Whole Script or Conveyor Belt Marking? Exploring the Way Forward for Public Examinations in Eswatini

Abstract

Without educational assessment, learning outcomes are hardly realised; and even if by chance they do, stakeholders fail to prove such milestones because their attainment remains fuzzy. Unreliable marking can make the difference between candidates getting the grade they deserve and a grade that does not reflect their knowledge and skills, and that difference can be life – changing. Good assessments of learning are a product of reliable processes, such as marking. This paper attempted to evaluate the Conveyor Belt and Whole Script Systems of marking through raising the following questions: (1) Does a relationship exist between marking system choice and the location of accrediting body among SAAEA member states? (2) To what extent do markers learn about marking systems at pre-service training level in Eswatini? (3) What factors influenced the choice of the currently used marking approach in Eswatini public examinations? The human factor theory and the models of both CBS and WSS underpinned the study. A qualitative descriptive case study designed was adopted where 9 research forum members were interviewed and 18 purposively selected markers, one former senior ECESWA staff member and five current ECESWA staff members were interviewed. The findings revealed a pattern between nature of marking approach and location of accreditor. The teacher training curriculum and pedagogy assessment was found to have very weak levels of inclusion of marking approaches. The voice of the accreditor, the level of accountability over one’s marking errors were found to have been high priority factors in compelling ECESWA to mark through WSS. The study recommends ECESWA not to rush for CBS before engaging in deep dialogue with the Accreditor.