The Registrar of the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB), Prof. Is-haq Oloyede, recently admitted culpability in the glitches that nearly marred the outcome of the 2025 Unified Tertiary Matriculation Examination (UTME), adversely affecting 379,997 candidates across 157 centres. PAUL OKAH, in this report, asks stakeholders and experts what to do to avert re-occurrence.
The admission of culpability by the Registrar of the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB), Prof. Is-haq Oloyede, on the controversial outcome of the 2025 Unified Tertiary Matriculation Examination (UTME) hinged on human errors and technical glitches have continued to attract public reactions on the position and future of the examination body.
No fewer than 379,997 candidates across 157 centres, primarily in Lagos state and the South-east were adversely affected thereby drawing mixed public sentiments.
While many commended Oloyede’s honesty for accepting responsibility as the head of the institution, others came down hard on JAMB for what they described as a perennial lack of proper preparedness for the conduct of the crucial public exam. Some Nigerians even demanded Oloyede’s immediate resignation for the contentious 2025 UTME results.
The 2025 UTME issues
On May 9, JAMB officially released results of the 2025 UTME conducted between April 24 and May 5, across 883 Computer Based Test (CTB) centres nationwide. Out of the 1,955,069 candidates who took the exam, more than 1.5 million scored below 200 marks over the 400 benchmark. An analysis of the result showed that of the nearly two million results processed, only 4,756 candidates (0.24per cent) scored 320 and above. Another 7,658 candidates (0.39per cent) scored between 300 and 319, bringing the number of those who scored 300 and above to just 12,414 (0.63per cent).
A total of 73,441 candidates (3.76per cent) scored between 250 and 299, 334,560 (17.11per cent) scored between 200 and 249, 983,187 (50.29per cent) scored between 160 and 199, 488,197 (24.97per cent) scored between 140 and 159, 57,419 (2.94 per cent) scored between 120 and 139, 3,820 (0.20per cent) scored between 100 and 119, while 2,031 (0.10per cent) scored below 100.
Expectedly, the poor performance of candidates in the UTME elicited public outcry and questions about the credibility of the results, complaints about and admission of technical and human errors which significantly impacted the candidates’ performances.
Consequently, on May 14, Oloyede said glitches in the Board’s system affected 379,997 candidates – 206,610 across 65 centres in Lagos and 173,387 in 92 centres in the South-east. He acknowledged lapses in JAMB’s system, publicly accepted responsibility and even broke down in tears while announcing a makeup exam for the affected candidates. The re-sit was conducted between May 16 and May 19.
On May 21, Oloyede said JAMB would conduct a special mop-up examination for estimated 5.6 per cent candidates who missed the rescheduled UTME as a result of participating in the ongoing West African Examinations Council (WAEC), including registered candidates who missed the first UTME for one reason or the other.
However, some critical stakeholders have expressed different views and suggestions on the conduct of future exams, how the examination body can improve its performance and forestall reoccurrence, as well as the future of JAMB.
Prof. Uba
Speaking with Blueprint Weekend, the Executive Director, ACUF Initiative for Policy and Governance (ACUFIPOLGOV), Prof. Chiwuike Uba, said JAMB should engage in urgent safeguards and structural reforms. He also said the Board must implement a nationwide protocol requiring full certification of server readiness, software patch compliance, and scoring logic integrity before any CBT session begins.
He said: “According to findings verified by both JAMB and third-party technical teams, a critical system update designed to support new answer randomisation and validation logic was erroneously omitted from the server clusters powering Lagos state and South-east regions.
“In the interest of fairness, accountability, and long-term integrity, JAMB should engage in urgent safeguards and structural reforms. It should offer immediate candidate support and fair admissions practice. Tertiary institutions should adopt a graduated cut-off mark policy that reflects the disadvantage experienced by affected candidates. A formal contextual admission framework should also be introduced to guide admissions committees in evaluating students within the context of examination irregularities.
“JAMB is encouraged to explore the possibility of recognising the higher of the two scores – original and retake – wherever technically feasible, to protect candidates who may have originally performed well despite the flawed system. JAMB should implement a nationwide protocol requiring full certification of server readiness, software patch compliance, and scoring logic integrity before any CBT session begins.
“The creation of a centralised, real-time technical oversight dashboard would enable instant visibility into server health, software versions, and deployment status across all zones thereby preventing silent disparities like those seen in the 2025 UTME. All CBT centre operators and software providers must undergo annual licensing audits, patch compliance checks, and random performance reviews before being permitted to host national examinations.”
He said further, “I propose the adoption of a formal UTME contingency and redress framework – a transparent protocol that outlines candidate rights, retake procedures, result preservation, and institutional responsibilities during future disruptions.
“Also, to guarantee transparency and impartiality in future incidents, an independent national examinations ombudsman should be constituted to oversee dispute resolution, investigate complaints, and ensure candidate protection. Again, as a short-term corrective measure, tertiary institutions should be allowed temporary quota adjustments to ensure that students from disadvantaged zones are not statistically penalised during the 2025/2026 admission cycle.
“JAMB should commit to the regular publication of anonymised centre-level performance data to enable independent validation by researchers, civil society, and education stakeholders. Continuous, clear communication with candidates, parents and institutions must remain a cornerstone of JAMB’s post-crisis strategy, reinforcing that this retake is a restorative – not punitive – measure. This is a defining moment for education policy in Nigeria. The decision to offer a retake was both necessary and commendable, but it cannot stand alone. We must now move boldly toward structural reform, ensuring that future UTME cycles are not only technically sound, but also guided by fairness, transparency, and empathy.”