The 2015 tertiary schools admission controversy

The federal government last week overruled the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB) on its new admission policy that sparked off protest in parts of the country. The confusion and uncertainty that trailed JAMB’s initial position, and the possibility it might delay admission exercise, were strong enough to persuade the government to take remedial action. […]

The federal government last week overruled the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB) on its new admission policy that sparked off protest in parts of the country. The confusion and uncertainty that trailed JAMB’s initial position, and the possibility it might delay admission exercise, were strong enough to persuade the government to take remedial action. The permanent secretary in the Federal Ministry of Education, Mr MacJohn Nwaobiala, had briefed President Muhammadu Buhari on the ministry’s activities and challenges, including JAMB’ cut-off mark policy and reactions to it, after which he announced the government’s stand.
For this year, JAMB had adopted a policy in which candidates who applied to universities that attract large number of applicants were to be reassigned to universities with lower number of applicants than those they indicated as their first choice during registration. This meant that such candidates would write the Post-Unified Tertiary Matriculation Examination (P-UTME) in universities different from those they already indicated as their most preferred choice. Protest started at the University of Lagos (UNILAG) when the institution’s authorities announced that only candidates whose names were officially forwarded to the institution by JAMB were eligible to participate in this year’s P-UTME of UNILAG, and had a minimum score, in some courses of 240, against JAMB’s minimum recommended 180.
Nwaobiala explained that the decision, which was jointly taken at a meeting that had parents of candidates in attendance, had been reversed, noting that candidates who made the national cut-off of 180 and above could now write their P-UTME in the original universities of their first choice.
JAMB Registrar, Professor ’Dibu Ojerinde, however noted that the Board’s intention was to redistribute candidates because, while some institutions were overwhelmed by the huge number of applicants, others don’t, and expressed worry that the polytechnics and colleges of education mostly suffered from the paucity of applicants. Ojerinde said that those who protested against the policy had vested interests not to seek resolution to the problem of access.
Another contentious issue that led to protest against the new policy emanated from JAMB’s decision to grant universities and other institutions the liberty to raise their cut-off marks above the national cut-off level. JAMB stressed that the cut-off marks of 180 for universities and 150 for other institutions in the 2015 UTME was a benchmark meant to set the tone for 2015 admission exercise. The host community of Ahmadu Bello University (ABU) Zaria, for instance, decried the policy, alleging that only names of candidates that scored 200 and above were forwarded by JAMB to the institution. It also accused JAMB and the ABU management of compromising the right of candidates who scored between 180 and above to be admitted by the institution through the P-UTME. 
 JAMB’s intention might be in good faith to save candidates who qualified for admission from being eventually left in cold, and transferring them to other institutions.  As it has turned, however, the effect has caused anguish and anxiety. Besides, reassigning candidates to institutions they did not express interest in makes nonsense of JAMB’s own procedure, which stipulates that admission to tertiary institutions would be based on the most preferred choices the candidates make when they register. Public universities, federal and state, are bound to have greater number of applicants than private universities for obvious economic reasons. This explains why arbitrarily transferring candidates from their first choice of a public institution to a privately-run one cannot be a workable solution.
It is important that universities maintain high degree of academic and moral standards in screening candidates that JAMB has certified worthy of being admitted. But institutions should not operate like they are in vacuum; they should be guided by the policies enunciated by JAMB and the National Universities Commission (NUC). Space is a constraint for all of them, and the government must devise ways and means to vastly increase this and make possible the admission of as many candidates as possible.  But JAMB was wrong to acquiesce to the situation that allows tertiary institutions to set their own cut-off points, thereby introducing an unwarranted hurdle in the path of young Nigerians eager for an education.
JAMB should strongly advocate, to the NUC through the Federal Ministry of Education that its policies, such as on cut-off points, be strictly adhered to by the nation’s institutions.