The University National Autonomous of Mexico (UNAM) has announced it detected “substantial changes” in results from its online and in-person exams, including the use of mobile phones and identity fraud. The institution is conducting a new in-person test for selected applicants and those who scored above historical minimums. According to Eduardo Bárzana García, president of the Technical Committee established July 27 to review the online exam, the analysis compared results from 2021 to 2025 with those obtained in this year’s 2026 exam. Bárzana García noted that while percentile shifts were relatively minor, the median and higher percentiles showed significantly greater increases. He explained that approximately 3.5% of applicants achieved 100 or more correct answers during the period 2021–2025, whereas in 2026, this proportion rose to 16.3%. Similarly, the percentage of applicants scoring 110 or more correct answers increased from 0.9% to 5.5%, representing a sixfold increase. These findings prompted the need for a comprehensive technical review, as the shift to an online format combined with the use of artificial intelligence introduced both advantages and risks. The committee identified several prohibited behaviors, including the use of mobile phones, assistance from others, external support for answering questions, and suspected identity theft. An AI-based monitoring system and human verification were used to detect these actions. As a result, nearly 2% of the 158,727 applicants had their tests canceled. Some candidates had already undergone prior verification, which revealed scores lower than those recorded in the initial online exam. The university will administer a second in-person test to around 58,000 applicants, according to officials. This measure aims to address anomalies and ensure fairness in the admissions process. The decision follows concerns raised by the Technical Committee regarding discrepancies in exam outcomes. While some applicants were already disqualified due to previous checks, the additional in-person assessment provides another opportunity for those who may have been unfairly affected. President Claudia Sheinbaum has expressed confidence in the integrity of the examination process, dismissing suggestions of malicious intent behind the online test. She emphasized her commitment to honesty and certainty in the evaluation of candidates. Her stance aligns with broader efforts to maintain transparency and accountability in academic assessments, particularly amid growing concerns over digital testing vulnerabilities. The use of AI in monitoring online exams has become increasingly common as institutions seek to prevent cheating. However, such measures are not without controversy. Critics argue that automated systems can sometimes fail to catch all instances of misconduct, especially when sophisticated methods are employed. In contrast, in-person exams offer a more direct means of supervision, though they come with logistical challenges and costs. The UNAM’s response reflects a balancing act between technological innovation and traditional oversight. By introducing a second round of testing, the university aims to reinforce its standards while addressing the complexities of remote examinations. The outcome of this process will likely influence future policies on digital assessments, particularly as more educational institutions adopt similar approaches. The university’s announcement underscores the ongoing debate surrounding the reliability of online exams. While technology offers convenience and scalability, it also introduces new avenues for potential abuse. The UNAM’s decision to implement additional safeguards highlights the importance of maintaining academic integrity in an evolving landscape. As the second in-person exam nears, attention will remain focused on how effectively the university can mitigate past issues and uphold its reputation for fair and rigorous admissions.
5 reports
El UniversalIndependentCenterFactual 85Objective 75yesterdayThe University National Autonomous of Mexico (UNAM) announced a new in-person test for applicants who were previously selected or scored above historical minimums. During this announcement, the Technical Committee revealed significant changes in online exam results compared to previous years when the exam was conducted in person. They noted that while percentile shifts were minimal, the median and higher percentiles showed substantial increases. The committee analyzed data from 2021 to 2025 and observed that the percentage of candidates scoring 100 or more correct answers rose from 3.5% to 16.3%, and those scoring 110 or more increased from 0.9% to 5.5%. These changes prompted a comprehensive technical review due to concerns over the impact of online exams and AI monitoring. The committee identified issues such as smartphone use, unauthorized assistance, external support, and suspected identity fraud, leading to the cancellation of approximately 2% of tests out of 158,727 applicants.
