School Location and Private Cost of Secondary Education in Oyo and Osun States, Nigeria

School Location and Private Cost of Secondary Education in Oyo and Osun States, Nigeria

T. L. Adepoju, Ph.D.^*, F. B. Bamire, Ph.D., O.R. Oparinde, Ph.D.

Dept. of Educational Management, Faculty of Education, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife. Osun State – Nigeria.

^*Corresponding Author

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.805179

Received: 05 January 2024; Revised: 21 January 2024; Accepted: 25 January 2024; Published: 24 June 2024

ABSTRACT

The study established the relationship between location of schools and private costs (cost of transportation, feeding, books and uniform) of secondary education in Oyo and Osun States, Nigeria. It also investigated the difference in the private cost of secondary education in urban and rural secondary schools and the parameters employed to site secondary schools in the two states under study. The study adopted a descriptive survey research design.  The population of the study consisted of all the senior secondary school III (SSS3) students in all the 63 local government areas in both Oyo and Osun states (Oyo and Osun states are made up of 33 and 30 local government areas respectively). The sample of the study comprised 2,000 SSSIII students (1,040 from Oyo state and 960 from Osun state) from 100 secondary schools (52 from Oyo state and 48 from Osun state) in 32 Local Government Areas (LGAs) of the two states under study (17 LGAs from Oyo state and 15 LGAs from Osun state). The selection of the students, schools and local government areas was based on Probability Proportional to Size (PPS) sampling method.  The instrument used for data collection is a questionnaire titled “Students’ Questionnaire on Secondary School Location and Private Cost” (SQSSLPC). Seven null hypotheses were formulated to guide the study. The results of the study showed that location of secondary schools and private cost of secondary education were not significantly related (χ² =0.8896, table value = 3.84, df = 1, P > 0.05) and there was no significant difference in the private cost of secondary education between urban and rural secondary schools (t-cal, -1.23 < t-crit, 1.96, df = 1,992). The study concludes that educational planners have essential roles to play in the process of locating secondary schools in the states.

Keywords: Private cost, predictor, secondary education; school location

INTRODUCTION

Education is a cornerstone of economic growth and social development and a principal means of improving the welfare of individuals.  It increases the productive capacity of societies and their political, economic, and scientific institutions (Adepoju, 2009). The importance of secondary education in the total development of an individual has been increasingly recognised in most societies.

In recent times, Nigeria realised the need for physical planning of activities both at the national and regional levels.  However, the activities of government have not justified its objective because of the short-term needs of economy and problems of quality and geographical aspects.

According to Ogolla, Nyerere & Njihia (2021), globally, countries in Latin America have reached universal primary education and more efforts have been put in place to ensure increase in access and retention in secondary schools. About 90 percent of learners transit from primary to lower secondary and about 80 percent complete that level of education successfully. However, at upper secondary, the completion rate is only 59 percent (UNESCO, 2017 in Ogolla, Nyerere & Njihia, 2021). In the United Kingdom, policies like lengthening compulsory schooling to make the basic education more conducive have been established. However, the problem of access and retention in secondary schools is still a major problem (UNESCO, 2019). In Africa, states have embraced various educational policies to aid the financing of mandatory education. Countries like Malawi, Kenya, Ghana and Sierra Leone have abolished tuition fee in secondary schools. This reform is linked to the efforts made by these countries towards achieving Sustainable Development Goal number 4.1 which advocates for quality and equitable education for all basic education learners by the year 2030. The report further stated that in Uganda, only 2.5 percent of the GDP is allocated to education by the government. This is one of the lowest spending in education in the world (Ogolla, Nyerere & Njihia, 2021).

The location of public facilities such as health care and education services according to Adepoju (2002), Effiom-Edem & Edoho (2017), Nwogu (2010), Bosede (2010), Agboola & Adeyemi (2012) has been left for long time without an overall location strategy. The overall result of the poor funding and lack of guided location of schools and healthcare services according to Ibitoye (1996) is inadequacy of school facilities resulting to irregular commuting time by pupils. It also creates dichotomy between private and public schools, and even among public schools in the provision of services, teaching and quality staff.

Private costs in the context of this study are the costs directly borne by students or their parents on transportation, feeding, books and uniform. To a very large extent, the location or distributions of schools do exert much influence on the private costs of secondary education all over the World. Of course, if school is distantly located to where the students are living, it would increase the cost of transportation, also, if inflationary rate is high in the country, the costs of feeding and books / uniform would go up.

