JAMB UTME - Use of English - 2020

The financing of the university will always be a vexatious problem not only because of the need for it to maintain a level of independence that allows for the thriving of intellectual pursuit but also for the size of the funding that is required to maintain an acceptable level ofinfrastructurein a modern university. The experience of the Nigerian university in recent years has, in this regard, been almost alarming. The funding levels requited constitute sufficient reasons for diversifying the sources. Even if the government was in a position on its own to meet all of the university's financial requirements, I consider it desirable that every effort be made to reduce such contribution in the interest of university autonomy. I also hold the view that theuniversity should seek to become dependent, in a substantial way, on funds generated from within. In other words, the sources of funding the university should be diversified as much as possible. Based on this principle, ·we can identify four sources - government, industry, students, and individual philanthropists. I must add quickly that each source has its own set of problems in its continuous interaction with the university, which ought to be addressed here.

Of all the four major sourcesof financing university education mentioned above, contribution through fees from the students involves intricate issues of specialconcern If government gives as an expression of its obligation to promote the general welfare of society if industry gives in order to enhance its chances of procurement of needed human information and material resources, as well as enhance its social responsibility if the general public gives as an indication of voluntary support for a worthy social cause, students (and by inference, their parents) should give in order to purchase an economic good for meeting their own felt need in the expectation that they will be satisfied with the product purchased.

[Adapted from Onosode, GO: 'The politics of Managing People, Prospects and Poverty: The Role of the University, 1990 OAU Convocation}

The financing of the university will always be a vexatious problem not only because of the need for it to maintain a level of independence that allows for the thriving of intellectual pursuit but also for the size of the funding that is required to maintain an acceptable level ofinfrastructurein a modern university. The experience of the Nigerian university in recent years has, in this regard, been almost alarming. The funding levels requited constitute sufficient reasons for diversifying the sources. Even if the government was in a position on its own to meet all of the university's financial requirements, I consider it desirable that every effort be made to reduce such contribution in the interest of university autonomy. I also hold the view that theuniversity should seek to become dependent, in a substantial way, on funds generated from within. In other words, the sources of funding the university should be diversified as much as possible. Based on this principle, ·we can identify four sources - government, industry, students, and individual philanthropists. I must add quickly that each source has its own set of problems in its continuous interaction with the university, which ought to be addressed here.

Of all the four major sourcesof financing university education mentioned above, contribution through fees from the students involves intricate issues of specialconcern If government gives as an expression of its obligation to promote the general welfare of society if industry gives in order to enhance its chances of procurement of needed human information and material resources, as well as enhance its social responsibility if the general public gives as an indication of voluntary support for a worthy social cause, students (and by inference, their parents) should give in order to purchase an economic good for meeting their own felt need in the expectation that they will be satisfied with the product purchased.

[Adapted from Onosode, GO: 'The politics of Managing People, Prospects and Poverty: The Role of the University, 1990 OAU Convocation}

Theatre in the recent past used to be a very popular art in traditional African society. It used to be a point of intersection where members of the community not only cometo entertain themselves, 'but join heads together'. In the traditional context of African drama, therefore, theatre was popular and respectable institution which preserved the people's culture and tradition. Theatre was popular with the people because it emphasized community participation, peace and progress. The presentations focused on the people's lives, their aspirations, fears, and hopes. But today, the situation is different. Theatre is becoming very unpopular.

Africa of the present age is pre-occupied with many problems yearning for immediate solutions. The continent is facing hydra-head challenges - challenges on the political, social, and economic scenes. In a world where Science and Technology are seen as the solutions to these problems, little attention is paid to the arts. Literature generally, and drama in particular is often rated very low on the utility-scale. Many Africa today look at drama and theatreas a mere thing of fun, a joke so to say.

Elitism is another barrier that militates against the appreciation of theatreas a communal art. Folktheatre is appreciated by a negligible number of people, contemporary focus is on literary theatre. Unfortunately, literary theatre only pretends to serve the interest of its society while in reality, it has a foreign audience in mind. The use of European and American theatricalconventions by our academic playwrights can bear witness to this anomaly.

The popularity of the literary African theatre is further marred by the medium of communication as most literary dramas in Africa are written in foreign languages which are not understood by many Africans. The question often asked is whether the artist should climb down to the level of his community of stay at his exalted height and wait for the community to gradually move up to him.

The financing of the university will always be a vexatious problem not only because of the need for it to maintain a level of independence that allows for the thriving of intellectual pursuit but also for the size of the funding that is required to maintain an acceptable level ofinfrastructurein a modern university. The experience of the Nigerian university in recent years has, in this regard, been almost alarming. The funding levels requited constitute sufficient reasons for diversifying the sources. Even if the government was in a position on its own to meet all of the university's financial requirements, I consider it desirable that every effort be made to reduce such contribution in the interest of university autonomy. I also hold the view that theuniversity should seek to become dependent, in a substantial way, on funds generated from within. In other words, the sources of funding the university should be diversified as much as possible. Based on this principle, ·we can identify four sources - government, industry, students, and individual philanthropists. I must add quickly that each source has its own set of problems in its continuous interaction with the university, which ought to be addressed here.

