SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT UPON INVESTIGATIONS INTO CERTAIN IRREGULARITIES IN THE 1998 MPUMALANGA SENIOR CERTIFICATE EXAMINATIONS
Eberhard Bertelsmann SC
Chambers - Pretoria
29 April 1999
SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT TO THE HONOURABLE MINISTER OF EDUCATION, DR SIBUSISO BENGU. REGARDING THE INVESTIGATIONS INTO CERTAIN IRREGULARITIES WHICH ALLEGEDLY OCCURRED DURING THE SENIOR CERTIFICATE EXAMINATIONS OF 1998 IN MPUMALANGA
1.
I had the privilege of presenting my principal report to the Honourable Minister of Education on the 6th of April 1999.
2.
Although it bad originally been intended to finalise not only my own report, but the investigation of the South African Police Services and of the South African Certification Council at the end of March 1999, this proved to be practically impossible.
3.
On the 6th of April 1999 it was resolved to postpone the deadline for the finalisation of these reports to Thursday the 22nd of April 1999.
4.
At that stage, the South African Certification Council still needed to finalise the investigation into all the subjects affected by the unlawful practices. In addition, the standardisation meeting had to be held before publication of the correct results could take place.
5.
On the 6th of April 1999 it was expected that the Police investigation would also be completed before the 22nd of April 1999, so that the results of all investigations could be published on the 22nd of April 1999 together with the corrected marks of the Mpumalanga matriculants.
6.
Unfortunately, further delays occurred in both the SAFCERT investigation and the Police investigation. At a meeting held on the 20th of April 1999 with the Honourable Minister, SAFCERT, representatives of the Joint Matriculation Board, the universities and technikons as well the Police, the Honourable MEC for Education of Mpumalanga, Mr D D Mabuza and Mr L M Mello, the acting head of department of the Mpumalanga Education Department, the deadline for the finalisation of the investigations was extended yet again to the 29th of April 1999.
7.
The standardisation meeting in respect of the Mpumalanga results, of which the corrected particulars became available on the 20th of April 1999, was eventually held on Thursday the 22nd of April 1999. At this meeting, SAFCERT was represented by its Chief Executive Officer, Dr Fred Calitz, and several of its committee members, while the National Department of Education was represented by Mr André Reyneke and Dr Ihron Rensburg.
8.
The Mpumalanga Education Department was represented by its acting head, Mr Mello and several of the department's senior officials.
9.
At the standardisation meeting, the full range of all the results of the matriculation examination was discussed in all subjects. I should add that the Mpumalanga Education Department had been in the possession of the corrected raw marks as calculated and re-established by SAFCERT since the afternoon of the 20th of April 1999.
10.
As was explained in my principal report, SAFCERT prepares statistical calculations for each subject predicting the probable results of the matriculation examination of all candidates, and the statistical spread of outstanding candidates, average candidates and below average candidates.
11.
During the standardisation meeting, the statistical prediction is compared to the actual raw marks which were obtained by the examinees and the results are then standardised. Marks are adjusted bearing in mind the aforesaid statistical predictions, the circumstances of the particular examination, any improvement in the teaching and preparation of the students, the integrity of the examination system and all other aspects which may impact upon the general result of the examination.
12.
Marks are then adjusted and allocated within the scientifically and educationally acceptable range applying the SAFCERT formula.
13.
A certain measure of latitude is allowed to SAFCERT and the examining body within these scientific parameters.
14.
By Friday evening, the parties represented at the standardisation meeting were agreed upon the results. Both Mr Mello and Dr Calitz as well as Mr Reyneke confirmed to me that the adjustment of the marks was accepted by everybody present.
15.
These parties have also confirmed in subsequent telephonic and personal discussions with me that the adjustment of the marks was effected in a spirit of compassion for the learners who have suffered as a result of the unlawful action perpetrated by senior officials and functionaries of the Mpumalanga Education Department. During the discussion of the statistically generated predictions, Mr Mello and his officials' appraoch were that a sympathetic application of these proposed adjustments should be applied. This was accepted by SAFCERT and the National Department within the scientifically permissible range.
16.
Eventually the adjusted marks showed a pass rate of 52,6%, an improvement of approximately 6.6% compared to the 1997 results. This compares to a 72,5% pass rate which was purportedly achieved according to the results which had been unlawfully tampered with.
17.
After the marks were properly standardised, it has emerged that 12,5% of the 41 649 candidates who achieved matriculation endorsement, namely a total number of 5,189 learners compared with the 7 101 who had purportedly achieved such an endorsement according to the unlawful results. 16 711 candidates did not qualify for a matriculation endorsement, but qualified for a senior certificate. In total 21 900 candidates passed and 19 749 candidates failed compared with 28 755 who passed and 10 927 who failed according to the tampered results. The full range of the results is annexed hereto, marked ANNEXURE "Y".
18.
On Friday, Dr Calitz reported to me that the standardisation of the marks had been effected unanimously, a fact which was later confirmed by Mr André Reyneke.
19.
It should be underlined at this stage that, although the standardisation meeting finally determines the overall marks of all learners on a statistically and scientifically justifiable basis, each and every learner, school, principal, parent and, where appropriate, each representative organisation can still request that individual candidates' scripts be checked and re-marked. This is still the case, in spite of the irregularities which occurred, because, as I pointed out in my principal report, the National Department of Education went to considerable lengths to ensure the safety and integrity of the examination scripts. With a few exceptions, all scripts are available and can be checked and examined.
20.
