By Mohammed Bello
Executive Director, CEO
AFRI-CIRD
The release of the 2025 National Examinations Council (NECO) results has sparked heated debate over the comparative performance of Kano and Abia States.
At the heart of the conversation lies one big question: What truly defines educational excellence?
“As a development research and policy expert with a strong bias in education, I contend that this moment offers an opportunity to transcend superficial rankings and embrace a more nuanced, evidence-based framework for evaluating systemic performance,” said Mohammed Bello, Executive Director of AFRI-CIRD.
While public discourse has mainly fixated on which state came “first,” Bello argues that both volume and efficiency metrics tell only part of the story and risk misleading policymakers and the public.
The Kano paradigm: Volume as reach, not rigour
The most widely cited metric is the Total Volume of Success, which highlights the absolute number of students who scored five credits including English and Mathematics. By this measure, Kano tops the chart nationally.
“This metric reflects the capacity of a state’s education system to deliver mass access to certification, particularly in contexts with large and youthful populations,” Bello explained. “It suggests that Kano, by virtue of its demographic weight, is a key player in supplying qualified individuals to tertiary institutions and the labour market.”
But Bello cautioned that volume metrics conceal deeper flaws:
“If a state registers 100,000 candidates and 50,000 pass, the success volume is high, but so is the 50% failure rate. This raises questions about instructional quality, resource utilisation, and systemic equity.”
The Abia paradigm: Pass rate as efficiency benchmark
The second major metric shaping the debate is the Pass Rate, which measures the proportion of students who sat for the exam and achieved the benchmark. By this standard, Abia State and its southeastern peers lead the nation.
Bello said:
“Pass rate is widely regarded as the gold standard in educational performance metrics. It reflects a system’s ability to convert educational inputs into successful outcomes, offering a direct measure of instructional effectiveness, curriculum delivery, and learner support.”
He noted that high pass rates also signal good returns on public investments in education, making them useful for benchmarking performance across states with different population sizes.
Beyond rankings: The need for inclusive metrics
Despite its global recognition, pass rate too has limitations. Bello warned it could mask exclusionary practices:
“If a state achieves an 85% pass rate but only registers a fraction of its eligible youth, then the metric reflects success for a selective group rather than the broader population.”
He stressed that true excellence must combine both quality and reach.
“While Abia’s high pass rate shows instructional efficiency, it must be weighed against inclusivity, access, and equity,” he said.
To bridge this gap, experts recommend advanced tools such as the Demographically Adjusted Pass Rate (DAPR) and the Inclusivity Index, which measure outcomes relative to socioeconomic context and enrolment coverage.
Context matters: Why Kano and Abia differ
Applying these best practices paints a more balanced picture.
“If Kano’s students are disproportionately affected by poverty, conflict, and systemic underinvestment, then achieving a near-50% pass rate may reflect exceptional value-added performance,” Bello explained.
“In contrast, Abia’s higher pass rate, while commendable, may benefit from more favourable baseline conditions.”
Kano’s size also gives it a strategic advantage.
“Even with a moderate pass rate, Kano’s ability to bring tens of thousands of students into the exam pipeline is a testament to its mass education infrastructure,” he added.
The Inclusivity Index, which multiplies pass rate by the ratio of student enrolment to exam registration, rewards systems that combine both reach and quality. This shows that scale without substance—or efficiency without access—cannot alone define the best performer.
A call for better policymaking
Bello concluded that the ongoing NECO debate should not be reduced to a Kano-versus-Abia contest.
“Kano’s dominance in absolute numbers reflects demographic scale, while Abia’s superior pass rate signals instructional efficiency. Both metrics offer partial truths, but neither suffices to define systemic excellence,” he said.
Instead, he urged policymakers to adopt three priorities: deconstruct the myth of raw volume, prioritise year-on-year growth over static metrics, and demand disaggregated data that exposes inequities across gender, geography, and income.
“As the OECD underscores, equity is not a peripheral concern; it is central to educational quality,” Bello emphasised. “Only through evidence-based frameworks can Nigeria move beyond rankings to achieve inclusive excellence in education.”
Disclaimer: This opinion completely belongs to Mohammed Bello
Executive Director, CEO
AFRI-CIRD with no ties to Iconic Times24.
