Graceland Polytechnic, Offa, has acknowledged that some of its graduates were affected by the non-accreditation of academic programmes at the time of their admission, attributing the situation to lapses under a previous management.
The admission is contained in a rejoinder issued by the institution’s management in response to an earlier investigative report detailing how students were admitted into programmes later found to be unaccredited by the National Board for Technical Education (NBTE).
While insisting that Graceland Polytechnic is a duly licensed private institution, the management confirmed that programmes, including Mass Communication and Science Laboratory Technology (SLT), only received NBTE accreditation in January 2025, several years after affected students had already been admitted and graduated.
According to the institution, the accreditation “does not cover students who graduated before the effective date,” an acknowledgement that aligns with complaints by graduates who say they have been unable to secure admission into Higher National Diploma (HND) programmes or gain Direct Entry into universities.
School Distances Itself from Responsibility
In its rejoinder, the Polytechnic distanced the current leadership from responsibility for the admissions, stating that the issue occurred during a “transition period” before the emergence of the present management.
“Any regulatory gaps referenced relate to a period before the current administration,” the statement said, adding that a new Governing Council and Management Team have since assumed office and initiated reforms to align the institution with NBTE standards.
The school rejected claims that students were abandoned, but did not outline any specific remedial pathway, such as conversion programmes, revalidation options, or institutional support mechanisms for graduates whose certificates remain unusable for further academic progression.
Instead, the Polytechnic said it has been offering “guidance to affected graduates within the framework of NBTE regulations,” without detailing how such guidance resolves the core issue of invalid academic credentials.
The management further emphasised that all programmes are now “fully accredited” and assured parents and prospective students that Graceland Polytechnic currently operates in compliance with NBTE guidelines.
However, the rejoinder did not dispute the central allegation that students were admitted into programmes that lacked accreditation at the time, nor did it explain why admissions continued before regulatory approval was secured.
The NBTE has yet to issue a public statement on the matter.
Graduates Push Back, Demand Accountability
The Polytechnic’s explanation has drawn sharp responses from affected graduates, who insist that accreditation, regardless of when it was eventually granted, does not resolve the damage already done.
Responding to the school’s position, Oladosu Abdulhammed Kewugbemi said the key issue remains unresolved.
“I am not disputing the fact that accreditation was eventually done, even though it was not backdated and the new management admitted it was done in 2025. What happens to the pre-accreditation victims is what I want to know,” he said.
He also called on Mr Ibitoye Abiodun Timothy, the immediate past Registrar of the institution, to publicly explain the circumstances surrounding the admissions.
In a separate response, Toheeb Omotayo disputed the Polytechnic’s timeline, stating that accreditation was actually completed in 2023, not 2025.
“You may have been unintentionally misinformed. This can be confirmed on the JAMB official website. Also, the new management only assumed office in August 2024,” he said.
‘Were We Just Scammed?’
Some graduates have described their experience as a betrayal, insisting that they followed due process throughout their time at the institution.
“We didn’t imagine our admission. We didn’t sneak into the school,” one graduate said.
“We were admitted by Graceland Polytechnic Offa, paid full fees, attended classes, wrote exams, and graduated only to later discover that the programme we dedicated our lives to was never accredited and our admission was not even on JAMB CAPS.”
The graduate questioned why students were admitted, taught, examined, and issued certificates if the programmes lacked approval.
“If accreditation is not backdated, responsibility must still be. You don’t get to say ‘it’s in the past’ when people are still stuck because of it,” the graduate added.
Others argue that the issue goes beyond institutional reforms.
“This is not about new management. You cannot fix tomorrow by destroying yesterday and pretending it doesn’t matter. Students’ lives were wasted. Years were lost. Resources were taken under false assurances.”
The graduates insist that until a clear, lawful solution is provided for those who completed their studies before accreditation, the issue remains unresolved.
Calls for Justice and Regulatory Action
The controversy has sparked calls for accountability, with affected graduates urging education regulators and government authorities to intervene.
As of the time of filing this report, neither the NBTE nor the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB) has publicly addressed the claims regarding admissions, accreditation timelines, or the status of affected graduates.
For many of the victims, the question remains unanswered: what becomes of certificates earned under programmes that were never accredited at the time of study?
