The University of Lagos (UNILAG) has found itself under intense public criticism following reports of widespread glitches in its Post-UTME screening examinations for the 2025/2026 academic session. Several candidates have taken to social media to express frustration after receiving emails falsely accusing them of examination malpractice.
One viral post highlighted the ordeal of a candidate who scored 350 in the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB) examination but was flagged by UNILAG’s artificial intelligence detection system for alleged cheating during the Post-UTME. The candidate’s supporters described the situation as “rubbish” and an insult to students who had worked hard to achieve high scores.
Concerns about faulty AI-driven proctoring are not new. Similar complaints have trailed the Post-UTME exercises of Obafemi Awolowo University (OAU) and the University of Ibadan (UI). Critics argue that Nigerian universities are embracing digital solutions without adequately addressing the risks of systemic glitches, thereby punishing innocent students for technical errors.
The major issue lies in the interpretation of AI flags. According to university policy, candidates flagged during the examination are sent automated emails notifying them of possible irregularities. However, the wording of the messages has generated outrage. Instead of stating that the flagged cases are “under review,” the emails reportedly declared some students “ineligible for admission.”
Parents, guardians, and education analysts argue that such phrasing is misleading and damaging, especially for candidates who may have committed no offense. “The statement should have clarified that video evidence is under review and final decisions would be communicated later,” one observer noted.
For many students, the accusations cut deep. “Na wa o,” one frustrated candidate wrote, lamenting how his 350 JAMB score had been undermined by what he described as a “useless AI detection system.” He further noted that glitches during exams had become a norm in Nigerian institutions, and instead of improving the systems, universities were frustrating the very students they were meant to evaluate fairly.
Education experts have explained that the flagging system could be triggered by benign issues such as background noise, temporary internet disconnection, poor lighting, or camera angles. In many cases, students have no control over these factors. Yet, the AI-powered system often interprets such occurrences as signs of malpractice.
An anonymous UNILAG official, however, tried to clarify the situation. “A flag only indicates a suspected issue, not a final judgment,” the official explained. “The university undertakes a careful review of the video recordings for every flagged candidate. Students cleared of wrongdoing will have their results processed normally. Results are only withheld when a clear violation is confirmed.”
Despite the assurances, students say the communication strategy has worsened the situation. One candidate, Loveth, recounted how she nearly fainted upon receiving the email. “I got this same message last night and started shaking. Like, how?!!! I almost wasn’t breathing,” she said, describing the anxiety the message caused.
In fact, many students believe UNILAG and other universities owe them greater transparency. Calls are growing for institutions to release the video evidence of suspected malpractice to students so they can verify the allegations. This, they argue, would reduce the risk of unjust punishment and restore confidence in the process.
A viral image shared by a Post-UTME candidate days before the exams also shed light on the stringent monitoring conditions. The rules indicated that any form of side movement, reading questions aloud, or even the slightest use of calculators or phones would be tagged as malpractice. Students insist that such extreme surveillance creates fear and tension, leading to unintentional behaviors that may be misinterpreted by the AI.
Some commentators have urged caution, reminding the public that technical glitches are possible in any digital system. However, they insist that Nigerian universities must learn to refine their technologies before deploying them at scale. “Glitches should not become official policy,” one social media user commented, criticizing the casual way institutions appear to dismiss student concerns.
The controversy has also raised broader questions about Nigeria’s readiness for full-scale digital examinations. While the integration of AI and online testing is meant to improve efficiency and curb malpractice, experts believe the lack of proper infrastructure, training, and human oversight makes such systems vulnerable to error.
For now, UNILAG maintains that flagged cases are being reviewed carefully and only those found guilty will face sanctions. Yet the backlash suggests that the university must do more to repair its image and reassure candidates. With education serving as a crucial gateway to opportunity, stakeholders argue that no student should suffer because of a machine’s error.
The Nigeria Education News will continue to monitor the situation as the review process unfolds and as universities across the country grapple with the balance between technology, fairness, and student welfare.
