WAEC MATHS:WHY CHEAT AFTER WAEC PROVIDED YOU WITH THESE GUIDES?(3)

WAEC exams

 

WAEC – May/June. 2009

 

General Comments

 

The standard of the paper like in previous years was reported to have been maintained. The questions were within the syllabus and covered a wide area of the syllabus. The rubrics as well as the marking scheme were reported to be clear, generous and quite liberal.

 

However, the performance of the candidates generally fell below those of previous years. Notwithstanding, there were isolated reported cases of brilliant ones who did excellently well in the paper.

 

Candidates’ Weaknesses

 

Apart from not giving answers to the required degree of accuracy, majority of the candidates could not apply the basic concepts and theorems correctly in some aspects of the syllabus. Such areas of the syllabus as reported included:
(1)     Mensuration of three dimensional shapes;
(2)     Circle theorems;
(3)     Trigonometry;
(4)     Geometrical Construction.

 

Many candidates were said to be able to solve the inequality in question 2 but they were unable to get the three greatest integral values of x.

 

Suggested Remedies

 

(1)Teachers should put in more effort in the teaching of plane and solid geometry.

 

(2)Teachers and students should be encouraged to use teaching aids
during mathematics lessons in order to make some mathematical concepts clearer to the pupils.

 

(3)Candidates should be groomed on the rudiments of answering questions.

 

(4)Candidates are encouraged to adequately prepare for the examinations by practicing on a wide range of problems.

 

(5)Mathematics syllabus should be adequately covered.

 

(6)Teachers should spend more time in teaching those areas of the syllabus where candidates’ performance had been consistently poor such as Geometry.

 

Candidates’ Strengths

 

From the responses of candidates, it was stated that their performance in the following areas had improved which was commendable:
(1)Surds;
(2)Indices;
(3)Statistics;
(4)Set theory.

 

GCE – Nov/Dec. 2009

 

General Comments

 

It was reported that the standard of the paper compared very favourably with those of the previous years.  The rubrics were clear and unambiguous and the instructions were precise.  The questions were also clear, straight-forward and had a good coverage of the syllabus.  Accuracies required were well stated and the diagrams were clear.  The marking scheme was reported to be quite liberal, clear and generous.  The marks distributions were adequate and student-centred.

 

Generally, the performance of candidates was reported not to be different from those of previous years although they appear to have improved over that of last year.  It was also observed that candidates whose performance on the question on Geometrical construction and graphs were above average, performed well in the paper.

 

Candidates’ Weaknesses

 

Many candidates were adjudged not to have adhered to the given instructions.  It was observed that candidates relied so much on tables and calculators even in questions which stated otherwise while others presented their responses poorly.

 

The chief examiner was also of the opinion that candidates exhibited weaknesses in their:

 

 interpretation and application of geometric statement and theorems as in

 

questions 5 and 9.

 

    interpretation of graphs.  Some candidates even drew histograms with

 

class limits instead of class boundaries.

 

solution to problems on probability especially where it involved addition

 

and multiplication of probabilities.

 

 simplification of simple surds.  

 

response to word problems.

 

Though the question on number bases was well attempted, many candidates resorted to first converting to base ten rather than working in the base given in the question.

 

Suggested Remedies
Candidates should study the syllabus in order to know the scope of coverage.

 

Candidates should adequately prepare for examinations by engaging private teachers or attending coaching classes.
    
Candidates should possess adequate materials such as four-figure tables, Mathematical sets etc.
    
Candidates should be well exposed to past WASSCE questions.

 

 

Candidates’ Strengths

 

Generally, no outstanding performance was observed.  However, there were observed improvement in candidates’ response in the following areas:

 

Simplification of fractions and simple algebraic equations.

 

Computation of tables and drawing of graphs.
    
Mensuration – areas of plane shapes.
    
Operations on number bases.

 

Candidates’ performance in Arithmetic Progression (A.P) and longitude and latitude were also commendable.