The distribution of secondary schools in both urban and rural areas could have serious implications on the private cost of secondary education.  For instance, secondary schools should be planned such that students living in all parts of the state can have cheap means of transport and easy access to them.  In order to reduce the private cost, school size has to be related to students’ potential population within the different communities or zones.  The provisions of nearby schools will undoubtedly help to increase enrolment rate, reduce transportation cost and bridge the gap of educational disparities within the state.

Literature abounds on school location and cost of secondary education within and outside Nigeria. School location refers to the particular place, in relation to other areas in the physical environment (rural or urban), where the school is sited. In Nigeria, rural life is uniform, homogenous and less complex than that of urban centers, with cultural diversity, which often is suspected to affect students’ academic achievement (Effiom-Edem & Edoho, 2017). This is because urban centers are better favoured with respect to distribution of social amenities such as pipe borne water, electricity, healthcare facilities while the rural areas are less favoured.

According to Effiom-Edem & Edoho (2017), the prevailing conditions imply that learning opportunities in Nigerian schools differ from school to school. It would appear therefore that students in Nigerian urban schools have more educational opportunities than their counterparts in rural schools have. While some studies have shown positive influence, others have shown negative influence of school location on the students’ learning outcome or achievement. In a study by Nwogu (2010), it was found that location was significant in learning aspects of mathematics and basic science that involve angles, with rural students exhibiting more learning difficulties than their urban counterparts do.

Bosede (2010) showed that there is no difference in performance of students because of location. Location here is in terms of whether the place of study or school is sited in rural or urban community.  The structure of education cost at higher level is different compared to primary and secondary school. Accommodation and living expenses are significant factors contributing to the private cost. In addition, students also need to pay for computer, communication and related items (Ismail, Awang & Noor, 2016).

Private cost is incurred either by the individual, household or parents. It is further divided into direct private cost and indirect private cost. Direct private cost is the expenditure incurred directly by the household for educating an individual while indirect cost (opportunity cost) is the income foregone by the student while obtaining education and not being employed in the next best alternative. The calculation of private cost is based on primary data and it involves inclusion of many items of expenditure, which are likely to be misinterpreted or over-estimated by the respondents. Therefore, few scholars have calculated private cost of education. Direct private cost is the expenditure on schooling borne by the household. Besides expenses on fees, books, stationery and equipment, boarding and lodging payments, conveyance, transport and entertainment those on private tuition and coaching as well as pre-admission expenses are also included (Salim, 1994).

In their study on the analysis of private and social costs of education in Malaysia by Ismail, Awang & Noor (2016), it was found that on average, students spent about MYR3151.35 per semester or MYR630 per month. The cost per student for learning resources such as books, reference materials, papers, stationaries, course activities and related items for learning was MYR3700. This cost was higher at the final year of study because of industrial training and final year project. An average private cost of education at university level was highest at the first year (MYR19866.92) and followed by the final year (MYR17283.36). The study also found that family or self-funding and education loan or a scholarship are the two sources of funding education by students. Majority of the students (60.5%) claimed that the loan given was insufficient to support the cost of their study.

According to Agboola & Adeyemi (2012), someone has to foot the bill of education most especially in the wake of ever-increasing growth of youth population and the attendance increase in enrolment ratio. Therefore, for the aims of the education system to be achieved, both the government and private individuals who demand education must actively participate in financing the cost of education. It is to be noted that private individuals cannot be actively involved in financing the private cost of education without having a clear knowledge of the total cost of private education.

Asemhokhai & Josiah (2021) in their study ascertained the private cost of students in the Faculty of Education, Ambrose Alli University, Ekpoma, Edo State. The specific objectives of the study were to: 1. ascertain the private costs of students in the faculty of education, Ambrose Alli University, Ekpoma, Edo State; 2. investigate the difference between the private costs of faculty of education students on the basis of their halls of residence; and 3. investigate the difference between the private costs of male and female students of the faculty of education, Ambrose Alli University, Ekpoma, Edo State. The study found that the private costs of students varied based on the course of studies in the Faculty. It was also found that there was no significant difference in the costs borne by students based on their halls of residence while the costs borne by male students was higher than their female counterparts.

