![At 3-33 on 9th oct, some children Playing inside Aayin Camp Benue [Photo Credit Popoola Ademola Premium Timesv]](https://i0.wp.com/media.premiumtimesng.com/wp-content/files/2026/03/WhatsApp-Image-2026-03-07-at-05.54.10.jpeg?resize=360%2C180&ssl=1)
The Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB) has addressed ongoing concerns from candidates and parents regarding the denial of university admissions despite high scores in the Unified Tertiary Matriculation Examination (UTME).
In a statement issued on Sunday and signed by its spokesperson, Fabian Benjamin, the board refuted these allegations, noting that admissions are determined through a comprehensive ranking system that evaluates applicants based on their O’level results, UTME scores, and post-UTME scores.
|
|
The board noted that admissions are not considered solely by UTME scores, emphasising that a high UTME score doesn’t automatically guarantee admission into the university.
Recurring allegations
JAMB noted recurring cases of parents and candidates accusing universities of bias in the admission process.
It noted, for instance, that a parent, Godwin Nsan, recently accused the University of Calabar of unfairly denying his son admission in a letter he wrote to JAMB.
|
|
|---|
However, JAMB’s findings revealed that the candidate, who scored 201 in the UTME with an aggregate score of 34 per cent, fell below the university’s cut-off marks of 55 per cent for merit, 35 per cent for catchment area and 35 per cent of Educationally Less Developed States (ELDS).
JAMB noted that another candidate, alongside his father, had also accused the University of Jos of unfairly denying him admission despite a 345 UTME score.
The board invited the candidate and his father to JAMB’s headquarters, where they were shown the ranking process.
“It was revealed that the student ranked 86th while the university could only admit 68 candidates on merit. Following this explanation, the father acknowledged his error and apologised,” the statement said.
“In some universities, a score of 345 might rank a candidate as low as 300, depending on the university’s subscription capacity.”
The board advised parents to avoid rushing to conclusions about admissions, emphasising that the UTME is designed to rank candidates competitively for the limited spaces available in tertiary institutions.
“We urge parents to consider the overall ranking process rather than personal perceptions of brilliance. Admission is a competitive process, and institutions must adhere to merit-based selection,” JAMB stated.
How to seek clarification
The board, however, noted that candidates who feel aggrieved can always raise their concerns via its ‘ticketing platform’ to seek clarifications.
“As a regulatory body, JAMB is committed to ensuring that qualified candidates are not substituted for inferior candidates, which is why we established the Central Admissions Processing System (CAPS) to transparently rank candidates for admission selection,” the board stated.
The board also expressed concern over the misuse of the ‘exceptionally brilliant window’ introduced for the 2025 UTME, which allows candidates younger than 16 to sit for the exam if they meet certain academic standards.
JAMB observed an unusually high number of applications through this provision, warning parents against exaggerating their children’s academic abilities.
Prosecution of university staff member
Meanwhile, the board disclosed that a senior university staff member is currently being prosecuted for admission-related offences, with four others under investigation.
The board reaffirmed its zero-tolerance stance on admission infractions and pledged to take “appropriate action against any individuals involved in questionable practices regarding admissions.”
READ ALSO:UTME 2025: JAMB warns CBT centres against late-night registration
JAMB also reiterated its commitment to transparency and fairness in Nigeria’s tertiary admission process while encouraging candidates and their guardians to seek clarifications through its official ticketing platform rather than resorting to public condemnations.