On Monday, the 26th of April 1999, a senior official of the Mpumalanga Education Department did, however, raise a number of practical questions relating to the results achieved by learners at certain examination centres in the subjects biology and geography. A meeting was arranged at the national Department, where it was agreed that the individual scripts of the learners affected would be examined immediately. This was done by Dr Calitz, Mr Reyneke and the Mpumalanga officials and it was reported to me in the evening that all queries had been resolved to everybody's satisfaction.
21.
I embarked upon the preparation of this supplementary report, only to be informed by Mr Mabuza on Tuesday night that a further problem had raised its head. This problem was eventually reduced to writing by Mr Mello in a letter, a copy of which is annexed hereto marked ANNEXURE "X".
22.
After Mr Mabuza had raised the issue of the moderators' reports with me, I phoned Mr Mello on the morning on the 28th of April 1999 and discussed the issue with him. I pointed out that, as far as I was aware, the adjustments of the marks had been conducted in a spirit of scientifically justifiable generosity toward the learners, with which statement Mr Mello agreed. In spite thereof, however, he was of the view that the moderators reports should be taken into consideration, in spite of the fact that some of these moderators were persons who participated in the untoward adjustment of the marks in the first instance.
23.
I investigated the matter and discussed it with Dr Calitz and Mr Reyneke, as well as Mr Mello during the course of the day on the telephone. I was informed by Mr Reyneke that:
23.1 Internal moderators are usually not in a position to comment upon the overall results, as they only see a limited segment of the learners and their scripts;
23.2 Consequently, their view as to whether the marks in a particulars subject, or the overall result, should be adjusted upward or downward, cannot be the decisive factor because they do not have the overview of all results achieved by all learners in all the subjects in which examinations were written;
23.3 These facts were discussed in passing during the standardisation meeting on Thursday, the 22nd of April 1999, and were accepted as correct by everybody present;
23.4 Normally, moderators' and examiners' reports are given limited, if any, attention during a standardisation meeting unless;
23.5 A moderator could point to a problem in a particular examination because of technical or scientific problems, such as the fact that an examination paper was ambiguous or contained a misleading question. In such event, a moderator's view in regard to an adjustment of the marks is of importance;
23.6.1.1. It is primarily the responsibility of the examining authority to refer to moderators' and examiners' reports if such are to be considered in the standardisation meeting;
23.7 As the adjustment of marks was carried out in a spirit of scientifically justifiable generosity, further reference to the moderators reports would not have affected the results at all;
23.8 Neither SAFCERT nor the National Department would be prepared to consider a further adjustment of the marks, but for exceptional cases based on educational sound principles or reasons of which there are no evidence at present;
23.9 The standardisation meeting was concluded properly and reached scientifically justifiable results;
23.10 It is in the interest of learners and of the public at large as well as the system as whole that the process, once properly concluded, remains finalised;
23.11 Each individual learner is still at liberty to request an inspection or remark of his individual scripts, so that the rights of no individual will be detrimentally affected if the adjusted marks are accepted as correct. Dr Calitz confirmed to me that SAFCERT regards the process as concluded and that he agrees with the attitude adopted by the National Department.
24.
After having discussed the matter with the various parties concerned over the telephone, it is my considered view that the attitude adopted by the National Department and by SAFCERT is correct. Quite apart from the educationally and scientifically motivated justification of this point of view, I find it rather strange that no effort was made to table the moderators' reports by the senior officials of the Mpumalanga Education Department during the standardisation meeting. Bearing in mind that at least some of the moderators concerned are prima facie guilty of having been involved to a considerable extent in the activities which have caused the present debacle, I would be extremely hesitant to accord any weight to their views in any event. I am convinced that there is no merit in the stance adopted by the Mpumalanga Education Department in this regard and I regret that further delay and expense has been caused thereby. I am satisfied that, given the magnitude of the malpractice's, the relevant authorities have done their best to rectify the situation and to limit the damage which has been caused to the individual learner as much as possible.
25.
It is in the interest of each and every learner, of the system as a whole, of the Mpumalanga Education Department and of the public at large that the process be finalised on the basis I have set out above.
26.
I would like to express my appreciation and admiration toward the officials of the National Department and in particular Mr Reyneke and Advocate Eben Boshoff as well as Dr Manganyi and Dr Rensburg as well as SAFCERT for the dedication and tireless efforts with which they contributed to a solution of the problem.
27.
I am happy to record that the representatives of the technikons and universities indicated during a meeting on the 20th of April 1999 that they would consider the recommendations I made in the principal report regarding the treatments of students who may not qualify for admission to a technikon or a university, but were admitted on the strength of incorrect marks, very sympathetically. I hope that a similarly understanding approach will be adopted by employers who appointed employees to positions which require a senior certificate which such new employee may now not have achieved.
28.
It had been hoped that the South African Police Services would be able to conclude their investigations at this stage as well. Unfortunately, because of the magnitude of the problem and, in particular, because of the fact that a large number of forensic tests have to be conducted it will still take two to three weeks before the Police will be in a position to prefer charges, if at all.
29.
It is regrettable that I cannot present a complete picture at this stage, but in the public interest the report must now be released.
30.
Because the Police enquiries are still continuing, no individual who may be regarded as a suspect on the ground of the findings that I have made should be identified at this stage. I would urgently request parties who have an interest in the matter to refrain from speculation about the identity of those individuals who may eventually be pointed out as suspects and or as accused, until such time as tile police and the
prosecution authorities have been able to conclude their task and any suspect has been given an opportunity to explain his or her actions to the investigating authorities should they wish to do so.
31.
I thank you for the trust placed in me. My particular thanks are due to Advocate Eben Boshoff and Mrs M Locke for their practical and administrative assistance and encouragement.
___________________________
EBERHARD BERTELSMANN SC
CHAMBERS
29 APRIL 1999