The university system, globally conceived, is built on a tripod of teaching, research, and community service. These three core mandates define not only the identity of the academic profession but also its relevance to national development. However, within Nigerian universities, a closer sociological interrogation reveals a wide spectrum of academic identities; some admirable, others troubling, and a few outright detrimental to institutional integrity. These variations are not merely individual differences; they reflect deeper structural, cultural, and systemic realities shaping higher education in Nigeria. Understanding these categories of scholars is crucial for diagnosing the challenges confronting Nigerian universities and for reimagining their future.
At one end of the spectrum are the research-driven scholars the intellectual purists who devote themselves to knowledge production. These academics publish extensively in reputable local and international journals, attract grants, supervise postgraduate students rigorously, and contribute to global scholarly conversations. They are the backbone of any serious university system. Alongside them are the teaching-focused lecturers, whose passion lies in classroom engagement. They prepare diligently, rarely miss classes, mentor students closely, and often leave indelible marks on generations of learners. There also exists a category of balanced academics, who effectively combine teaching excellence with research productivity and meaningful community engagement. These are the ideal embodiments of the university mission, though they are increasingly rare due to systemic pressures.
However, beyond these commendable categories lie a more complex and concerning array of academic identities. There are community engagement enthusiasts, who invest heavily in public speaking, consultancy, NGO activities, and media visibility. While community service is a legitimate component of academic responsibility, it becomes problematic when it overshadows teaching and research. More troubling are the political academics; those who spend disproportionate time scheming for administrative positions such as; Heads of Department, Deans, Directors, Deputy Vice-Chancellors, and even Vice-Chancellors. For them, scholarship becomes secondary to power acquisition. Their offices become arenas of patronage rather than platforms for academic leadership.
Closely related are the academic godfathers and godmothers, who wield informal power by installing protégés (“stooges”) into strategic positions. This patron-client system undermines meritocracy and fosters mediocrity. Another emerging group is the “Owambe scholars”; academics more visible at social events than in lecture halls or research labs. Their intellectual contributions are often minimal, yet their social presence is overwhelming. Then there are the career-stagnant academics, often without PhDs or with outdated qualifications, who have remained on the same rank for years, contributing little to institutional growth. Additionally, the rise of religious caucus academics, who leverage religious affiliations to secure positions and influence decisions, introduces a new layer of identity politics into the academy.
Further complicating this landscape are opportunistic consultants, who prioritize externally funded engagements over institutional responsibilities; publication minimalists, who do just enough to meet promotion criteria without genuine intellectual contribution; and academic entrepreneurs, who commercialize every aspect of university life, from handouts to supervision; often at the expense of quality and ethics. There are also absentee scholars, physically present on payroll but largely absent from academic duties, and intellectual isolationists, who resist collaboration and operate in silos, thereby weakening interdisciplinary growth.
Another significant category within the Nigerian academic landscape is what may be described as “Parapo scholars”; a term that captures those who mobilize ethnic, tribal, or sectional affiliations as instruments of influence within the university system. These academics operate within informal ethnic networks, subtly or overtly leveraging identity politics to secure appointments, influence promotion outcomes, and shape institutional decisions. While the rhetoric of federal character and inclusivity has its legitimate place in national policy, its distortion within academic spaces often leads to the elevation of loyalty over merit. In such contexts, competence, scholarly productivity, and intellectual depth are sometimes subordinated to ethnic alignment or group solidarity. The danger inherent in this phenomenon is profound: it erodes the principle of meritocracy, breeds resentment among staff, deepens divisions within the academic community, and ultimately compromises the quality of leadership and scholarship. When universities become arenas of ethnic bargaining rather than centres of intellectual excellence, the very foundation of the academy is weakened, and the vision of the university as a universal, borderless community of scholars is severely undermined.
The implications of all these fragmented academic culture are profound. When scientists abandon their laboratories for administrative politics, innovation suffers. Laboratories become obsolete, research grants go unutilized, and postgraduate students are left without proper mentorship. The university gradually shifts from a knowledge-producing institution to a bureaucratic arena. This erosion of research culture has direct consequences for national development. In a country grappling with challenges in health, agriculture, technology, and security, the absence of rigorous scientific inquiry is a critical handicap.
Moreover, the politicization of academia breeds inefficiency and corruption. Decision-making becomes driven by loyalty rather than competence. Designated positions are filled not by the most qualified but by the most connected. This undermines institutional credibility and discourages young, talented academics who might otherwise contribute meaningfully. The culture of patronage also stifles dissent and critical thinking; two essential elements of any vibrant academic environment.
The dominance of non-academic pursuits among lecturers also affects teaching quality. Students are shortchanged when lecturers are more committed to meetings, conferences, or political gatherings than to classroom instruction. Poor teaching leads to poorly trained graduates, which in turn affects the labour market and national productivity. The cycle of underdevelopment is thus perpetuated through the very institutions meant to break it.
At a broader level, these dynamics reflect what may be termed a misalignment between educational purpose and societal expectations. Universities are expected to drive innovation, produce skilled manpower, and contribute to social transformation. However, when internal cultures prioritize personal advancement over institutional goals, this alignment is lost. The result is a system that consumes resources without delivering commensurate value to society.
To reverse this trend, there must be a deliberate reorientation of academic values. Promotion criteria should emphasize quality over quantity, and administrative appointments should be based on proven academic leadership rather than political loyalty. Universities must also strengthen accountability mechanisms to ensure that lecturers fulfill their core responsibilities. Mentorship programmes, research funding, and capacity-building initiatives should be prioritized to support genuine scholars.
In conclusion, the Nigerian university system is a microcosm of the larger society; rich in potential but challenged by competing interests and structural inefficiencies. While the diversity of academic identities is not inherently negative, the dominance of non-academic orientations poses a serious threat to institutional integrity and national development. The future of Nigeria depends significantly on the health of its universities. If scholars abandon scholarship for politics, and laboratories for lobbying, the cost will not only be academic decline but also a weakened nation unable to compete in a knowledge-driven global economy.
Oni is a Professor of Sociology, in the Department of Educational Foundations, Faculty of Education, University of Lagos
First, my gratitude to God for the opportunity to be tutored, mentored and nutured by you, my pride of place till eternity. Prof sir, you have said it all. And if I may borow Chinua Achebe words in the title of a book, I paraphrase ” their was a Ivory Tower and in this context: Nigeria higher institutions of earning rather than learning.” This narative starred me in my face during my PhD where I saw some of my colleagues cut corners and so called supervisors passing out PhD u meritoriously. Well, it’s one thing to get in through the back door but time will surely tell who leaves gallantly via the right exit.
I salute you sir, a distinguish mind and scholarship sacrificing all and unfortunately in a country where politicians have reduce universities to a parting gift like a cap flung to audience in a campaign rally.
My regards.
This is a very intellectual write up by Prof. Soji Oni.l believe the federal government of Nigeria can do justice to the points mentioned on it.
This is a well thought out of reality of the Nigerian university systems. It is hoped that the suggested way out will be internalised by the different individuals concerned by making use of the abundant rich potentials for projection of the university name beyond its boarders.