By: Dane Sinclair

Acting Head of Mathematics

 Compare the Number of Passes obtained this
year to last year, 2018.
 Examine the overall performance of
candidates in each Profile.
 Outline a plan of action to combat observed
weaknesses.
In the June 2018 sitting of the CSEC
Mathematics Examination the school
obtained 63 passes out of a total of 124
candidates who sat the examination.
In the June 2019 sitting the school obtained 73
passes out of 163 students who sat the
examination.
There were improvements in the quality and
number of passes obtained. This year
produced more grade 1’s and 2’s. The
number of passes exceed last by 10.
The number of students who sat the
examination increased by 31% in the June
2019 sitting ( from 124 to 163).
Though more passes was obtained, there was a
decrease in the percentage pass of 6 % ( 51%
to 45%).
From the results obtained from the June 2019
sitting, there were:
 A total of 4 grade ones
 22 grade twos
 47 grade threes
 68 grade fours and
 22 grade fives
Students in the grade 1 range obtained;
straight A profile for Knowledge,
comprehension and reasoning. One student
obtained a B for reasoning.

Students in the grade 2 range obtained mixed

profiles. 2 obtained an A for Knowledge, 19 a
B and 1 obtaining a C. For Comprehension; 0
obtained an A, while 14 obtained B and 8
obtained C.
For reasoning; 1 student obtained an A, 15
obtained B and 6 obtained C.
The results demonstrates that students who
obtained grade 2, fell down in the area of
Comprehension and reasoning.
Those obtaining range 3, showed that no
student obtained an A for knowledge,
Comprehension or Reasoning. 16 obtained a B
for knowledge and 5 a B for comprehension,
no student obtained an A for reasoning.
Most of the students obtaining range 3
obtained C profile for knowledge,
comprehension and reasoning.

Those who obtained range 4, performed poorly

in all three profiles with; 0 obtaining either
an A or a B.
18 obtaining C for knowledge, 6 C for
comprehension and 8 C for reasoning.
Majority obtained D and E profiles for
Knowledge, Comprehension and Reasoning
The End of year results showed that majority
of our students are falling below the
requirement. Attributes to this were:
I. Shortage of teachers
II. Inability of some teachers to manage the
class in order to make an impact.
From the results students who failed to obtain
range 1 to 3 performed poorly in all three
profiles. To strengthen these weaknesses the
strategies will be implemented:
 Students will need more concept build skills
by utilizing a more differentiated approach
to teaching and learning of mathematics. No
more can teachers use the traditional
approach to teaching. Teachers will have to
integrate technology and use projects to
heighten students under standing
 Assessment: Assessments given to students
must be tailored to cover all three profiles.
Students from as early as grade 7 must be
introduced to cxc past paper questions.
Teachers are to use the GRASP method to
create assessments.
Manipulative: There need to be more use of
manipulative in the classroom which foster
meaning student interaction. Mathematics
must be treated like an exploration into a
safari. Students must learn by doing rather
than by observing and modeling.
Journaling: Students must return to the basics
of keeping a Math Journal which outline
definitions, important points and useful
formula, categorized by topic. This Year
Schoology will be used to create discussion
forums, wherein immediate feedback can be
given or obtained.
For transformation to be obtained, the
following requirements must be met:
 A more secure and steady internet
connection.
 Access to the computer labs for research and
Gamification strategies.
 Acquisition of computers for the Math lab,
equipped with Math Software.