Do We Really Need the Post-UTME?
I argued somewhere
sometime that JAMB should be scrapped, and that argument made a lot of my
listeners roar in disagreements. But let me place the argument here, just for the
purpose of clarity and persistence. I say again, JAMB should be scrapped! This
position is not because I have any contempt for JAMB, but because I strongly
believe we do not really need JAMB when it was created, what we needed was the
strengthening of the O/Level examination body—WAEC, and its functions, and same
thing applies to how we started post-UTME when what we needed was to strengthen
JAMB and its functions. Below are my arguments.
Firstly,
Nigeria—instead of reviving what's not efficient as we expect it to be or need
it to be—just always like to go about starting another one. That’s why I said
JAMB was not what we needed when it was created, but because we don’t so much
know how to strengthen and/or revive our institutions, hence, it seem to us
like the best thing to do is start another institution when one is somewhat down
or not doing enough. Another instance apart from the examination-body instance
is the creation of the Federal Road Safety Commission (FRSC) when the real thing
we needed to do was to strengthen the traffic department of the Nigeria Police
Force (NPF), and widen their functions even to the highways. But everyone in
the Nigerian government just always wants to start something of their own,
something that would be attached to the successes of their administration;
hence, the creation of JAMB when WAEC only needed to be stronger, and starting
of Post-UTME when the JAMB was supposed to be strengthened.
My second argument
against JAMB, UTME and Post-UTME is: only very few countries—even in
Africa—have these sorts of exams they write to qualify for admission into the
higher institutions of learning. Most of the countries in the world just write
application letters or some essay and send it to their choice of school and
expect mails from the school telling them of whether they are admitted or not. It’s
that simple! But it’s funny that our own Nigeria of over 170 million
people—with over 40% of the population lacking the read-and-write skills and
over 60% of them not having the higher education—would still continue making
getting admission and retaining it near-impossible. Getting to the higher institutions
here is like going to a bow war—you have to put beyond your all in it to win,
all because the candidates must be screened to determine whether they deserve
to be admitted or not, and whether they can cope or not with what the higher
institutions would do to them should they eventually gain the admission. And
this is where it gets even confusing, because the Nigerian government is always
claiming they want to curb the rate of illiteracy in the county, but then, they
are always also making policies that contradict that objective. And then, my
rhetorical questions at this point are: are UTME and the Post-UTME capable of
telling who deserves to be admitted? Are they capable of telling who could do
well in school should they be admitted? Sincerely, my position would be: no,
they aren’t!
I won't criticize
UTME and Post-UTME so meanly that I forget they—especially the latter—have been
able to reduce the rate of students who go on probation per session, and the
rate of students who get the advice to withdraw from the school because they
cannot do well in their studies; and believe me, these seem to be the
biggest—if not the only—achievements the exams have obviously achieved. And to unfortunately
spoil the achievements, the exams do more harm than the good they do to the
country’s literacy level. There are so many students per year who get denied of
admission because they couldn’t do well in the exams, but end up being gurus
later on when they finally gained the admission by chance (of which I myself is
a very good example). There are also students who someway somehow got to score
high marks in the exams, gained admission, but couldn’t do well in the higher
institution. And believe me, that’s because the exams only test 3 or 4 aspects
of learning (retention, remembrance, speed and arguably how well the candidates
can guess right) at the expense of the most important one the higher institutions
really need—potential.
Though the exams
pretend they test the potential of the candidate in relation to what they can
do in the higher institution and how well they can do in the school, but they just
aren’t ever testing for these, they just test who should or should not be admitted
based on how high they have scored and leave the schools to use other criteria
such as: who you know, how much money you have, and what other thing you can
give to define if you deserve to be admitted or not. It makes the exams not
needed really. The Post-UTME on its own has over the years being a source of
generating revenue for the institutions; in fact more attention is paid to the
revenue generating aspect of the screening process than the real thing the
screening should be doing. It’s like the institutions are allowed (legally) to
take advantage of the students’ urge and the need to get admitted, coupled with
their ignorance of how the admission are really given; that’s why the
institutions would advertise that students with certain score in the UTME exam
should come apply for the Post-UTME without telling them that the course they
have applied for would take more than the certain score they advertise.
Institution like OAU for instance would call students with 200 scores in the
UTME to come do the Post-UTME screening, but not endeavor to tell them that a
person who has scored just 200 can never be admitted to study courses like Accounting,
Economics, Law, Medicine and the likes of them—even if the candidate has chosen
any of these. They will be asked to apply to the Post-UTME even with
exploitative prices, and yet not be admitted later on as they finally get to
realize they have only scored 200 but the 200 cannot get them into school.
It’s just too depressing
that even the higher institutions that are supposed to be teaching against
exploitations are the ones doing it the most, all in the scheme of generating
revenue and screening applicants. So, do these make it seem like we really need
UTME and the Post-UTME?
A counter-argument
was placed against my position on Facebook where—prior to this—I have argued
about why we don’t need the UTME and Post-UTME; the nice man argued that
without the Post-UTME the schools would only be admitting shabby students and
be producing shabby graduates. Based on the fact that the level of exam
malpractices in UTME now is near zero, he argued that the exam is doing the
right thing in scoring out who can be admitted and who cannot. Yes, I agree,
JAMB has achieved so much when it comes to UTME and credibility; they really
have, and that is commendable. But I can also argue that neither the
credibility of UTME nor that of the Post-UTME is a primary determinant of the kinds
of graduates the schools will produce; neither is it a guarantee that the
schools are admitting the “promising” students. I believe if the O/Level exams
are fostered too—just as the UTME is fostered—they will do better in defining
which student deserves to be admitted or not, and how they would do in school when
admitted; and in fact, they could even be used in placing the students to
departments where they can do better. But then, the government is yet to figure
out if they want the schools to be educating or exploiting. Come to think of
it, needing to go through like three stages of exams to get into the higher institution;
exams you will have to pay huge sums of money for, what effect would it have on
trying to curb illiteracy in the country? This is all I thought to make me
conclude we really do not need UTME or the Post-UTME. All we need to do is make
WAEC and NECO better and widen their functions.
People who read this also have interest in reading this:
Our Services for OAU Undergraduate Degrees Aspirants
No comments:
Post a Comment