Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Jamb2012 Performance Analysis
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Jamb2012 Performance Analysis

774

Published on

A Statistical analysis & Interpretation showing Applicants' performance in the JAMB 2012 examination

A Statistical analysis & Interpretation showing Applicants' performance in the JAMB 2012 examination

Published in: Education, Business, Technology
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
774
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
10
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. StatiSense ® - Wale Micaiah ©
  • 2. JAMB 2012:Performance Analysis
  • 3. The news fluttered in “only 3 candidates scoredabove 300 in this year’s JAMB 2012 examination.”The immediate reaction was condemnation of theEducation Sector and the insensitivity of theGovernment. Truth be told, our Education is incomatose; irrespective, is it possible to attest toany positive sign when they show up withoutallowing prejudice becloud our judgments?I believe we are not near where we ought to, soalso we are not where we were. JAMB2012 resultis not as bad as it seems; but how can we tell ifwe don’t consult the numbers and facts from pastexaminations. Lets go!
  • 4. Lets consider past JAMB results 2009, 2010, 2011with the recent 2012. See the table below 2009 2010 2011 2012Total Candidate 1,182,381 1,375,652 1,493,604 1,503,931No. that scored 200 and above 548,543 501,463 597,494 673,394scored below 200 460,702 842,851 711,250scored below 170 167,251 201,798 336,330scored 170 – 199 293,451 641,143 374,920scored 200 – 249 495,426 601,151 N/Ascored 250 – 269 67,732 71,339scored 270 – 299 N/A 31,444 901scored above 300 2,892 3with invalid or incomplete results 28,069 5,161withheld for malpractice 23,819 20,780 15,160 27,266results being investigated N/A 7,504 N/A N/A – not available
  • 5. Based on 200 as minimum cut-off for mostUniversities; the focus is on Candidates withscores of => 200. 2009 2010 2011 2012Total Candidate 1,182,381 1,375,652 1,493,604 1,503,931No. that scored 200 and above 548,543 501,463 597,494 673,394% of 200 and above 46.39% 36.45% 40.00% 44.78% % of 200 and above 50.00% 46.39% 44.78% 45.00% 40.00% 40.00% 36.45% 35.00% 30.00% 25.00% 20.00% 15.00% 10.00% 5.00% 0.00% 2009 2010 2011 2012
  • 6. By implication; this year’s JAMB result offersmore candidates (44.78% of total examined) theopportunity to vie for admission in theirrespective institution of choices. 2009 2010 2011 2012Total Candidate 1,182,381 1,375,652 1,493,604 1,503,931% of 200 and above 46.39% 36.45% 40.00% 44.78%
  • 7. JAMB 2012 records very few high scorers; this iswhere a lot of analysts concentrate on and drewthe conclusion that the result is woeful. 2009 2010 2011 2012Total Candidate 1,182,381 1,375,652 1,493,604 1,503,931No. that scored 200 and above 548,543 501,463 597,494 673,394scoring 250 – 269 67,732 71,339scoring 270 – 299 31,444 901 N/A N/Ascoring above 300 2,892 3with invalid or incomplete results 28,069 5,161withheld for malpractice 23,819 20,780 15,160 27,266results being investigated N/A 7,504 N/ATherefore, the result of JAMB 2012 is not wherewe aim but also it is not where we used to be.
  • 8. Data source:- JAMB result as announced in the dailiesFreely share, freely use and freely recognizethe source – © Wale Micaiah Analysis by: Wale Micaiah e: walegate@yahoo.com m: 08078001800 b: walemicaiah.blog.com w. www.statisense.info StatiSense ® - Wale Micaiah ©

×