Sociological Analysis of Exam Malpractice in Nigerian Public Universities: A Case Study of UNIJOS

Examination malpractice in Nigerian higher education institutions represents a systemic integrity problem with consequences for educational quality, professional competence, and social trust in credentials. This study conducts a sociological analysis of examination malpractice at the University of Jos, Plateau State, North Central Nigeria. A descriptive survey design was employed, with structured questionnaires administered to 420 undergraduate students across six faculties, complemented by six focus group discussions and eight interviews with lecturers and examination officials. The Neutralization Theory of Sykes and Matza was applied as the theoretical framework. Results indicate that 64% of respondents admitted to participating in at least one form of malpractice during their university career, with impersonation, contract cheating, and unauthorized note smuggling being the most cited forms. Rationalization of malpractice was widespread, with 72% of participating respondents endorsing at least one neutralization technique including denial of responsibility (citing inadequate teaching), denial of injury (arguing that it hurts no one), and appeal to higher loyalties (citing family pressure to graduate). Faculty with higher student-to-lecturer ratios demonstrated higher reported malpractice prevalence. Examination supervision quality was rated as inadequate by 58% of lecturers. Economic pressures to complete degrees quickly were identified as a systemic driver. Recommendations include reduced examination class sizes, electronic plagiarism and exam integrity systems, lecturer evaluation tied to teaching quality metrics, and mandatory ethics education for freshmen at UNIJOS. Keywords: examination malpractice, university, Jos, academic integrity, neutralization theory.