Makerere denies exam scam

Jul 14, 2005

MAKERERE University yesterday disputed a Sunday Vision report in which an undercover reporter sat two examinations and exposed gross examination irregularities.

By Willie Wambedde & Fortunate Ahimbisibwe

MAKERERE University yesterday disputed a Sunday Vision report in which an undercover reporter sat two examinations and exposed gross examination irregularities.

Vice-Chancellor Prof. Livingstone Luboobi said he had instituted an internal investigation, which established that the story was false and that it did not correspond with what happened on the dates given by the reporter. He, however, declined to name the members who had investigated the report despite requests from several journalists.

Luboobi said exam records did not show either of the registration numbers used by the writer.

“The undercover reporter claims he sat for a paper on Tuesday, June 28, but this particular paper was done on Tuesday June 23.

This was in accordance with the timetable issued by the academic registrar, which is available for inspection. The examination Records Book in the office of the dean of Faculty of Arts also shows that this particular examination was dispatched on Tuesday, June 23 as time tabled,” Luboobi said.

Luboobi, Prof. David Bakibinga, the deputy vice-chancellor finance and administration, academic registrar Amos Olal Odur, deans Dr. Edward Kirumira and Associate Prof. Ssengendo addressed a press conference at the university’s conference hall.

“While the undercover reporter claims to have sat in the Lumumba Hall dining room, this examination was held in 13 different venues, which do not include Lumumba Hall,” he said.

Luboobi said the registration number 00/U5342/Eve does not appear on the register of those who sat SOC 1203-Introduction to Sociological Perspectives, Theories and Methods exam, which was conducted on Saturday June 25 in Mitchell Hall.

Luboobi said the registration number 00/4453/EVE did not exist on the history attendance list since there was no history exam in Lumumba Hall.

The writer, however, reported that he/she sat for History 1201 (Themes of East African History Since 1900) on June 28.

“It is on record that no single student for that particular paper was permitted to sit for an examination using a Police letter,” Luboobi said.

Sunday Vision editor David Mukholi defended the story, saying the paper even has a photograph of the reporter coming out of the examination room in Mitchel Hall.

A university source said no committee had been instituted to probe the issues raised in the story. “All they have done is to dismiss the story but some staff members want a committee to start probing the issues raised.”

Prime Minister Prof. Apolo Nsibambi on Monday asked Luboobi to investigate reports that students hire ‘mercenaries’ to do examinations for them.

The story said lecturers hire non-academic staff like relatives, students or taxi drivers and touts to supervise exams and sneak out to run private business during exams.

The undercover writer was allowed into the exam room on the basis of a forged Police letter saying he/she had lost the university identity card.

The story told of how invigilators spent most of the time reading newspapers as students shared their answers.

The writer said he/she sat for two exams in Mitchell and Lumumba halls because there were no checks to ensure that only genuine students entered the exam rooms.

Invigilators were tired and did not check, hoping everyone had the requirements. The students reportedly made outlines of answers on question papers and exchanged them. Some used permission to go to the toilets to consult notes hidden there or to reach their rooms for answers.

“University regulations permit only lecturers and postgraduate students to invigilate examinations,” Luboobi said.

However, last month, Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Lillian Ekirikubinza, in a circular, warned staff against using unqualified personnel to invigilate exams.

Luboobi said attendance lists for examinations are signed during and not at the end of an examination.

“It can only be concluded that the undercover reporter’s story is a malicious fabrication. It is full of untruths and lacks credibility. This raises questions as to what the motive of the story could have been, especially since no efforts were made to crosscheck the purported facts with the university authorities prior to running the story,” he said.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});