SYNOPSES FOR CAPE – 2016

ACCOUNTING

This is the fourth year of examination based on the revised CAPE Accounting syllabus.
In Unit 1, 87 per cent of the candidates achieved Grades I-V in 2016 compared 96 per cent in 2015. This decline in performance was also reflected in the performance on all three modules compared with 2015.

In Unit 2, 86 per cent of the candidates achieved acceptable grades in 2016 compared with 91 per cent in 2015. Small declines in performance were observed on Module 1, Costing Principles, and Module 2, Costing Systems. Consistently low performance was also evident on Module 3, Planning and Decision Making, for 2015 and 2016.

AGRICULTURAL SCIENCE

For this second sitting of the examination, 91 per cent of the candidates achieved acceptable grades, Grades I–V, for Unit 1, compared with 90 per cent in 2015. This Unit tested the fundamentals of agriculture and crop production. Questions were based on topics such as transport mechanisms, unconventional farming, genetically modified organisms and horticulture. The most challenging areas for the candidates were transport mechanisms and micro propagation techniques.

For Unit 2, 94 per cent of the candidates achieved acceptable grades, Grades I–V, compared with 97 per cent in 2015. This Unit tested animal production and the environment, and included topics such as soil conservation, animal nutrition and aquaculture. The most challenging areas for the candidates were extensive farming and marketability of products, and hazard analysis critical control points (HACCP).

APPLIED MATHEMATICS

In Unit 1, candidate performance remained consistent with 91 per cent of the candidates achieving acceptable grades, Grades I–V, in both 2016 and 2015. As in previous years, weaknesses in algebraic manipulation affected the overall performance of some candidates. In Unit 2, 90 per cent of the candidates achieved acceptable grades, Grades I–V, compared with 86 per cent in 2015.

This year, the performance of candidates on Module 1, Discrete Mathematics, and Module 3, Particle Mechanics, was below that of 2015. However, there was an improved performance on Module 2, Probability and Distribution. For both Units, the performance on the School-Based Assessment component of the examination was similar to that in 2015. Generally, candidates chose topics that were suitable to their level and relevant to the objectives.

ART AND DESIGN

In Unit 1, 100 per cent of the candidates achieved acceptable grades, Grades I–V in 2016, as in 2015. Candidates performed best on Module 2, Two-Dimensional Art and Design while Module 1, Cultural Studies, continues to prove the most challenging. In Unit 2, 99.6 per cent of the candidates achieved Grades I–V compared with 100 per cent in 2015.

Candidates performed best on Module 3, Creative Projects, while performance on Module 1, Design and Module 2, Applied Arts continue to show improvement.

BIOLOGY

For Unit 1, 79 per cent of the candidates achieved acceptable grades, Grades I–V, in 2016 compared with 89 per cent in 2015. While candidates showed some improvement on questions which required recall of information, they experienced challenges making links between distinct but related objectives such as how the endosymbiotic theory explains the evolution of mitochondria and chloroplasts from prokaryotes.

For Unit 2, 94 per cent of the candidates achieved Grades I–V in 2016 compared with 95 per cent in 2015. As in the previous year, candidates performed well on the questions requiring them to draw graphs and interpret data. However, candidates had difficulties applying knowledge of concepts to new situations. For example, explaining how insulin and glucagon coordinate activities in mammals, or explaining how Myasthenia Gravis results in the progressive weakening of skeletal muscles.

BUILDING AND MECHANICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY

Option A
In Unit 1, 86 per cent of candidates who wrote the examination in 2016 achieved acceptable Grades I – V. Performance on Paper 01, the Multiple-Choice Paper, was very good with 92 per cent of candidates achieving acceptable grades. However, the performance on Paper 02, the Structured Paper, was weak. Candidate performance on Paper 03, the School Based Assessment, was moderate. Performance on Module 1, Geometry 1, Module 2, Geometry 2, and Module 3, Engineering Drawing was fair.

