Page 357 - SEC_2017WorkingDocument_Neat

UNACCEPTABLE SYSTEM FOR ADDRESS OF QUERIES.

A Issuance of a well-publicized and more comprehensive statement that clarifies what the
“Administrative check” involves and explains how such check either prompts further
interrogation of students’ scripts or results in no change.
B A case is proffered for a more in-depth service instead of the superficial administrative
check as a better fit with the expectations, of parents, needs of students and the high fee
incurred.

The release of incorrect results, as discussed in the previous item, emphasizes the need to re-
visit the new position of CXC in terms of how the query of students’ results are treated. Apart
from having no clear understanding of this new system which mainly focuses on providing
“an administrative check” and what this involves, other questions arise, such as:
o How does such a “check” determine that no further action is needed or may prompt a
further rigorous interrogation of students’ scripts?
o Given CXC conducts e marking, is the actual script re-examined or the scans? Reports
have been received of scans missing pages, incorrectly labeled, or incorrectly collated so
pages from scripts of two students are mixed. Moreso, where students have to submit
drawings and diagrams, the scan may not adequately replicate all essential features.
o Reports on testing, specifically for Digital Media, indicated that students’ files were not
received in their entirety, despite the required assessment activities being completed by
the students. As a result of irregularities arising from e testing, students’ may also be
unfairly assigned a poor grade and the present system for addressing queries does not
effectively allow for interrogating such.
o In such a tiered approach to addressing queries, why is one significantly large fee
applied across the board? With services that are tiered, the fee structure should also be
tiered.
o As a matter of fact, it can be argued, given current perception of what the “administrative
check” involves, no fee should be incurred as this payment is being tendered to CXC for
a service which is already being contracted by the MOE, that is to exercise due diligence
in faithfully and accurately transfer students’ scores from marked scripts to a system that
correctly tally their total. Why should parents pay at all, for a check that this an
operational task CXC must execute with due diligence?
o What is expected from a query are; a review to ensure all responses or parts thereof were
marked and accurately scores or a re-mark to ensure students’ responses are correctly
interpreted and the mark schemes applied with fidelity. No one should be expected to
pay CXC for ensuring that scores were accurately transferred and totaled.

There is currently no data available to give concrete insight into the significance of this issue
in terms of how many queries are tended and the scope of changes as well as number of
incidents of unchanged results (CSEC or CAPE). CXC conducts this function directly with
schools so the MOE has no effective means to monitor this facility. However, reference is
made to a report on responses to queries of the SEA (appendix 1) where it is apparent that the

12