Technology is designed to make life easier: to automate processes, save time, and reduce human effort.
But behind every line of code is a human, and behind every system is a person who relies on it.
As software developers, our work is more than creating features.
It is noble, and it carries serious responsibility.
Technical Glitch, A Life Lost
Following the release of candidates’ results by the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB) in Nigeria, a 19-year-old student tragically ended her life after receiving what she believed was a poor UTME (Unified Tertiary Matriculation Examination) score: she thought her dreams were over. Her confidence was shattered. This is heartbreaking.
Not until days after the release of the result that investigation into JAMB’s system revealed that the system could not be trusted due to technical error.
Not a hack.
Not a breach.
Just… a glitch.
But the consequence? Irreversible.
The Weight We Carry as Developers
At Moat Academy, when teaching software development, we lay emphasis on the need to test edge cases, understand the “why” beneath every abstractions and know the impact of every decision made in the code. It is not until one starts building systems for safety-critical industries like airline, health monitoring etc that security be given its place because the truth is: every piece of software is safety-critical as long as real people are using it.
The platforms we build hold the dreams, data, time, and dignity of real users: even the smallest bug can have devastating consequences.
Security has long be classified as a “non-functional requirement”, much like visual design or UX enhancements. How can security be a ‘nice to have’ ? optional ? No, It must be central to how we build!
Avoiding the Glitch
Some 8 years ago when Moat Academy was founded, one of the challenges in the software industry we sought to address was the proliferation of software developers who ‘created applications’ through a copy-and-paste approach – code monkeys who simply copy insecure and unvalidated codes from online forums and use indiscriminately because they either do not have a deep understanding or are not aware of security best practices in application development.
Now, in the era of vibe coding, the conversation must shift even further. We must teach developers to understand the building blocks of software, to explore why things work, because that is how innovators and creators are born!
The software we build has real consequences; it can determine: who gets admitted to school, who gets hired, who gets credit, who feels empowered and who feels invisible, we can not afford to leave the fate our users in the hands of LLM prompts.
The tragedy surrounding the JAMB result is a reminder that all “technical glitches” must be investigated and where necessary, people must be held accountable.
That’s why data protection regulations like the GDPR mandate disclosure of security breaches.
Transparency and accountability help us grow, improve, and restore public trust.
Thank you for this thorough analysis. However, let me be very clear—I do not speak as a distant observer or casual commentator on these matters.
My journey with CBT in Nigeria dates back to its inception. I’ve served not only as a test center administrator for JAMB, TOEFL, and other high-stakes exams, but also as a technical partner to some of the earliest organizations that pioneered CBT deployment in our education sector.
I say this not to defend technology blindly, but to emphasize that this crisis did not begin with a missed patch—it began the day JAMB severed ties with Deji, the developer behind the proven Rapid Test software, which had consistently delivered stability and performance for years. I know this both personally and professionally—Deji is not just a colleague, but a competent programmer whose system was built through experience, iteration, and actual use-case testing.
The unfortunate truth is that JAMB’s transition to an internal software solution was not driven by strategic necessity but by internal politics and institutional envy. What followed was the hasty adoption of a haphazardly developed, minimally tested, and operationally unstable system—one that clearly lacked the maturity and robustness needed to manage an examination of national consequence.
Yes, human error was the trigger this time, but the real failure is systemic and cultural—a recurring pattern of ignoring external expertise in favour of internal control, regardless of competence.
Until JAMB confronts the root cause—poor strategic decisions, weak internal accountability, and the abandonment of proven solutions for untested internal experiments—we will continue to witness preventable failures disguised as “technical errors.”
We owe it to the hundreds of thousands of candidates affected to be honest about where the rot truly lies.
Olufemi Awogbemi,
EdTech Professional, Veteran CBT Administrator & Cyber Security Expert.
If the impact of a failed software is acknowledged; more genuine factors other than personal interests would be considered during vendor selection.
I hope we grow.