The West African Senior Secondary Certificate Examination (WASSCE) is a crucial milestone for Liberian students, as it determines their readiness for higher education and future employment. However, the way WASSCE results are currently reported and interpreted in Liberia raises serious concerns about transparency and accuracy. This editorial highlights the urgent need for reform in how WASSCE data is presented and demonstrates how current reporting practices inflate success rates, masking the true extent of the challenges within the education system.
A key issue is the practice of counting students who pass only one or two subjects as having “passed” the entire WASSCE. According to WAEC’s official standards, students must pass at least five subjects, including English and Mathematics, to be considered successful. However, in Liberia, students who pass fewer subjects are often categorized as having passed the exam. This misleading practice inflates perceptions of student achievement and undermines the education system’s ability to accurately diagnose and address the root causes of underperformance.
To better understand the scale of the problem, our analysis of the 2023 WASSCE results revealed that only 45.5% of students passed English and an alarming 29.4% passed Mathematics. These two core subjects are essential for students to meet WAEC’s full passing criteria. Despite these low pass rates, WAEC’s current reporting practices group students who pass only one or two subjects into the overall pass rate, creating a false sense of progress. This approach does not reflect the true preparedness of Liberian students for higher education or the workforce.
Threshold Analysis: A Closer Look at the Numbers
To assess how many students truly met the full WASSCE passing criteria, we employed a threshold analysis using Venn diagram modeling to estimate the overlap between students passing English, Mathematics, and at least three additional subjects. Two separate model assumptions were applied to ensure a conservative yet realistic estimate.
In the first model, we used a conservative assumption that all students who passed Mathematics—the lowest-performing core subject—also passed English and three additional subjects. Since the Mathematics pass rate was only 29.4%, this cohort represents the minimum number of students likely to have met the full WASSCE criteria. The pass rates for English (45.5%) and three additional subjects (Biology, Economics, and Physics with pass rates of 67.8%, 60.3%, and 40.6%, respectively) were then combined to estimate the overlap.
Using this modeling approach, we calculated a combined pass rate of 2.24%, which, when applied to the total number of students who sat for the exam (50,001), gives an estimate that only 1,120 students met the full WASSCE criteria. This is in sharp contrast to the much larger number of students who are reported to have passed based on individual subject success. This conservative model shows that students passing Mathematics—the subject with the lowest pass rate—form the baseline for meeting the full criteria.
In the second model, we took a broader assumption that students who passed both English and Mathematics may not have necessarily passed three additional subjects. Given the higher pass rates in subjects like Biology and Economics, we estimated that students passing English and Mathematics had a 60% probability of passing at least one or two additional subjects. This raised the combined probability of passing all five subjects to 4.25%, resulting in an estimated 2,125 students meeting the full WASSCE criteria under this more optimistic scenario.
Both models reveal a significant discrepancy between the number of students who truly met WAEC’s full passing criteria and those who are reported to have passed based on individual subject success. Even with the more favorable model, only 4.25% of students met the full criteria. This demonstrates the importance of WAEC adhering strictly to its own standards when reporting pass rates. Reporting students who pass just one or two subjects as having passed the WASSCE creates a false sense of achievement that does not align with students’ actual preparedness for higher education or the workforce.
These assumptions, while conservative, clearly indicate that the majority of students sitting for the WASSCE are not meeting the fundamental requirements for success. This data-driven analysis provides compelling evidence that a more honest and transparent reporting method is urgently needed. Without such transparency, the true scale of the challenges facing Liberia’s education system remains hidden, making it difficult for policymakers to design effective interventions.
Data Limitations: A Barrier to Progress
Another key issue is the limitations of the data provided by WAEC. The current dataset lacks essential information, such as breakdowns by county, school type (urban vs. rural, public vs. private), and other critical factors that would help pinpoint where the education system is failing and where interventions are most needed. Additionally, WAEC does not provide cohort-level reporting, which tracks the number of students who meet the full WASSCE criteria of passing five subjects, including English and Mathematics.
The absence of such granular data prevents a clear understanding of the regional disparities and specific challenges faced by different schools. Without this level of detail, policymakers and educators cannot accurately target the root causes of underperformance, whether related to teacher quality, resource allocation, or student engagement. Moreover, the lack of longitudinal data, which tracks student performance over time, limits the ability to identify trends or evaluate the effectiveness of reforms. Unfortunately, this critical information remains unavailable.
A Call to Action for Transparent Reporting
The way forward is clear: Liberia must adopt a more transparent and data-driven approach to reporting WASSCE results. This begins with WAEC adhering strictly to its own criteria when calculating pass rates. Students who do not meet the full WASSCE standards should not be counted as having passed the exam. Accurate reporting will create a baseline that reflects the true extent of the problem, enabling policymakers and educators to design interventions that address the specific needs of students and schools.
Additionally, WAEC should provide disaggregated data that links student performance to counties, school types, and other factors. This transparency will allow for a more targeted approach to improving educational outcomes, helping to identify where interventions are most urgently needed. WAEC should also shift from reporting individual subject pass rates to focusing on cohort-level success, where the emphasis is on how many students meet the full WASSCE criteria, rather than highlighting individual subject successes.
Accurate and transparent data is the foundation for any meaningful reform. With honest reporting, Liberia’s education system can take the first step toward addressing the real challenges facing its students. By aligning the curriculum with the actual needs of learners, enhancing teacher training, and addressing resource disparities, Liberia can ensure that its students are fully prepared for higher education and the workforce. The time to act is now, and it begins with transparency in data reporting.
Discussion about this post