysis (SPSS)	50,000			50,000
	Sub-Total	280,000			280,000
5.0	Travels
5.1	Hiring of vehicles	130,000			130,000
5.2	Fueling & Maintenance	120,000			120,000
	Sub-Total	250,000			250,000
6.0	Dissemination
6.1	Publications	59,400			59,400
	Sub-Total (not ˃ 3%)	59,400			59,400
7.0	Others/miscellaneous (specify)
7.1	Refreshment	50,000			50,000
7.2	Honouraria	70,000			70,000
7.3	Consultations	60,000			60,000
	Sub-Total	180,000			180,000
	Total direct cost	1,557,000			1,557,000
	Indirect cost (10%)	173,000			173,000
	Grand Total	1,730,000			1,730,000

References

Ajayi, S.O. (2004). Information technology. Ibadan: Spectrum Books Ltd.

Ashish, K. & Arun, K. (2005). IT-based KM for institutions of higher education. Paper published in a weekly in India  from Association of Indian Universities.  New Delhi India.

Asiyai, R. I. (2005). Challenges of quality higher education in Nigeria in the 21st century. International Journal of Educational Planning and Administration. 3(4), 30-34.

Baird, J. R. (2006). Quality: What should make higher education “higher”? Higher Education Research and Development, 7(2), 141-152. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/10. 1080/0729436880070205.

Borahan, N. G. & Ziarati, R. (2002). Developing quality criteria for application in the higher education sector in Turkey. Total Quality Management, 13(7),  913-926.

Chaoes, L. (2006). Database development and management. London: Auerbach Ltd.

Christiana, M. (2008). Information and communication technology for administration and management of secondary schools in Cyprus. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching 4 (3), 234-249.

Cullen, J., Joyce, J., Hassall, T., & Broadbent, M. (2003). Quality in higher education: From monitoring to management. Quality Assurance in Higher Education, 11(1), 30-34.

Ehigiamusoe, U. K. (2012). Private sector participation in secondary education: Implication for national development. International Journal of Development Studies 1(3), 1062-1074. Retrieved from www.http://isdsnet. com/ijds

Fry, H. (2007). Quality judgments and quality improvement. Higher Education Quarterly, 49(1), 59-77.

Harvey, L. & Knight, P. T. (1996). Transforming higher education. Buckingham: SRHE and Open University Press.

Hossein, Z. (2008). Administration of faculties by information and communication technology and its obstacles. International Journal of Education and Information Technologies, 2(1), 415-428.

Jackson, N. (1998). Academic regulation in UK higher education: Part 1 current practice and conceptual frameworks. Quality Assurance in Education, 6 (1), 5-18.

Jackson, S. (2009). Strategic management. London: Darling Kindersley. Journal of Higher Education, 67(5), 483-497. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2943865.

Kola, A. (2014). Development of an automated hostel facility management system.  Department of computer science, Moshood Abiola Polytechnic, Abeokuta, Nigeria. KSA: Dar Almareekh.

Lagoke, B. A., Oladejo, M. A. & Oladejo, S. A. (2012). Historical development of e-learning in Nigeria: Problems and policy implications. In V.I. Aleburu, B.T. Opoola, A. A. Adejumobi, M. A.Oladejo, E. O. Gbadegesin & F. I.  Akinsowon (Eds), Electronic applications in Nigerian education I (248-258). Ibadan: Glory-Land Publishing Company.

Mbakwem, J. N & Okeke, F.N (2007). Enhancing internal and external quality assurance mechanisms in Nigerian Universities through ICT compliance.  Journal of National Association of Educational Administration and Planning (NAEAP), 5(3), 121-136.

McKay, J. & Kember, D. (1999). Quality assurance systems and educational development: Part 1 the limitations of quality control. Quality Assurance in Education, 7 (1), 25-29.

Miller, E. (2002). Quality Assurance in Higher Education in the Commonwealth Caribbean. Paper Presented at Seminar on Higher Education,and Science and Technology in Latin America and the Caribbean Responding to Expansion and Diversification, Fortileza, Brazil, March 8, 2002.

Najem, N. A. (2004).  Electronic management (strategic functions and problems). KSA: Dar almareekh.

Nordvall, R. C. & Braxton, J. M. (1996). An alternative definition of quality undergraduate education. Journal of Higher Education 67:483-97.

Nosiri, C. (2005). Pupils personnel: A hand book on educational administration. Owerri: New African Publishing Co. Ltd.

Nwankwo, M.C. (2002).  Educational planning: Theory and practice. Lagos: Molad Publishers.

Ogunsaju, S. (2001). Nature and Purpose of educational management in D.O. Durosaro & S, Ogunsaju (Eds). The craft of educational management. Ibadan: Reginason Book Publishers.

Ogunsaju S (2006). School management and supervision. Ile-Ife: Cleanpnut Publishers.

Ojedele, P. K. (2007). Vocational and technical education in Nigeria: Issues and challenges. Paper Presented at the International Conference of the Nigerian Association for Educational Management Administration and Planning (NAEP) held at University of Lagos (24-27 September).

Okebukola, P. (1998). Management of higher education with special reference to Nigeria. In:  Higher education in Africa: achievements, challenges and prospects (297-321). Edited by the UNESCO Regional Office for Africa. Dakar, Senegal: BREDA

Oladejo, M. A. (2007). Educational management: An overview. In C.S. Oke, A. A. Odetokun, K. Quadri, S.O. Akinpelu, J.A. Ogunjide, A.O. Fagunwa, M.A Oladejo, & M. A. Oladimeji (Eds), Fundamentals of educational management in Nigeria (1-15).Oyo: Fola Christlike Publishers.

Oneil, C. (1997), Student Ratings at Dalahousie, Focus, 6 (5), 1- 8.

Oni, S. (2011). Orientation programme for new intakes. Enugu: Sally Publishing Company.

Onyeagbako, J.R. (2002). Micros computer studies for beginners. Onitsha, Spiriton Publishers.

Owlia, M. S. & Aspinwall, S. (1996), A framework for the dimensions of quality in higher education, Quality Assurance in Education, 4 (2), 12-20.

Pounder, J. (1999). Institutional performance in higher education: Is Quality a Relevant Concept? Quality Assurance in Education, 7 (3), 156-163.

Powell, A., Hunt, A. & Irving, A. (1997). Evaluation of courses by Whole Student Cohorts: a case study, Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 22 (4), 397 404.

Roffe, I. M. (1998). Conceptual problems of continuous quality improvement and innovation in higher education. Quality Assurance in Education, 6 (2), 74-82

Seresht, H. R. (2008). ICT barriers and challenges in Iran. E-ower Kraklead.

Thomas, K.O. (2004). Practical application of ICT to enhance university education in Ghana. Feature Article, Ghana Web.

Wiklund, H., Klefso, B., Wiklund, P., and Edvardsson, B. (2003), Innovation and TQM in Swedish higher education institutions possibilities and Pitfalls. The TQM Magazine, 15 (2), 97 -107.

Yao, Q. M, Othman, K.A., Aballa, M. & Omar, F. (2011). E-management development and deployment strategy for future organization. African Journal of Business Management. Faculty of Technology Management, 2(4),222-246. University Malaysia Pahang, Kuantan 25300, Malaysia.

Yorke, M. (1994). Enhancement-led higher education? Quality Assurance in Education, 2 (3), 6-12.