WAEC defends BECE marking process, rejects private school bias claims amid results dispute

The West African Examinations Council (WAEC) has firmly rejected allegations that candidates from private schools were disadvantaged during the marking of the 2026 Basic Education Certificate Examination (BECE), arguing that the structure of its assessment process makes such discrimination practically impossible.

The response comes after the Ghana National Association of Private Schools (GNAPS) questioned aspects of this year’s BECE results, citing reports from member schools of grades that allegedly did not correspond with students’ academic performance, as well as cases where candidates were reportedly assigned results in subjects they claimed not to have registered for.

Those concerns have intensified public debate over the credibility of this year’s examination outcomes, prompting calls for an independent audit and reconciliation of affected results.

Speaking on Joy FM’s Super Morning Show, WAEC’s Head of Public Affairs, John Kapi, sought to reassure parents, schools and candidates that the Council’s marking procedures are built around anonymity and standardisation, two principles intended to eliminate examiner bias.

According to Mr Kapi, examination scripts presented to markers carry only centre numbers and candidate ranges rather than school names or other identifying information. This means examiners are unable to determine whether a script originates from a private or public institution during the marking process.

“We examine all of them the same way.”

He further explained:

“If you were to bring scripts and tell me that these are from school A or school B, I’ll not be able to identify unless I go back to the database and check which school centre number this is or that.”

The Council maintains that every script is assessed using identical marking schemes, moderation procedures and quality assurance mechanisms irrespective of the candidate’s educational background.

Pressure mounts despite WAEC’s assurances

WAEC’s explanation comes as pressure builds from private education stakeholders seeking greater transparency over this year’s results.

GNAPS says it has activated its nationwide network of district, zonal and regional executives to compile evidence from schools that believe there are inconsistencies in the released grades. The association intends to present a comprehensive report to WAEC for investigation.

The allegations extend beyond concerns about unexpectedly low grades. Some schools have also questioned reported subject allocations, arguing that a number of candidates received results in subjects they did not register to write.

While WAEC’s defence addresses concerns about possible examiner bias, it does not entirely resolve questions surrounding data processing, candidate registration or post-marking result compilation—areas that stakeholders may continue to scrutinise if discrepancies are formally established.

Confidence in examination systems remains critical

The dispute highlights the delicate balance examination authorities must maintain between safeguarding the integrity of national assessments and responding transparently to stakeholder concerns.

For Ghana’s education system, public confidence in the BECE extends beyond individual candidates. The examination serves as the gateway to senior high school placement, making the credibility of its results central to educational planning and social trust.

International examination bodies typically rely on anonymous marking systems precisely because they reduce opportunities for conscious or unconscious bias. Such systems separate candidate identities from the assessment stage, with identification restored only during result processing.

However, experts note that while anonymous marking protects fairness during script evaluation, concerns over registration errors, data entry, scanning, moderation or result compilation require separate administrative verification processes.

Should WAEC proceed with a review of the complaints submitted by GNAPS, the exercise could help reinforce confidence in the examination system regardless of whether significant anomalies are ultimately confirmed.

For now, the Council maintains that the marking process itself remains impartial and insulated from institutional bias through its coded assessment procedures.