Addressing poor pass rate in HE exit exam remains urgent

The Ethiopian Ministry of Education recently released the results of the national higher education exit examination, which was conducted for the second time in 2024.

The national results show little improvement from last year and call for a more in-depth investigation of the factors that affect student success.

While a total of 123,049 students registered for the second national exam, only 97,673 wrote it.

The number of public- and private-sector students who registered for the first time this year was 54,519. A total of 17,940 were from the public sector and 36,579 from private institutions.

However, the number of students who eventually took the exam was 31,397. A total of 13,810 of students were from public universities and the remaining 17,587 from private institutions.

There were also 68,530 students, the majority of whom failed last year, who registered to take the exam for the second time. Of this group, 66,276 students wrote the exam. The majority, 44,088, came from private institutions.

The difference between the number of students who registered to write the exam and those who actually wrote, demands further explanation.

In addition, the student figures in general indicate that there are more students from the private sector registering and sitting for the national exam than from the public sector. Yet, it is often assumed that the public sector has more students. In fact, up to three-quarters of all the students nationally are reportedly enrolled in this sector.

Public virtues and private vices?

Among this year’s exam takers only 27,035 students, 41%, managed to pass or score 50% and above. This achievement is similar to the national achievement in the exam completed in July 2023 when 42% of students passed the exam.

The scores recorded over the past two exam sessions consistently indicate that students in the public sector outperform those from the private sector.

Among the total of 31,397 students who took the exam for the first time this year, the private sector contributed 17,587 students, but managed to pass only 3,671, or 21% of them.

Of the 13,810 public-sector students, 9,527 or 69%, managed to pass, which is more than three times the achievement level recorded by the cohort from private institutions.

Although the public sector appears to outperform the private sector’s students who took the exam for the second time, the overall achievement of the public sector remains far below national expectations.

Among the 22,188 students from the public sector who sat for the exam for the second time, only 7,279 students, or 33%, passed the exam. The figure for the private sector is a dismal 15%, as only 6,568 out of a total of 44,088 students who sat for the exam for the second time passed.

Red flag for the private sector

The private sector’s dismal achievement was also mirrored by the low number of institutions that had students who passed. Out of nearly 200 institutions that participated in the exam, only students in 17 institutions managed to pass with the required 50% and higher.

The situation in the private sector is quite alarming. It could even threaten the future of several institutions, given the Ethiopian Training Authority’s (ETA) new requirement that student achievement in the national exit exam may affect programme continuity.

According to the ETA’s new regulation, an institution that fails to pass 25% of its students in three consecutive national exams will not be able to re-accredit its programmes.

Given the ETA’s practice of accrediting private higher education institutions despite the legal requirement to also keep an eye on the public sector, the regulation will have serious implications for the weaker private sector, which will have the additional burden of getting their programmes reaccredited.

A variety of reasons are often suggested to account for the difference in achievement between the private and public sectors, including student profile, student motivation, commercial motives [undermining educational goals] and the level of support given to students by individual institutions to prepare for the examination.

However, far beyond mere speculation, the issue requires detailed investigation and deliberation with sector representatives to find out the real causes for the poor achievements of students and to search for appropriate solutions.

Rather than assume this to be the exclusive responsibility of individual institutions, the government should come up with mechanisms to improve the dismal performance rate. It is a clear indication of educational wastage and failure to meet the ministry’s goals and aspirations.

There are also other factors that need to be considered to ameliorate the challenges in this area. They are discussed below.

Student motivation and preparation

One of the key areas of change that can have a significant impact on student performance is their own motivation and preparation.

There are growing complaints from staff and university administrators that students exhibit little motivation and exert limited effort towards preparing for their exams.

This is reflected in the little time students allocate to revise their course notes and the poor attendance they exhibit during tutorial sessions prepared by their institutions.

Given the negative impact of the national exit exam on their future employment and delaying their graduation, more needs to be done on the part of students to improve their performance in the national exam.

Support systems and resources

The efforts of institutions towards students’ success are significant. The resources deployed and the support systems put in place can play a crucial role in influencing student performance.

Among others, continuous student and staff awareness and academic as well as psychosocial support for students using a variety of means and modalities, can help to prepare for the exam.

While there are institutions that offer months of well-organised support to their students, there are others that provide little assistance to help students.

Exam setting and moderation: Adhering to national blueprints

One of the complaints that appear to show little change over the course of the past year is how much the exams adhere to the national test blueprints set by the ministry of education.

It is difficult to get hard evidence about the nature of the exam questions due to the ministry’s practice of not making exam texts available after the exam period.

However, students and teachers who have participated in the exam attest that there are exams that do not align with the test blueprints prepared by the ministry.

This may be because of some exam setters and moderators who may not strictly follow the exam guidelines set for each programme area.

Failure in this area does not only affect the performance of individual students, but can have a negative impact in terms of institutional preparations and the credibility of the national exam itself.

Exam security and cheating

Another area of complaint is related to exam security and cheating. The government’s decision to conduct national exams in public university settings followed the need to protect the security of the national exam process in general and has brought significant improvements over the past few years.

However, this does not mean that there are no security challenges at all. The fact that there were students who were caught cheating in the past two national exams is a clear indication that there are still attempts to breach the ethical guidelines set.

The ministry has been serious in terms of disqualifying students who breach the law and it appears to have succeeded in preventing such attempts much better than was the case when students used to take national exams at their own schools.

Despite these efforts, there have been incidents of students who make screenshots of exam papers and circulate them in search of possible answers.

In this regard, the ministry’s efforts need to be further strengthened to prevent such unethical acts, which can defeat the whole purpose of the exam.

The need for further improvement

The efforts of the Ethiopian Ministry of Education to introduce the national exit exam and coordinate its implementation during the past two exam periods are commendable.

However, given the size and complexity of the task, and the accompanying challenges, it is high time a more professionalised approach [was taken, which] would enhance the credibility and sustainability of the national exit exam.

One possible direction or approach is the need for involving the Ethiopian National Educational Assessment and Examinations Agency to take responsibility for administering the exam.

Given its experience, expertise and organisational set-up, the exam can be best planned, administered and monitored if the ministry of education relinquished its current responsibility to the exam agency and focused on supervising and overseeing the whole process in line with its national mandate.

The poor student achievement should also be a source of concern for all stakeholders and, particularly, institutions, instructors and students, who should work together to improve student performance in the national higher education exit examination.

Wondwosen Tamrat (PhD) is an associate professor of higher education and founding president of St Mary’s University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, a collaborating scholar of the Programme for Research on Private Higher Education at the State University of New York at Albany, United States, and coordinator of the private higher education sub-cluster of the Continental Education Strategy for Africa. He may be reached at preswond@smuc.edu.et or wondwosen@gmail.com. This is a commentary.