The Federal Government’s proposal to replace the current administrative separation between Junior and Senior Secondary Schools with an uninterrupted 12-year basic education system has sparked fresh debate over the best way to tackle Nigeria’s out-of-school crisis, writesWALE AKINSELUREAbout 21 months after President Bola Tinubu appointed Dr Tunji Alausa as Minister of Education on October 23, 2024, Nigeria’s education sector has witnessed an unrelenting wave of reforms, policy pronouncements and ambitious initiatives. Scarcely has one policy settled before another has emerged, making the ministry one of the Federal Government’s busiest centres of reform. The minister insists the sector is undergoing a transformation under his leadership. Whether that transformation has translated into measurable improvements, however, remains open to debate.From expanding Technical and Vocational Education and Training, introducing digital education management systems and learner identification numbers, to promoting student loans, reforming university administration, repositioning technical colleges and unveiling new policies on school governance and curriculum, the ministry has sought to reshape virtually every layer of the education system. Some initiatives have been widely welcomed; others have generated sharp criticism, including the decision to replace the National Language Policy with English as the sole medium of instruction and the proposal to remove compulsory Mathematics as an admission requirement for Arts and Humanities candidates.The latest scrutiny of the many reforms is Alausa’s latest proposal: scrapping the long-standing administrative separation between Junior Secondary School and Senior Secondary School in favour of an uninterrupted 12-year basic education structure.The proposal, unveiled last week, is intended to address one of Nigeria’s gravest education challenges -the country’s estimated 20 million out-of-school children. Nigeria has an estimated 18.3 million out-of-school children, according to reports by the United Nations Children’s Fund. While the minister argues that the existing separation between junior and senior secondary schools contributes to the crisis, many education stakeholders contend that the real obstacles lie elsewhere.Solving wrong problem?In keeping with its rapid pace of policy reforms and ministerial pronouncements, the education minister last week unveiled another proposal that could fundamentally reshape Nigeria’s basic education structure.The government is proposing to phase out the long-standing separation between Junior Secondary School and Senior Secondary School, replacing the current arrangement with an uninterrupted 12-year basic education model.Under the present framework, pupils complete six years of primary education, three years of Junior Secondary School and three years of Senior Secondary School before proceeding to tertiary education. While the structure itself remains the 6-3-3-4 system, the policy of “disarticulation” requires junior and senior secondary schools to operate as separate administrative entities, often with different principals, staff and facilities.Announcing the proposal, Alausa argued that the disarticulation policy had failed to achieve its objectives and might even be contributing to Nigeria’s alarming number of out-of-school children.On the rationale behind the proposal, Alausa said, “We have 20 million dropouts from primary school to JSS. Where are those students? We have found we have 80,000 public primary schools and only about 15,000 junior secondary schools. That is a one-to-eight ratio.”Nigeria currently has the highest number of out-of-school children in the world, estimated at 20 million, making every policy aimed at reversing the trend one that naturally attracts national attention.Yet, while few education stakeholders disagree with the urgency of tackling the crisis, many are questioning whether dismantling the JSS/SSS separation addresses the real causes of school dropout.The 6-3-3-4 structure was officially adopted in 1982 to replace what was deemed a largely academic colonial education model with one that would better prepare learners for employment, entrepreneurship and vocational careers. It envisioned six years of primary education, three years of junior secondary education, three years of senior secondary education and four years of tertiary education.Junior Secondary School was deliberately designed as the concluding phase of compulsory basic education rather than merely the first half of secondary education. At that stage, learners were expected to receive exposure to vocational, technical, business and creative subjects, alongside career guidance that would enable them to either proceed to Senior Secondary School or transition into technical colleges and vocational training.On paper, the framework appeared progressive.In practice, however, implementation fell far short of the original vision.Across much of the country, the vocational workshops that were supposed to distinguish junior secondary education either never existed or gradually became abandoned. Technical subjects were often taught theoretically because schools lacked workshops, laboratories and equipment. Career guidance services remained weak, while shortages of qualified teachers further undermined the philosophy behind the reform.Consequently, Junior Secondary School gradually evolved into little more than the first three years of conventional secondary education, rather than the practical and career-oriented stage originally envisioned by policymakers.That implementation gap led many observers to ask whether the policy itself failed or whether successive governments simply failed to implement it faithfully.For millions of families, particularly in rural and underserved communities, completion of JSS3 became the first major educational milestone. The Basic Education Certificate represented successful completion of compulsory education and provided an opportunity either to continue into senior secondary school or pursue technical and vocational training.But education experts note that technical colleges received little attention, vocational education remained underfunded, and career guidance was largely neglected, leaving Senior Secondary School as the only realistic progression route for most students.Successive governments have introduced new education policies with impressive ambitions, but implementation has repeatedly been undermined by inadequate funding, poor monitoring, weak political commitment and inconsistent execution.Experts dividedEducation experts argue that linking the country’s out-of-school crisis solely to the separation between junior and senior secondary education oversimplifies a far more complex challenge.They contend that the real drivers of school dropout include chronic underfunding of education, teacher shortages, insecurity, poverty, poor infrastructure, gender inequality, child labour and limited economic opportunities for vulnerable households.For them, changing the structure without addressing these underlying constraints risks treating the symptom rather than the disease.Professor Jide Gbenu, a Professor of Educational Planning at Lagos State University, believes the proposal raises more questions than answers.According to him, there is no empirical evidence establishing a direct relationship between the 6-3-3-4 structure and Nigeria’s out-of-school crisis.He argued that before replacing an existing education model, policymakers should first determine whether the original objectives of the system were ever properly evaluated.Gbenu posed several fundamental questions: “Was there any empirical study linking out-of-school children to the 6-3-3-4 system? Were the goals of the policy ever evaluated? What evidence suggests that a new structure would reduce dropout rates, particularly in Northern Nigeria where the problem is most severe?”Rather than focusing primarily on restructuring the education system, he urged the government to prioritise issues that directly affect school participation, including stronger political commitment, improved teacher motivation, poverty reduction, school infrastructure, security, curriculum reforms that balance local values with technological advancement, genuinely free education, wider access to schools, especially in the North, and greater public enlightenment on population management.“There is no correlation between the rate of out-of-school children and the 6-3-3-4 system, except if the honourable minister can empirically justify that,” Gbenu said.“The minister should address those concerns which touch directly on out-of-school children if that is the focus of his administration. Replacing the 6-3-3-4 system is another policy matter entirely that requires extensive consultation with critical stakeholders.”While some education experts insist the proposal risks addressing the wrong problem, others believe integrating junior and senior secondary education under one uninterrupted structure could improve learner retention and reduce administrative bottlenecks.For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. About 21 months after President Bola Tinubu appointed Dr Tunji Alausa as Minister of Education on October 23, 2024, Nigeria’s education sector has witnessed an unrelenting wave of reforms, policy pronouncements and ambitious initiatives. Scarcely has one policy settled before another has emerged, making the ministry one of the Federal Government’s busiest centres of reform. The minister insists the sector is undergoing a transformation under his leadership. Whether that transformation has translated into measurable improvements, however, remains open to debate.From expanding Technical and Vocational Education and Training, introducing digital education management systems and learner identification numbers, to promoting student loans, reforming university administration, repositioning technical colleges and unveiling new policies on school governance and curriculum, the ministry has sought to reshape virtually every layer of the education system. Some initiatives have been widely welcomed; others have generated sharp criticism, including the decision to replace the National Language Policy with English as the sole medium of instruction and the proposal to remove compulsory Mathematics as an admission requirement for Arts and Humanities candidates.The latest scrutiny of the many reforms is Alausa’s latest proposal: scrapping the long-standing administrative separation between Junior Secondary School and Senior Secondary School in favour of an uninterrupted 12-year basic education structure.The proposal, unveiled last week, is intended to address one of Nigeria’s gravest education challenges -the country’s estimated 20 million out-of-school children. Nigeria has an estimated 18.3 million out-of-school children, according to reports by the United Nations Children’s Fund. While the minister argues that the existing separation between junior and senior secondary schools contributes to the crisis, many education stakeholders contend that the real obstacles lie elsewhere.Solving wrong problem?In keeping with its rapid pace of policy reforms and ministerial pronouncements, the education minister last week unveiled another proposal that could fundamentally reshape Nigeria’s basic education structure.The government is proposing to phase out the long-standing separation between Junior Secondary School and Senior Secondary School, replacing the current arrangement with an uninterrupted 12-year basic education model.Under the present framework, pupils complete six years of primary education, three years of Junior Secondary School and three years of Senior Secondary School before proceeding to tertiary education. While the structure itself remains the 6-3-3-4 system, the policy of “disarticulation” requires junior and senior secondary schools to operate as separate administrative entities, often with different principals, staff and facilities.Announcing the proposal, Alausa argued that the disarticulation policy had failed to achieve its objectives and might even be contributing to Nigeria’s alarming number of out-of-school children.On the rationale behind the proposal, Alausa said, “We have 20 million dropouts from primary school to JSS. Where are those students? We have found we have 80,000 public primary schools and only about 15,000 junior secondary schools. That is a one-to-eight ratio.”Nigeria currently has the highest number of out-of-school children in the world, estimated at 20 million, making every policy aimed at reversing the trend one that naturally attracts national attention.Yet, while few education stakeholders disagree with the urgency of tackling the crisis, many are questioning whether dismantling the JSS/SSS separation addresses the real causes of school dropout.The 6-3-3-4 structure was officially adopted in 1982 to replace what was deemed a largely academic colonial education model with one that would better prepare learners for employment, entrepreneurship and vocational careers. It envisioned six years of primary education, three years of junior secondary education, three years of senior secondary education and four years of tertiary education.Junior Secondary School was deliberately designed as the concluding phase of compulsory basic education rather than merely the first half of secondary education. At that stage, learners were expected to receive exposure to vocational, technical, business and creative subjects, alongside career guidance that would enable them to either proceed to Senior Secondary School or transition into technical colleges and vocational training.On paper, the framework appeared progressive.In practice, however, implementation fell far short of the original vision.Across much of the country, the vocational workshops that were supposed to distinguish junior secondary education either never existed or gradually became abandoned. Technical subjects were often taught theoretically because schools lacked workshops, laboratories and equipment. Career guidance services remained weak, while shortages of qualified teachers further undermined the philosophy behind the reform.Consequently, Junior Secondary School gradually evolved into little more than the first three years of conventional secondary education, rather than the practical and career-oriented stage originally envisioned by policymakers.That implementation gap led many observers to ask whether the policy itself failed or whether successive governments simply failed to implement it faithfully.For millions of families, particularly in rural and underserved communities, completion of JSS3 became the first major educational milestone. The Basic Education Certificate represented successful completion of compulsory education and provided an opportunity either to continue into senior secondary school or pursue technical and vocational training.But education experts note that technical colleges received little attention, vocational education remained underfunded, and career guidance was largely neglected, leaving Senior Secondary School as the only realistic progression route for most students.Successive governments have introduced new education policies with impressive ambitions, but implementation has repeatedly been undermined by inadequate funding, poor monitoring, weak political commitment and inconsistent execution.Experts dividedEducation experts argue that linking the country’s out-of-school crisis solely to the separation between junior and senior secondary education oversimplifies a far more complex challenge.They contend that the real drivers of school dropout include chronic underfunding of education, teacher shortages, insecurity, poverty, poor infrastructure, gender inequality, child labour and limited economic opportunities for vulnerable households.For them, changing the structure without addressing these underlying constraints risks treating the symptom rather than the disease.Professor Jide Gbenu, a Professor of Educational Planning at Lagos State University, believes the proposal raises more questions than answers.According to him, there is no empirical evidence establishing a direct relationship between the 6-3-3-4 structure and Nigeria’s out-of-school crisis.He argued that before replacing an existing education model, policymakers should first determine whether the original objectives of the system were ever properly evaluated.Gbenu posed several fundamental questions: “Was there any empirical study linking out-of-school children to the 6-3-3-4 system? Were the goals of the policy ever evaluated? What evidence suggests that a new structure would reduce dropout rates, particularly in Northern Nigeria where the problem is most severe?”Rather than focusing primarily on restructuring the education system, he urged the government to prioritise issues that directly affect school participation, including stronger political commitment, improved teacher motivation, poverty reduction, school infrastructure, security, curriculum reforms that balance local values with technological advancement, genuinely free education, wider access to schools, especially in the North, and greater public enlightenment on population management.“There is no correlation between the rate of out-of-school children and the 6-3-3-4 system, except if the honourable minister can empirically justify that,” Gbenu said.