A recent statement by Alex Onyia, CEO of the edtech platform Educare, has ignited a heated national conversation about a longstanding yet controversial practice in Nigeria’s education system sending children home from school over unpaid fees. Onyia took to social media to voice his disapproval, stating boldly: “Sending kids home for school fees their parents were unable to pay should be abolished. It erodes self-confidence at an early stage.”
The post, though brief, triggered a firestorm of responses from educators, parents, school owners, and former students. While many praised Onyia’s empathy for the emotional toll on students, others raised strong objections, particularly those managing or teaching in privately-owned institutions. For them, unpaid school fees remain a critical issue affecting school operations, staff salaries, and daily administration.
Some of the most heartbreaking responses came from people recalling personal trauma. “The worst is flogging students for fees owed by their parents. LAPO pikin dey suffer too much for Nigeria,” one user wrote. Another shared, “What if flogging students for the PTA meeting their parents couldn’t attend?” These remarks highlight the extent to which school fee-related punishments go beyond being just administrative decisions they are often dehumanizing experiences.
For critics of the current system, the emotional and psychological impact on children is the main concern. Onyia and his supporters argue that punishing a child for a parent’s financial hardship cultivates shame, resentment, and broken self-esteem. In a country where many families live below the poverty line, asking children to bear the burden of unpaid fees seems especially unjust.
But not everyone agrees with the abolishment of such measures. “Good evening, Mr. Alex. Kindly, what alternative approach would you recommend for teachers and school owners in place of that?” one school owner asked. Another respondent argued, “Without enforcement, some parents won’t turn up. Defaulting students can be confined in a class until closing or be turned back in the morning instead.”
This sentiment reflects a widespread fear among school administrators: that leniency will only embolden defaulting parents. Many parents, they argue, would refuse to pay fees unless pressured. With no policy support, school owners are left with two options: either enforce payment by all means or run their schools into bankruptcy.
Others pointed out that the debate changes completely when public schools are separated from private ones. “You can say this for public schools, not privately-owned ones. Private schools are capitalist setups…and they are out to maximize gains while balancing the cost of running,” one user observed. In other words, private schools are businesses, and businesses cannot survive without income.
Several contributors emphasized the practical difficulties faced by private schools, particularly in semi-urban and rural areas. “Remember, the school also has needs. You see, most parents will relax and not worry about paying their children’s school fees if no action is taken. It’s just unfortunate the children are at the receiving end,” one commenter explained.
A user, who claimed to manage a school, gave a more personal story: “My dad’s school is almost a charity organisation because of this. He’d say it’s not the children’s fault that they couldn’t pay their fees. But he ended up paying teachers with his own money, enrolling students for WAEC out of pocket—and many parents never paid back.” These stories reveal that the consequences of leniency sometimes fall heavily on educators themselves.
The deeper problem, some argued, is not just the policy of sending students home, but the absence of a robust social support system for education. If public education were truly free and functional, private schools wouldn’t bear such heavy pressure. One user concluded: “Let’s be honest, the failure of the public education sector is what gave rise to private schools. But now we want private school owners to carry the burden of a broken system.”
As the debate unfolded, others proposed alternative models: installment payment plans, written undertakings from parents, or even school-community fundraising efforts. However, these solutions depend on mutual trust between schools and families, something many say is hard to find in an increasingly cash-strapped and skeptical society.
Some suggested legal protection for private schools, with clauses in admission contracts that protect children’s rights while also holding parents accountable. “We need policy clarity. Protect the children, but also protect the educators,” one education lawyer suggested.
Meanwhile, student voices have remained mostly unheard in the debate. The few who spoke up did so with emotion. One former student tweeted: “I still remember the day I was sent home in JSS2. My friends laughed. I cried all day. I never forgot that shame. I started skipping school entirely after that.” These memories, though years old, underscore how long-lasting the emotional effects can be.
As of press time, the Ministry of Education has not issued an official statement on the matter. However, many stakeholders now agree that the time has come for a national conversation not just about whether students should be sent home, but about how to make quality education truly accessible, equitable, and humane for every Nigerian child.
Alex Onyia may have touched a nerve, but in doing so, he has exposed a deep and painful reality: that in Nigeria’s classrooms, the cost of education is sometimes paid in shame and the ones paying are not the ones owing.