In a similar study, Agboola and Adeyemi (2012) carried out a study on analysis of private cost of education in a selected Nigerian university. Data on private costs were obtained with checklist from students, while the demographic and institutional data were obtained from the university records. Percentage, mean, charts and cost-analysis formula were used to analyse data. The results revealed that there was a gap between the average institutional unit cost and private cost. Furthermore, private cost varied across gender, course and level of study and place of residence.

In another study conducted on private cost of education and its effect to access and retention in public secondary schools in Homa Bay County, Kenya by Ogolla, Nyerere & Njihia (2021).  The study aimed at determining which effect the private cost of education has on the secondary school learners’ access and retention in Homa-Bay County, Kenya. The study found that cost of boarding has got a significant effect on access and retention, cost of lunch affects access and retention of students in public secondary schools in Ndhiwa Sub County, opportunity cost affects access and retention of students in public secondary schools in Ndhiwa Sub County. The study concluded that private cost of education like cost of boarding, lunch and opportunity cost hinder access and retention of students in public secondary schools in Ndhiwa Sub County.

James, Simiyu, & Riechi (2016) in their study on factors affecting subsidized free day secondary education in enhancing learners’ retention in secondary schools in Kenya identified several factors and their significant effects on learning retention of students in secondary schools.

Sureiman, Maisiba & Kikechi’s (2016) carried out a study on comparative analysis of students’ direct costs in boarding and day secondary schools in Nyamira County, Kenya. The study tried to compare students’ direct private costs in boarding secondary schools to those in day secondary schools. The descriptive and ex post facto designs were used. The sample comprised of fifteen boarding schools, fifteen-day schools and six hundred form four students. Study findings revealed that the average student’s cost of Kshs 51,177(84.1%) in boarding school is higher than that of Kshs 33,822(71.1%) of day schools. The various costs of boarders were higher than for day scholars while their examination expenditure was not significantly different. The day scholars pay more for only transport because of their more frequency of travel. Both day and boarding schools do not charge the standardized charges as they violate it indirectly through the holiday tuition and remedial teaching levies. The study recommended that the government should increase the subsidy to secondary schools’ expenditure, encourage community income generating initiatives to support secondary education, intensify using a balanced scorecard approach so as to target secondary schools and or areas that need financial or material assistance, improve on the vetting of approved textbooks to reduce costs and ensure optimum enrolment to minimize the costs.

Statement of Research Problem

Educational institutions are expected to be located within a given catchment areas, population structure and adequate planning parameters. Because of its strategic status, secondary school performs consumptive and productive roles (it consumes the output of basic education and produces the input of tertiary education). Observations and research reports (Adepoju, 2002; Adepoju, 2008; Adepoju & Akinwumi, 2000; Adepoju & Akinwumi, 2001; Adepoju & Oluchukwu, 2011; Ismail, Awang & Noor, 2016; Asemhokhai & Josiah,2021) have shown that adequate planning has not always been considered before new secondary schools are established and sited. There are therefore controversies on whether this development has influence on the private cost (cost of transportation, cost of books and uniform, and cost of feeding) been incurred by parents in the course of educating their children in secondary schools either in the urban or rural areas; hence, this study.

The Study Area and Scope

Two states, Oyo and Osun are the states covered in this study. The states are among the 6 states in the southwestern zone in Nigeria. They are similar in terms of background, language and culture. The structures of the two states are presented in Table 1.

Table 1: Structures of the Oyo and Osun States

Sources: 1. Oyo state government (2022). Information about the state. Ibadan: Government Press.

 2. Osun state government (2022). Information about the state. Osogbo: Government Press.

Note:

LA          = Land Area/ Land mass

Pop         = Population

LGAs     = Local Government Areas

NPSS     = Number of Public Secondary Schools

NT          = Number of Teachers

NU         = Number of Universities

NP          = Number of Polytechnics

NCO      = Number of Colleges of Education

F             = Federal

S             = State

P             = Private

Origin and Characteristics of Oyo State

Oyo state is an inland state in southwestern Nigeria. Its capital is Ibadan, the 3^rd most populous city in the country and formerly the second most populous city in Africa. The state coordinates 8⁰ 00 ’N, 4⁰00’E. Oyo state has a projected population of 7,840,864, by 2016 National Population Census with land area/mass of 28,454km². In terms of education, the state is doing well. The state has 2,004 public primary schools and 971 private nursery/primary schools. There are 806 public secondary schools spread across the 33 local government areas with 64,611 teachers including 7 schools of science and 57 private secondary schools. The number of universities in the state is 8 (1 federal, 2 state and 5 privately-owned). The federal university, University of Ibadan, Ibadan (formerly, University College, Ibadan, UCI) in Oyo state and located in the state capital is the first University in Nigeria that was established in 1948. The state also has 3 Polytechnics (1 federal and 2 state-owned) and 8 Colleges (2 federal and 6 state-owned).

