Assessment of Internal Revenue Generation Techniques of Public Secondary School Managers in Cross River State, Nigeria

Abstract

The poor funding of education in many developing nations, including Nigeria, is widely acknowledged in national and international literature. This indicates the need for alternative approaches to be adopted regarding the supplementation of funds from government and non-government sources. This study takes an empirical approach to evaluate the internal revenue generation strategies adopted by school managers, and how they influence the level of school finance. Quantitative data were obtained from a random sample of 407 secondary school managers (136 principals and 271 viceprincipals) selected from 136 schools in Cross River State, Nigeria. Findings showed that prevalent internal revenue generation techniques adopted by principals include PTA levies, the sale of art and craft materials, alumni support, and funds from parents. Aside from these four, there were seventeen other strategies not utilized by the majority of secondary school principals. It was also revealed that the extent of school finance depended on the level of principals' generation of internal revenue. Based on these findings relevant policy implications are discussed for future school financing and development. It was recommended that workshops should be organized for secondary school managers to learn innovative approaches to generate internal revenue to assist with the smooth running of schools. Contribution/Originality: This study used a new estimation approach to assess the techniques adopted by educational managers in generating funds internally for secondary schools. The study also used a rigorous technique to examine various internally generated revenue (IGR) techniques and the extent to which they are utilized for school-based funding.

Predicting students’ multidimensional learning outcomes in public secondary schools: The roles of school facilities, administrative expenses and curriculum

“…Therefore, the government's national expenditure in funding the education system is important for local expenses at the institutional level (Ekaette et al, 2019;Odigwe & Owan, 2019). Other sources of funds for administrative expenses are internal revenue generation (Mbah & Onuora, 2018;Odigwe, 2020) and alternative funding (Onyeche, 2018). Despite the importance of internal funding and expenditure, the literature has been silent on school managers' administrative expenses.…”

“…In the education sector, most studies have focused on school leaders' budgeting (Sinclair & Malen, 2021), accountability (Keddie & Holloway, 2020;Paletta et al, 2020;Wang et al, 2022), cost-sharing (Alazmi & Al-Kubaisi, 2020;Hayes & Burkett, 2021), internal revenue generation (Mbah & Onuora, 2018;Odigwe, 2020;Onyeche, 2018) fund management (Aliyu, 2018;Odigwe & Owan, 2022;Owan et al, 2021), and resource procurement practices (Buys et al, 2020;Prabhakar et al, 2022) and other related constructs. Although some of these variables are tied to administrative expenses in one or the other (for example, resource procurement), the extent to which principals' day-to-day expenditure predicts students' outcomes was not the focus of the cited studies.…”

“…The researchers created new instruments because none already existed that had suitable psychometric properties for measuring the variables of this study. The items in both instruments were based on previous studies (e.g., Bassey et al, 2019;Lili et al, 2018;Odigwe, 2020;Robert & Owan, 2019), theories/ models (such as "human capital development theory" by Schultz, 1961; "contemporaneous educational production model by Coleman et al (1966) and ideas from consulted field experts. Based on principals' perspectives, the SIQ was designed to measure school facilities, curriculum and administrative expenses.…”

Joint Mediation of Psychosis and Mental Stress on Alcohol Consumption and Graduates’ Job Performance: A PLS Structural Equation Modeling

“…Other scholars have attributed it to graduates being unprepared, having too much theory and insufficient practical content, and engaging in unethical academic activities for good school grades (Arop et al, 2018;Madukwe et al, 2019). Poor school financing (Akomolafe & Aremu, 2016;Odigwe, 2020;Odigwe & Owan, 2019), parental socioeconomic level, nutrition (Akah, Owan, Uduigwomen, et al, 2022), residence, peer pressure, school administration, and evaluation techniques (Onyebuchukwu et al, 2015) are other suspected variables affecting graduates' job performance. For improvement, it has been suggested that rather than relying just on academic grades (which might be deceptive), higher education graduates should have their productivity in the workplace and degree of experience, talents, and competencies evaluated (Ajjawi et al, 2020;Bassey et al, 2019;Espinoza et al, 2020;Nabulsi et al, 2021).…”