“The minister should address those concerns which touch directly on out-of-school children if that is the focus of his administration. Replacing the 6-3-3-4 system is another policy matter entirely that requires extensive consultation with critical stakeholders.”While some education experts insist the proposal risks addressing the wrong problem, others believe integrating junior and senior secondary education under one uninterrupted structure could improve learner retention and reduce administrative bottlenecks.For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. From expanding Technical and Vocational Education and Training, introducing digital education management systems and learner identification numbers, to promoting student loans, reforming university administration, repositioning technical colleges and unveiling new policies on school governance and curriculum, the ministry has sought to reshape virtually every layer of the education system. Some initiatives have been widely welcomed; others have generated sharp criticism, including the decision to replace the National Language Policy with English as the sole medium of instruction and the proposal to remove compulsory Mathematics as an admission requirement for Arts and Humanities candidates.The latest scrutiny of the many reforms is Alausa’s latest proposal: scrapping the long-standing administrative separation between Junior Secondary School and Senior Secondary School in favour of an uninterrupted 12-year basic education structure.The proposal, unveiled last week, is intended to address one of Nigeria’s gravest education challenges -the country’s estimated 20 million out-of-school children. Nigeria has an estimated 18.3 million out-of-school children, according to reports by the United Nations Children’s Fund. While the minister argues that the existing separation between junior and senior secondary schools contributes to the crisis, many education stakeholders contend that the real obstacles lie elsewhere.Solving wrong problem?In keeping with its rapid pace of policy reforms and ministerial pronouncements, the education minister last week unveiled another proposal that could fundamentally reshape Nigeria’s basic education structure.The government is proposing to phase out the long-standing separation between Junior Secondary School and Senior Secondary School, replacing the current arrangement with an uninterrupted 12-year basic education model.Under the present framework, pupils complete six years of primary education, three years of Junior Secondary School and three years of Senior Secondary School before proceeding to tertiary education. While the structure itself remains the 6-3-3-4 system, the policy of “disarticulation” requires junior and senior secondary schools to operate as separate administrative entities, often with different principals, staff and facilities.Announcing the proposal, Alausa argued that the disarticulation policy had failed to achieve its objectives and might even be contributing to Nigeria’s alarming number of out-of-school children.On the rationale behind the proposal, Alausa said, “We have 20 million dropouts from primary school to JSS. Where are those students? We have found we have 80,000 public primary schools and only about 15,000 junior secondary schools. That is a one-to-eight ratio.”Nigeria currently has the highest number of out-of-school children in the world, estimated at 20 million, making every policy aimed at reversing the trend one that naturally attracts national attention.Yet, while few education stakeholders disagree with the urgency of tackling the crisis, many are questioning whether dismantling the JSS/SSS separation addresses the real causes of school dropout.The 6-3-3-4 structure was officially adopted in 1982 to replace what was deemed a largely academic colonial education model with one that would better prepare learners for employment, entrepreneurship and vocational careers. It envisioned six years of primary education, three years of junior secondary education, three years of senior secondary education and four years of tertiary education.Junior Secondary School was deliberately designed as the concluding phase of compulsory basic education rather than merely the first half of secondary education. At that stage, learners were expected to receive exposure to vocational, technical, business and creative subjects, alongside career guidance that would enable them to either proceed to Senior Secondary School or transition into technical colleges and vocational training.On paper, the framework appeared progressive.In practice, however, implementation fell far short of the original vision.Across much of the country, the vocational workshops that were supposed to distinguish junior secondary education either never existed or gradually became abandoned. Technical subjects were often taught theoretically because schools lacked workshops, laboratories and equipment. Career guidance services remained weak, while shortages of qualified teachers further undermined the philosophy behind the reform.Consequently, Junior Secondary School gradually evolved into little more than the first three years of conventional secondary education, rather than the practical and career-oriented stage originally envisioned by policymakers.That implementation gap led many observers to ask whether the policy itself failed or whether successive governments simply failed to implement it faithfully.For millions of families, particularly in rural and underserved communities, completion of JSS3 became the first major educational milestone. The Basic Education Certificate represented successful completion of compulsory education and provided an opportunity either to continue into senior secondary school or pursue technical and vocational training.But education experts note that technical colleges received little attention, vocational education remained underfunded, and career guidance was largely neglected, leaving Senior Secondary School as the only realistic progression route for most students.Successive governments have introduced new education policies with impressive ambitions, but implementation has repeatedly been undermined by inadequate funding, poor monitoring, weak political commitment and inconsistent execution.Experts dividedEducation experts argue that linking the country’s out-of-school crisis solely to the separation between junior and senior secondary education oversimplifies a far more complex challenge.They contend that the real drivers of school dropout include chronic underfunding of education, teacher shortages, insecurity, poverty, poor infrastructure, gender inequality, child labour and limited economic opportunities for vulnerable households.For them, changing the structure without addressing these underlying constraints risks treating the symptom rather than the disease.Professor Jide Gbenu, a Professor of Educational Planning at Lagos State University, believes the proposal raises more questions than answers.According to him, there is no empirical evidence establishing a direct relationship between the 6-3-3-4 structure and Nigeria’s out-of-school crisis.He argued that before replacing an existing education model, policymakers should first determine whether the original objectives of the system were ever properly evaluated.Gbenu posed several fundamental questions: “Was there any empirical study linking out-of-school children to the 6-3-3-4 system? Were the goals of the policy ever evaluated? What evidence suggests that a new structure would reduce dropout rates, particularly in Northern Nigeria where the problem is most severe?”Rather than focusing primarily on restructuring the education system, he urged the government to prioritise issues that directly affect school participation, including stronger political commitment, improved teacher motivation, poverty reduction, school infrastructure, security, curriculum reforms that balance local values with technological advancement, genuinely free education, wider access to schools, especially in the North, and greater public enlightenment on population management.“There is no correlation between the rate of out-of-school children and the 6-3-3-4 system, except if the honourable minister can empirically justify that,” Gbenu said.“The minister should address those concerns which touch directly on out-of-school children if that is the focus of his administration. Replacing the 6-3-3-4 system is another policy matter entirely that requires extensive consultation with critical stakeholders.”While some education experts insist the proposal risks addressing the wrong problem, others believe integrating junior and senior secondary education under one uninterrupted structure could improve learner retention and reduce administrative bottlenecks.For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. The latest scrutiny of the many reforms is Alausa’s latest proposal: scrapping the long-standing administrative separation between Junior Secondary School and Senior Secondary School in favour of an uninterrupted 12-year basic education structure.The proposal, unveiled last week, is intended to address one of Nigeria’s gravest education challenges -the country’s estimated 20 million out-of-school children. Nigeria has an estimated 18.3 million out-of-school children, according to reports by the United Nations Children’s Fund. While the minister argues that the existing separation between junior and senior secondary schools contributes to the crisis, many education stakeholders contend that the real obstacles lie elsewhere.Solving wrong problem?In keeping with its rapid pace of policy reforms and ministerial pronouncements, the education minister last week unveiled another proposal that could fundamentally reshape Nigeria’s basic education structure.The government is proposing to phase out the long-standing separation between Junior Secondary School and Senior Secondary School, replacing the current arrangement with an uninterrupted 12-year basic education model.Under the present framework, pupils complete six years of primary education, three years of Junior Secondary School and three years of Senior Secondary School before proceeding to tertiary education. While the structure itself remains the 6-3-3-4 system, the policy of “disarticulation” requires junior and senior secondary schools to operate as separate administrative entities, often with different principals, staff and facilities.Announcing the proposal, Alausa argued that the disarticulation policy had failed to achieve its objectives and might even be contributing to Nigeria’s alarming number of out-of-school children.On the rationale behind the proposal, Alausa said, “We have 20 million dropouts from primary school to JSS. Where are those students? We have found we have 80,000 public primary schools and only about 15,000 junior secondary schools. That is a one-to-eight ratio.”Nigeria currently has the highest number of out-of-school children in the world, estimated at 20 million, making every policy aimed at reversing the trend one that naturally attracts national attention.Yet, while few education stakeholders disagree with the urgency of tackling the crisis, many are questioning whether dismantling the JSS/SSS separation addresses the real causes of school dropout.The 6-3-3-4 structure was officially adopted in 1982 to replace what was deemed a largely academic colonial education model with one that would better prepare learners for employment, entrepreneurship and vocational careers. It envisioned six years of primary education, three years of junior secondary education, three years of senior secondary education and four years of tertiary education.Junior Secondary School was deliberately designed as the concluding phase of compulsory basic education rather than merely the first half of secondary education. At that stage, learners were expected to receive exposure to vocational, technical, business and creative subjects, alongside career guidance that would enable them to either proceed to Senior Secondary School or transition into technical colleges and vocational training.On paper, the framework appeared progressive.In practice, however, implementation fell far short of the original vision.Across much of the country, the vocational workshops that were supposed to distinguish junior secondary education either never existed or gradually became abandoned. Technical subjects were often taught theoretically because schools lacked workshops, laboratories and equipment. Career guidance services remained weak, while shortages of qualified teachers further undermined the philosophy behind the reform.Consequently, Junior Secondary School gradually evolved into little more than the first three years of conventional secondary education, rather than the practical and career-oriented stage originally envisioned by policymakers.That implementation gap led many observers to ask whether the policy itself failed or whether successive governments simply failed to implement it faithfully.For millions of families, particularly in rural and underserved communities, completion of JSS3 became the first major educational milestone. The Basic Education Certificate represented successful completion of compulsory education and provided an opportunity either to continue into senior secondary school or pursue technical and vocational training.But education experts note that technical colleges received little attention, vocational education remained underfunded, and career guidance was largely neglected, leaving Senior Secondary School as the only realistic progression route for most students.Successive governments have introduced new education policies with impressive ambitions, but implementation has repeatedly been undermined by inadequate funding, poor monitoring, weak political commitment and inconsistent execution.Experts dividedEducation experts argue that linking the country’s out-of-school crisis solely to the separation between junior and senior secondary education oversimplifies a far more complex challenge.They contend that the real drivers of school dropout include chronic underfunding of education, teacher shortages, insecurity, poverty, poor infrastructure, gender inequality, child labour and limited economic opportunities for vulnerable households.For them, changing the structure without addressing these underlying constraints risks treating the symptom rather than the disease.Professor Jide Gbenu, a Professor of Educational Planning at Lagos State University, believes the proposal raises more questions than answers.According to him, there is no empirical evidence establishing a direct relationship between the 6-3-3-4 structure and Nigeria’s out-of-school crisis.He argued that before replacing an existing education model, policymakers should first determine whether the original objectives of the system were ever properly evaluated.Gbenu posed several fundamental questions: “Was there any empirical study linking out-of-school children to the 6-3-3-4 system? Were the goals of the policy ever evaluated? What evidence suggests that a new structure would reduce dropout rates, particularly in Northern Nigeria where the problem is most severe?”Rather than focusing primarily on restructuring the education system, he urged the government to prioritise issues that directly affect school participation, including stronger political commitment, improved teacher motivation, poverty reduction, school infrastructure, security, curriculum reforms that balance local values with technological advancement, genuinely free education, wider access to schools, especially in the North, and greater public enlightenment on population management.“There is no correlation between the rate of out-of-school children and the 6-3-3-4 system, except if the honourable minister can empirically justify that,” Gbenu said.“The minister should address those concerns which touch directly on out-of-school children if that is the focus of his administration. Replacing the 6-3-3-4 system is another policy matter entirely that requires extensive consultation with critical stakeholders.”While some education experts insist the proposal risks addressing the wrong problem, others believe integrating junior and senior secondary education under one uninterrupted structure could improve learner retention and reduce administrative bottlenecks.For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. The proposal, unveiled last week, is intended to address one of Nigeria’s gravest education challenges -the country’s estimated 20 million out-of-school children. Nigeria has an estimated 18.3 million out-of-school children, according to reports by the United Nations Children’s Fund. While the minister argues that the existing separation between junior and senior secondary schools contributes to the crisis, many education stakeholders contend that the real obstacles lie elsewhere.Solving wrong problem?In keeping with its rapid pace of policy reforms and ministerial pronouncements, the education minister last week unveiled another proposal that could fundamentally reshape Nigeria’s basic education structure.The government is proposing to phase out the long-standing separation between Junior Secondary School and Senior Secondary School, replacing the current arrangement with an uninterrupted 12-year basic education model.Under the present framework, pupils complete six years of primary education, three years of Junior Secondary School and three years of Senior Secondary School before proceeding to tertiary education. While the structure itself remains the 6-3-3-4 system, the policy of “disarticulation” requires junior and senior secondary schools to operate as separate administrative entities, often with different principals, staff and facilities.Announcing the proposal, Alausa argued that the disarticulation policy had failed to achieve its objectives and might even be contributing to Nigeria’s alarming number of out-of-school children.On the rationale behind the proposal, Alausa said, “We have 20 million dropouts from primary school to JSS. Where are those students? We have found we have 80,000 public primary schools and only about 15,000 junior secondary schools. That is a one-to-eight ratio.”Nigeria currently has the highest number of out-of-school children in the world, estimated at 20 million, making every policy aimed at reversing the trend one that naturally attracts national attention.Yet, while few education stakeholders disagree with the urgency of tackling the crisis, many are questioning whether dismantling the JSS/SSS separation addresses the real causes of school dropout.The 6-3-3-4 structure was officially adopted in 1982 to replace what was deemed a largely academic colonial education model with one that would better prepare learners for employment, entrepreneurship and vocational careers. It envisioned six years of primary education, three years of junior secondary education, three years of senior secondary education and four years of tertiary education.Junior Secondary School was deliberately designed as the concluding phase of compulsory basic education rather than merely the first half of secondary education. At that stage, learners were expected to receive exposure to vocational, technical, business and creative subjects, alongside career guidance that would enable them to either proceed to Senior Secondary School or transition into technical colleges and vocational training.On paper, the framework appeared progressive.In practice, however, implementation fell far short of the original vision.Across much of the country, the vocational workshops that were supposed to distinguish junior secondary education either never existed or gradually became abandoned. Technical subjects were often taught theoretically because schools lacked workshops, laboratories and equipment. Career guidance services remained weak, while shortages of qualified teachers further undermined the philosophy behind the reform.Consequently, Junior Secondary School gradually evolved into little more than the first three years of conventional secondary education, rather than the practical and career-oriented stage originally envisioned by policymakers.That implementation gap led many observers to ask whether the policy itself failed or whether successive governments simply failed to implement it faithfully.For millions of families, particularly in rural and underserved communities, completion of JSS3 became the first major educational milestone. The Basic Education Certificate represented successful completion of compulsory education and provided an opportunity either to continue into senior secondary school or pursue technical and vocational training.But education experts note that technical colleges received little attention, vocational education remained underfunded, and career guidance was largely neglected, leaving Senior Secondary School as the only realistic progression route for most students.Successive governments have introduced new education policies with impressive ambitions, but implementation has repeatedly been undermined by inadequate funding, poor monitoring, weak political commitment and inconsistent execution.Experts dividedEducation experts argue that linking the country’s out-of-school crisis solely to the separation between junior and senior secondary education oversimplifies a far more complex challenge.They contend that the real drivers of school dropout include chronic underfunding of education, teacher shortages, insecurity, poverty, poor infrastructure, gender inequality, child labour and limited economic opportunities for vulnerable households.For them, changing the structure without addressing these underlying constraints risks treating the symptom rather than the disease.Professor Jide Gbenu, a Professor of Educational Planning at Lagos State University, believes the proposal raises more questions than answers.According to him, there is no empirical evidence establishing a direct relationship between the 6-3-3-4 structure and Nigeria’s out-of-school crisis.He argued that before replacing an existing education model, policymakers should first determine whether the original objectives of the system were ever properly evaluated.Gbenu posed several fundamental questions: “Was there any empirical study linking out-of-school children to the 6-3-3-4 system? Were the goals of the policy ever evaluated? What evidence suggests that a new structure would reduce dropout rates, particularly in Northern Nigeria where the problem is most severe?”Rather than focusing primarily on restructuring the education system, he urged the government to prioritise issues that directly affect school participation, including stronger political commitment, improved teacher motivation, poverty reduction, school infrastructure, security, curriculum reforms that balance local values with technological advancement, genuinely free education, wider access to schools, especially in the North, and greater public enlightenment on population management.