Eighty-six per cent of candidates who wrote the Unit 2 examination in 2016 achieved acceptable grades. Performance on Paper 01, the Multiple-Choice, was very good with 86 per cent of candidates achieving acceptable grades. Performance on Paper 02, the structured paper, was weak while the performance on Paper 03, the School-Based Assessment, was good. Candidate performance on all modules: Module 1, Mechanics of Machines, Module 2, Engineering Materials and Process, and Module 3, Engineering Design Elements, was good.

Option B
In Unit 1, 75 per cent of candidates who wrote the examination in 2016 achieved Grades I–V. Performance on Paper 01, the Multiple Choice Paper, was good with 90 per cent of candidates achieving acceptable grades, Grades I–V, while performance on Paper 02, the Structured Paper, was very weak. Candidate performance on Paper 03, the School-Based Assessment, was good. Performance on all modules: Module 1, Geometry 1, Module 2, Geometry 2, and Module 3, Building Drawing was fairly good.

Ninety-two per cent of candidates who wrote the Unit 2 examination in 2016 achieved Grades I–V. Performance on Paper 01, the Multiple-Choice Paper, was fairly good with 75 per cent of candidates earning acceptable Grades I – V. Performance on Paper 02, the Structured Paper, was very weak while performance on Paper 03, the School-Based Assessment, was fairly good. In terms of performance on modules, performance on Module 1, Structural Drawings, candidate performance was very good. Performance on Module 2, Building Materials and Processes and Module 3, Management and Design was fairly good.

CARIBBEAN STUDIES

Overall performance in 2016 was consistent with 2015 as 95 per cent of the candidates achieved Grades I–V. While the performance on Module 1, Caribbean Society and Culture, and Module 3, Researching Issues in the Caribbean, was consistent with that of 2015, there was an improved performance on Module 2, Issues in Caribbean Development, with 96 per cent of candidates achieving Grades A-E compared with 86 per cent in 2015.

CHEMISTRY

In 2016, 80 per cent of the candidates who wrote Unit 1 achieved acceptable grades, Grades I–V, a decline from the performance in 2015 when 85 per cent of the candidates achieved acceptable grades. Eighteen percent of the candidates earned Grade I compared with 19 percent in 2015. Eighty-six percent of the candidates who wrote Unit 2 achieved acceptable grades, Grades I – V, compared with 92 percent in 2015. Twelve percent achieved Grade I compared with 30percent in 2015.

The weaknesses highlighted in previous reports have persisted. Too many candidates demonstrated a lack of facility with the appropriate technical language in their responses to questions thus revealing a weak grasp of concepts and principles. Candidates and teachers are urged to use the School-Based Assessment and laboratory exercises as a teaching tool - to reinforce, illustrate or clarify theoretical concepts.

COMMUNICATION STUDIES

Performance on the 2016 examination was consistent with 2015 as approximately 97 per cent of the candidates achieved Grades I-V in each year. However, the performance on the Modules varied. While there was an increase in the percentage of candidates achieving Grades A-C on Modules 2, Language and Community, and Module 3, Speaking and Writing, there was a decline on Module 1, Gathering Information.

COMPUTER SCIENCE

In Unit 1, 91per cent of the candidates achieved Grades I to V, compared with 92 per cent in 2015. In Unit 2, 95 per cent of the candidates achieved Grades I-V, in both 2015 and 2016. It has been noted that the percentage of candidates obtaining Grade I has improved for both Units over that of 2015.

Although the performance on programming questions is usually poor, there were a number of excellent responses from candidates showing that an increasing number of candidates are performing at the required level.

DIGITAL MEDIA

In Unit 1, 98 per cent of candidates achieved Grades I–V compared to 94 per cent in 2015. Candidates continue to perform best on Module 3, Creative Solution Design, while Module 2, Digital Media Ecosystem, proved the most challenging. In Unit 2, 99 per cent of the candidates achieved Grades I–V compared with 100 per cent achieving Grades I-IV in 2015. Candidates performed best on Module 1, Visual and Interactive Design, while Module 2, Web and Digital Publishing, proved the most challenging.

