Some many years back before post JAMB, securing admission into
higher institutions, universities to be precise, was very difficult for the
brainy owing to high level of admission malpractices, directly or indirectly by
the school bodies. The advent of POST JAMB ( Now post UTME) put an end or
perhaps a very big check on this negativity.

I, personally, happen to be one of the many that faced these
challenges and also part of the lucky
ones that reaped the good fruit of post UTME. Without much ado, I can
categorically say that post UTME is one of the best quality assurance mechanism for most
institutions.
Some beautiful quotes in line with this article:
"If universities will not become breeding
grounds for ill-baked, sophomoric and dilettantish graduates, then, post UME
test must remain to be part of our admission process criteria."....anonymous
"To avoid the
abuse of university education in the country, JAMB and Post-JAMB should work
together to compliment each other so that the optimal output will be
achieved in our Universities. While Post-JAMB will continue to benefit from
JAMB, the fear of passing Post-JAMB screening test will reduce the desire to
bribe JAMB staff to cheat hence passing JAMB is no more the only criteria to
gain admission into university in the country but a mere qualification to face
Post-JAMB screening test which does not give room for cheating.''..... Hundu William Terseer
In
highlights, here my five reasons why post UTME should not be scrapped:
1. It check-mates 'runs'....tell me you don't know the meaning of
'runs'
2. It invites in more transparency to institutions enrolment
processes.
3. Students knowing that two screening processes await them, they
tend to tighten their belts as regards preparation.
4. It creates a major resistance to students who exceedingly
passed jamb via malpractices.
5. Various institutions can boast of good quality of students.
This is true as post UTME has improved the academic standard of undergraduate students
owing to their good academic performances.
More
Cushion:
According to an educational research carried out by Hundu William Terseer,
" The foregoing discussion has shown that Post-JAMB is more
effective than JAMB as selection test for university admission. However,
lessons have to be learnt from the finding. The effectiveness of
Post-JAMB may not be unconnected with the fact that the screening test is
conducted for students who have already taken JAMB examinations. This implies
that Post-JAMB on its own may not be able to achieve huge success unless JAMB
comes in to trim down the large population opting for University Admission.
JAMB can continue as a primary screening exercise for university admission
while Post-JAMB will continue to be the final screening exercise.
TWO SYSTEMS OF ENROLLMENT
The retaining of the two systems of enrollment is vital and
cost effective if education is to be taken as serious business in the country.
This can be considered in two ways. First, JAMB plays the role of ‘filtering’
which reduces the population students that would have become an obstacle to the
smooth conduct of Post-JAMB test, secondary, Students access information about
University admission from JAMB, such information will be difficult to access is
leave into the hand of individual universities.
The implication from the findings of this study is that,
poor academic performance of undergraduate students is strongly related to the enrollment process through which they gain admission. The fact still
remains that irrespective of poor infrastructure in our universities, if
qualified students are admitted they will at least earn a class of degree
higher than a third class and pass degree. This has been proved to be true from
this research work. The federal government should therefore have a rethink on
University Entrance Examinations if the desired manpower is to be achieved for
economic development and nation building.
Although Post-JAMB screening exercise might not be the best
option to solve JAMB problem in a democratic setting, it is however the most
effective tool to rescue to educational system in the country. The problem is
diverse; JAMB seems to be the cause of the dilemma it found itself. JAMB
has for long taken its JAMB for granted. JAMB engages in collecting money from
students who do not have minimum qualification for university education, only
to allow them write an examination they are not qualified for, this often
results to unprecedented number of student seating for the examination such
that JAMB cannot effectively control, this has resulted to proliferation of
JAMB centres that does not look like centres for conducting examination for
university entrance.
Secondly the remunerations JAMB pays to her adhoc staff and
the calibre of staff JAMB recruits these days is overwhelming. Even to this
present day, JAMB pay as low as N2000.00 for conduct of an examination that
candidates are willing to pay over 10,000 for ‘assistance’. Perhaps, what
interest JAMB adhoc staff is not the JAMB money but money they will collect
from candidates for ‘assistance’?
The credibility of Post-JAMB is however commendable.
In the first place, the calibre of staff conducting the Post-JAMB
screening are usually made of senior staff that cannot easily be bought over
for a peanut and there is less contact between the candidate and those
conducting the examination. Again must of the Universities including Federal
University of Technology, Yola, have adapted the use of on-line test where
students interact with computer to approach question This also reduces the
involvement of human error in the screening test.
To avoid the abuse of university education in the country,
JAMB and Post-JAMB should work together to complimentary each other so that the
optimal output will be achieved in our Universities. While Post-JAMB will
continue to benefit from JAMB, the fear of passing Post-JAMB screening test
will reduce the desire to bribe JAMB staff to cheat hence passing JAMB is no
more the only criteria to gain admission into university in the country but a
mere qualification to face Post-JAMB screening test which does not give room
for cheating.''
No comments:
Post a Comment