The Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB) has announced plans to review the results of the 2025 Unified Tertiary Matriculation Examination (UTME) on Thursday, following what it described as “unusual” public complaints.
The board revealed that the review meeting will bring together vice-chancellors, provosts, rectors, school principals, examiners, and technical experts to thoroughly assess the examination process and address the concerns raised by candidates and other stakeholders.
This decision comes amid growing protests from candidates and parents, who allege technical glitches and inconsistencies in the conduct and results of the exam, which were released last Friday.
The official notice indicated that the review panel will comprise representatives from various professional and educational bodies, including the All Nigeria Confederation of Principals of Secondary Schools, the National Association of Proprietors of Private Schools, the Computer Professionals Registration Council of Nigeria, and the Educational Assessment and Research Network. Senior officials from tertiary institutions across the country will also be part of the panel.
“In furtherance of the commitment of the board to earn public confidence in its processes, the management of the board has approved your participation to be part of the review panel constituted to appraise the conduct of the examination with the mandate to identify challenges, if any, and proffer relevant recommendations to prevent a recurrence,” the notice reads in part.
It also noted that the work of the panel would be carried out at no financial cost to the board.
The UTME is a major criterion for admission into Nigerian universities and other tertiary institutions. It tests students in four subjects, including the compulsory Use of English and three other subjects related to their proposed course of study.
This year, approximately 1.9 million candidates sat for the exam. Of this number, over 1.5 million candidates reportedly scored below 200 out of a possible 400 marks, raising widespread concerns about the overall performance and possible flaws in the process.
According to JAMB, 1,955,069 results were processed. Only 4,756 candidates (0.24 per cent) scored 320 and above, while 7,658 candidates (0.39 per cent) scored between 300 and 319. This brought the number of those who scored 300 and above to 12,414 (0.63 per cent).
ALSO READ
In addition, 73,441 candidates (3.76 per cent) scored between 250 and 299, and 334,560 candidates (17.11 per cent) scored between 200 and 249.
Meanwhile, 983,187 candidates (50.29 per cent) scored between 160 and 199, a range often seen as the minimum benchmark for admission in many institutions. Another 488,197 candidates (24.97 per cent) scored between 140 and 159. Scores between 120 and 139 were recorded for 57,419 candidates (2.94 per cent), while 3,820 candidates (0.20 per cent) scored between 100 and 119. Only 2,031 candidates (0.10 per cent) scored below 100.
Over 75 percent of the candidates scored below 200, prompting more intense scrutiny from parents, schools, and candidates alike.
Some candidates, dissatisfied with their results, have threatened to sue JAMB.
In response, JAMB’s spokesperson, Dr. Fabian Benjamin, said on Monday that the board was fast-tracking its annual post-examination review process to address the unusual volume of complaints.
“We are particularly concerned about the unusual complaints originating from a few states within the federation,” Benjamin stated.
“We are currently scrutinising these complaints in detail to identify and rectify any potential technical issues.”
He explained that the annual review typically covers the registration process, the conduct of the examination, and the release of results.
JAMB further noted that it ensures all candidates are given the opportunity to take the exam and, in cases of technical disruption, reschedules the test for those affected.
As part of this year’s review, JAMB said it has enlisted the help of IT experts to investigate the alleged technical glitches and ensure fairness and accuracy in the examination process.