The projects received reflected an improvement in the variety of goods and services that can be used for entrepreneurial purposes. It was notable that many students were innovative and used brainstorming and other project management techniques to carefully select which project to execute in their School-Based Assessment. However, several candidates submitted unacceptable SBAs. This was due mainly to the fact that candidates submitted an entrepreneurial type project instead of a project that incorporates a digital product that can be used to solve a problem.

ECONOMICS

There was a decline in the performance of candidates on Unit 1 in 2016. Seventy-two per cent of the candidates achieved acceptable grades, Grades I-V, in 2016 compared with 85 per cent in 2015. Performance on Paper 01, the Multiple-Choice Paper was consistent with 2015, while there was a decline in performance on Paper 02, the Essay Paper and Paper 031, the School-Based Assessment. A moderate improvement in performance was noted on Paper 032, the Alternative to the School-Based Assessment.

In 2016, 83 per cent of the candidates achieved acceptable grades, Grades I-V, compared with 89 per cent in 2015. The performance on Paper 01, the Multiple-Choice Paper was consistent with that of 2015. There was a decline in the performance on Paper 02, the Essay Paper, Paper 031, the School-Based Assessment and Paper 032, the Alternative to the School-Based Assessment.

ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONIC TECHNOLOGY

In Unit 1, 49 per cent of candidates who wrote the examination in 2016 achieved Grades I–V compared with 65 per cent in 2015. This decline in performance was mainly due to declining performance on Papers 01 and 02, the structured papers and Paper 03, the School-Based Assessment. In terms of performance on modules, candidate performance on the three modules, DC Circuit Theory, Analogue Electronics and Communications and Introduction to Electrical Power Systems, declined compared with the 2015 performance.

Seventy-two per cent of candidates who wrote the Unit 2 examination in 2016 achieved Grades I–V compared with 65 per cent in 2015. This improvement was mainly due to improved performance on Paper 01, the structured paper. Candidate performance on Paper 02, the other structured paper was marginally below that of 2015. Performance in Paper 03, the School-Based Assessment, was consistent with that of 2015. Candidate performance on Module 1, AC Circuit Theory, declined marginally. The performance on Module 2, Digital Electronics and Data Communications, improved compared with that of 2015. Performance on Module 3, Introduction to AC Machines, was consistent with that of 2015.

ENTREPRENEURSHIP

This is the second year of the examination for the Entrepreneurship syllabus. There was a marginal improvement in performance as 97 per cent of the candidates achieved Grades I-V in 2016 compared with 96 per cent in 2015. Performance improved on Module 1, Entrepreneurial Mind-set and Module 2, The Entrepreneurial Process, while performance was consistent in Module 3, Creativity and Innovation.

One thousand and seventy- three candidates wrote the Unit 2 examination in 2016 compared with 71 in 2015. Ninety-nine per cent of the candidates achieved acceptable grades in 2016. Performance declined for Module 1, Essentials of Business Ownership and Module 2, New Venture Planning and Creation but improved on Module 3, Managing and Growing the Venture.

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE

In Unit 1, approximately 97 per cent of candidates achieved acceptable grades, Grades I–V, in 2016 compared with 89 per cent in 2015. Candidates performed better on Module 2, Human Population and the Environment, and Module 3, Sustainable Use of Natural Resources, than on Module 1, Fundamental Ecological Principles.

In Unit 2, 98 per cent of the candidates achieved acceptable grades, Grades I–V, compared with 94 per cent in 2015. Candidates performed best on Module 1, Agriculture and the Environment, while Module 3, Pollution and the Environment and Module 2, Energy and the Environment, proved the most challenging.

The overall quality of the School-Based Assessment continues to show improvement.

FOOD AND NUTRITION

In Unit 1, the overall performance in 2016 was consistent with that of 2015. Ninety-seven per cent of the candidates achieved Grades I–V in both years. The performance of candidates in all modules was also consistent in 2015 and 2016.