Bias read (Center): The article presents factual findings regarding academic integrity issues during an online exam at UNAM, focusing on statistical anomalies and detected misconduct. It does not take a clear ideological stance but reports on administrative actions taken by the university. While the issue of academic诚信
Why factuality (85): The article reports on the UNAM's findings regarding changes in exam results between online and in-person formats, citing specific percentages and trends from 2021 to 2026. It provides data and quotes from officials, aligning with the cross-source consensus that there were significant anomalies dete
Why objectivity (75): The tone is informative but leans toward presenting the issue as a problem requiring technical review, which may imply a certain level of concern. While it remains neutral in reporting facts, the emphasis on the need for a technical review suggests a slight editorial bias towards acknowledging the s
La JornadaIndependentCenterFactual 80Objective 853 days agoPresident-elect Claudia Sheinbaum has dismissed allegations of 'bad intent' regarding the virtual exams conducted by the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM). In a statement, she emphasized her commitment to honesty and transparency in academic assessments. The remarks come amid ongoing discussions about the integrity of online examinations during the pandemic. Sheinbaum's comments reflect broader concerns about academic fraud and the need for reliable evaluation methods. Her stance aligns with efforts to maintain trust in educational institutions.
Bias read (Center): The article presents Sheinbaum's position on academic integrity without overtly endorsing or criticizing specific policies. It focuses on her personal stance rather than taking a partisan angle. While the topic relates to governance and education policy, the framing remains balanced, avoiding strong
Why factuality (80): This article presents the statement by Sheinbaum dismissing 'mal intent' and emphasizing honesty, which aligns with the broader narrative of the event. It lacks detailed data but reflects common positions among officials, maintaining consistency with other sources.
Why objectivity (85): The article maintains a neutral tone, focusing on Sheinbaum’s statements without introducing personal opinions or emotional language. It presents the position of a high-level official without taking sides or adding subjective commentary.
La JornadaIndependentProgressiveFactual 75Objective 707 days ago Alleged cheating casts doubt on the legitimacy of UNAM's digital entrance exam: specialistThe article reports that a specialist has raised concerns about the legitimacy of the UNAM (National Autonomous University of Mexico) digital entrance exam, suggesting potential traps or flaws in the test design. The expert's comments question whether the exam accurately measures students' abilities and whether it ensures fairness in admissions. The piece highlights growing skepticism among educators and parents regarding the reliability and transparency of the digital assessment process. No specific evidence or data is provided to substantiate these claims, leaving the allegations open to further investigation.
Bias read (Progressive): The framing leans left by highlighting criticism of an institutional process (UNAM's digital exam), which is often associated with state-controlled education systems. The focus on questioning the legitimacy of the exam suggests a critique of bureaucratic or systemic issues, aligning with progressive
Why factuality (75): The article includes quotes from an academic expert who discusses concerns about the legitimacy of the exam and mentions specific examples like the increase in scores in Medicine. These details align with the general consensus but lack direct evidence or official confirmation, reducing its factualit
Why objectivity (70): The language used by the expert carries some criticism and skepticism, which introduces a degree of subjectivity. The article frames the issue as a credibility crisis, suggesting a potential bias toward highlighting the negative implications of the exam results.
ReformaIndependentCenter11 hr. agoThe article reports that the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM) will conduct another examination due to anomalies detected in previous assessments. The headline suggests that irregularities were identified, prompting the university to take further action to ensure fairness and accuracy in the evaluation process.
Bias read (Center): The article presents information about an institutional decision regarding academic evaluations without overtly endorsing or criticizing any political stance. It focuses on procedural actions taken by a public institution rather than taking a clear ideological position.
La JornadaIndependentCenteryesterday The face-to-face control exam that UNAM will apply will be for about 58 thousand applicants: AramburoThe National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM) will conduct a mandatory in-person exam for approximately 58,000 applicants, according to Arámburo. This measure is likely aimed at ensuring the integrity of the admissions process by verifying candidates' identities and preventing academic fraud. The exam will serve as a verification step for those applying to various programs at the university. Such measures are common in higher education institutions to maintain standards and prevent cheating. The implementation of this exam reflects ongoing efforts by educational authorities to address concerns over the authenticity of student applications.
Bias read (Center): The article reports on a standard administrative procedure implemented by a public institution, without apparent ideological framing or biased language. It focuses on the logistical aspect of the exam rather than taking a stance on broader political issues.
★
Keep the news honest.
ObjectiveNews is reader-funded and ad-free — we show you the bias instead of hiding it. Support independent journalism for €5/month.
Become a Supporter
MX