“There is no correlation between the rate of out-of-school children and the 6-3-3-4 system, except if the honourable minister can empirically justify that,” Gbenu said.“The minister should address those concerns which touch directly on out-of-school children if that is the focus of his administration. Replacing the 6-3-3-4 system is another policy matter entirely that requires extensive consultation with critical stakeholders.”While some education experts insist the proposal risks addressing the wrong problem, others believe integrating junior and senior secondary education under one uninterrupted structure could improve learner retention and reduce administrative bottlenecks.For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. Solving wrong problem?In keeping with its rapid pace of policy reforms and ministerial pronouncements, the education minister last week unveiled another proposal that could fundamentally reshape Nigeria’s basic education structure.The government is proposing to phase out the long-standing separation between Junior Secondary School and Senior Secondary School, replacing the current arrangement with an uninterrupted 12-year basic education model.Under the present framework, pupils complete six years of primary education, three years of Junior Secondary School and three years of Senior Secondary School before proceeding to tertiary education. While the structure itself remains the 6-3-3-4 system, the policy of “disarticulation” requires junior and senior secondary schools to operate as separate administrative entities, often with different principals, staff and facilities.Announcing the proposal, Alausa argued that the disarticulation policy had failed to achieve its objectives and might even be contributing to Nigeria’s alarming number of out-of-school children.On the rationale behind the proposal, Alausa said, “We have 20 million dropouts from primary school to JSS. Where are those students? We have found we have 80,000 public primary schools and only about 15,000 junior secondary schools. That is a one-to-eight ratio.”Nigeria currently has the highest number of out-of-school children in the world, estimated at 20 million, making every policy aimed at reversing the trend one that naturally attracts national attention.Yet, while few education stakeholders disagree with the urgency of tackling the crisis, many are questioning whether dismantling the JSS/SSS separation addresses the real causes of school dropout.The 6-3-3-4 structure was officially adopted in 1982 to replace what was deemed a largely academic colonial education model with one that would better prepare learners for employment, entrepreneurship and vocational careers. It envisioned six years of primary education, three years of junior secondary education, three years of senior secondary education and four years of tertiary education.Junior Secondary School was deliberately designed as the concluding phase of compulsory basic education rather than merely the first half of secondary education. At that stage, learners were expected to receive exposure to vocational, technical, business and creative subjects, alongside career guidance that would enable them to either proceed to Senior Secondary School or transition into technical colleges and vocational training.On paper, the framework appeared progressive.In practice, however, implementation fell far short of the original vision.Across much of the country, the vocational workshops that were supposed to distinguish junior secondary education either never existed or gradually became abandoned. Technical subjects were often taught theoretically because schools lacked workshops, laboratories and equipment. Career guidance services remained weak, while shortages of qualified teachers further undermined the philosophy behind the reform.Consequently, Junior Secondary School gradually evolved into little more than the first three years of conventional secondary education, rather than the practical and career-oriented stage originally envisioned by policymakers.That implementation gap led many observers to ask whether the policy itself failed or whether successive governments simply failed to implement it faithfully.For millions of families, particularly in rural and underserved communities, completion of JSS3 became the first major educational milestone. The Basic Education Certificate represented successful completion of compulsory education and provided an opportunity either to continue into senior secondary school or pursue technical and vocational training.But education experts note that technical colleges received little attention, vocational education remained underfunded, and career guidance was largely neglected, leaving Senior Secondary School as the only realistic progression route for most students.Successive governments have introduced new education policies with impressive ambitions, but implementation has repeatedly been undermined by inadequate funding, poor monitoring, weak political commitment and inconsistent execution.Experts dividedEducation experts argue that linking the country’s out-of-school crisis solely to the separation between junior and senior secondary education oversimplifies a far more complex challenge.They contend that the real drivers of school dropout include chronic underfunding of education, teacher shortages, insecurity, poverty, poor infrastructure, gender inequality, child labour and limited economic opportunities for vulnerable households.For them, changing the structure without addressing these underlying constraints risks treating the symptom rather than the disease.Professor Jide Gbenu, a Professor of Educational Planning at Lagos State University, believes the proposal raises more questions than answers.According to him, there is no empirical evidence establishing a direct relationship between the 6-3-3-4 structure and Nigeria’s out-of-school crisis.He argued that before replacing an existing education model, policymakers should first determine whether the original objectives of the system were ever properly evaluated.Gbenu posed several fundamental questions: “Was there any empirical study linking out-of-school children to the 6-3-3-4 system? Were the goals of the policy ever evaluated? What evidence suggests that a new structure would reduce dropout rates, particularly in Northern Nigeria where the problem is most severe?”Rather than focusing primarily on restructuring the education system, he urged the government to prioritise issues that directly affect school participation, including stronger political commitment, improved teacher motivation, poverty reduction, school infrastructure, security, curriculum reforms that balance local values with technological advancement, genuinely free education, wider access to schools, especially in the North, and greater public enlightenment on population management.“There is no correlation between the rate of out-of-school children and the 6-3-3-4 system, except if the honourable minister can empirically justify that,” Gbenu said.“The minister should address those concerns which touch directly on out-of-school children if that is the focus of his administration. Replacing the 6-3-3-4 system is another policy matter entirely that requires extensive consultation with critical stakeholders.”While some education experts insist the proposal risks addressing the wrong problem, others believe integrating junior and senior secondary education under one uninterrupted structure could improve learner retention and reduce administrative bottlenecks.For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. In keeping with its rapid pace of policy reforms and ministerial pronouncements, the education minister last week unveiled another proposal that could fundamentally reshape Nigeria’s basic education structure.The government is proposing to phase out the long-standing separation between Junior Secondary School and Senior Secondary School, replacing the current arrangement with an uninterrupted 12-year basic education model.Under the present framework, pupils complete six years of primary education, three years of Junior Secondary School and three years of Senior Secondary School before proceeding to tertiary education. While the structure itself remains the 6-3-3-4 system, the policy of “disarticulation” requires junior and senior secondary schools to operate as separate administrative entities, often with different principals, staff and facilities.Announcing the proposal, Alausa argued that the disarticulation policy had failed to achieve its objectives and might even be contributing to Nigeria’s alarming number of out-of-school children.On the rationale behind the proposal, Alausa said, “We have 20 million dropouts from primary school to JSS. Where are those students? We have found we have 80,000 public primary schools and only about 15,000 junior secondary schools. That is a one-to-eight ratio.”Nigeria currently has the highest number of out-of-school children in the world, estimated at 20 million, making every policy aimed at reversing the trend one that naturally attracts national attention.Yet, while few education stakeholders disagree with the urgency of tackling the crisis, many are questioning whether dismantling the JSS/SSS separation addresses the real causes of school dropout.The 6-3-3-4 structure was officially adopted in 1982 to replace what was deemed a largely academic colonial education model with one that would better prepare learners for employment, entrepreneurship and vocational careers. It envisioned six years of primary education, three years of junior secondary education, three years of senior secondary education and four years of tertiary education.Junior Secondary School was deliberately designed as the concluding phase of compulsory basic education rather than merely the first half of secondary education. At that stage, learners were expected to receive exposure to vocational, technical, business and creative subjects, alongside career guidance that would enable them to either proceed to Senior Secondary School or transition into technical colleges and vocational training.On paper, the framework appeared progressive.In practice, however, implementation fell far short of the original vision.Across much of the country, the vocational workshops that were supposed to distinguish junior secondary education either never existed or gradually became abandoned. Technical subjects were often taught theoretically because schools lacked workshops, laboratories and equipment. Career guidance services remained weak, while shortages of qualified teachers further undermined the philosophy behind the reform.Consequently, Junior Secondary School gradually evolved into little more than the first three years of conventional secondary education, rather than the practical and career-oriented stage originally envisioned by policymakers.That implementation gap led many observers to ask whether the policy itself failed or whether successive governments simply failed to implement it faithfully.For millions of families, particularly in rural and underserved communities, completion of JSS3 became the first major educational milestone. The Basic Education Certificate represented successful completion of compulsory education and provided an opportunity either to continue into senior secondary school or pursue technical and vocational training.But education experts note that technical colleges received little attention, vocational education remained underfunded, and career guidance was largely neglected, leaving Senior Secondary School as the only realistic progression route for most students.Successive governments have introduced new education policies with impressive ambitions, but implementation has repeatedly been undermined by inadequate funding, poor monitoring, weak political commitment and inconsistent execution.Experts dividedEducation experts argue that linking the country’s out-of-school crisis solely to the separation between junior and senior secondary education oversimplifies a far more complex challenge.They contend that the real drivers of school dropout include chronic underfunding of education, teacher shortages, insecurity, poverty, poor infrastructure, gender inequality, child labour and limited economic opportunities for vulnerable households.For them, changing the structure without addressing these underlying constraints risks treating the symptom rather than the disease.Professor Jide Gbenu, a Professor of Educational Planning at Lagos State University, believes the proposal raises more questions than answers.According to him, there is no empirical evidence establishing a direct relationship between the 6-3-3-4 structure and Nigeria’s out-of-school crisis.He argued that before replacing an existing education model, policymakers should first determine whether the original objectives of the system were ever properly evaluated.Gbenu posed several fundamental questions: “Was there any empirical study linking out-of-school children to the 6-3-3-4 system? Were the goals of the policy ever evaluated? What evidence suggests that a new structure would reduce dropout rates, particularly in Northern Nigeria where the problem is most severe?”Rather than focusing primarily on restructuring the education system, he urged the government to prioritise issues that directly affect school participation, including stronger political commitment, improved teacher motivation, poverty reduction, school infrastructure, security, curriculum reforms that balance local values with technological advancement, genuinely free education, wider access to schools, especially in the North, and greater public enlightenment on population management.“There is no correlation between the rate of out-of-school children and the 6-3-3-4 system, except if the honourable minister can empirically justify that,” Gbenu said.“The minister should address those concerns which touch directly on out-of-school children if that is the focus of his administration. Replacing the 6-3-3-4 system is another policy matter entirely that requires extensive consultation with critical stakeholders.”While some education experts insist the proposal risks addressing the wrong problem, others believe integrating junior and senior secondary education under one uninterrupted structure could improve learner retention and reduce administrative bottlenecks.For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. The government is proposing to phase out the long-standing separation between Junior Secondary School and Senior Secondary School, replacing the current arrangement with an uninterrupted 12-year basic education model.Under the present framework, pupils complete six years of primary education, three years of Junior Secondary School and three years of Senior Secondary School before proceeding to tertiary education. While the structure itself remains the 6-3-3-4 system, the policy of “disarticulation” requires junior and senior secondary schools to operate as separate administrative entities, often with different principals, staff and facilities.Announcing the proposal, Alausa argued that the disarticulation policy had failed to achieve its objectives and might even be contributing to Nigeria’s alarming number of out-of-school children.On the rationale behind the proposal, Alausa said, “We have 20 million dropouts from primary school to JSS. Where are those students? We have found we have 80,000 public primary schools and only about 15,000 junior secondary schools. That is a one-to-eight ratio.”Nigeria currently has the highest number of out-of-school children in the world, estimated at 20 million, making every policy aimed at reversing the trend one that naturally attracts national attention.Yet, while few education stakeholders disagree with the urgency of tackling the crisis, many are questioning whether dismantling the JSS/SSS separation addresses the real causes of school dropout.The 6-3-3-4 structure was officially adopted in 1982 to replace what was deemed a largely academic colonial education model with one that would better prepare learners for employment, entrepreneurship and vocational careers. It envisioned six years of primary education, three years of junior secondary education, three years of senior secondary education and four years of tertiary education.Junior Secondary School was deliberately designed as the concluding phase of compulsory basic education rather than merely the first half of secondary education. At that stage, learners were expected to receive exposure to vocational, technical, business and creative subjects, alongside career guidance that would enable them to either proceed to Senior Secondary School or transition into technical colleges and vocational training.On paper, the framework appeared progressive.In practice, however, implementation fell far short of the original vision.Across much of the country, the vocational workshops that were supposed to distinguish junior secondary education either never existed or gradually became abandoned. Technical subjects were often taught theoretically because schools lacked workshops, laboratories and equipment. Career guidance services remained weak, while shortages of qualified teachers further undermined the philosophy behind the reform.Consequently, Junior Secondary School gradually evolved into little more than the first three years of conventional secondary education, rather than the practical and career-oriented stage originally envisioned by policymakers.That implementation gap led many observers to ask whether the policy itself failed or whether successive governments simply failed to implement it faithfully.For millions of families, particularly in rural and underserved communities, completion of JSS3 became the first major educational milestone. The Basic Education Certificate represented successful completion of compulsory education and provided an opportunity either to continue into senior secondary school or pursue technical and vocational training.But education experts note that technical colleges received little attention, vocational education remained underfunded, and career guidance was largely neglected, leaving Senior Secondary School as the only realistic progression route for most students.Successive governments have introduced new education policies with impressive ambitions, but implementation has repeatedly been undermined by inadequate funding, poor monitoring, weak political commitment and inconsistent execution.Experts dividedEducation experts argue that linking the country’s out-of-school crisis solely to the separation between junior and senior secondary education oversimplifies a far more complex challenge.They contend that the real drivers of school dropout include chronic underfunding of education, teacher shortages, insecurity, poverty, poor infrastructure, gender inequality, child labour and limited economic opportunities for vulnerable households.For them, changing the structure without addressing these underlying constraints risks treating the symptom rather than the disease.Professor Jide Gbenu, a Professor of Educational Planning at Lagos State University, believes the proposal raises more questions than answers.According to him, there is no empirical evidence establishing a direct relationship between the 6-3-3-4 structure and Nigeria’s out-of-school crisis.He argued that before replacing an existing education model, policymakers should first determine whether the original objectives of the system were ever properly evaluated.Gbenu posed several fundamental questions: “Was there any empirical study linking out-of-school children to the 6-3-3-4 system? Were the goals of the policy ever evaluated? What evidence suggests that a new structure would reduce dropout rates, particularly in Northern Nigeria where the problem is most severe?”Rather than focusing primarily on restructuring the education system, he urged the government to prioritise issues that directly affect school participation, including stronger political commitment, improved teacher motivation, poverty reduction, school infrastructure, security, curriculum reforms that balance local values with technological advancement, genuinely free education, wider access to schools, especially in the North, and greater public enlightenment on population management.