Origin and Characteristics of Osun State

Osun state, a state in southwestern Nigeria, was created on 27^th August 1991 from the Eastern part of the old Oyo State. It is bounded to the East by Ekiti State and Ondo State, to the North by Kwara State, to the South by Ogun state and to the West by Oyo State.  It has land area/mass of 9,251km² with a population of 4,705,600 by 2016 National Population Census. The people of the state are mainly traders, artisans and farmers. Their own occupations include hand woven, textiles, tie and dye, leather work, calabash carving and mat-weaving. There are 690 public secondary schools which are spread across the 30 local government areas in the state with 7, 045 teachers. The state has 9 Universities (consisting of 1 federal, 1 state and 7 privately-owned). The number of Polytechnic is 9, made up of 1 federal, 2 state and 6 privately-owned. There are 6 Colleges of Education in the state consisting, 1 federal 2 state and 3 privately-owned.

In the present study, the focus is on school location and private cost of secondary education in the two states under study.

The Assumption of the Study

The study assumes that school location is the independent or predictor variable while private cost is the dependent variable. Using the functional notation, the assumed relationship between private cost of secondary education and the predictor variables could be expressed thus;

Pc = f (S_l)……………………………………………………….1

Or

X_1, X_2, X₃   = f (S_l)……………….………………………………2

Or

X_1…X_n  = f (S_l)………………………………..…………….…..3

The three equations are saying the same thing but being expressed differently.

Where;

X_1….,X_n  = X_1, X_2, X₃ 

X₁ = Cost of transportation

X₂ = Cost of feeding

X₃ = Cost of books and uniform

From the expression in equations 1, 2 and 3, ‘Pc’, and ‘X_1…,X_n’ are dependent variables while ‘S_l’ is an independent (predictor) variable. By implication, private cost of secondary education (Pc) is a function of school location (S_l), (the predictor variable identified in the context of this study).

The assumption in equations 1, 2 and 3 could also be expressed using linear curve in Figure 1 thus;

Figure 1: School Location and Private Cost of Secondary Education Curve (SLPCSEC)

Figure 1 shows that a linear correlation exists between private cost of secondary education (Pc) and predictor variable ((S_l). In other words, the simple linear equation (y = a+bx) and curvilinear regression have shown that the more effective and quality consideration of the necessary parameters of siting secondary schools, the more reduction in the private cost of secondary education. This would ultimately result in the relevance and more responsive of secondary education in the states understudy.

The Specific Objectives of the Study

The main objective of the study is to provide information on the extent to which school location could exert influence on private cost of secondary education in Oyo and Osun states, Nigeria. The specific objectives of the study are to;

1. establish the relationship between location of secondary schools and private cost of secondary education in Oyo and Osun states;
2. examine the relationship between location of secondary schools and cost of transportation to schools;
3. determine the relationship between location of secondary schools and cost of feeding incurred by the students;
4. establish the relationship between location of secondary schools and costs of books and uniform incurred by the students;
5. investigate the difference in the private cost of secondary education in urban and rural secondary schools in Oyo and Osun states;
6. investigate the difference in the private cost of secondary education in Oyo and Osun states; and
7. examine the difference in the parameters employ to site secondary schools in Oyo and Osun states.

Hypotheses

The following null hypotheses were formulated and tested in the study.

Ho₁: There is no significant relationship between location of secondary schools and private cost of secondary education in Oyo and Osun states;

Ho₂: There is no significant relationship between location of secondary schools and cost of transportation of students;

Ho₃: There is no significant relationship between location of secondary schools and cost of feeding incurred by the students; and

Ho₄: There is no significant relationship between location of secondary schools and cost of books and uniform incurred by the students.

Ho₅: There is no significant difference in the private cost of secondary education in urban and rural secondary schools in Oyo and Osun states.

Ho₆: There is no significant difference in private cost of secondary education in Oyo and Osun states;

Ho₇: There is no significant difference in the parameters employ to site secondary schools in Oyo and Osun states.

