The season of exam results is upon us again. While the top achievers both at CSEC and CAPE have been announced, we do not as yet have the figures for how the two sets of candidates as a whole performed. Only then will we know whether there has been an improvement or otherwise across the board. And that is especially important this year considering the disruptions to schooling caused by the pandemic. Since the preparation time for CXC examinations is at least two years, there will be some students whose course work would have had to been undertaken largely, or perhaps even entirely, during the Covid period.
The situation with the National Grade Six Assessments is somewhat clearer, after Dr Nicole Manning, the Director of Operations, gave her report on them at the Arthur Chung Conference Centre on Friday. The exams consist of four subjects – English, Maths, Science and Social Science – with two papers in each. Paper One comprises forty multiple choice items, while Paper Two takes the form of either essay style or open-ended questions. The highest possible total score is 523, and it therefore does the three top performers – Neuel Bancroft, Angelica Subryan and Jonathan Gomes − enormous credit that they managed a total of 518, earning them a place in Queen’s College. In all, it was reported, 16,223 students were registered to sit the 2022 assessment.
Dr Manning told the audience that there had been an improvement in the results for Science and Social Studies, and what she described as a “slight” decrease in Mathematics and English. She made reference to a steady increase in performances in the case of the first two subjects over a period of five years, and a rise of 56% to 58% between last year and this for Social Studies in particular. (One presumes that she is referring to pass rates.) This notwithstanding there was, however, a reduction in the number of candidates who scored full marks, which is not, in itself, necessarily a troubling issue, depending on how well the majority of those who passed performed. In contrast the same cannot be said for the increase in the number of candidates who gained no marks at all.
Where Science was concerned she described, “A good movement of almost 6 per cent, from 40.12 to 46.45 per cent.” In addition there was an increase in the number of candidates who obtained full marks and a slight increase in those receiving zero marks. Slightly puzzlingly we quoted Dr Manning as saying, “But the Maths and Science … you did much better than the Social Studies and English.” She did, however, clarify this statement later.
And as for English and Mathematics, the last-named subject dropped from 36% last year to 34%, added to which there was a “very great” increase in the number of those both scoring full marks as well as no marks. She described this as an area for “review.” English registered a decline from 65% last year to 64% this, although it reflected the highest overall performance of the four subjects. Social Studies was next with 58%, Science with 46% and Maths with 34%. Nevertheless, Dr Manning was at pains to emphasise, “Remember, please remember that your Maths and Science has been improving. So while it’s showing that it’s less than the English and the Social Studies, remember you had marked improvement in both of these areas.”
While this information was fine as far as it went, it left a number of questions unanswered. Some of the elucidation would probably have to come from the Ministry of Education itself, rather than Dr Manning, and it may not have had time to do its breakdowns as yet. One thing which the Director could explain, however, is the context of the percentages which she provided. While technically speaking the NGSA was intended to be an assessment rather than an examination, for all practical purposes it functions as a school placement test. As such it must work with a pass rate (in addition to cut-off points for various schools), and one cannot think there is any good reason for not providing this to the public.
That was certainly done in 2020, when Chief Education Officer Dr Marcel Hutson gave the statistics for the number of candidates securing over 50% in the various subjects. What would be instructive to know is whether the 50% stays stable from year to year, or whether it varies because of unusual circumstances like the pandemic, for instance. If it does, then what significance do the comparative percentages have?
The percentage of pupils receiving full marks is infinitely less important from an educational point of view than the number who scored no marks at all. If the figures are to have any meaning then the public needs to be told what percentage of the cohort obtained zero in each subject, and if there were any students who registered nought in more than one subject. If so, one would want to know what percentage of the complement they represented. In addition, it would be useful to learn what percent of the candidates gained very low marks, as opposed to just zero, in each of the four areas, and how that compared with previous years.
It is to be assumed that after the Ministry completes its own analysis it will provide information on which regions, or parts of regions performed best, and which are lagging behind. Do the schools in urban areas, particularly Georgetown, for example, outperform the rural ones, and do many hinterland regions still operate at a disadvantage to the coast. It is not sufficient to undertake comparisons only with last year, because that too was a Covid year; one hopes the Ministry would go back pre-pandemic.
Minister of Education Priya Manickchand addressed the gathering before Dr Manning rose to speak, and outlined how difficult it had been for children in this period, and what measures the Ministry had taken to try and mitigate the difficulties. She spoke of providing Grades 5 and 6 pupils with all the textbooks they needed, and how public school students for the first time ever were able to have books to which only private school children normally had access. In addition, she related, “We spoke to teachers more than we ever spoke to teachers before in the Grade 6 level. In short, there was a lot of work that went in to getting us here.”
In particular she was of the view that the government’s decision to send children back to school and have them sit the exam in July despite the objections of many, had been vindicated. “The children who are writing these exams stopped going to school in Grade 4. This is Grade 6. They didn’t have teaching the way we have all become accustomed to teaching since Grade 4. We put them back in school…. Today, we see the benefit of that decision,” she was quoted as saying.
While she is probably correct that the decision to reopen the schools was the right one, and while efforts were made by the educational authorities to alleviate the problem of lack of schooling, it is still important to know just how much damage was done to students’ educational progress as a consequence of the pandemic. The NGSA might be viewed by some as a crude tool for such an assessment, but it is the best one we have to hand at the moment. The Ministry needs to do a clear-eyed analysis of the statistics at its disposal, and give the public its conclusions. Who appears to have been most affected? Is Covid the reason for clusters of low scores, including zero marks? Where were such pupils resident, and have those in their area always registered poor performances, or is this something new in terms of what obtained before?
Dr Manning provided an initial outline; now we need the details.
