Page 349 - SEC_2017WorkingDocument_Neat

INTRODUCTION.
The annual report tendered by the Trinidad and Tobago National CXC Committee, aims to
highlight issues related to the design, administration, marking and certification of the
th
examinations implemented. A previous submission, a pre-marking report, dated 27 June
2017, is also incorporated in this annual report. This report therefore provides a
comprehensive commentary on the conduct of assessments administered to students of
Trinidad and Tobago by the Caribbean Examination Council (CXC) for the year 2017.

This report comments on the following activities involved in the implementation of the
examinations at the CSEC, CVQ and CAPE levels:

1. Release of results: Specific mention is made of the continued late release of CVQ
results and the delay, this year, in release of CSEC and CAPE results. Also of significant
concern is the release of inaccurate/incomplete results.
2. Unacceptable System for address of queries. The opportunity is also taken to re-table
and further interrogate outstanding concerns related to issues raised in the 2016 annual
report on the approach currently used to query of students’ script whereby an
administrative check may be conducted in lieu of an actual script review.
3. E Marking. Some concerns expressed in the 2016 annual report are reiterated and other
issues are raised concerning the quality of markers, reports of sub-contracting by
markers, recruitment of markers, quality of “SEEDs” and system malfunction. Linked to
this point would be issues raised on online submissions, that is receipt of complete
submissions, quality of scans, effectiveness of scans to reproduce quality of students’
work (Visual Arts, TD, BMED)
4. Syllabus revision: Concerns are also raised in relation to the breadth of content to be
covered in the timeframe (Music, Pure Mathematics), suggestions on objectives to be
omitted or added (Business Subjects, Mathematics, Applied Math,), the introduction of
MCQs for certain subjects (Theatre Arts, French, Spanish and Literatures in English as
well as the removal of optional questions (CAPE Economics, Sociology). Concern is
also noted with the redundancy of objectives which are already adequately treated with at
the CSEC level (Physics)
The requirement of use of CAD only for Technical subjects is unreasonable given the
challenge with contingent requirements such as: facilities with appropriate electrical
supply, hardware for use of CAD software, printing equipment and supporting staff.
5. School-based Assessments: forms posted were dated, data entry on the ORS had many
challenges. Concern is reiterated on the prescribed word limit that makes demands that is
unreasonable for secondary students (Sociology, Law, Business Subjects, Caribbean
Studies). Comments are also provided concerning a wide range of issues (moderation,
weighting of paper) with the SBA for CAPE Physical Education. In addition to the
observations detailed further in this document, clarification is requested for CSEC
Additional Mathematics and Office Administration have yet to be addressed.
o Clarification of the composition of groups for implementation of the CSEC Math
SBA ie maximum number of students per group, assignment of topics- can all groups
do the same topic?

4