New Grading System Generates the Following Reactions
New Grading System Generates the Following Reactions. Education stakeholders have been divided over the decision to change the KCSE grading structure for the remaining classes under the 8-4-4 system. These changes, announced by the Education Cabinet Secretary, will come into effect this year.
Under the new system recommended by the President’s Task Force on Education Reform, the KCSE assessment will now depend on two compulsory subjects to determine students’ final scores: mathematics and one language (English, Kiswahili or Kenyan Sign Language). the best performance in the next five subjects.
Previously, there were five compulsory subjects divided into three groups of groups: mathematics, English, Kiswahili, two natural sciences and one humanities.
However, the Kenya Union of Post Primary Education Teachers (KUPPET) has questioned the changes, saying they are a hasty reaction that may confuse candidates rather than help them. KUPPET is concerned that this shift may encourage students to choose easier subjects, potentially jeopardizing STEM-related subjects and courses.
Conversely, the Kenya National Union of Teachers (KNUT) supports assessment reforms, stressing that rigidity in marking and marking has led to unfilled posts in universities. KNUT sees these changes as a way to integrate the Competency Based Curriculum (CBC) into the 8-4-4 system.
The President of the National Association of Parents, Silas Obuhatsa, believes that the changes should have been extended to this year’s KCPE examination. It proposes that applicants be assessed on only three subjects instead of all five.
Kenya Association of Private Universities, represented by Prof. Stephen Mbugua, believes these changes will improve access to tertiary education and increase enrollments in institutions facing declining numbers due to changes in university funding models.
Education expert Paul Wanjohi supports the reforms, saying they are in line with the goals of the new curriculum in developing every student’s potential, and believes the model should have been adopted earlier.