Of all the four major sourcesof financing university education mentioned above, contribution through fees from the students involves intricate issues of specialconcern If government gives as an expression of its obligation to promote the general welfare of society if industry gives in order to enhance its chances of procurement of needed human information and material resources, as well as enhance its social responsibility if the general public gives as an indication of voluntary support for a worthy social cause, students (and by inference, their parents) should give in order to purchase an economic good for meeting their own felt need in the expectation that they will be satisfied with the product purchased.

[Adapted from Onosode, GO: 'The politics of Managing People, Prospects and Poverty: The Role of the University, 1990 OAU Convocation}

Theatre in the recent past used to be a very popular art in traditional African society. It used to be a point of intersection where members of the community not only cometo entertain themselves, 'but join heads together'. In the traditional context of African drama, therefore, theatre was popular and respectable institution which preserved the people's culture and tradition. Theatre was popular with the people because it emphasized community participation, peace and progress. The presentations focused on the people's lives, their aspirations, fears, and hopes. But today, the situation is different. Theatre is becoming very unpopular.

Africa of the present age is pre-occupied with many problems yearning for immediate solutions. The continent is facing hydra-head challenges - challenges on the political, social, and economic scenes. In a world where Science and Technology are seen as the solutions to these problems, little attention is paid to the arts. Literature generally, and drama in particular is often rated very low on the utility-scale. Many Africa today look at drama and theatreas a mere thing of fun, a joke so to say.

Elitism is another barrier that militates against the appreciation of theatreas a communal art. Folktheatre is appreciated by a negligible number of people, contemporary focus is on literary theatre. Unfortunately, literary theatre only pretends to serve the interest of its society while in reality, it has a foreign audience in mind. The use of European and American theatricalconventions by our academic playwrights can bear witness to this anomaly.

The popularity of the literary African theatre is further marred by the medium of communication as most literary dramas in Africa are written in foreign languages which are not understood by many Africans. The question often asked is whether the artist should climb down to the level of his community of stay at his exalted height and wait for the community to gradually move up to him.

The financing of the university will always be a vexatious problem not only because of the need for it to maintain a level of independence that allows for the thriving of intellectual pursuit but also for the size of the funding that is required to maintain an acceptable level ofinfrastructurein a modern university. The experience of the Nigerian university in recent years has, in this regard, been almost alarming. The funding levels requited constitute sufficient reasons for diversifying the sources. Even if the government was in a position on its own to meet all of the university's financial requirements, I consider it desirable that every effort be made to reduce such contribution in the interest of university autonomy. I also hold the view that theuniversity should seek to become dependent, in a substantial way, on funds generated from within. In other words, the sources of funding the university should be diversified as much as possible. Based on this principle, ·we can identify four sources - government, industry, students, and individual philanthropists. I must add quickly that each source has its own set of problems in its continuous interaction with the university, which ought to be addressed here.

Of all the four major sourcesof financing university education mentioned above, contribution through fees from the students involves intricate issues of specialconcern If government gives as an expression of its obligation to promote the general welfare of society if industry gives in order to enhance its chances of procurement of needed human information and material resources, as well as enhance its social responsibility if the general public gives as an indication of voluntary support for a worthy social cause, students (and by inference, their parents) should give in order to purchase an economic good for meeting their own felt need in the expectation that they will be satisfied with the product purchased.

[Adapted from Onosode, GO: 'The politics of Managing People, Prospects and Poverty: The Role of the University, 1990 OAU Convocation}

The financing of the university will always be a vexatious problem not only because of the need for it to maintain a level of independence that allows for the thriving of intellectual pursuit but also for the size of the funding that is required to maintain an acceptable level ofinfrastructurein a modern university. The experience of the Nigerian university in recent years has, in this regard, been almost alarming. The funding levels requited constitute sufficient reasons for diversifying the sources. Even if the government was in a position on its own to meet all of the university's financial requirements, I consider it desirable that every effort be made to reduce such contribution in the interest of university autonomy. I also hold the view that theuniversity should seek to become dependent, in a substantial way, on funds generated from within. In other words, the sources of funding the university should be diversified as much as possible. Based on this principle, ·we can identify four sources - government, industry, students, and individual philanthropists. I must add quickly that each source has its own set of problems in its continuous interaction with the university, which ought to be addressed here.

