The minister’s line of thought is that JAMB is the proper body established by law to set examination questions, score the candidates and determine their admission status. On the other divide, those in support of the post-UTME screening exercise argue that JAMB has outlived its relevance hence the need for universities to adopt their method of screening candidates. Ideally both parties are correct in the following ways: JAMB is a statutory examination body saddled with the task of screening candidates, scoring them and determining their admission status. On the other hand, the post-UTME is thought to be a shield and not a sword. It is initiated to thoroughly ensure that every candidate seeking admission into the Ivory Towers is fit and proper, competent to excel in any course of study. But the issue that arises for a rethink of the post-UTME screening exercise is whether it is a blessing or a curse going by the trend of events arising from it.
It is sad that rather than bring the much desired result, the post-UTME concept has been used as an instrument of fraud, exploitation and manipulation of all sorts. It is has resulted in large-scale corruption cutting across both federal and state universities to the exclusion of the private-owned ones. The objective of the exercise has been abandoned. The exercise has become a tool to fund their projects and to all intents and purposes enrich their lackeys and cronies. Ask me how? This writer has been a victim of manipulation and corruption in his quest for admission into one of the federal universities. In fact it was during those difficult moments that the ‘trade’ became clearer to him.
In most federal and state universities corruption and exploitation manifest in different shades under the pretext of post-UTME. The problem occurs especially where a candidate fails to meet the merit mark ab initio. It is compounded where the course of study is a professional one whether medicine, law, accountancy, pharmacology, etc. Rather than allot an optional course of study to the candidate, undue delay results. There is what is known as the Second List. The Merit List comprises the names of candidates who have successfully met the cut-off mark but the publication of the Second List is fraught with corruption and to the detriment of the ignorant candidate. How do I mean by ignorant? The candidate is ignorant because he does not know how to cut corners as the others. He only hopes he would be granted admission to pursue another course of study.
The Second List comprises mostly the names of candidates who have ‘settled’ their way with high-ranking officials of the said institution. This is the real business of the post-UTME exercise! What’s more? As funny as this trend appears the so-called Second List is thought as undergoing ‘deliberation’ and the list of candidates is classified bearing different titles such as VC’s List, Lecturers’ List, etc. The candidates whose names feature on the list are those who desperately need admission, so they pay as much as N 450,000 (four hundred and fifty thousand naira ) and above depending on the particular course of study. In fact, professional courses attract heavy cost when compared to the non-professional ones. The ignorant, honest candidate still hopes to be granted admission. His hope is anchored on the fact his score is close to the cut-off mark. Unfortunately his hope is dashed when he surfs the internet to find that he is not admitted or that his name does not feature on the admission list.
The whole exercise may seem preposterous but it is the reality on ground. Private universities conduct theirs and admit candidates whether they meet the cut-off or otherwise since their sponsors can afford the huge fee cost. When stakeholders and academics kicked against the policy one wonders the real motive for their objecting. Therefore it became expedient to expose the underbelly of this exercise. If indeed the object of the exercise is to maintain high academic standard of learning; as well as admit candidates who are fit and proper , then the institutions concerned should shun corruption and manipulation, conduct examinations and without undue delay admit those who have successfully passed. Also where a candidate did not meet the merit mark for a particular course, an alternative course of study should be offered without recourse to cutting corners. This is to ensure equality and fairness to all candidates. For instance if a candidate applied for Accountancy and the merit mark is 80 but had 74 he could be offered Commerce or Economics to choose from. While it is understandable that our institutions don’t have enough slots available the same does not mean that a candidate should be shut out for not cutting corners to secure admission.
Furthermore the manipulation and maneuvering by which desperate admission seekers secure their way must be jettisoned. Candidates should be given an even and equal opportunity to prove their worth. Screening candidates at the front and at the back door would amount to double standard. If the post-UTME exercise is to remain the objective must be strictly adhered to. Candidates should not be guaranteed any other means of securing admission than hard work and excellent performance. The irony about the exercise is that the porous candidates are given leverage over the brilliant ones on ‘settlement’ basis. This is the very act of corruption that seems to elude the attention of columnists, analysts and commentators who argued in favor of the exercise.
The honorable minister of education should be commended for this action in the sense that it is a means to ending corruption and manipulation. The object of the exercise as intended is to checkmate the high rate of poor performance by undergraduates and not a pretext for aiding desperate admission seekers by corrupt means. In this way the post-UTME screening exercise may be regarded as a blessing and not a curse.
- yugoboss
No comments:
Post a Comment