Losing marks

And so, steps must be taken to ensure there is no repeat of the kind of errors which affected Thursday’s Secondary Entrance Assessment (SEA) examination.

According to various accounts, three questions were defective.

While it is difficult to quantify exactly how the defects would have impacted students, it is not hard to envision how some students would have wasted time pondering over the flawed questions in vain. So preoccupied, they would have had less time to handle other questions.

Unfortunately, it is impossible for the simple removal of the three marks from the exam to evenly account for this kind of impact. However, in the circumstances it is probably the easiest remedy.

On the other hand, some might argue that the flaws did not have as adverse an impact as we have been led to believe.

In fact, they may have benefitted better students. Those students unable to break the backs of the questions may have opted to move on to others. This is the kind of prioritising which should be rewarded, not penalised.

But because the SEA is such an emotional issue we cannot afford to have such carelessness, even if it benefits smarter students or students with better time management skills. Students prepare for a long time and there is much expectation over their performance. The State should do what it can to minimise the great social pressures which are already in play, not contribute.

Judging from the accounts given by the Ministry of Education, however, it would appear the problem originated at the level of the Caribbean Examinations Council (CXC). Perhaps as a precaution against leaks, examination papers are not opened locally but rather all checks are done by CXC officials abroad.

This means the State is only made aware of defects when it is too late.

Efforts must be made to ensure the system of checks in place at CXC is up to the task.

Because of the considerable trust placed in CXC’s hands it must be able to assure that its processes are watertight. If we cannot have confidence in CXC to prepare a faultless examination paper, can we depend on CXC to handle scores? To correct papers? To manage private information? CXC has lost marks and must now make up for it.

Aside from the issue of the examination script, other aspects appeared to have gone smoothly.

Administratively, the process — involving 18,000 students — seems to have been a success.

The ministry should be congratulated in this regard. However, CXC must be urged to improve its overall system.

The Ministry of Education should also look into a system of control that balances the need for confidentiality and for quality.

While it may be reluctant to impinge on the jurisdiction of the CXC officials, clearly there may be need for more cooperation.

Should it really be the case that the ministry does not see the examinations script? The National Primary School Principals Association and the Trinidad and Tobago Unified Teachers Association should be consulted with a view to possible recommendations in this regard.

We also wish all students best of luck and remind them that — examination error or no — the SEA is just an examination.

It does not define worth and cannot limit any student’s true potential. We also hope there will be no errors when the time comes for results.