The release of the 2025 Unified Tertiary Matriculation Examination (UTME) results by the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB) has sparked controversy. Over 1.5 million of the 1,955,069 candidates, 78.5%, scored below 200 out of 400.
Social media platforms, particularly X, have erupted with outrage as candidates, parents, and educators demand answers. JAMB’s response, outlined in a statement by Public Communication Advisor Fabian Benjamin, Ph.D., promises a “fast-forwarded” review but falls short in addressing the crisis.
In this article, Technext draws five critical ways JAMB’s response fails Nigeria’s youth, exposing systemic flaws and eroding public trust.
1. Vague promises over concrete answers
JAMB’s acknowledgement of “unusual complaints” from “a few states” is frustratingly vague, offering no clarity on the specific technical glitches plaguing the 2025 UTME.
Candidates faced issues where questions 1 to 10 in Use of English failed to display, with only answer options visible, directly impacting scores. Others saw their scores plummet from 295 in 2024 to 132 in 2025, raising questions about scoring accuracy.
JAMB’s response sidesteps these specifics, merely noting a review involving experts from the Computer Professionals Association of Nigeria and Vice Chancellors. This lack of transparency fuels distrust, not forgetting that candidates and parents demand detailed explanations for frozen screens, missing questions, and inconsistent results.
If the exam body fails to address these issues head-on, JAMB leaves students questioning the integrity of the examination process, undermining their confidence in a system meant to secure their future.
2. Reactive, not proactive, crisis management
JAMB’s decision to expedite its annual system review, typically conducted months after the exam, reveals a reactive approach unprepared for the scale of the 2025 backlash.
Concerned Nigerians like Alex Onyia, CEO of Educare, have mobilised for a class action lawsuit to demand transparency in scoring.
JAMB’s statement, issued days after the May 9, 2025, result release, suggests the Board was caught off-guard despite known issues during the April 24 to May 5 exam period.
For instance, JAMB delisted four Computer-Based Test (CBT) centres in Kano, Zaria, Imo, and Ogun for “technical deficiencies”, yet its response does not explain why these issues weren’t addressed before results were released.
This delay in action contrasts sharply with JAMB’s claim of rescheduling exams for candidates facing technical issues during testing, highlighting a disconnect between its operational protocols and post-result accountability.
3. Ignoring stakeholder voices
While JAMB touts the involvement of experts in its review, it conspicuously ignores the voices of affected candidates, parents, and education advocates.
Onyia’s call for JAMB to release detailed marking sheets was a demand echoed by candidates whose 2025 results contrasted sharply with their 2024 results.
JAMB’s response does not acknowledge these calls for transparency or propose mechanisms for candidates to verify their scores. Instead, it leans on its historical data, with Registrar Prof. Ishaq Oloyede claiming the results align with a 12-year trend.
This dismissal of individual grievances alienates stakeholders and fuels perceptions of arrogance.
By failing to engage directly with those most impacted, JAMB misses a critical opportunity to rebuild trust and demonstrate accountability.
4. Sidestepping scoring discrepancies
The 2025 UTME results reveal stark anomalies. JAMB’s response does not address these discrepancies. Instead, it emphasises its anti-malpractice measures, such as withholding 39,834 results for suspected infractions.
While these measures are commendable, they do not explain why high-performing candidates experienced such drastic declines. A Technext analysis suggests potential issues with CBT scoring algorithms or data processing errors, yet JAMB’s statement offers no commitment to auditing these systems.
This omission leaves candidates who scored 156 after a 285 in the previous year feeling cheated and without recourse. JAMB’s failure to confront these allegations head-on perpetuates doubts about the fairness of its scoring process, further eroding public confidence.
5. Neglecting systemic educational challenges
JAMB’s focus on technical glitches and its review process ignores the broader systemic issues contributing to the 2025 UTME’s poor outcomes.
There are apparent issues related to curriculum misalignment, inadequate preparation, and overconfidence from 2024’s relatively better results (26.35% scored above 200) as factors in the 2025 decline to 21.5%. Also, logistical issues, such as delayed exam starts for physically challenged candidates under JAMB’s Equal Opportunity Group, may have exacerbated performance gaps.
JAMB’s response does not acknowledge these challenges or propose collaboration with educational bodies to address them. By framing the issue as primarily technical, JAMB sidesteps the need for reforms like increased education funding, teacher training, or stricter eligibility criteria.
This narrow approach fails to address the root causes of Nigeria’s educational crisis, leaving students vulnerable to repeated failures.
JAMB cannot claim this surpasses its purview.
What about accountability, JAMB?
JAMB promises a review but fails on transparency, urgency, and inclusivity. Its vague assurances, reactive posture, and failure to engage stakeholders or address scoring discrepancies have deepened public distrust, as evidenced by the responses to the statement.
The Board’s neglect of systemic issues further underscores its disconnect from the broader educational landscape, leaving Nigeria’s youth in a cycle of frustration and uncertainty.
To restore faith, JAMB must go beyond its current measures.
It should publish detailed reports on CBT performance metrics and scoring methodologies, as recommended, and allow candidates access to their marking sheets, even though this is going to be logistically and physically draining.
An independent audit of the 2025 results, including CBT systems, could validate or refute claims of irregularities. Moreover, JAMB should collaborate with stakeholders to address logistical and educational challenges, ensuring future exams are fair and reflect candidates’ abilities.
The 2025 UTME results represent the aspirations of millions of Nigerian youths. JAMB’s failure to address these five critical shortcomings risks jeopardising those dreams and perpetuating a system that rewards bureaucratic inertia over accountability.
Technext Newsletter
Get the best of Africa’s daily tech to your inbox – first thing every morning.
Join the community now!
