General Comments

The standard of the paper compared favorably with previous years. The questions were clear, distinctive and devoid of ambiguity. Also, the performance of candidates compares favourably with previous years. However, the performance as usual separates the candidates into the good, the bad and the ugly.

The rubrics were clear and in simple language. The marking schemes were adequate with no ambiguity. The various domains of assessment were adequately covered.

The candidates’ raw mean score of 19 out of 50 and a standard deviation of 10.72 with a candidature of 63546 indicates a better performance than that of WASSCE for Private Candidate 2016, when a raw mean score of 15 out of 50 marks and a standard deviation of 07.28 with a candidature of 77990 was recorded.