19 mistakes (WASSCE) candidates commit in History Paper 2

History, just like any other subject, has certain format which is acceptable, particularly to emerging Historians in the Senior High Schools. Candidates at times perform abysmal due to some of these mistakes. This write up seems to unearth some of these mistakes that candidates make during the West African Senior School Certificate Examination. 

SUMMARY OF WEAKNESS OF CANDIDATES DURING WASSCE 

1.      Many of the candidates are not able of express themselves well in the English language making it difficult for them to articulate their points well. They as a results muddled up their points and thereby rendered their ideas unfathomable

2.      Bad expression: bad expression inhibited some candidates from writing their ideas in more convincing way. Their work was replete with more tenses and grammatical errors

3.      Some candidates continue to answer more questions than the required

4.      Some candidates select questions from other member countries which they feel could easily be answered thereby disregarding the rubrics.

5.      Scattered Answers: some candidates did spread their answer to a questions on several pages without alerting examiners to the pages.

6.      Some candidates spend a lot of time and emphasis on one question to the neglect of the others.

7.      Majority of the candidates show shallow knowledge of the subject matter by writing on issues not related to the task.

8.      Majority of the candidates are not able to spell correctly names of prominent men in history, historical towns, articles of trade, and ethnic groups, among others.

9.      Many candidates do not support their essay with facts.

10.  Many candidates produce facts which are not related/relevant to the questions at all – an indication of ill-preparation for the examination.

11.  Misinterpretation of questions: despite the clarity and simplicity of the questions presented, some candidates found difficult to interpret. They therefore give inadequate and inappropriate points which did not earn them good marks 

12.  Wrong choice of words: the problem of selecting the appropriate words to describe situations has been a headache to some candidates. For example, some candidates write “boarders” instead of “borders”, instead of “search”, some candidates write “such”, “awear” instead of “aware”.

13.  Many candidates list points without explaining them.

14.  A number of candidates fail to differentiate points which are political, economic and social.

15.  Some candidates number their points (otherwise stated) and also leave lines blank.

16.  Some candidates do not pay attention to the nitty- gritty of questions asked. They instead answers questions in its general form instead of limiting to the demands of the questions. For example, a question might limit students to write about the economic importance of the River Nile to the Egyptians. Candidates end up writing entirely about the River Nile including its social and political importance disregarding the rubrics. 

17.  Skimpy answers: short and one-sentence answers were observed in candidates’ responses. This was as a results of inadequate preparation and inability to read extensively which considerably limited their expression of ideas.

18.  LEAVING BLANK LINES: still some and quite an appreciable number of candidates leave blanks lines or spaces in presentation of their points instead of presenting each point in a paragraph.

19.  ALL POINTS IN ONE PARAGRAPH: Some also presented the points in one paragraph, thus making it difficult since an examiner has to strain before awarding mark.

 

1