Much ado about Post-UTME screening tests in Nigeria

Much ado about Post-UTME screening tests in Nigeria

Director, Inter-Campus and Public Affairs, Dr Toyese Dahunsi

It is another season of admissions into Nigeria’s higher educational institutions. After the release of Unified Tertiary Matriculations Examination (UTME) results earlier in the year, one next stage in the admission cycle is the post-UTME screening exercises conducted by universities, polytechnics and other institutions in the country. What is called post-UTME screening exercise today started during the 2005/2006 academic sessions of most higher educational institutions in the country. It was a government-backed interventionist policy to stem the sharp rise in examination malpractice associated with the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board examinations, fueled by “miracle centres” where candidates scored artificially high marks. It was purposely designed as a quality control mechanism, a verification system to confirm that candidates’ actual abilities match their JAMB scores. In practice, each institution designs its own tests, ranging from computer-based tests and pencil-and-paper examinations to physical credential screening and oral interviews.

There is no doubt that this exercise has its benefits and advantages. For example, it has been argued to be a superior predictor of academic success; it has drastically reduced attrition rates at entry level; and, it has exposed the UTME performance gap. What is worrisome, however, is that even after 20 years, no university has taken the bold step to critically review the relevance, cost-effectiveness and associated socio-economic and policy criticisms of the exercise since its inception. Higher educational institutions are supposed to be drivers of knowledge, and should, themselves, be driven by knowledge. Where universities tenaciously hold on to a single approach to solving same problem for two decades even in the face of the ever-changing socio-economic and technological realities, such institutions can never be ranked favorably among the comity of global institutions. It is unfortunate how universities see this exercise as an annual ritual. Quite funnily, you see professors managing long student queues for days, sweating profusely to match candidates into examination halls. You even see Vice-Chancellors moving round jubilantly with journalists to show-case how the exercises are calmly conducted. What the media do not show, however, is that in this age, candidates still line up under the sun for hours waiting for their turn to write examinations, and that most of the candidates sleep at motor parks and risky open spaces waiting for such turns.

The justifications for a critical re-evaluation of the relevance of post-UTME screening exercises are glaring to the discernible. First, the security situation in the country is becoming increasingly unfavorable for candidates to travel from Kano to Lagos or from Kaduna to Ibadan in the name of post-UTME screening. Thousands of candidates have met their untimely deaths as a result of this. But because they are not students yet, they are consistently treated as “unknown soldiers”. We have had cases of universities denying and dissociating themselves from cases of innocent candidates who fell into the hands of abductors or got involved in fatal accidents on their way to write their post-UTME screening tests because such victims were not students yet. Second, with the current level of technological advancement, does it still make any reasonable sense forcing candidates from all parts of the country to travel down to our campuses in the name of post-UTME tests, even when admissions based on that are not guaranteed? If JAMB is not forcing candidates to come down to Abuja for examinations but is relying on technology to disarticulate and decentralize the conduct of examinations across the country, then the Board seems more realistic and sensitive than our institutions. It is even more disheartening that universities of technology still engage in this. What then is the technology component of their mandate?

Third, how does this practice compare with other universities with which we are competing globally? Today, the best universities in the world (the likes of Harvard, Cambridge, Oxford, MIT, Princeton, etc.) rely strictly on technology for applications and admission processing. Everything is done online, even including virtual tours of facilities, interaction with admission recruiters, and so on. If they were to go the Nigerian way, they would not trust anyone in the process. They would ask candidates from all parts of the world to first fly down to their campuses and write admission tests and fly back. Are these not the institutions we are being ranked with? Fourth, even though post-UTME screening tests have been shown to ensure students’ entry level quality, students are still advised to withdraw from programs and universities because they are found to be weak and not meeting the requirements for their academic progress. Students graduating with First-class degrees have not significantly increased compared to pre-UTME days, and students still graduate with third-class and pass degrees across programs.

Fifth, the standards and integrity of examinations conducted by JAMB in the last one decade have continued to witness massive improvements. As this is now the case, do we still need to duplicate examinations for admission into our institutions when our initial justification was the nation-wide malpractice that used to characterize JAMB examinations? Last point, not the least, is the effect of this practice on prospective candidates from outside the country. How easy or sustainable is it for candidates from Ghana, South Africa or even the UK to first travel down to a university campus in Nigeria for post-UTME and travel back? This, undoubtedly, is one of the reasons our campuses are extremely low in student diversity, a fundamental requirement for favorable webometric ranking.

At a time like this, a university that knows why it was established must stand out. That university must not follow the bandwagon of “Because other universities are doing it”. That university must leverage technology to ease candidates’ stress and completely eradicate their travel hazards for what is not sure for them. That university must start by conducting its post-UTME online, if it must. The starting point can be to have strategic centres across the nation. There are thousands of JAMB accredited CBT centres that can be collaborated with for these examinations with agreed cost-sharing formula, perhaps starting with three or four strategic regional hubs. The advantages of this are many. It will definitely reduce travel hazards, security risks, and the heavy financial burden of interstate trips for candidates and their families. It will also eliminate severe campus overcrowding with its attendant physical and health challenges, just as it will reduce the logistical strain on university facilities. The era of “It is impossible” is long gone. As individuals and institutions, we need to change our orientations and problem-solving approaches.

But it needs be stressed that there is even no law that says every university must conduct post-UTME screening. It is just a circumstantial intervention that can be reviewed, improved or discontinued. For example, Osun State University has never invited candidates for any physical post-UTME screening exercises. It deploys a solution online where candidates submit their credentials. The results are then computed automatically on the basis of 40% (Ordinary level result) and 60% (UTME performance). Candidates also automatically get their results online and the overall results are used to determine minimum pass-marks (cut-off points) per course. The pass-marks are circulated online. In this case, no candidate travels anywhere and there is no extortion of any sort. To be honest too, there has not been any noticeable reduction in students’ academic performance since the University started this way. It should also be emphasized that Nigerian institutions’ hidden motive of revenue generation is not in any way thwarted by leveraging technology to decentralize the exercise. Candidates can even pay double the current fees if they will no longer have to travel long distances for the exercise.

Ultimately, the post-UTME screening exercise has long outlived its original justification as a physical, campus-bound intervention. Retaining a two-decade-old approach in the face of escalating national security risks, severe financial strain on families, and rapid technological advancement is no longer a mark of academic rigor, but a reflection of institutional inertia. Nigerian universities, particularly those that are seriously dedicated to technology, must lead by example by embracing fully digital models, collaborating with decentralized CBT networks, or adopting automated credential verification systems. By shedding the unnecessary drama and human cost of physical screenings, our higher institutions can finally align with global admission standards, prioritizing candidate safety, operational efficiency, and genuine innovation over an outdated annual ritual.

Dahunsi, Director, Inter-Campus and Public Affairs, Osun State University, wrote via: toyese.dahunsi@uniosun.edu.ng