“There is no correlation between the rate of out-of-school children and the 6-3-3-4 system, except if the honourable minister can empirically justify that,” Gbenu said.“The minister should address those concerns which touch directly on out-of-school children if that is the focus of his administration. Replacing the 6-3-3-4 system is another policy matter entirely that requires extensive consultation with critical stakeholders.”While some education experts insist the proposal risks addressing the wrong problem, others believe integrating junior and senior secondary education under one uninterrupted structure could improve learner retention and reduce administrative bottlenecks.For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. Under the present framework, pupils complete six years of primary education, three years of Junior Secondary School and three years of Senior Secondary School before proceeding to tertiary education. While the structure itself remains the 6-3-3-4 system, the policy of “disarticulation” requires junior and senior secondary schools to operate as separate administrative entities, often with different principals, staff and facilities.Announcing the proposal, Alausa argued that the disarticulation policy had failed to achieve its objectives and might even be contributing to Nigeria’s alarming number of out-of-school children.On the rationale behind the proposal, Alausa said, “We have 20 million dropouts from primary school to JSS. Where are those students? We have found we have 80,000 public primary schools and only about 15,000 junior secondary schools. That is a one-to-eight ratio.”Nigeria currently has the highest number of out-of-school children in the world, estimated at 20 million, making every policy aimed at reversing the trend one that naturally attracts national attention.Yet, while few education stakeholders disagree with the urgency of tackling the crisis, many are questioning whether dismantling the JSS/SSS separation addresses the real causes of school dropout.The 6-3-3-4 structure was officially adopted in 1982 to replace what was deemed a largely academic colonial education model with one that would better prepare learners for employment, entrepreneurship and vocational careers. It envisioned six years of primary education, three years of junior secondary education, three years of senior secondary education and four years of tertiary education.Junior Secondary School was deliberately designed as the concluding phase of compulsory basic education rather than merely the first half of secondary education. At that stage, learners were expected to receive exposure to vocational, technical, business and creative subjects, alongside career guidance that would enable them to either proceed to Senior Secondary School or transition into technical colleges and vocational training.On paper, the framework appeared progressive.In practice, however, implementation fell far short of the original vision.Across much of the country, the vocational workshops that were supposed to distinguish junior secondary education either never existed or gradually became abandoned. Technical subjects were often taught theoretically because schools lacked workshops, laboratories and equipment. Career guidance services remained weak, while shortages of qualified teachers further undermined the philosophy behind the reform.Consequently, Junior Secondary School gradually evolved into little more than the first three years of conventional secondary education, rather than the practical and career-oriented stage originally envisioned by policymakers.That implementation gap led many observers to ask whether the policy itself failed or whether successive governments simply failed to implement it faithfully.For millions of families, particularly in rural and underserved communities, completion of JSS3 became the first major educational milestone. The Basic Education Certificate represented successful completion of compulsory education and provided an opportunity either to continue into senior secondary school or pursue technical and vocational training.But education experts note that technical colleges received little attention, vocational education remained underfunded, and career guidance was largely neglected, leaving Senior Secondary School as the only realistic progression route for most students.Successive governments have introduced new education policies with impressive ambitions, but implementation has repeatedly been undermined by inadequate funding, poor monitoring, weak political commitment and inconsistent execution.Experts dividedEducation experts argue that linking the country’s out-of-school crisis solely to the separation between junior and senior secondary education oversimplifies a far more complex challenge.They contend that the real drivers of school dropout include chronic underfunding of education, teacher shortages, insecurity, poverty, poor infrastructure, gender inequality, child labour and limited economic opportunities for vulnerable households.For them, changing the structure without addressing these underlying constraints risks treating the symptom rather than the disease.Professor Jide Gbenu, a Professor of Educational Planning at Lagos State University, believes the proposal raises more questions than answers.According to him, there is no empirical evidence establishing a direct relationship between the 6-3-3-4 structure and Nigeria’s out-of-school crisis.He argued that before replacing an existing education model, policymakers should first determine whether the original objectives of the system were ever properly evaluated.Gbenu posed several fundamental questions: “Was there any empirical study linking out-of-school children to the 6-3-3-4 system? Were the goals of the policy ever evaluated? What evidence suggests that a new structure would reduce dropout rates, particularly in Northern Nigeria where the problem is most severe?”Rather than focusing primarily on restructuring the education system, he urged the government to prioritise issues that directly affect school participation, including stronger political commitment, improved teacher motivation, poverty reduction, school infrastructure, security, curriculum reforms that balance local values with technological advancement, genuinely free education, wider access to schools, especially in the North, and greater public enlightenment on population management.“There is no correlation between the rate of out-of-school children and the 6-3-3-4 system, except if the honourable minister can empirically justify that,” Gbenu said.“The minister should address those concerns which touch directly on out-of-school children if that is the focus of his administration. Replacing the 6-3-3-4 system is another policy matter entirely that requires extensive consultation with critical stakeholders.”While some education experts insist the proposal risks addressing the wrong problem, others believe integrating junior and senior secondary education under one uninterrupted structure could improve learner retention and reduce administrative bottlenecks.For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. Announcing the proposal, Alausa argued that the disarticulation policy had failed to achieve its objectives and might even be contributing to Nigeria’s alarming number of out-of-school children.On the rationale behind the proposal, Alausa said, “We have 20 million dropouts from primary school to JSS. Where are those students? We have found we have 80,000 public primary schools and only about 15,000 junior secondary schools. That is a one-to-eight ratio.”Nigeria currently has the highest number of out-of-school children in the world, estimated at 20 million, making every policy aimed at reversing the trend one that naturally attracts national attention.Yet, while few education stakeholders disagree with the urgency of tackling the crisis, many are questioning whether dismantling the JSS/SSS separation addresses the real causes of school dropout.The 6-3-3-4 structure was officially adopted in 1982 to replace what was deemed a largely academic colonial education model with one that would better prepare learners for employment, entrepreneurship and vocational careers. It envisioned six years of primary education, three years of junior secondary education, three years of senior secondary education and four years of tertiary education.Junior Secondary School was deliberately designed as the concluding phase of compulsory basic education rather than merely the first half of secondary education. At that stage, learners were expected to receive exposure to vocational, technical, business and creative subjects, alongside career guidance that would enable them to either proceed to Senior Secondary School or transition into technical colleges and vocational training.On paper, the framework appeared progressive.In practice, however, implementation fell far short of the original vision.Across much of the country, the vocational workshops that were supposed to distinguish junior secondary education either never existed or gradually became abandoned. Technical subjects were often taught theoretically because schools lacked workshops, laboratories and equipment. Career guidance services remained weak, while shortages of qualified teachers further undermined the philosophy behind the reform.Consequently, Junior Secondary School gradually evolved into little more than the first three years of conventional secondary education, rather than the practical and career-oriented stage originally envisioned by policymakers.That implementation gap led many observers to ask whether the policy itself failed or whether successive governments simply failed to implement it faithfully.For millions of families, particularly in rural and underserved communities, completion of JSS3 became the first major educational milestone. The Basic Education Certificate represented successful completion of compulsory education and provided an opportunity either to continue into senior secondary school or pursue technical and vocational training.But education experts note that technical colleges received little attention, vocational education remained underfunded, and career guidance was largely neglected, leaving Senior Secondary School as the only realistic progression route for most students.Successive governments have introduced new education policies with impressive ambitions, but implementation has repeatedly been undermined by inadequate funding, poor monitoring, weak political commitment and inconsistent execution.Experts dividedEducation experts argue that linking the country’s out-of-school crisis solely to the separation between junior and senior secondary education oversimplifies a far more complex challenge.They contend that the real drivers of school dropout include chronic underfunding of education, teacher shortages, insecurity, poverty, poor infrastructure, gender inequality, child labour and limited economic opportunities for vulnerable households.For them, changing the structure without addressing these underlying constraints risks treating the symptom rather than the disease.Professor Jide Gbenu, a Professor of Educational Planning at Lagos State University, believes the proposal raises more questions than answers.According to him, there is no empirical evidence establishing a direct relationship between the 6-3-3-4 structure and Nigeria’s out-of-school crisis.He argued that before replacing an existing education model, policymakers should first determine whether the original objectives of the system were ever properly evaluated.Gbenu posed several fundamental questions: “Was there any empirical study linking out-of-school children to the 6-3-3-4 system? Were the goals of the policy ever evaluated? What evidence suggests that a new structure would reduce dropout rates, particularly in Northern Nigeria where the problem is most severe?”Rather than focusing primarily on restructuring the education system, he urged the government to prioritise issues that directly affect school participation, including stronger political commitment, improved teacher motivation, poverty reduction, school infrastructure, security, curriculum reforms that balance local values with technological advancement, genuinely free education, wider access to schools, especially in the North, and greater public enlightenment on population management.“There is no correlation between the rate of out-of-school children and the 6-3-3-4 system, except if the honourable minister can empirically justify that,” Gbenu said.“The minister should address those concerns which touch directly on out-of-school children if that is the focus of his administration. Replacing the 6-3-3-4 system is another policy matter entirely that requires extensive consultation with critical stakeholders.”While some education experts insist the proposal risks addressing the wrong problem, others believe integrating junior and senior secondary education under one uninterrupted structure could improve learner retention and reduce administrative bottlenecks.For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. On the rationale behind the proposal, Alausa said, “We have 20 million dropouts from primary school to JSS. Where are those students? We have found we have 80,000 public primary schools and only about 15,000 junior secondary schools. That is a one-to-eight ratio.”Nigeria currently has the highest number of out-of-school children in the world, estimated at 20 million, making every policy aimed at reversing the trend one that naturally attracts national attention.Yet, while few education stakeholders disagree with the urgency of tackling the crisis, many are questioning whether dismantling the JSS/SSS separation addresses the real causes of school dropout.The 6-3-3-4 structure was officially adopted in 1982 to replace what was deemed a largely academic colonial education model with one that would better prepare learners for employment, entrepreneurship and vocational careers. It envisioned six years of primary education, three years of junior secondary education, three years of senior secondary education and four years of tertiary education.Junior Secondary School was deliberately designed as the concluding phase of compulsory basic education rather than merely the first half of secondary education. At that stage, learners were expected to receive exposure to vocational, technical, business and creative subjects, alongside career guidance that would enable them to either proceed to Senior Secondary School or transition into technical colleges and vocational training.On paper, the framework appeared progressive.In practice, however, implementation fell far short of the original vision.Across much of the country, the vocational workshops that were supposed to distinguish junior secondary education either never existed or gradually became abandoned. Technical subjects were often taught theoretically because schools lacked workshops, laboratories and equipment. Career guidance services remained weak, while shortages of qualified teachers further undermined the philosophy behind the reform.Consequently, Junior Secondary School gradually evolved into little more than the first three years of conventional secondary education, rather than the practical and career-oriented stage originally envisioned by policymakers.That implementation gap led many observers to ask whether the policy itself failed or whether successive governments simply failed to implement it faithfully.For millions of families, particularly in rural and underserved communities, completion of JSS3 became the first major educational milestone. The Basic Education Certificate represented successful completion of compulsory education and provided an opportunity either to continue into senior secondary school or pursue technical and vocational training.But education experts note that technical colleges received little attention, vocational education remained underfunded, and career guidance was largely neglected, leaving Senior Secondary School as the only realistic progression route for most students.Successive governments have introduced new education policies with impressive ambitions, but implementation has repeatedly been undermined by inadequate funding, poor monitoring, weak political commitment and inconsistent execution.Experts dividedEducation experts argue that linking the country’s out-of-school crisis solely to the separation between junior and senior secondary education oversimplifies a far more complex challenge.They contend that the real drivers of school dropout include chronic underfunding of education, teacher shortages, insecurity, poverty, poor infrastructure, gender inequality, child labour and limited economic opportunities for vulnerable households.For them, changing the structure without addressing these underlying constraints risks treating the symptom rather than the disease.Professor Jide Gbenu, a Professor of Educational Planning at Lagos State University, believes the proposal raises more questions than answers.According to him, there is no empirical evidence establishing a direct relationship between the 6-3-3-4 structure and Nigeria’s out-of-school crisis.He argued that before replacing an existing education model, policymakers should first determine whether the original objectives of the system were ever properly evaluated.Gbenu posed several fundamental questions: “Was there any empirical study linking out-of-school children to the 6-3-3-4 system? Were the goals of the policy ever evaluated? What evidence suggests that a new structure would reduce dropout rates, particularly in Northern Nigeria where the problem is most severe?”Rather than focusing primarily on restructuring the education system, he urged the government to prioritise issues that directly affect school participation, including stronger political commitment, improved teacher motivation, poverty reduction, school infrastructure, security, curriculum reforms that balance local values with technological advancement, genuinely free education, wider access to schools, especially in the North, and greater public enlightenment on population management.“There is no correlation between the rate of out-of-school children and the 6-3-3-4 system, except if the honourable minister can empirically justify that,” Gbenu said.