JAMB Policy Meeting 2025: Key Decisions on Admission & Cut-Off Marks Revealed!

The Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB) has released the cut-off marks for admission into various tertiary institutions across the nation for the 2025/26 academic year. These marks were established during the board’s annual policy meeting, which took place on July 8 at the Bola Ahmed Tinubu International Conference Centre in Abuja.

The event also highlighted the 5th edition of the National Tertiary Admissions Performance Merit Award (NATAP-M), aimed at recognizing institutions that excelled in the admissions process within the legal framework.

A cut-off benchmark of 150 was sanctioned for university admissions, 100 for polytechnics, and 140 for colleges of education, including nursing colleges.

These marks were determined through voting by relevant stakeholders. While vice-chancellors voted to set the cut-off marks for universities, rectors decided on the marks for polytechnics, and provosts set the entry points for colleges of education.

Notably, JAMB’s registrar, Professor Ishaq Oloyede, and the Minister of Education, Dr. Tunji Alausa, advocated for a minimum cut-off of 160 for universities, but the stakeholders’ preferences prevailed.

This year’s cut-off mark for universities is slightly above the 140 mark maintained in 2021, 2022, 2023, and 2024. Conversely, the cut-off for colleges of education increased to 140 from the previous 100, while the threshold for polytechnics has stayed at 100.

Some critics argue that these cut-off marks, less than half of the possible 400 points in each exam subject, are too low, suggesting they reflect a decline in educational quality in the country.

These critics contend that such low standards could lead to a deterioration in the quality of graduates from the nation’s tertiary institutions, undermining their global competitiveness and ability to contribute effectively in their fields.

However, it is often overlooked that the UTME score is merely one factor in the admission process. Other criteria, such as school certificate results with at least five credits, including English and mathematics, and post-UTME scores, are also considered alongside UTME scores. Institutions cannot admit candidates below the cut-off marks set during the policy meeting.

In fact, institutions frequently accept candidates with higher UTME scores, particularly for more competitive courses or programs with limited slots.

The latest annual policy meeting has successfully resolved the debate over implementing an 18-year minimum admission age for universities, which was based on the concern that younger children, despite their intelligence, might lack the emotional and psychological readiness for an independent university life.

Many parents who opposed this policy, viewing it as unfair to exceptionally gifted children, should be pleased with the minister’s announcement that the minimum age for admission has now been established at 16, effective for the 2025/26 academic session. As the minister stated, “This policy decision strikes a balance between cognitive maturity and academic readiness. The age of sixteen is non-negotiable.”

We believe this decision is reasonable.

JAMB merits praise for its tradition of engaging crucial stakeholders in the tertiary education sector during its policy-making process. Collectively, they must tackle and resolve the issues afflicting the sector, including the increasing sophistication of fraudsters attempting to bypass the board’s procedures.

It is both important and praiseworthy that JAMB consistently stays one step ahead of them and their schemes, owing to the extensive use of technology in its operations.

Furthermore, we might have expected that instead of continually establishing new public tertiary institutions, seemingly for political reasons, both state and federal governments would be better off enhancing the facilities in existing institutions to accommodate the growing number of admission applicants.

The private institutions created to address these gaps are primarily profit-driven and are too costly for all but a small percentage of the population.