JAMB Admits To Errors and Concedes to Irregularities as 2025 UTME Performance Sparks National Alarm

 

The Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB) has publicly acknowledged errors that contributed to the dismal performance of candidates in the 2025 Unified Tertiary Matriculation Examination (UTME), drawing both criticism and concern from stakeholders across Nigeria’s educational sector.

Speaking at a press conference in Abuja on Wednesday, the Registrar of JAMB, Professor Ishaq Oloyede, conceded that the examination process was marred by certain “errors,” which may have significantly impacted students’ outcomes. His remarks marked a rare admission of fault by the nation’s primary tertiary entrance examination body.

“What should have been a moment of joy has changed due to one or two errors,” Oloyede stated, referring to the aftermath of the UTME, which has left many candidates and their families frustrated and disillusioned.

The UTME, which remains the gateway for admission into Nigerian universities, polytechnics, and colleges of education, evaluates candidates in four subjects—three based on their chosen field of study and the mandatory Use of English. For many, it is a defining milestone, determining their academic futures.

Despite nearly 1.96 million candidates sitting for the exam this year, data released by JAMB painted a bleak picture. Only a minuscule 0.63 percent—just 12,414 candidates—managed to score 300 and above out of a possible 400 marks. Within that subset, a mere 4,756 candidates (0.24 percent) broke the 320 mark, typically considered the benchmark for top-tier performance.

Scores between 250 and 299 were recorded by 73,441 candidates, representing just 3.76 percent of the entire cohort. A slightly more substantial 17.11 percent—or 334,560 candidates—scored between 200 and 249, a range often viewed as decent but still not outstanding.

However, it was the volume of candidates scoring below 200 that fueled widespread concern. A staggering 983,187 candidates—constituting over half of all examinees—found themselves in the 160 to 199 band, the threshold generally considered the minimum requirement for tertiary admissions in many Nigerian institutions.

Additional figures added to the sobering statistics:

• 488,197 candidates (24.97 percent) scored between 140 and 159.

• 57,419 candidates (2.94 percent) scored between 120 and 139.

• 3,820 candidates (0.20 percent) scored between 100 and 119.

• 2,031 candidates (0.10 percent) scored below 100.

Cumulatively, over 1.5 million candidates failed to attain a score of 200, the midway point of the maximum score, suggesting that three out of every four candidates performed below average.

This wave of underperformance has triggered intense backlash from candidates, parents, educators, and civil society groups. Several affected students have reportedly expressed intentions to pursue legal action against the examination board, citing emotional distress, reputational damage, and potential academic derailment.

Legal analysts have begun weighing in on the feasibility of such lawsuits, noting that while examination bodies possess some protection under existing statutes, demonstrated negligence or systemic failure could form a valid basis for litigation.

Meanwhile, educational analysts and school administrators have questioned the integrity of the examination’s conduct. Some have suggested a comprehensive audit of JAMB’s technical systems, including its testing software, server infrastructure, and grading algorithms, especially given the increasing reliance on Computer-Based Testing (CBT) formats.

Professor Oloyede’s brief acknowledgment of “one or two errors” did little to quell the outrage, especially as he provided no further clarification on the nature of the mistakes or plans for remediation. Critics argue that transparency is needed now more than ever to restore public trust.

Calls for an independent review of the 2025 UTME are gaining momentum. Several education-focused NGOs and advocacy groups have proposed the establishment of an oversight panel to assess what went wrong and how to prevent a recurrence.

For the thousands of candidates caught in the crossfire, however, the damage may already be done. With limited time to apply for admissions and scholarships, and confidence shaken, their academic journeys remain in limbo.

JAMB has not yet issued any formal apology or proposed any specific redress mechanisms. As tensions rise and legal threats loom, all eyes are on the examination body’s next move.