“The minister should address those concerns which touch directly on out-of-school children if that is the focus of his administration. Replacing the 6-3-3-4 system is another policy matter entirely that requires extensive consultation with critical stakeholders.”While some education experts insist the proposal risks addressing the wrong problem, others believe integrating junior and senior secondary education under one uninterrupted structure could improve learner retention and reduce administrative bottlenecks.For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. Nigeria currently has the highest number of out-of-school children in the world, estimated at 20 million, making every policy aimed at reversing the trend one that naturally attracts national attention.Yet, while few education stakeholders disagree with the urgency of tackling the crisis, many are questioning whether dismantling the JSS/SSS separation addresses the real causes of school dropout.The 6-3-3-4 structure was officially adopted in 1982 to replace what was deemed a largely academic colonial education model with one that would better prepare learners for employment, entrepreneurship and vocational careers. It envisioned six years of primary education, three years of junior secondary education, three years of senior secondary education and four years of tertiary education.Junior Secondary School was deliberately designed as the concluding phase of compulsory basic education rather than merely the first half of secondary education. At that stage, learners were expected to receive exposure to vocational, technical, business and creative subjects, alongside career guidance that would enable them to either proceed to Senior Secondary School or transition into technical colleges and vocational training.On paper, the framework appeared progressive.In practice, however, implementation fell far short of the original vision.Across much of the country, the vocational workshops that were supposed to distinguish junior secondary education either never existed or gradually became abandoned. Technical subjects were often taught theoretically because schools lacked workshops, laboratories and equipment. Career guidance services remained weak, while shortages of qualified teachers further undermined the philosophy behind the reform.Consequently, Junior Secondary School gradually evolved into little more than the first three years of conventional secondary education, rather than the practical and career-oriented stage originally envisioned by policymakers.That implementation gap led many observers to ask whether the policy itself failed or whether successive governments simply failed to implement it faithfully.For millions of families, particularly in rural and underserved communities, completion of JSS3 became the first major educational milestone. The Basic Education Certificate represented successful completion of compulsory education and provided an opportunity either to continue into senior secondary school or pursue technical and vocational training.But education experts note that technical colleges received little attention, vocational education remained underfunded, and career guidance was largely neglected, leaving Senior Secondary School as the only realistic progression route for most students.Successive governments have introduced new education policies with impressive ambitions, but implementation has repeatedly been undermined by inadequate funding, poor monitoring, weak political commitment and inconsistent execution.Experts dividedEducation experts argue that linking the country’s out-of-school crisis solely to the separation between junior and senior secondary education oversimplifies a far more complex challenge.They contend that the real drivers of school dropout include chronic underfunding of education, teacher shortages, insecurity, poverty, poor infrastructure, gender inequality, child labour and limited economic opportunities for vulnerable households.For them, changing the structure without addressing these underlying constraints risks treating the symptom rather than the disease.Professor Jide Gbenu, a Professor of Educational Planning at Lagos State University, believes the proposal raises more questions than answers.According to him, there is no empirical evidence establishing a direct relationship between the 6-3-3-4 structure and Nigeria’s out-of-school crisis.He argued that before replacing an existing education model, policymakers should first determine whether the original objectives of the system were ever properly evaluated.Gbenu posed several fundamental questions: “Was there any empirical study linking out-of-school children to the 6-3-3-4 system? Were the goals of the policy ever evaluated? What evidence suggests that a new structure would reduce dropout rates, particularly in Northern Nigeria where the problem is most severe?”Rather than focusing primarily on restructuring the education system, he urged the government to prioritise issues that directly affect school participation, including stronger political commitment, improved teacher motivation, poverty reduction, school infrastructure, security, curriculum reforms that balance local values with technological advancement, genuinely free education, wider access to schools, especially in the North, and greater public enlightenment on population management.“There is no correlation between the rate of out-of-school children and the 6-3-3-4 system, except if the honourable minister can empirically justify that,” Gbenu said.“The minister should address those concerns which touch directly on out-of-school children if that is the focus of his administration. Replacing the 6-3-3-4 system is another policy matter entirely that requires extensive consultation with critical stakeholders.”While some education experts insist the proposal risks addressing the wrong problem, others believe integrating junior and senior secondary education under one uninterrupted structure could improve learner retention and reduce administrative bottlenecks.For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. Yet, while few education stakeholders disagree with the urgency of tackling the crisis, many are questioning whether dismantling the JSS/SSS separation addresses the real causes of school dropout.The 6-3-3-4 structure was officially adopted in 1982 to replace what was deemed a largely academic colonial education model with one that would better prepare learners for employment, entrepreneurship and vocational careers. It envisioned six years of primary education, three years of junior secondary education, three years of senior secondary education and four years of tertiary education.Junior Secondary School was deliberately designed as the concluding phase of compulsory basic education rather than merely the first half of secondary education. At that stage, learners were expected to receive exposure to vocational, technical, business and creative subjects, alongside career guidance that would enable them to either proceed to Senior Secondary School or transition into technical colleges and vocational training.On paper, the framework appeared progressive.In practice, however, implementation fell far short of the original vision.Across much of the country, the vocational workshops that were supposed to distinguish junior secondary education either never existed or gradually became abandoned. Technical subjects were often taught theoretically because schools lacked workshops, laboratories and equipment. Career guidance services remained weak, while shortages of qualified teachers further undermined the philosophy behind the reform.Consequently, Junior Secondary School gradually evolved into little more than the first three years of conventional secondary education, rather than the practical and career-oriented stage originally envisioned by policymakers.That implementation gap led many observers to ask whether the policy itself failed or whether successive governments simply failed to implement it faithfully.For millions of families, particularly in rural and underserved communities, completion of JSS3 became the first major educational milestone. The Basic Education Certificate represented successful completion of compulsory education and provided an opportunity either to continue into senior secondary school or pursue technical and vocational training.But education experts note that technical colleges received little attention, vocational education remained underfunded, and career guidance was largely neglected, leaving Senior Secondary School as the only realistic progression route for most students.Successive governments have introduced new education policies with impressive ambitions, but implementation has repeatedly been undermined by inadequate funding, poor monitoring, weak political commitment and inconsistent execution.Experts dividedEducation experts argue that linking the country’s out-of-school crisis solely to the separation between junior and senior secondary education oversimplifies a far more complex challenge.They contend that the real drivers of school dropout include chronic underfunding of education, teacher shortages, insecurity, poverty, poor infrastructure, gender inequality, child labour and limited economic opportunities for vulnerable households.For them, changing the structure without addressing these underlying constraints risks treating the symptom rather than the disease.Professor Jide Gbenu, a Professor of Educational Planning at Lagos State University, believes the proposal raises more questions than answers.According to him, there is no empirical evidence establishing a direct relationship between the 6-3-3-4 structure and Nigeria’s out-of-school crisis.He argued that before replacing an existing education model, policymakers should first determine whether the original objectives of the system were ever properly evaluated.Gbenu posed several fundamental questions: “Was there any empirical study linking out-of-school children to the 6-3-3-4 system? Were the goals of the policy ever evaluated? What evidence suggests that a new structure would reduce dropout rates, particularly in Northern Nigeria where the problem is most severe?”Rather than focusing primarily on restructuring the education system, he urged the government to prioritise issues that directly affect school participation, including stronger political commitment, improved teacher motivation, poverty reduction, school infrastructure, security, curriculum reforms that balance local values with technological advancement, genuinely free education, wider access to schools, especially in the North, and greater public enlightenment on population management.“There is no correlation between the rate of out-of-school children and the 6-3-3-4 system, except if the honourable minister can empirically justify that,” Gbenu said.“The minister should address those concerns which touch directly on out-of-school children if that is the focus of his administration. Replacing the 6-3-3-4 system is another policy matter entirely that requires extensive consultation with critical stakeholders.”While some education experts insist the proposal risks addressing the wrong problem, others believe integrating junior and senior secondary education under one uninterrupted structure could improve learner retention and reduce administrative bottlenecks.For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. The 6-3-3-4 structure was officially adopted in 1982 to replace what was deemed a largely academic colonial education model with one that would better prepare learners for employment, entrepreneurship and vocational careers. It envisioned six years of primary education, three years of junior secondary education, three years of senior secondary education and four years of tertiary education.Junior Secondary School was deliberately designed as the concluding phase of compulsory basic education rather than merely the first half of secondary education. At that stage, learners were expected to receive exposure to vocational, technical, business and creative subjects, alongside career guidance that would enable them to either proceed to Senior Secondary School or transition into technical colleges and vocational training.On paper, the framework appeared progressive.In practice, however, implementation fell far short of the original vision.Across much of the country, the vocational workshops that were supposed to distinguish junior secondary education either never existed or gradually became abandoned. Technical subjects were often taught theoretically because schools lacked workshops, laboratories and equipment. Career guidance services remained weak, while shortages of qualified teachers further undermined the philosophy behind the reform.Consequently, Junior Secondary School gradually evolved into little more than the first three years of conventional secondary education, rather than the practical and career-oriented stage originally envisioned by policymakers.That implementation gap led many observers to ask whether the policy itself failed or whether successive governments simply failed to implement it faithfully.For millions of families, particularly in rural and underserved communities, completion of JSS3 became the first major educational milestone. The Basic Education Certificate represented successful completion of compulsory education and provided an opportunity either to continue into senior secondary school or pursue technical and vocational training.But education experts note that technical colleges received little attention, vocational education remained underfunded, and career guidance was largely neglected, leaving Senior Secondary School as the only realistic progression route for most students.Successive governments have introduced new education policies with impressive ambitions, but implementation has repeatedly been undermined by inadequate funding, poor monitoring, weak political commitment and inconsistent execution.Experts dividedEducation experts argue that linking the country’s out-of-school crisis solely to the separation between junior and senior secondary education oversimplifies a far more complex challenge.They contend that the real drivers of school dropout include chronic underfunding of education, teacher shortages, insecurity, poverty, poor infrastructure, gender inequality, child labour and limited economic opportunities for vulnerable households.For them, changing the structure without addressing these underlying constraints risks treating the symptom rather than the disease.Professor Jide Gbenu, a Professor of Educational Planning at Lagos State University, believes the proposal raises more questions than answers.According to him, there is no empirical evidence establishing a direct relationship between the 6-3-3-4 structure and Nigeria’s out-of-school crisis.He argued that before replacing an existing education model, policymakers should first determine whether the original objectives of the system were ever properly evaluated.Gbenu posed several fundamental questions: “Was there any empirical study linking out-of-school children to the 6-3-3-4 system? Were the goals of the policy ever evaluated? What evidence suggests that a new structure would reduce dropout rates, particularly in Northern Nigeria where the problem is most severe?”Rather than focusing primarily on restructuring the education system, he urged the government to prioritise issues that directly affect school participation, including stronger political commitment, improved teacher motivation, poverty reduction, school infrastructure, security, curriculum reforms that balance local values with technological advancement, genuinely free education, wider access to schools, especially in the North, and greater public enlightenment on population management.“There is no correlation between the rate of out-of-school children and the 6-3-3-4 system, except if the honourable minister can empirically justify that,” Gbenu said.“The minister should address those concerns which touch directly on out-of-school children if that is the focus of his administration. Replacing the 6-3-3-4 system is another policy matter entirely that requires extensive consultation with critical stakeholders.”While some education experts insist the proposal risks addressing the wrong problem, others believe integrating junior and senior secondary education under one uninterrupted structure could improve learner retention and reduce administrative bottlenecks.For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. Junior Secondary School was deliberately designed as the concluding phase of compulsory basic education rather than merely the first half of secondary education. At that stage, learners were expected to receive exposure to vocational, technical, business and creative subjects, alongside career guidance that would enable them to either proceed to Senior Secondary School or transition into technical colleges and vocational training.On paper, the framework appeared progressive.In practice, however, implementation fell far short of the original vision.Across much of the country, the vocational workshops that were supposed to distinguish junior secondary education either never existed or gradually became abandoned. Technical subjects were often taught theoretically because schools lacked workshops, laboratories and equipment. Career guidance services remained weak, while shortages of qualified teachers further undermined the philosophy behind the reform.Consequently, Junior Secondary School gradually evolved into little more than the first three years of conventional secondary education, rather than the practical and career-oriented stage originally envisioned by policymakers.That implementation gap led many observers to ask whether the policy itself failed or whether successive governments simply failed to implement it faithfully.For millions of families, particularly in rural and underserved communities, completion of JSS3 became the first major educational milestone. The Basic Education Certificate represented successful completion of compulsory education and provided an opportunity either to continue into senior secondary school or pursue technical and vocational training.But education experts note that technical colleges received little attention, vocational education remained underfunded, and career guidance was largely neglected, leaving Senior Secondary School as the only realistic progression route for most students.Successive governments have introduced new education policies with impressive ambitions, but implementation has repeatedly been undermined by inadequate funding, poor monitoring, weak political commitment and inconsistent execution.Experts dividedEducation experts argue that linking the country’s out-of-school crisis solely to the separation between junior and senior secondary education oversimplifies a far more complex challenge.They contend that the real drivers of school dropout include chronic underfunding of education, teacher shortages, insecurity, poverty, poor infrastructure, gender inequality, child labour and limited economic opportunities for vulnerable households.For them, changing the structure without addressing these underlying constraints risks treating the symptom rather than the disease.Professor Jide Gbenu, a Professor of Educational Planning at Lagos State University, believes the proposal raises more questions than answers.According to him, there is no empirical evidence establishing a direct relationship between the 6-3-3-4 structure and Nigeria’s out-of-school crisis.He argued that before replacing an existing education model, policymakers should first determine whether the original objectives of the system were ever properly evaluated.Gbenu posed several fundamental questions: “Was there any empirical study linking out-of-school children to the 6-3-3-4 system? Were the goals of the policy ever evaluated? What evidence suggests that a new structure would reduce dropout rates, particularly in Northern Nigeria where the problem is most severe?”Rather than focusing primarily on restructuring the education system, he urged the government to prioritise issues that directly affect school participation, including stronger political commitment, improved teacher motivation, poverty reduction, school infrastructure, security, curriculum reforms that balance local values with technological advancement, genuinely free education, wider access to schools, especially in the North, and greater public enlightenment on population management.