KCSE malpractices – Episode 2: Pre-exam phase

Malpractices in KCSE examinations appear to follow a script strikingly similar to that of elections in African states, making irregularities difficult to detect while maintaining an illusion of authenticity. The formula is simple yet effective — first, build up expectations, then manipulate the process, and finally create confusion, to conceal the predetermined outcomes.
As captured in Episode 1 of this article series, the process begins a year before the exams, with schools using banners and social media to promote their anticipated mean scores.
These unrealistic projections condition parents and other stakeholders to accept the forthcoming “success” as legitimate. The process ends with paid-up schools hopefully securing modified results at the computing stage, ensuring their candidates emerge as top achievers regardless of actual performance. Episode 2 of 7 highlights the pre-examination phase malpractices.
The period between setting target means and the official release of results by the minister is packed with orchestrated cheating schemes, typically facilitated through well-organised syndicates involving school principals (centre managers), teachers, invigilators, supervisors, security officers, cooks, rogue KNEC insiders and candidates themselves. Some schools and candidates obtain these papers through underground networks, days or even weeks before the exams begin.
Leakages occur through assorted channels, often starting as early as June or July of the exam year, when the exams have already been set, moderated and the final exam to be administered has already been decided on.
The exam setters themselves, sometimes act as informants, subtly passing critical content to students and colleagues under the guise of subject revision. They also find their way into schools as invited senior examiners/subject experts who share their “experiences” with students.
In the exams leakage game, cartels ensure that materials are discreetly distributed to well-connected and fiscally compliant institutions. In these schools, the leaked exams are photocopied, administered to students, revised and the question papers diligently collected and destroyed.
Another major loophole exists in the handling of practical exam materials. During the distribution process at KNEC storage containers, live copies of assorted exams are smuggled out under the pretext of advance instructions for practical exams. Photographs of the exam papers are taken and circulated, giving privileged candidates a significant advantage.
Social media platforms, particularly WhatsApp groups, have become critical tools in propagating these malpractices. These groups, managed at local, regional, and national levels, facilitate the sharing of leaked content. Principals of schools who subscribe to the scheme encourage subject teachers to join such groups.
Such teachers are also handsomely facilitated by the schools to attend strategically planned subject meetings, where leaked materials are exchanged. Upon returning, these teachers quickly incorporate leaked questions into school revision exams, ensuring that students are well-prepared for the actual KCSE papers.
The manipulation extends to the invigilation process, where principals lobby and pay for the placement of friendly supervisors and invigilators in their schools. Through connections with sub-county TSC directors, they ensure friendly examiners are assigned to oversee their centres, allowing them to influence the administration of exams. In cases where external supervisors are posted, well-crafted bribery schemes that rope in security personnel ensure that any irregularities go unreported.
Teachers, being central figures in the education system, act as facilitators in these malpractices. Apart from distributing leaked papers to students under the guise of “revision materials”, they provide subtle hints or structured “predictions” of expected questions, particularly when they have prior access to examination content.
In some cases, subject teachers conduct last-minute, highly specific and intensive coaching sessions, ensuring students are well-drilled for questions they should not have had access to in the first place.
— The writer is a Professor of chemistry at the University of Eldoret, a former vice-chancellor, and a Quality Assurance Expert