Dear Editor,
CXC’s decision to administer CSEC and CAPE Exams in July has been greeted with a barrage of protests from various stakeholders across the region. Whereas the criticisms by these stakeholders have focused on the issues of timing as well as the health and welfare of the candidates involved, another critical issue namely the validity of the said Exams has been placed on the backburner.
CXC’s proposal to use only Paper 1 (multiple choice) together with the students’ SBAs or IAs to assess them is seriously flawed. This is simply because this proposal does not in any way cater for assessment of the critical skill of ‘the use of knowledge’ in a Paper 2 which has been the standard over the years. To compound the issue CXC has been woefully silent on the final weighting for either Paper 1 or the SBAs and IAs thereby making the entire issue of validity of the 2020 Exams all the more dubious.
In addition, one has to pose the very pertinent question: How does CXC propose to correct the students’ SBAs and IAs under the restructured examination format? Rather than the traditional requirement of 5 SBA samples per subject for each school, CXC is now demanding the submission of all SBAs. What new plans does CXC hope to put in place in such a short timeframe to correct SBAs and IAs from each candidate? This question is especially important in the subjects of English and Maths where the quantity of SBAs would reach formidable proportions since both are compulsory. Does CXC plan to employ additional moderators and markers given the tremendous increase in volume? What provisions will be made for the requisite training of such new moderators and markers in such a short timeframe to guarantee the necessary ‘quality assurance’ in the marking of these SBAs? It is a monumental task to say the least and stakeholders must feel confident that CXC is equal to the new challenge that it has set for itself.
The most worrying aspect of CXC’s July proposal is its undue emphasis on Paper 1 which simply tests knowledge. It is no secret that CXC recycles the multiple choice items that it uses in its Paper 1s for the various subject areas examined. It is for this reason that CXC does not allow teachers to see Paper I nor does it circulate the said Paper after the completion of the Exam. I with some thirty years of teaching experience have never seen a Paper 1.Despite this security measure adopted by CXC over the years, there is a sizable number of teachers who by fair means or foul have in fact acquired such Paper Is over the years. They continually drill their students with these papers and have even been brazen enough to use them as Mock Exams. Given these circumstances, how valid can any CXC Exam be if it uses Paper 1 as a principal means of assessment in awarding final grades? Candidates from schools that have strictly adhered to CXC’s security arrangements over the years will be placed at a serious disadvantage over candidates from other schools where those security arrangements have been openly flouted in the past? CXC must be aware of these security breaches. If so, how can it even with the slightest modicum of integrity insist on an Exam where Paper 1 is only one of two components by which students will be assessed? Such an exam cannot be deemed valid even if one were to stretch one’s imagination to its ultimate limit.
It is nothing short of amazing that in the face of the multitude of bone fide concerns that CXC has chosen to go full speed ahead with its misguided proposal for July Exams. Here I wish to ask the simple question: Who controls CXC? Don’t the respective territories make annual contributions to its very functioning? How then can CXC so flippantly disregard the legitimate concerns of stakeholders in its contributing territories? In the same vein, I humbly ask: How can the Ministers of Education of Trinidad and Tobago, Jamaica and Barbados which have the lion’s share of candidates sitting these CXC Exams not use this advantageous position as leverage to ensure that these genuine concerns are in fact addressed by CXC? It would appear that the tail is wagging the dog and not the other way around.
CXC must seriously reconsider its rigid July proposal. Is it that CXC is so obsessed with the issue of time that it is willing to sacrifice the integrity of its own Exams in the pursuit of it? It cannot act as if it is business as usual in the face of a crisis which will place the lives of so many of our students, teachers and invigilators at risk. If CXC is charged with the responsibility for an area as critical as education, it must exercise due diligence in the discharge of that responsibility. Is it not better to delay the proposed Exams and assess our students properly rather than administer early exams where the instruments of assessment are grossly defective and the health of thousands is at risk? If other reputable examining bodies like Cambridge could temporarily shelve their scheduled Exams in the face of the Covid-19 crisis what prevents CXC from following suit?
Apparently none of our regional institutions responsible for education seems willing to consider delaying exams in the face of a “virus crisis” which is akin to a war. As I write this letter, UWI students are preparing feverishly for Exams which begin next week. The UWI like CXC has gone full speed ahead with its plans for “open book exams” which students will do on line. The students have been given time limits varying between 1 to 4 days to complete each exam Just imagine that!!! At the tertiary level at our most esteemed educational institution, academics and administrators have implemented an Exam proposal just to allow students to graduate or proceed to the next level all in the overriding interest of time. How will the degrees of the graduating students of this period compare with those awarded in previous years? One is only left to wonder what would have been the final decision if the region was in fact engaged in actual warfare.
CXC cannot afford to compromise its standards or the welfare of our most precious resource in the interest of either time or money. The decision as regards the July proposal can only be rescinded by a meeting between all the representative Ministers of the member territories and CXC. I, therefore, urge Ministers and Mia Mottley, the Chairman of CARICOM to call such a meeting with the utmost dispatch. A new meeting will allow CXC to at least salvage some of its integrity which has been seriously tarnished in the relentless pursuit of its proposal for July Exams.
Yours faithfully,
Miguel Browne