METHODOLOGY

The study is a descriptive survey research, which sought to determine the predictive ability of location of secondary schools on private cost of secondary education in Oyo and Osun States, Nigeria. The study adopted a descriptive survey research design. The population of the study consisted of all the senior secondary school III (SSS3- the last stage of secondary education as specified in the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and the National Policy of Education document (FRN, 2014) students in all the 63 local government areas in both Oyo and Osun states (Oyo and Osun states are made up of 33 and 30 local government areas respectively). The sample of the study comprised 2,000 SSS3 students (1,040 from Oyo state and 960 from Osun state) from 100 secondary schools (52 from Oyo state and 48 from Osun state) in 32 Local Government Areas (LGAs) of the two states under study (17 LGAs from Oyo state and 15 LGAs from Osun state). The selection of the students, schools and local government areas was based on Probability Proportional to Size (PPS) sampling method.  One set of instruments was specifically designed for the study by the investigators. This instrument was titled, “Students’ Questionnaire on Secondary School Location and Private Cost” (SQSSLPC).  This questionnaire was divided into three sections, section A elicited information on personal data of each of the respondents, section B elicited information on the locational parameters/efficiency of the secondary schools while section C obtained relevant information on private cost (cost of transportation, cost of feeding, cost of books and uniform) of secondary education incurred by students or their parents.

The schools were stratified into 6 administrative zones into which each of the two states is divided, these zones cut across all the 63 LGAs. However, 3 out of the 6 administrative zones were considered in each of the states under study.  Twenty (20) SSS3 students were randomly selected from each of the 100 secondary schools totalling 2,000 students selected in all.

This instrument was administered on 2,000 respondents directly. Out of the 2,000 questionnaires administered, 1,994 were returned.  This represents 99.4% return rate. The data collected were analysed with the used of Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS/PC+).  This is computer software designed to investigate relationship between and/or among variables.  The statistical tools used in the study varied in relation to the type of the hypotheses raised and tested.

1. Chi-square (X²) statistics was used to test hypotheses 1, 2, 3 and 4.
2. T-test statistics was used to test hypotheses 5, 6 and 7.

The level of significance adopted is P < 0.05 alpha level.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS

Results

The results of the study are presented based on the hypotheses earlier formulated and through Tables.

Hypothesis 1: There is no significant relationship between location of secondary schools and private cost of secondary education in Oyo and Osun states.

Table 2: Relationship between location of secondary schools and private cost of secondary education.

The result in Table 2 shows a non-significant relationship between location of secondary school and private cost (Transport + Feeding + Books & Uniform) of secondary education in Oyo and Osun states (χ² =0.8896, table value = 3.46, df = 1, P> 0.05).  The null hypothesis was therefore accepted or upheld.

Hypothesis 2: There is no significant relationship between location of secondary schools and cost of transportation of students to schools.

Table 3: Relationship between location of secondary schools and cost of transportation of students.

Note

X₁        =N10 – N20

X₂        =N30 – N40

X₃        =N50 – N40

X₄        =N70 and above

The result as shown in Table 3 indicates that there was no significant relationship between location of secondary schools and cost of transportation of students (χ² = 6.73, df = 3, P>0.05). The null hypothesis was accepted.

Hypothesis 3: There is no significant relationship between location of secondary schools and cost of feeding incurred by students.

Table 4: Relationship between location of secondary schools and cost of feeding incurred by students.

* Significant at P < 0.05

Note

X₅                                =          Less than N30

X₆                                =          N40 – N60

X₇                                =          N70 – N90

X₈                                =          N100 and above

The result in Table 4 shows that, there was pronounced significant relationship between location of secondary schools and cost of feeding in Oyo and Osun states (χ² = 17.412 > t-value = 7.81, df = 3, P < 0.05), the null hypothesis was rejected.

Hypothesis 4: There is no significant relationship between location of secondary schools and cost of books and uniform.

Table 5: Relationship between location of secondary schools and cost of books and uniform.

Note

X₉        =          Less than N2,000

X₁₀      =          N2100 – N4,000

X₁₁      =          N4200 – N6,000

X₁₂      =          N6100 and above

The result in Table 5 reveals that there was no significant relationship between location of secondary schools and cost of books and uniform (χ² = 6.59, df = 3, P>0.05).  The hypothesis was upheld.