Of all the four major sourcesof financing university education mentioned above, contribution through fees from the students involves intricate issues of specialconcern If government gives as an expression of its obligation to promote the general welfare of society if industry gives in order to enhance its chances of procurement of needed human information and material resources, as well as enhance its social responsibility if the general public gives as an indication of voluntary support for a worthy social cause, students (and by inference, their parents) should give in order to purchase an economic good for meeting their own felt need in the expectation that they will be satisfied with the product purchased.

[Adapted from Onosode, GO: 'The politics of Managing People, Prospects and Poverty: The Role of the University, 1990 OAU Convocation}

Theatre in the recent past used to be a very popular art in traditional African society. It used to be a point of intersection where members of the community not only cometo entertain themselves, 'but join heads together'. In the traditional context of African drama, therefore, theatre was popular and respectable institution which preserved the people's culture and tradition. Theatre was popular with the people because it emphasized community participation, peace and progress. The presentations focused on the people's lives, their aspirations, fears, and hopes. But today, the situation is different. Theatre is becoming very unpopular.

Africa of the present age is pre-occupied with many problems yearning for immediate solutions. The continent is facing hydra-head challenges - challenges on the political, social, and economic scenes. In a world where Science and Technology are seen as the solutions to these problems, little attention is paid to the arts. Literature generally, and drama in particular is often rated very low on the utility-scale. Many Africa today look at drama and theatreas a mere thing of fun, a joke so to say.

Elitism is another barrier that militates against the appreciation of theatreas a communal art. Folktheatre is appreciated by a negligible number of people, contemporary focus is on literary theatre. Unfortunately, literary theatre only pretends to serve the interest of its society while in reality, it has a foreign audience in mind. The use of European and American theatricalconventions by our academic playwrights can bear witness to this anomaly.

The popularity of the literary African theatre is further marred by the medium of communication as most literary dramas in Africa are written in foreign languages which are not understood by many Africans. The question often asked is whether the artist should climb down to the level of his community of stay at his exalted height and wait for the community to gradually move up to him.

Theatre in the recent past used to be a very popular art in traditional African society. It used to be a point of intersection where members of the community not only cometo entertain themselves, 'but join heads together'. In the traditional context of African drama, therefore, theatre was popular and respectable institution which preserved the people's culture and tradition. Theatre was popular with the people because it emphasized community participation, peace and progress. The presentations focused on the people's lives, their aspirations, fears, and hopes. But today, the situation is different. Theatre is becoming very unpopular.

Africa of the present age is pre-occupied with many problems yearning for immediate solutions. The continent is facing hydra-head challenges - challenges on the political, social, and economic scenes. In a world where Science and Technology are seen as the solutions to these problems, little attention is paid to the arts. Literature generally, and drama in particular is often rated very low on the utility-scale. Many Africa today look at drama and theatreas a mere thing of fun, a joke so to say.

Elitism is another barrier that militates against the appreciation of theatreas a communal art. Folktheatre is appreciated by a negligible number of people, contemporary focus is on literary theatre. Unfortunately, literary theatre only pretends to serve the interest of its society while in reality, it has a foreign audience in mind. The use of European and American theatricalconventions by our academic playwrights can bear witness to this anomaly.

The popularity of the literary African theatre is further marred by the medium of communication as most literary dramas in Africa are written in foreign languages which are not understood by many Africans. The question often asked is whether the artist should climb down to the level of his community of stay at his exalted height and wait for the community to gradually move up to him.

Theatre in the recent past used to be a very popular art in traditional African society. It used to be a point of intersection where members of the community not only cometo entertain themselves, 'but join heads together'. In the traditional context of African drama, therefore, theatre was popular and respectable institution which preserved the people's culture and tradition. Theatre was popular with the people because it emphasized community participation, peace and progress. The presentations focused on the people's lives, their aspirations, fears, and hopes. But today, the situation is different. Theatre is becoming very unpopular.

Africa of the present age is pre-occupied with many problems yearning for immediate solutions. The continent is facing hydra-head challenges - challenges on the political, social, and economic scenes. In a world where Science and Technology are seen as the solutions to these problems, little attention is paid to the arts. Literature generally, and drama in particular is often rated very low on the utility-scale. Many Africa today look at drama and theatreas a mere thing of fun, a joke so to say.

Elitism is another barrier that militates against the appreciation of theatreas a communal art. Folktheatre is appreciated by a negligible number of people, contemporary focus is on literary theatre. Unfortunately, literary theatre only pretends to serve the interest of its society while in reality, it has a foreign audience in mind. The use of European and American theatricalconventions by our academic playwrights can bear witness to this anomaly.

The popularity of the literary African theatre is further marred by the medium of communication as most literary dramas in Africa are written in foreign languages which are not understood by many Africans. The question often asked is whether the artist should climb down to the level of his community of stay at his exalted height and wait for the community to gradually move up to him.