As the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB) released the 2025 Unified Tertiary Matriculation Examination (UTME) results, one dataset that stood out was the performance of underage candidates—those younger than the minimum 16-year benchmark for university admission in Nigeria. Of the 40,247 underage candidates who sat for the UTME, only 467 (representing 1.16%) scored high enough to be considered as possessing “exceptional ability”—a classification that permits further assessment in three additional stages. In comparison, 22% of candidates overall scored 200 and above in the same exam.
This low performance figure once again draws attention to the long-running controversy surrounding age limits in Nigerian higher education. Should age alone determine readiness for university education? Or are there broader questions about emotional preparedness, cognitive maturity, and the integrity of the school system?
The Numbers Tell a Story
While many underage candidates are typically seen as gifted or academically advanced, the 2025 UTME results suggest that academic acceleration does not always translate to top-tier performance.
Of the total 1,955,069 candidates who sat the exam, only 22%—about 420,415 candidates—scored 200 and above, the general benchmark for university competitiveness. Yet among the 40,247 underage candidates, only 467—or 1.16%—met the exceptional ability threshold.
This stark contrast raises the question: were these candidates truly ready for the rigor of tertiary education—or simply pushed through the system too quickly?
The figure also aligns with broader concerns about the quality of foundational education in Nigeria, particularly in private schools where fast-tracking students through basic and secondary education has become a trend.
JAMB’s Position on Age
JAMB’s age policy—stipulating a minimum of 16 years for university admission—has faced pushback in recent years. Critics argue that intelligence, not age, should be the key factor for determining university eligibility. In fact, some candidates and civil society groups have previously taken legal action against JAMB and the Federal Ministry of Education, demanding that the age restriction be lifted for exceptionally bright students. However, JAMB and several institutions insist that 16 is a reasonable standard, considering the maturity demands of higher education.
JAMB’s decision to allow underage candidates to sit for the 2025 UTME appears to reflect a measured concession to mounting legal and public pressure.
In previous years, the Board maintained its focus on general candidates and occasionally highlighted blind and physically challenged candidates.
However, following the lawsuit and advocacy against the age-limit policy, JAMB not only permitted underage participation this year but also released specific empirical data on their performance—an uncommon move that suggests a subtle shift in its long-held stance.
Maturity, Not Just Merit
Beyond test scores, concerns about social and emotional readiness loom large. Lecturers, psychologists, and academic advisers have often noted that many under-16s, even when intellectually gifted, struggle to adjust to university life—a highly autonomous environment with academic, social, and ethical pressures.
Moreover, the maturity argument intersects with issues of safety, exploitation, and mental health, particularly for very young students navigating the complexities of adult spaces.
Systemic Shortcuts or True Talent?
The high number of underage candidates also raises questions about educational shortcuts. Are schools accelerating students because they’re gifted, or simply to please ambitious parents? In many urban private schools, it’s not uncommon to find children finishing secondary school by age 14 or 15, often without the developmental scaffolding that older peers possess.
A 2021 education sector report by UNICEF Nigeria warned against “academic malnutrition,” where the rush to achieve milestones undermines deeper learning and cognitive resilience.
Looking Ahead: What Should Change?
The performance of underage candidates in the 2025 UTME is a wake-up call for policymakers and educators.
Rather than blanket bans or open doors, Nigeria’s education system may benefit from a structured alternative for academically advanced youth. Perhaps, a pre-degree programme, maturity assessment, or mentorship track could be a way to keep them busy.
Ultimately, education is not a race. While brilliance can emerge early, the system must ensure it is accompanied by preparedness. The poor performance of most underage candidates in this year’s UTME suggests that the 16-year age policy is more than just a number—it may be a protective boundary for quality and maturity.
EduCeleb will continue to follow developments around age policy and university admissions in Nigeria. Share your thoughts on this issue in the comments.
For information on Press Releases, Photos, Promotional Events and Adverts, Please message us on WhatsApp via (+234) 09052129258, 08124662170 or send an email to: info@educeleb.com.
