Recently, the Nigerian Minister of Education, Professor Tahir Mamman, sparked a heated debate on the age requirement for students seeking admission into tertiary institutions in the country. The issue arose during the 2024 policy meeting of the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB), where the Minister expressed concerns about underage students taking exams to gain admission into universities.
The Minister’s proposal for an 18-year minimum age requirement received mixed reactions from education administrators, leading to a temporary reversal and the eventual agreement on a minimum age of 16 for the 2024 admission cycle. Despite this decision, controversy and confusion continued to surround the issue, prompting JAMB’s spokesman, Fabian Benjamin, to clarify that candidates who would be at least 16 years old at the time of admission would be eligible for the 2024 admission cycle.
One of the key concerns raised by the Minister and education administrators is the prevalence of age forgery and alteration, leading to an influx of false affidavits and doctored age adjustments on identity documents. This practice not only affects the education system but also extends into other sectors, such as the public service, where individuals alter their ages to extend their careers.
The issue creating this debate is the ethical and practical implications of early admissions and premature progression into university. Cases were shared where students who gained early admissions at 16 or even younger faced challenges due to immaturity, leading to wasted opportunities and the need to start over at a later age.
The prevailing problem, it seems, is the desire for early graduation, often resulting in premature entry into tertiary education. This rush, influenced by societal pressures, financial considerations, and the quest to showcase brilliance, has led to a system that encourages early progression without due consideration for the physiological and psychological readiness of the students.
The root of this issue, as highlighted, appears to stem from a lack of commitment and enforcement of existing policies by successive governments. The existing 6-3-3-4 policy in Nigeria, if strictly followed, would lead to a timeline where no student would graduate before the age of 21 or 22. However, due to the lax enforcement and lack of consequences for age forgery, the system has been bypassed, resulting in immature graduates.
It is evident that the debate around the age factor in Nigeria’s educational system is multifaceted, encompassing concerns about student readiness, ethical considerations, and the need for a more stringent approach in policy implementation. While exceptional cases of early brilliance exist, the prevailing norm indicates that the rush for early progression may not be in the best interest of the students’ overall development and readiness for higher education.
Ultimately, the need for a more rigorous approach in enforcing age policies, a reevaluation of societal pressures, and a concerted effort to prioritize the holistic development of students over early progression is essential to ensure a more balanced and nurturing educational system.
