Congratulations to all the students who received their CSEC and CAPE exam results this week. The Caribbean Examination Council (CXC) has been the cornerstone of Caribbean examinations since the first CSEC exams were conducted in 1979. The introduction of Caribbean-based exams was an important step for the region. It meant that our students no longer had to depend solely on examinations developed in Britain and based largely on British content and experiences. Instead, they could study the region’s history, societies, cultures and economies and sit examinations designed around our regional reality.
On the one hand, CXC has generally served the region well over the years. On the other hand, there have been serious complaints about its handling of examinations and results.
In 2005, Mathematics and English A papers were reportedly available in Guyana before the examinations, forcing new sittings for the affected candidates. In 2020, students across the Caribbean complained about unexpected CSEC and CAPE grades following changes to the examination format during the pandemic. In 2023, the CSEC Mathematics Paper 2 was leaked before the examination. CXC discarded the paper and calculated students’ grades using Paper 1 and the SBA. Then, in 2024, CAPE Chemistry Unit 2 candidates complained that questions on their examination appeared to come from the Unit 1 syllabus.
These incidents have left students, parents and teachers questioning CXC’s quality-control systems and the fairness of some of its decisions.
It is against this background that CXC’s latest changes must be examined. CXC is introducing the Caribbean Targeted Education Certificate (CTEC), which divides traditional subjects into smaller modules. Students will be able to complete and be assessed in one module at a time and receive a credential for each module successfully completed.
Given that not every student learns at the same pace, there is certainly value in this approach. It is fair that someone who has mastered part of a subject should not necessarily leave school with nothing to show for it.
For students with learning challenges, smaller modules could reduce the pressure of preparing for an entire subject examination at one time.
CXC has pointed to the results of its 2026 Mathematics pilot as evidence that the approach can work. Of the 2,535 candidates who wrote Mathematics Module 1, 88 per cent received acceptable grades. I am not sure what exactly “acceptable grades” means, but CXC Registrar Dr Wayne Wesley was very clear that “… a module is not a whole subject. The full qualification still requires completion of every module at the full standard.”
My concern is that CXC may be using this “test run” with the Mathematics exam to present a skewed picture of student success and encourage acceptance of the modular structure. I mean, were the students and schools involved in the pilot representative of the wider Caribbean student population?
Also, these students completed one module, not the entire Mathematics syllabus. Thus, an 88 per cent success rate in one module cannot be directly compared with the pass rate for the full CSEC Mathematics examination.
There are other questions that CXC must answer. How much will it cost a student to write each module? Will completing a subject through separate modules eventually cost parents considerably more than one CSEC examination?
Is there a time frame for students to complete all the modules? What happens if a student passes two modules but repeatedly fails the third? Will employers and universities accept individual module certificates, or will they continue to require a full CSEC subject with Grades I, II or III?
Most importantly, we must ensure that the system does not create two levels of students, with some encouraged to complete full subjects and those quietly directed towards partial qualifications.
My greatest concern, however, is the decision to introduce revised syllabuses with so little preparation. Take CSEC Caribbean History, for example.
The academic year begins in a matter of weeks, yet the final syllabus is still not publicly available for teaching, as the version currently circulating is marked “not for teaching.” Form Four students have already received book lists, and many parents have purchased textbooks based on the existing syllabus. Some teachers may now have to teach the old syllabus to Form Five students while introducing the revised one to Form Four.
History is already struggling for survival in many of our schools. In attempting to modernise the subject, CXC may end up putting another nail in its coffin. The responsible approach would be to delay implementation, release the final syllabus and give classroom teachers, authors and publishers sufficient time to engage with it.
The teachers who work with Form Four and Five students must be central to this process and they need proper training and specimen papers so they can better guide their students, not a rushed workshop less than a month before school reopens.
I am all for educational reform, especially in a world where students are increasingly using AI and how they access and apply knowledge are changing rapidly. However, reform must be properly planned.
Change cannot simply be announced and schools expected to adjust within weeks. If CXC wants students to think critically rather than memorise information for an examination, it must give teachers the time and tools to make that possible. If reform is rushed and poorly communicated, it will create confusion rather than improve education.
CXC needs to get it right because these determine the future of Caribbean children.