“There is no correlation between the rate of out-of-school children and the 6-3-3-4 system, except if the honourable minister can empirically justify that,” Gbenu said.“The minister should address those concerns which touch directly on out-of-school children if that is the focus of his administration. Replacing the 6-3-3-4 system is another policy matter entirely that requires extensive consultation with critical stakeholders.”While some education experts insist the proposal risks addressing the wrong problem, others believe integrating junior and senior secondary education under one uninterrupted structure could improve learner retention and reduce administrative bottlenecks.For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. On paper, the framework appeared progressive.In practice, however, implementation fell far short of the original vision.Across much of the country, the vocational workshops that were supposed to distinguish junior secondary education either never existed or gradually became abandoned. Technical subjects were often taught theoretically because schools lacked workshops, laboratories and equipment. Career guidance services remained weak, while shortages of qualified teachers further undermined the philosophy behind the reform.Consequently, Junior Secondary School gradually evolved into little more than the first three years of conventional secondary education, rather than the practical and career-oriented stage originally envisioned by policymakers.That implementation gap led many observers to ask whether the policy itself failed or whether successive governments simply failed to implement it faithfully.For millions of families, particularly in rural and underserved communities, completion of JSS3 became the first major educational milestone. The Basic Education Certificate represented successful completion of compulsory education and provided an opportunity either to continue into senior secondary school or pursue technical and vocational training.But education experts note that technical colleges received little attention, vocational education remained underfunded, and career guidance was largely neglected, leaving Senior Secondary School as the only realistic progression route for most students.Successive governments have introduced new education policies with impressive ambitions, but implementation has repeatedly been undermined by inadequate funding, poor monitoring, weak political commitment and inconsistent execution.Experts dividedEducation experts argue that linking the country’s out-of-school crisis solely to the separation between junior and senior secondary education oversimplifies a far more complex challenge.They contend that the real drivers of school dropout include chronic underfunding of education, teacher shortages, insecurity, poverty, poor infrastructure, gender inequality, child labour and limited economic opportunities for vulnerable households.For them, changing the structure without addressing these underlying constraints risks treating the symptom rather than the disease.Professor Jide Gbenu, a Professor of Educational Planning at Lagos State University, believes the proposal raises more questions than answers.According to him, there is no empirical evidence establishing a direct relationship between the 6-3-3-4 structure and Nigeria’s out-of-school crisis.He argued that before replacing an existing education model, policymakers should first determine whether the original objectives of the system were ever properly evaluated.Gbenu posed several fundamental questions: “Was there any empirical study linking out-of-school children to the 6-3-3-4 system? Were the goals of the policy ever evaluated? What evidence suggests that a new structure would reduce dropout rates, particularly in Northern Nigeria where the problem is most severe?”Rather than focusing primarily on restructuring the education system, he urged the government to prioritise issues that directly affect school participation, including stronger political commitment, improved teacher motivation, poverty reduction, school infrastructure, security, curriculum reforms that balance local values with technological advancement, genuinely free education, wider access to schools, especially in the North, and greater public enlightenment on population management.“There is no correlation between the rate of out-of-school children and the 6-3-3-4 system, except if the honourable minister can empirically justify that,” Gbenu said.“The minister should address those concerns which touch directly on out-of-school children if that is the focus of his administration. Replacing the 6-3-3-4 system is another policy matter entirely that requires extensive consultation with critical stakeholders.”While some education experts insist the proposal risks addressing the wrong problem, others believe integrating junior and senior secondary education under one uninterrupted structure could improve learner retention and reduce administrative bottlenecks.For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. In practice, however, implementation fell far short of the original vision.Across much of the country, the vocational workshops that were supposed to distinguish junior secondary education either never existed or gradually became abandoned. Technical subjects were often taught theoretically because schools lacked workshops, laboratories and equipment. Career guidance services remained weak, while shortages of qualified teachers further undermined the philosophy behind the reform.Consequently, Junior Secondary School gradually evolved into little more than the first three years of conventional secondary education, rather than the practical and career-oriented stage originally envisioned by policymakers.That implementation gap led many observers to ask whether the policy itself failed or whether successive governments simply failed to implement it faithfully.For millions of families, particularly in rural and underserved communities, completion of JSS3 became the first major educational milestone. The Basic Education Certificate represented successful completion of compulsory education and provided an opportunity either to continue into senior secondary school or pursue technical and vocational training.But education experts note that technical colleges received little attention, vocational education remained underfunded, and career guidance was largely neglected, leaving Senior Secondary School as the only realistic progression route for most students.Successive governments have introduced new education policies with impressive ambitions, but implementation has repeatedly been undermined by inadequate funding, poor monitoring, weak political commitment and inconsistent execution.Experts dividedEducation experts argue that linking the country’s out-of-school crisis solely to the separation between junior and senior secondary education oversimplifies a far more complex challenge.They contend that the real drivers of school dropout include chronic underfunding of education, teacher shortages, insecurity, poverty, poor infrastructure, gender inequality, child labour and limited economic opportunities for vulnerable households.For them, changing the structure without addressing these underlying constraints risks treating the symptom rather than the disease.Professor Jide Gbenu, a Professor of Educational Planning at Lagos State University, believes the proposal raises more questions than answers.According to him, there is no empirical evidence establishing a direct relationship between the 6-3-3-4 structure and Nigeria’s out-of-school crisis.He argued that before replacing an existing education model, policymakers should first determine whether the original objectives of the system were ever properly evaluated.Gbenu posed several fundamental questions: “Was there any empirical study linking out-of-school children to the 6-3-3-4 system? Were the goals of the policy ever evaluated? What evidence suggests that a new structure would reduce dropout rates, particularly in Northern Nigeria where the problem is most severe?”Rather than focusing primarily on restructuring the education system, he urged the government to prioritise issues that directly affect school participation, including stronger political commitment, improved teacher motivation, poverty reduction, school infrastructure, security, curriculum reforms that balance local values with technological advancement, genuinely free education, wider access to schools, especially in the North, and greater public enlightenment on population management.“There is no correlation between the rate of out-of-school children and the 6-3-3-4 system, except if the honourable minister can empirically justify that,” Gbenu said.“The minister should address those concerns which touch directly on out-of-school children if that is the focus of his administration. Replacing the 6-3-3-4 system is another policy matter entirely that requires extensive consultation with critical stakeholders.”While some education experts insist the proposal risks addressing the wrong problem, others believe integrating junior and senior secondary education under one uninterrupted structure could improve learner retention and reduce administrative bottlenecks.For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. Across much of the country, the vocational workshops that were supposed to distinguish junior secondary education either never existed or gradually became abandoned. Technical subjects were often taught theoretically because schools lacked workshops, laboratories and equipment. Career guidance services remained weak, while shortages of qualified teachers further undermined the philosophy behind the reform.Consequently, Junior Secondary School gradually evolved into little more than the first three years of conventional secondary education, rather than the practical and career-oriented stage originally envisioned by policymakers.That implementation gap led many observers to ask whether the policy itself failed or whether successive governments simply failed to implement it faithfully.For millions of families, particularly in rural and underserved communities, completion of JSS3 became the first major educational milestone. The Basic Education Certificate represented successful completion of compulsory education and provided an opportunity either to continue into senior secondary school or pursue technical and vocational training.But education experts note that technical colleges received little attention, vocational education remained underfunded, and career guidance was largely neglected, leaving Senior Secondary School as the only realistic progression route for most students.Successive governments have introduced new education policies with impressive ambitions, but implementation has repeatedly been undermined by inadequate funding, poor monitoring, weak political commitment and inconsistent execution.Experts dividedEducation experts argue that linking the country’s out-of-school crisis solely to the separation between junior and senior secondary education oversimplifies a far more complex challenge.They contend that the real drivers of school dropout include chronic underfunding of education, teacher shortages, insecurity, poverty, poor infrastructure, gender inequality, child labour and limited economic opportunities for vulnerable households.For them, changing the structure without addressing these underlying constraints risks treating the symptom rather than the disease.Professor Jide Gbenu, a Professor of Educational Planning at Lagos State University, believes the proposal raises more questions than answers.According to him, there is no empirical evidence establishing a direct relationship between the 6-3-3-4 structure and Nigeria’s out-of-school crisis.He argued that before replacing an existing education model, policymakers should first determine whether the original objectives of the system were ever properly evaluated.Gbenu posed several fundamental questions: “Was there any empirical study linking out-of-school children to the 6-3-3-4 system? Were the goals of the policy ever evaluated? What evidence suggests that a new structure would reduce dropout rates, particularly in Northern Nigeria where the problem is most severe?”Rather than focusing primarily on restructuring the education system, he urged the government to prioritise issues that directly affect school participation, including stronger political commitment, improved teacher motivation, poverty reduction, school infrastructure, security, curriculum reforms that balance local values with technological advancement, genuinely free education, wider access to schools, especially in the North, and greater public enlightenment on population management.“There is no correlation between the rate of out-of-school children and the 6-3-3-4 system, except if the honourable minister can empirically justify that,” Gbenu said.“The minister should address those concerns which touch directly on out-of-school children if that is the focus of his administration. Replacing the 6-3-3-4 system is another policy matter entirely that requires extensive consultation with critical stakeholders.”While some education experts insist the proposal risks addressing the wrong problem, others believe integrating junior and senior secondary education under one uninterrupted structure could improve learner retention and reduce administrative bottlenecks.For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. Consequently, Junior Secondary School gradually evolved into little more than the first three years of conventional secondary education, rather than the practical and career-oriented stage originally envisioned by policymakers.That implementation gap led many observers to ask whether the policy itself failed or whether successive governments simply failed to implement it faithfully.For millions of families, particularly in rural and underserved communities, completion of JSS3 became the first major educational milestone. The Basic Education Certificate represented successful completion of compulsory education and provided an opportunity either to continue into senior secondary school or pursue technical and vocational training.But education experts note that technical colleges received little attention, vocational education remained underfunded, and career guidance was largely neglected, leaving Senior Secondary School as the only realistic progression route for most students.Successive governments have introduced new education policies with impressive ambitions, but implementation has repeatedly been undermined by inadequate funding, poor monitoring, weak political commitment and inconsistent execution.Experts dividedEducation experts argue that linking the country’s out-of-school crisis solely to the separation between junior and senior secondary education oversimplifies a far more complex challenge.They contend that the real drivers of school dropout include chronic underfunding of education, teacher shortages, insecurity, poverty, poor infrastructure, gender inequality, child labour and limited economic opportunities for vulnerable households.For them, changing the structure without addressing these underlying constraints risks treating the symptom rather than the disease.Professor Jide Gbenu, a Professor of Educational Planning at Lagos State University, believes the proposal raises more questions than answers.According to him, there is no empirical evidence establishing a direct relationship between the 6-3-3-4 structure and Nigeria’s out-of-school crisis.He argued that before replacing an existing education model, policymakers should first determine whether the original objectives of the system were ever properly evaluated.Gbenu posed several fundamental questions: “Was there any empirical study linking out-of-school children to the 6-3-3-4 system? Were the goals of the policy ever evaluated? What evidence suggests that a new structure would reduce dropout rates, particularly in Northern Nigeria where the problem is most severe?”Rather than focusing primarily on restructuring the education system, he urged the government to prioritise issues that directly affect school participation, including stronger political commitment, improved teacher motivation, poverty reduction, school infrastructure, security, curriculum reforms that balance local values with technological advancement, genuinely free education, wider access to schools, especially in the North, and greater public enlightenment on population management.“There is no correlation between the rate of out-of-school children and the 6-3-3-4 system, except if the honourable minister can empirically justify that,” Gbenu said.“The minister should address those concerns which touch directly on out-of-school children if that is the focus of his administration. Replacing the 6-3-3-4 system is another policy matter entirely that requires extensive consultation with critical stakeholders.”While some education experts insist the proposal risks addressing the wrong problem, others believe integrating junior and senior secondary education under one uninterrupted structure could improve learner retention and reduce administrative bottlenecks.For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. That implementation gap led many observers to ask whether the policy itself failed or whether successive governments simply failed to implement it faithfully.For millions of families, particularly in rural and underserved communities, completion of JSS3 became the first major educational milestone. The Basic Education Certificate represented successful completion of compulsory education and provided an opportunity either to continue into senior secondary school or pursue technical and vocational training.But education experts note that technical colleges received little attention, vocational education remained underfunded, and career guidance was largely neglected, leaving Senior Secondary School as the only realistic progression route for most students.Successive governments have introduced new education policies with impressive ambitions, but implementation has repeatedly been undermined by inadequate funding, poor monitoring, weak political commitment and inconsistent execution.Experts dividedEducation experts argue that linking the country’s out-of-school crisis solely to the separation between junior and senior secondary education oversimplifies a far more complex challenge.They contend that the real drivers of school dropout include chronic underfunding of education, teacher shortages, insecurity, poverty, poor infrastructure, gender inequality, child labour and limited economic opportunities for vulnerable households.For them, changing the structure without addressing these underlying constraints risks treating the symptom rather than the disease.Professor Jide Gbenu, a Professor of Educational Planning at Lagos State University, believes the proposal raises more questions than answers.According to him, there is no empirical evidence establishing a direct relationship between the 6-3-3-4 structure and Nigeria’s out-of-school crisis.He argued that before replacing an existing education model, policymakers should first determine whether the original objectives of the system were ever properly evaluated.Gbenu posed several fundamental questions: “Was there any empirical study linking out-of-school children to the 6-3-3-4 system? Were the goals of the policy ever evaluated? What evidence suggests that a new structure would reduce dropout rates, particularly in Northern Nigeria where the problem is most severe?”Rather than focusing primarily on restructuring the education system, he urged the government to prioritise issues that directly affect school participation, including stronger political commitment, improved teacher motivation, poverty reduction, school infrastructure, security, curriculum reforms that balance local values with technological advancement, genuinely free education, wider access to schools, especially in the North, and greater public enlightenment on population management.