Hypothesis 5: There is no significant difference in the private cost of secondary education in urban and rural secondary schools in Oyo and Osun states.

Table 6: T-test analysis of the difference in the private cost of secondary education in urban and rural secondary schools in Oyo and Osun States.

The result in Table 6 indicates a non-significant negative difference in the private cost of secondary education in urban and rural secondary schools (t-cal, -1.23 < t-crit, 1.96, df = 1,992).  The null hypothesis was therefore upheld.

Hypothesis 6: There is no significant difference in private cost of secondary education in Oyo and Osun states;

Table 7: T-test analysis of the difference in the private cost of secondary education in Oyo and Osun states

The result in Table 7 reveals that there was no significant difference in the private cost of secondary education in Oyo and Osun states (t-cal, 1.43 < t-crit, 1.96, df = 1,992).  The null hypothesis was therefore accepted.

Hypothesis 7: There is no significant difference in the parameters employ to site secondary schools in Oyo and Osun states.

Table 8: T-test analysis of the difference in the parameters employ to site secondary schools in Oyo and Osun states.

The result in Table 8 indicates that there was no significant difference in the parameters employ to site secondary schools in Oyo and Osun states (t-cal, 1.33 < t-crit, 1.96, df = 1,992).  The null hypothesis was therefore accepted

Discussion of Findings

The finding of the study revealed that there was no significant relationship between location of secondary schools and private cost of secondary education (χ²=. 8896, df = 1) corroborates with the findings of Asemhokhai & Josiah (2021), Ismail, Awang & Noor (2016) and Agboola & Adeyemi (2012). In their separate studies, the cost of secondary education in urban and rural secondary schools were found to be significantly related. The general picture as shown in Table 2 also reveals that location of secondary schools was not significantly related to the cost of transportation (χ² = 6.73, df 3, P > 0.05).  In most of the studies conducted earlier (James, Simiyu, & Riechi, 2016), the two variables were found to be related.

The result as shown in Table 3, established it that location of secondary schools and cost of feeding were not significantly related (χ² = 17.412, df = 3 P > 0.05). This finding disagrees with the finding of Agboola & Adeyemi (2012). In Table 4, the finding is that, cost of books and uniform was found not to be related with location of secondary schools.  The general picture here is that, of all the components of private cost of secondary education considered in this study, cost of feeding is the only component found to be related with the location of schools.  This was confirmed and supported in the interviews conducted when majority of students that live very far from the schools stated that they do not usually eat at home hence, their parents give them enough money to eat in schools. This could be because they live very far from the school.

The finding as shown in Table 5 indicated a non significant negative difference in the private cost of secondary education in urban and rural secondary schools (t-cal = -1.23, t-crit = 1.96, df = 992,).  This finding contradicts that of Sureiman, Maisiba & Kikechi (2016), Nwogu (2010) and Bosede (2010).  In their respective studies, the cost of secondary education was found to be significantly different in urban and rural areas.

Implications for Educational Planning

The findings of this study have some implications for educational planning in Oyo and Osun States. Since the study has revealed that location of secondary schools has not constituted a major threat to private cost (in its composite form), this implies that the process of locating secondary schools in the states has been considerably in order. As far as this study is concerned, the following parameters; catchment area, population structure, school-age population, home-school distance and radius which are necessary ingredients toward planning functional education are fairly considered in planning education in the two states under study. Cost of feeding that was found to be significantly related with the location of secondary schools was attributed to the increase in the level of inflation in the country which has had a multiplier effect on the cost of food production and market price. In order to ameliorate the suffering of the school children and increase the level of their academic performance, Federal government of Nigeria and some state governments have launched School Feeding Scheme (SFS) in which school pupils are provided food nutrients during the school hours. This project should be embraced by other state governments that are yet to commence it.

CONCLUSION

This study has examined the predictive ability of location of secondary schools on private cost (cost of transportation, cost of feeding, cost of books and uniform) of secondary education in Oyo and Osun States, Nigeria. It concludes that educational planners have essential roles to play in the process of siting/locating secondary schools and distribution of educational services/facilities in all the states of the federation.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Following the findings of this study, the following recommendations should be considered by various governments and other stakeholders;

1. Consideration should always be given to the cost to be borne by parents in the course of educating their children while planning secondary education so that they could be relieved of the burden.
2. All state governments should consider the possibility of providing feeding to secondary school students as being done by Federal government and some state governments in Nigeria. This will no doubt increase participation rate at this level of education.
3. Government should continue to involve educational planners in the process of distribution of educational services and facilities. This will encourage effective planning of educational facilities and increase access to secondary education across the state.

