Ebekozien, A and Aigbavboa, C (2022) Evaluation of built environment programmes accreditation in the 21st century education system in Nigeria: Stakeholders' perspective. International Journal of Building Pathology and Adaptation, 41(6), pp. 102-118. ISSN 23984708
Abstract
Purpose: The built environment is a complex sector that demands coordination and cooperation of stakeholders. Construction projects from the complex sector require skills, services, and integration of major disciplines in the built environment. Sustainability of the major disciplines' standards regarding the appropriateness of the built environment tertiary education cannot be over-emphasised in Nigeria. Studies concerning Nigeria's built environment programmes accreditation (BEPA) in the 21st-century education system are scarce. Thus, the study investigated the relevance and perceived factors hindering Nigeria's BEPA in the 21st-century education system. Also, the study proffered measures to improve Nigerian built environment tertiary education accreditation ranking. Design/methodology/approach: Data were sourced from elite virtual interviews across Nigeria. The interviewees were knowledgeable about Nigeria's built environment programmes accreditation, and many of them have been directly or indirectly involved. The investigators utilised a thematic analysis for the collated data and enhanced it with secondary sources. Findings: The study revealed that several Nigerian academia in the built environment lack fame in research, publication, and citations due to barriers in their workplace. It has hindered their global institution's accreditation and ranking standards. Findings identified inadequate basic infrastructure, obsolete curricula, lack of research novelty, lack of higher education institutions funding, inadequate staffing and lax upskilling and reskilling, and unethical practices “systematic corruption” as major factors hindering BEPA. Also, findings proffered measures to improve Nigeria's BEPA global ranking. Research limitations/implications: The study is limited to the perceived barriers and measures to improve BEPA in the 21st-century in Nigeria via semi-structured virtual interviews. Future study is needed to validate the findings as highlighted in the thematic network. Practical implications: The paper confirms that the BEPA requires innovative and multidisciplinary measures to improve the global ranking of these programmes and, by extension, the higher education institutions ranking globally. The paper would stir major stakeholders and advance the built environment programmes quality accreditation regarding international best practices and maintain the minimum standards. Originality/value: The paper comprehensively analyses the perceived factors and proffered measures to improve Nigeria's BEPA in the 21st-century via a thematic network. The outcome intends to improve the global ranking and stir stakeholders to reposition and showcase Nigeria's built environment programmes to the world.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | accreditation; built environment programmes; Nigeria; stakeholders; teaching |
| Index terms: | integration, methodology, unethical practices, programme, Nigeria, thematic analysis, best practice, cooperation, interview, tertiary, funding, publication, construction project, academia, corruption, higher education institution, built environment, future study, coordination |
| Subjects: | infrastructure and transport systems, production management, research dissemination and communication, Geography, methods and analysis, economic analysis, organizational analysis, psychology, educational institutions, project controls, management, ethical practice, business, research methods, curriculum development, professional ethics, research design and methodology, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Geographical Context, Information Management, Time Control, Urban Studies, Legal Issues, Project Management, Research Practice, Organizational Design, Education |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here