“There is no correlation between the rate of out-of-school children and the 6-3-3-4 system, except if the honourable minister can empirically justify that,” Gbenu said.“The minister should address those concerns which touch directly on out-of-school children if that is the focus of his administration. Replacing the 6-3-3-4 system is another policy matter entirely that requires extensive consultation with critical stakeholders.”While some education experts insist the proposal risks addressing the wrong problem, others believe integrating junior and senior secondary education under one uninterrupted structure could improve learner retention and reduce administrative bottlenecks.For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. For millions of families, particularly in rural and underserved communities, completion of JSS3 became the first major educational milestone. The Basic Education Certificate represented successful completion of compulsory education and provided an opportunity either to continue into senior secondary school or pursue technical and vocational training.But education experts note that technical colleges received little attention, vocational education remained underfunded, and career guidance was largely neglected, leaving Senior Secondary School as the only realistic progression route for most students.Successive governments have introduced new education policies with impressive ambitions, but implementation has repeatedly been undermined by inadequate funding, poor monitoring, weak political commitment and inconsistent execution.Experts dividedEducation experts argue that linking the country’s out-of-school crisis solely to the separation between junior and senior secondary education oversimplifies a far more complex challenge.They contend that the real drivers of school dropout include chronic underfunding of education, teacher shortages, insecurity, poverty, poor infrastructure, gender inequality, child labour and limited economic opportunities for vulnerable households.For them, changing the structure without addressing these underlying constraints risks treating the symptom rather than the disease.Professor Jide Gbenu, a Professor of Educational Planning at Lagos State University, believes the proposal raises more questions than answers.According to him, there is no empirical evidence establishing a direct relationship between the 6-3-3-4 structure and Nigeria’s out-of-school crisis.He argued that before replacing an existing education model, policymakers should first determine whether the original objectives of the system were ever properly evaluated.Gbenu posed several fundamental questions: “Was there any empirical study linking out-of-school children to the 6-3-3-4 system? Were the goals of the policy ever evaluated? What evidence suggests that a new structure would reduce dropout rates, particularly in Northern Nigeria where the problem is most severe?”Rather than focusing primarily on restructuring the education system, he urged the government to prioritise issues that directly affect school participation, including stronger political commitment, improved teacher motivation, poverty reduction, school infrastructure, security, curriculum reforms that balance local values with technological advancement, genuinely free education, wider access to schools, especially in the North, and greater public enlightenment on population management.“There is no correlation between the rate of out-of-school children and the 6-3-3-4 system, except if the honourable minister can empirically justify that,” Gbenu said.“The minister should address those concerns which touch directly on out-of-school children if that is the focus of his administration. Replacing the 6-3-3-4 system is another policy matter entirely that requires extensive consultation with critical stakeholders.”While some education experts insist the proposal risks addressing the wrong problem, others believe integrating junior and senior secondary education under one uninterrupted structure could improve learner retention and reduce administrative bottlenecks.For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. But education experts note that technical colleges received little attention, vocational education remained underfunded, and career guidance was largely neglected, leaving Senior Secondary School as the only realistic progression route for most students.Successive governments have introduced new education policies with impressive ambitions, but implementation has repeatedly been undermined by inadequate funding, poor monitoring, weak political commitment and inconsistent execution.Experts dividedEducation experts argue that linking the country’s out-of-school crisis solely to the separation between junior and senior secondary education oversimplifies a far more complex challenge.They contend that the real drivers of school dropout include chronic underfunding of education, teacher shortages, insecurity, poverty, poor infrastructure, gender inequality, child labour and limited economic opportunities for vulnerable households.For them, changing the structure without addressing these underlying constraints risks treating the symptom rather than the disease.Professor Jide Gbenu, a Professor of Educational Planning at Lagos State University, believes the proposal raises more questions than answers.According to him, there is no empirical evidence establishing a direct relationship between the 6-3-3-4 structure and Nigeria’s out-of-school crisis.He argued that before replacing an existing education model, policymakers should first determine whether the original objectives of the system were ever properly evaluated.Gbenu posed several fundamental questions: “Was there any empirical study linking out-of-school children to the 6-3-3-4 system? Were the goals of the policy ever evaluated? What evidence suggests that a new structure would reduce dropout rates, particularly in Northern Nigeria where the problem is most severe?”Rather than focusing primarily on restructuring the education system, he urged the government to prioritise issues that directly affect school participation, including stronger political commitment, improved teacher motivation, poverty reduction, school infrastructure, security, curriculum reforms that balance local values with technological advancement, genuinely free education, wider access to schools, especially in the North, and greater public enlightenment on population management.“There is no correlation between the rate of out-of-school children and the 6-3-3-4 system, except if the honourable minister can empirically justify that,” Gbenu said.“The minister should address those concerns which touch directly on out-of-school children if that is the focus of his administration. Replacing the 6-3-3-4 system is another policy matter entirely that requires extensive consultation with critical stakeholders.”While some education experts insist the proposal risks addressing the wrong problem, others believe integrating junior and senior secondary education under one uninterrupted structure could improve learner retention and reduce administrative bottlenecks.For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. Successive governments have introduced new education policies with impressive ambitions, but implementation has repeatedly been undermined by inadequate funding, poor monitoring, weak political commitment and inconsistent execution.Experts dividedEducation experts argue that linking the country’s out-of-school crisis solely to the separation between junior and senior secondary education oversimplifies a far more complex challenge.They contend that the real drivers of school dropout include chronic underfunding of education, teacher shortages, insecurity, poverty, poor infrastructure, gender inequality, child labour and limited economic opportunities for vulnerable households.For them, changing the structure without addressing these underlying constraints risks treating the symptom rather than the disease.Professor Jide Gbenu, a Professor of Educational Planning at Lagos State University, believes the proposal raises more questions than answers.According to him, there is no empirical evidence establishing a direct relationship between the 6-3-3-4 structure and Nigeria’s out-of-school crisis.He argued that before replacing an existing education model, policymakers should first determine whether the original objectives of the system were ever properly evaluated.Gbenu posed several fundamental questions: “Was there any empirical study linking out-of-school children to the 6-3-3-4 system? Were the goals of the policy ever evaluated? What evidence suggests that a new structure would reduce dropout rates, particularly in Northern Nigeria where the problem is most severe?”Rather than focusing primarily on restructuring the education system, he urged the government to prioritise issues that directly affect school participation, including stronger political commitment, improved teacher motivation, poverty reduction, school infrastructure, security, curriculum reforms that balance local values with technological advancement, genuinely free education, wider access to schools, especially in the North, and greater public enlightenment on population management.“There is no correlation between the rate of out-of-school children and the 6-3-3-4 system, except if the honourable minister can empirically justify that,” Gbenu said.“The minister should address those concerns which touch directly on out-of-school children if that is the focus of his administration. Replacing the 6-3-3-4 system is another policy matter entirely that requires extensive consultation with critical stakeholders.”While some education experts insist the proposal risks addressing the wrong problem, others believe integrating junior and senior secondary education under one uninterrupted structure could improve learner retention and reduce administrative bottlenecks.For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. Experts dividedEducation experts argue that linking the country’s out-of-school crisis solely to the separation between junior and senior secondary education oversimplifies a far more complex challenge.They contend that the real drivers of school dropout include chronic underfunding of education, teacher shortages, insecurity, poverty, poor infrastructure, gender inequality, child labour and limited economic opportunities for vulnerable households.For them, changing the structure without addressing these underlying constraints risks treating the symptom rather than the disease.Professor Jide Gbenu, a Professor of Educational Planning at Lagos State University, believes the proposal raises more questions than answers.According to him, there is no empirical evidence establishing a direct relationship between the 6-3-3-4 structure and Nigeria’s out-of-school crisis.He argued that before replacing an existing education model, policymakers should first determine whether the original objectives of the system were ever properly evaluated.Gbenu posed several fundamental questions: “Was there any empirical study linking out-of-school children to the 6-3-3-4 system? Were the goals of the policy ever evaluated? What evidence suggests that a new structure would reduce dropout rates, particularly in Northern Nigeria where the problem is most severe?”Rather than focusing primarily on restructuring the education system, he urged the government to prioritise issues that directly affect school participation, including stronger political commitment, improved teacher motivation, poverty reduction, school infrastructure, security, curriculum reforms that balance local values with technological advancement, genuinely free education, wider access to schools, especially in the North, and greater public enlightenment on population management.“There is no correlation between the rate of out-of-school children and the 6-3-3-4 system, except if the honourable minister can empirically justify that,” Gbenu said.“The minister should address those concerns which touch directly on out-of-school children if that is the focus of his administration. Replacing the 6-3-3-4 system is another policy matter entirely that requires extensive consultation with critical stakeholders.”While some education experts insist the proposal risks addressing the wrong problem, others believe integrating junior and senior secondary education under one uninterrupted structure could improve learner retention and reduce administrative bottlenecks.For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. Education experts argue that linking the country’s out-of-school crisis solely to the separation between junior and senior secondary education oversimplifies a far more complex challenge.They contend that the real drivers of school dropout include chronic underfunding of education, teacher shortages, insecurity, poverty, poor infrastructure, gender inequality, child labour and limited economic opportunities for vulnerable households.For them, changing the structure without addressing these underlying constraints risks treating the symptom rather than the disease.Professor Jide Gbenu, a Professor of Educational Planning at Lagos State University, believes the proposal raises more questions than answers.According to him, there is no empirical evidence establishing a direct relationship between the 6-3-3-4 structure and Nigeria’s out-of-school crisis.He argued that before replacing an existing education model, policymakers should first determine whether the original objectives of the system were ever properly evaluated.Gbenu posed several fundamental questions: “Was there any empirical study linking out-of-school children to the 6-3-3-4 system? Were the goals of the policy ever evaluated? What evidence suggests that a new structure would reduce dropout rates, particularly in Northern Nigeria where the problem is most severe?”Rather than focusing primarily on restructuring the education system, he urged the government to prioritise issues that directly affect school participation, including stronger political commitment, improved teacher motivation, poverty reduction, school infrastructure, security, curriculum reforms that balance local values with technological advancement, genuinely free education, wider access to schools, especially in the North, and greater public enlightenment on population management.“There is no correlation between the rate of out-of-school children and the 6-3-3-4 system, except if the honourable minister can empirically justify that,” Gbenu said.“The minister should address those concerns which touch directly on out-of-school children if that is the focus of his administration. Replacing the 6-3-3-4 system is another policy matter entirely that requires extensive consultation with critical stakeholders.”While some education experts insist the proposal risks addressing the wrong problem, others believe integrating junior and senior secondary education under one uninterrupted structure could improve learner retention and reduce administrative bottlenecks.For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. They contend that the real drivers of school dropout include chronic underfunding of education, teacher shortages, insecurity, poverty, poor infrastructure, gender inequality, child labour and limited economic opportunities for vulnerable households.For them, changing the structure without addressing these underlying constraints risks treating the symptom rather than the disease.Professor Jide Gbenu, a Professor of Educational Planning at Lagos State University, believes the proposal raises more questions than answers.According to him, there is no empirical evidence establishing a direct relationship between the 6-3-3-4 structure and Nigeria’s out-of-school crisis.He argued that before replacing an existing education model, policymakers should first determine whether the original objectives of the system were ever properly evaluated.Gbenu posed several fundamental questions: “Was there any empirical study linking out-of-school children to the 6-3-3-4 system? Were the goals of the policy ever evaluated? What evidence suggests that a new structure would reduce dropout rates, particularly in Northern Nigeria where the problem is most severe?”Rather than focusing primarily on restructuring the education system, he urged the government to prioritise issues that directly affect school participation, including stronger political commitment, improved teacher motivation, poverty reduction, school infrastructure, security, curriculum reforms that balance local values with technological advancement, genuinely free education, wider access to schools, especially in the North, and greater public enlightenment on population management.“There is no correlation between the rate of out-of-school children and the 6-3-3-4 system, except if the honourable minister can empirically justify that,” Gbenu said.“The minister should address those concerns which touch directly on out-of-school children if that is the focus of his administration. Replacing the 6-3-3-4 system is another policy matter entirely that requires extensive consultation with critical stakeholders.”While some education experts insist the proposal risks addressing the wrong problem, others believe integrating junior and senior secondary education under one uninterrupted structure could improve learner retention and reduce administrative bottlenecks.For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. For them, changing the structure without addressing these underlying constraints risks treating the symptom rather than the disease.Professor Jide Gbenu, a Professor of Educational Planning at Lagos State University, believes the proposal raises more questions than answers.According to him, there is no empirical evidence establishing a direct relationship between the 6-3-3-4 structure and Nigeria’s out-of-school crisis.He argued that before replacing an existing education model, policymakers should first determine whether the original objectives of the system were ever properly evaluated.Gbenu posed several fundamental questions: “Was there any empirical study linking out-of-school children to the 6-3-3-4 system? Were the goals of the policy ever evaluated? What evidence suggests that a new structure would reduce dropout rates, particularly in Northern Nigeria where the problem is most severe?”Rather than focusing primarily on restructuring the education system, he urged the government to prioritise issues that directly affect school participation, including stronger political commitment, improved teacher motivation, poverty reduction, school infrastructure, security, curriculum reforms that balance local values with technological advancement, genuinely free education, wider access to schools, especially in the North, and greater public enlightenment on population management.“There is no correlation between the rate of out-of-school children and the 6-3-3-4 system, except if the honourable minister can empirically justify that,” Gbenu said.