It is hoped that if these recommendations are given consideration in the planning of education, the government would continue to achieve its role in providing functional and productive education in the country.

REFERENCES

1. Adepoju, T. L. (2002). Locational factors as correlates of private cost and academic performance of secondary school students in Oyo State, Nigeria. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Educational Management, Faculty of Education, University of Ibadan, Ibadan.
2. Adepoju, T. L. (2008). Motivational variables and academic performance of urban and rural secondary school students in Oyo State, Nigeria. The Korean Educational Development Institute (KEDI), Journal of Educational Policy (KJEP). 5 (2), 33-39.  
3. Adepoju, T. L. (2009). Planning and policy models for multigrade teaching techniques in Nigerian schools. eJournal of Educational Policy. (Northern Arizona University). (Available online at https://www.4nau.edu/cee/jep/journals.aspx?id. Spring.
4. Adepoju, T. L., & Akinwumi F.S. (2000). Population distribution and school locational planning in Oyo State (1990-1994). African Journal of Educational Planning and Policy Studies. University of Ibadan, Ibadan. 1(1), 51 –62.
5. Adepoju, T. L., & Akinwumi, F. S. (2001). Location of secondary schools as a factor determining academic performance of students in senior school certificate examinations in Oyo State, Nigeria.  Ibadan Journal of Educational Studies. A Publication of the Faculty of Education, University of Ibadan, Ibadan. 1 (2), 410-420.
6. Adepoju, T. L., & Oluchukwu, E. E. (2011). A study of secondary school students’ academic performance at the senior school certificate examinations and implications for educational planning and policy in Nigeria. African Research Review 5 (6), 314-333.
7. Agboola, B. M., & Adeyemi, J. K. (2012). Analysis of private cost of education in selected universities. Journal of Research in National Development, 10 (3), 281-292.
8. Asemhokhai, A. S., & Joshiah, O. (2021). Analysis of private costs of schooling by students of the faculty of education, Ambrose Alli university, Ekpoma, Edo State, Nigeria. Global Scientific Journal, 9 (11), 1533-1543.
9. Bosede, A. F. (2010). Influence of sex and location on relationship between students problems and academic performance. The Social Science. 5 (4), 340 – 345.
10. Effiom-Edem, N., & Edhoho, E. A. (2017). Influence of school location on students’ attitude towards mathematics and basic science. British Journal of Education, 5 (10), 76-85.
11. Federal Republic of Nigeria (2014). National policy on education (Revised edition). Abuja: Government Press.
12. Ibitoye, O.A. (1996). Locational efficiency of social services: The example of primary schools in Ado-Ekiti.  Journal of Educational Research and Evaluation, 1 (2), 293-298.
13. Ismail, R., Awang, M., & Noor, M. A. M. (2016). Analysis of private and social costs of education in Malaysia: An Overview. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 6 (11), 24–37.
14. James, A. M., Simiyu, A. M., & Riechi, A. (2016). Factors affecting subsidized free day secondary education in enhancing learners’ retention in secondary schools in Kenya. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(20), 49–55.
15. Nwogu, E. (2010). An inquiry into the major difficulties expressed/exhibited by junior secondary school students in solving problems involving angles. Unpublished B.Sc. (Education/Mathematics) Project, Department of Science Education, University of Nigeria, Nsukka.
16. Ogolla, D. O., Nyerere, J., & Njihia, M. (2021). Strategies on boarding cost to improve access and retention. Journal of Education, 9 (10), 12-33
17. Oyo state government (2022). Information about the state. Ibadan: Government Press.
18. Osun state government (2022). Information about the state. Osogbo: Government Press.
19. Salim, A. A. (1994). The cost of higher education in India (with Special reference to Kerela). India: Anmol Publication Private Limited.
20. Sureiman, O., Maisiba, J. A., & Kikechi, R. W. (2016). Comparative analysis of students’ direct costs in boarding and day secondary schools in Nyamira County, Kenya. Journal of Technology and Education in Nigeria, 16 (1), 73-80
21. UNESCO (2019). Migration, displacement and education: Building bridges, Not walls. In UNESCO (Ed.), Global Education Monitoring Report (First edition). UNESCO.