Why JAMB Excluded Under-age UTME Candidate Who Scored 371
The (JAMB) has explained the exclusion of one under-age candidate who scored 371 marks in the 2025 UTME from its final vetting process. The board emphasised that the process for under-age candidates is rigorous and conditional, and non-participation in any required stage leads to disqualification.
Quick Insight: Achieving a high UTME score alone does not guarantee admission—especially for candidates under the minimum tertiary-entry age; full compliance with all screening stages is mandatory.
1. The Minimum Age Policy & Special Vetting
• The Ministry of Education sets a minimum age of 16 years for entry into tertiary institutions to ensure mental and emotional maturity.
• For exceptional under-age candidates (below 16) who meet high academic standards, JAMB introduced a special multi-stage vetting route.
• This vetting includes meeting UTME score thresholds, SSCE performance, an internal screening by the chosen university, and a final JAMB-administered panel screening.
2. Candidate’s Exclusion Explained
• The candidate achieved the required UTME score of 371 and advanced through the first two screening phases.
• She applied to a university and participated in the first screenings, but was later reported absent for the university’s internal screening exercise.
• The internal screening is the third of four required stages. Absence at this stage made her ineligible for the final JAMB-administered screening.
• JAMB stated the exclusion was not due to bias or oversight but based on the official report from the institution.
3. What This Means for Candidates & Institutions
• Under-age candidates must ensure they meet **all** criteria — not just UTME scores — including age, SSCE results, institutional screening attendance, and final panel assessment.
• Universities must adhere strictly to their internal screening schedules and report accurately to JAMB.
• Parents and applicants should plan ahead and ensure readiness for each screening phase, so as not to miss any stage.
• Admission transparency is reinforced by automated systems like the Central Admission Processing System (CAPS), which JAMB uses for fairness across all institutions.
Broader Implications for Nigerian Tertiary Admissions
• The policy reinforces that merit is multi-dimensional: age, performance, screening attendance and rules compliance all count.
• It highlights the need for better communication and awareness among high-performing younger students about additional admission procedures.
• Universities may face increased scrutiny and pressure to manage and report their screening processes accurately.
• For the education system, this case hints at the push for balancing exceptional talent with admission integrity and procedural fairness.