“The minister should address those concerns which touch directly on out-of-school children if that is the focus of his administration. Replacing the 6-3-3-4 system is another policy matter entirely that requires extensive consultation with critical stakeholders.”While some education experts insist the proposal risks addressing the wrong problem, others believe integrating junior and senior secondary education under one uninterrupted structure could improve learner retention and reduce administrative bottlenecks.For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. Professor Jide Gbenu, a Professor of Educational Planning at Lagos State University, believes the proposal raises more questions than answers.According to him, there is no empirical evidence establishing a direct relationship between the 6-3-3-4 structure and Nigeria’s out-of-school crisis.He argued that before replacing an existing education model, policymakers should first determine whether the original objectives of the system were ever properly evaluated.Gbenu posed several fundamental questions: “Was there any empirical study linking out-of-school children to the 6-3-3-4 system? Were the goals of the policy ever evaluated? What evidence suggests that a new structure would reduce dropout rates, particularly in Northern Nigeria where the problem is most severe?”Rather than focusing primarily on restructuring the education system, he urged the government to prioritise issues that directly affect school participation, including stronger political commitment, improved teacher motivation, poverty reduction, school infrastructure, security, curriculum reforms that balance local values with technological advancement, genuinely free education, wider access to schools, especially in the North, and greater public enlightenment on population management.“There is no correlation between the rate of out-of-school children and the 6-3-3-4 system, except if the honourable minister can empirically justify that,” Gbenu said.“The minister should address those concerns which touch directly on out-of-school children if that is the focus of his administration. Replacing the 6-3-3-4 system is another policy matter entirely that requires extensive consultation with critical stakeholders.”While some education experts insist the proposal risks addressing the wrong problem, others believe integrating junior and senior secondary education under one uninterrupted structure could improve learner retention and reduce administrative bottlenecks.For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. According to him, there is no empirical evidence establishing a direct relationship between the 6-3-3-4 structure and Nigeria’s out-of-school crisis.He argued that before replacing an existing education model, policymakers should first determine whether the original objectives of the system were ever properly evaluated.Gbenu posed several fundamental questions: “Was there any empirical study linking out-of-school children to the 6-3-3-4 system? Were the goals of the policy ever evaluated? What evidence suggests that a new structure would reduce dropout rates, particularly in Northern Nigeria where the problem is most severe?”Rather than focusing primarily on restructuring the education system, he urged the government to prioritise issues that directly affect school participation, including stronger political commitment, improved teacher motivation, poverty reduction, school infrastructure, security, curriculum reforms that balance local values with technological advancement, genuinely free education, wider access to schools, especially in the North, and greater public enlightenment on population management.“There is no correlation between the rate of out-of-school children and the 6-3-3-4 system, except if the honourable minister can empirically justify that,” Gbenu said.“The minister should address those concerns which touch directly on out-of-school children if that is the focus of his administration. Replacing the 6-3-3-4 system is another policy matter entirely that requires extensive consultation with critical stakeholders.”While some education experts insist the proposal risks addressing the wrong problem, others believe integrating junior and senior secondary education under one uninterrupted structure could improve learner retention and reduce administrative bottlenecks.For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. He argued that before replacing an existing education model, policymakers should first determine whether the original objectives of the system were ever properly evaluated.Gbenu posed several fundamental questions: “Was there any empirical study linking out-of-school children to the 6-3-3-4 system? Were the goals of the policy ever evaluated? What evidence suggests that a new structure would reduce dropout rates, particularly in Northern Nigeria where the problem is most severe?”Rather than focusing primarily on restructuring the education system, he urged the government to prioritise issues that directly affect school participation, including stronger political commitment, improved teacher motivation, poverty reduction, school infrastructure, security, curriculum reforms that balance local values with technological advancement, genuinely free education, wider access to schools, especially in the North, and greater public enlightenment on population management.“There is no correlation between the rate of out-of-school children and the 6-3-3-4 system, except if the honourable minister can empirically justify that,” Gbenu said.“The minister should address those concerns which touch directly on out-of-school children if that is the focus of his administration. Replacing the 6-3-3-4 system is another policy matter entirely that requires extensive consultation with critical stakeholders.”While some education experts insist the proposal risks addressing the wrong problem, others believe integrating junior and senior secondary education under one uninterrupted structure could improve learner retention and reduce administrative bottlenecks.For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. Gbenu posed several fundamental questions: “Was there any empirical study linking out-of-school children to the 6-3-3-4 system? Were the goals of the policy ever evaluated? What evidence suggests that a new structure would reduce dropout rates, particularly in Northern Nigeria where the problem is most severe?”Rather than focusing primarily on restructuring the education system, he urged the government to prioritise issues that directly affect school participation, including stronger political commitment, improved teacher motivation, poverty reduction, school infrastructure, security, curriculum reforms that balance local values with technological advancement, genuinely free education, wider access to schools, especially in the North, and greater public enlightenment on population management.“There is no correlation between the rate of out-of-school children and the 6-3-3-4 system, except if the honourable minister can empirically justify that,” Gbenu said.“The minister should address those concerns which touch directly on out-of-school children if that is the focus of his administration. Replacing the 6-3-3-4 system is another policy matter entirely that requires extensive consultation with critical stakeholders.”While some education experts insist the proposal risks addressing the wrong problem, others believe integrating junior and senior secondary education under one uninterrupted structure could improve learner retention and reduce administrative bottlenecks.For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. Rather than focusing primarily on restructuring the education system, he urged the government to prioritise issues that directly affect school participation, including stronger political commitment, improved teacher motivation, poverty reduction, school infrastructure, security, curriculum reforms that balance local values with technological advancement, genuinely free education, wider access to schools, especially in the North, and greater public enlightenment on population management.“There is no correlation between the rate of out-of-school children and the 6-3-3-4 system, except if the honourable minister can empirically justify that,” Gbenu said.“The minister should address those concerns which touch directly on out-of-school children if that is the focus of his administration. Replacing the 6-3-3-4 system is another policy matter entirely that requires extensive consultation with critical stakeholders.”While some education experts insist the proposal risks addressing the wrong problem, others believe integrating junior and senior secondary education under one uninterrupted structure could improve learner retention and reduce administrative bottlenecks.For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. “There is no correlation between the rate of out-of-school children and the 6-3-3-4 system, except if the honourable minister can empirically justify that,” Gbenu said.“The minister should address those concerns which touch directly on out-of-school children if that is the focus of his administration. Replacing the 6-3-3-4 system is another policy matter entirely that requires extensive consultation with critical stakeholders.”While some education experts insist the proposal risks addressing the wrong problem, others believe integrating junior and senior secondary education under one uninterrupted structure could improve learner retention and reduce administrative bottlenecks.For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. “The minister should address those concerns which touch directly on out-of-school children if that is the focus of his administration. Replacing the 6-3-3-4 system is another policy matter entirely that requires extensive consultation with critical stakeholders.”While some education experts insist the proposal risks addressing the wrong problem, others believe integrating junior and senior secondary education under one uninterrupted structure could improve learner retention and reduce administrative bottlenecks.For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. While some education experts insist the proposal risks addressing the wrong problem, others believe integrating junior and senior secondary education under one uninterrupted structure could improve learner retention and reduce administrative bottlenecks.For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. For the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Prof Kehinde Kester, the proposal is a welcome development, provided the government demonstrates the political will to implement it effectively.He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. He argued that collapsing the administrative separation between junior and senior secondary schools could reduce personnel costs, improve continuity in students’ academic progression and encourage peer mentoring among learners.Related NewsKaduna plans life skills, gender education in schoolsLekki school wins Lagos science challengeAlumni urge Ondo to fix school infrastructure, recruit teachers“To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. “To me, it is an excellent idea,” he said.“When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. “When students remain within one school system, there is continuity. They naturally progress from one level to another without the psychological impression that they have completed a stage of education. It also encourages interaction between older and younger students, creating opportunities for peer mentoring.”Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. Kester also believes the reform could streamline school administration by eliminating the need for separate principals and duplicated operational structures.However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. However, he warned that the success of the policy would depend almost entirely on implementation.“There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. “There must be a very strong political will,” he said. “Government must pay attention to teacher-student ratios, infrastructure and funding. Otherwise, we may end up with overcrowded classrooms and another well-intended policy that fails in practice.”He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. He further argued that an uninterrupted 12-year structure could discourage early school leaving because students would no longer perceive the completion of Junior Secondary School as the end of a distinct educational phase.“In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. “In the past, some students finished junior secondary school and simply stopped. Under a continuous system, dropping out at that stage would mean leaving school entirely, which may encourage more learners to complete their secondary education.”Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. Yet, Kester acknowledged that one of the original objectives of the 6-3-3-4 system had already been undermined by years of neglect.“The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. “The intention was that students who completed junior secondary school could proceed to technical colleges and vocational education,” he noted. “But where are those technical colleges today? Many of them have virtually disappeared.”Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. Prof Idou Kehinde of the Faculty of Education, University of Lagos, argued that successive governments have never faithfully implemented the existing policy, making it difficult to conclude that the structure itself is defective.According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. According to him, the problem lies less with the design of the 6-3-3-4 system than with decades of poor implementation.“The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. “The curriculum for Junior Secondary School was designed to prepare students for multiple pathways,” he explained. “It was meant to expose them not only to senior secondary education but also to technical schools and vocational centres. Unfortunately, only one pathway – the transition to senior secondary school – received any real attention.”Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. Drawing from his experience as a classroom teacher, Kehinde recalled how many of the workshops and equipment supplied to schools during the early years of the policy were either abandoned or never put into use.He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. He cited examples of expensive woodworking machines that remained idle for years because schools lacked trained personnel or the commitment to utilise them effectively.“Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. “Integrated science, which was intended to provide practical scientific exposure at the junior secondary level, often became entirely theoretical because schools lacked laboratories and functional equipment.“The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. “The facilities were either unavailable or left unused,” he said. “That happened in many schools, especially in rural communities. So the policy itself was never allowed to succeed.”For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. For Kehinde, simply changing the nomenclature or administrative structure is unlikely to reduce the country’s out-of-school population.“A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. “A child determined to drop out can still drop out, whether the system is separated or continuous,” he argued.“The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. “The more important question is: why are children leaving school in the first place? Until we answer that question, changing structures alone will not solve the problem.”He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. He identified chronic underfunding, inadequate teacher recruitment, overcrowded classrooms and weak political commitment as more pressing issues deserving government attention.“Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. “Education is expensive,” he said. “It requires sustained investment. Go beyond the urban centres and visit public schools in rural communities. You will understand the scale of the challenges. Many schools simply do not have enough teachers or adequate learning facilities.”Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. Outside academia, similar concerns have been expressed by stakeholders in the education sector.The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. The General Secretary of the Association of Independent Publishers of Nigeria, Iru-Davies Bonaventure, described the proposal to abolish the junior secondary structure as potentially disastrous if pursued without addressing the underlying problems confronting education.For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. For him, the issue is not the structure of the system but the steady erosion of its foundations.“Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. “Education is built on foundations,” he said.“The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. “The crisis is not the existence of Junior Secondary School. The crisis is neglect.”He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. He argued that poor teacher welfare, inadequate learning facilities, weak supervision, widespread poverty and corruption have done far more damage to the education system than the current structure ever could.Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. Rather than abolishing Junior Secondary School, Bonaventure urged the government to recruit more qualified teachers, improve remuneration, institutionalise regular teacher training, strengthen school monitoring mechanisms, provide adequate instructional facilities and create safer learning environments.He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. He also advocated scholarship programmes and merit-based awards to motivate students while promoting value-based education capable of instilling positive character in young Nigerians.“I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. “I passionately appeal to the Minister of Education to have a rethink,” he said. “Do not cut the foundation. Fix the foundation.”Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. Former National Librarian, Professor Olatokunbo Aina, however, viewed the proposal from a different perspective.Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. Having witnessed the scale of educational exclusion in Northern Nigeria, particularly among Almajiri children, he believes any genuine effort aimed at reducing the country’s out-of-school population deserves serious consideration.“If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. “If you have travelled across parts of the North, you will appreciate the magnitude of the problem,” he said.“I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. “I have seen thousands of children roaming the streets when they should be in school. Anything the government wants to do that can genuinely reduce that number is welcome.”For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. For Aina, the proposal is workable, provided it forms part of a broader strategy to expand access to education rather than merely altering administrative structures.Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned. Whether Nigeria ultimately adopts a 12-year basic education structure or retains the current arrangement, experts are of the view that the country’s education crisis cannot be solved through structural reforms alone. They note that governments must confront chronic underfunding, insecurity, poverty, teacher shortages and weak policy implementation, arguing that millions of children will remain outside the classroom regardless of how many times the system is redesigned.