In Unit 2, overall performance in 2016 was consistent with that of 2015 with 98 per cent of candidates achieving Grades I–V in both years. Candidates performed best on Module 3, Food Preparation and Service, Large Quantity and Commercial, while Module 2, Food Science and Technology proved to be challenging. Candidates continue to perform satisfactorily in all aspects of the School-Based Assessment.

FRENCH

In Unit 1, the performance in the 2016 examination was consistent with that of 2015 with 99 per cent of the candidates achieving Grades I–V in both years. Candidates performed best on Module 2: La société et les affaires sociales, which showed some improvement from 2015. Module 1: L’individu, la famille et la vie journalière and Module 3: L’environnement showed some decline in performance when compared wih 2015. The performance on the School-Based Assessment was consistent with 2015.

The percentage of candidates achieving Grades I–V in Unit 2 increased from 96 per cent in 2015 to 99 per cent in 2016. The candidates performed best in Module 3: L’industrie et l’économie, while Module 1: L’actualité and Module 2: La science et la technologie, showed some improvement, over 2015. The performance on the School-Based Assessment was comparable to consistent with that of 2015.

GEOGRAPHY

The performance on the 2016 examination was consistent with that of 2015. However, there was an improvement in candidate performance on the compulsory Question 1 for Paper 2 in both Units, which shows that some effort was placed on developing the practical skills of the candidates. The percentage of candidates achieving acceptable grades, Grades I–V, in Unit 1 remained consistent, 97 percent in 2016 compared with 96 percent in 2015. For Unit 2, 93 percent earned acceptable grades in 2016 compared with 96 percent in 2015.

For Unit 1, five per cent of the candidates achieved Grade I in both 2016 and 2015. For Unit 2, six per cent achieved Grade I compared with 4 per cent in 2015.

General improvement in the quality of the School-Based Assessment was also noted as most schools selected research projects from among the topics on the syllabus.

HISTORY

In Unit 1, the percentage of candidates achieving Grades I–V in 2016 was 81 per cent compared with 72 percent in 2015. Candidates performed best on Module 1, Indigenous Societies. However, Module 2, Slave Systems: Character and Dismantlement and Module 3, Freedom in Action, showed improvement over the performance in 2015.

The percentage of candidates achieving Grades I–V in Unit 2 was 85 per cent compared with 83 per cent in 2015. Candidates performed best on Module 1, Atlantic World: Interactions and Module 3, International Relations: Conflict and Liberation, while Module 2, Atlantic Development: Identity and Industry, proved the most challenging.

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

Eighty-eight per cent of the candidates who wrote the Unit 1 examination achieved acceptable grades compared with 96 per cent in 2015. The performance on Paper 01, the Multiple-Choice Paper, was consistent with 2015 with 99 per cent of the candidates earning acceptable grades in both years. On Paper 02, the Structured Response Paper, 72 per cent of the candidates achieved acceptable grades compared with 70 per cent in 2015.

In Unit 2, 94 per cent of the candidates achieved acceptable grades compared with 98 per cent in 2015. On Paper 01, the Multiple-Choice Paper, there was a decline in the percentage of candidates achieving Grade I although the percentage achieving acceptable grades was consistent over the last two years. On Paper 02, the Structured Response Paper, 45 per cent of the candidates achieved acceptable grades in 2016 compared with 72 per cent in 2015.

INTEGRATED MATHEMATICS

This is the first year of examination for the new syllabus. The percentage of candidates achieving Grades I–IV was 49.

The questions were designed to ensure coverage of the syllabus and at the appropriate level of difficulty to test the following skills: Conceptual Knowledge, Algorithmic Knowledge and Reasoning. However, the candidates performed poorly on a number of questions.

Candidates performed satisfactorily on the School-Based Assessment component of the examination. Generally, they chose topics that were suitable to their level and relevant to the objectives.

LAW

The overall performance on both units was consistent with 2015 as 88 percent of candidates on Unit 1 and 85 per cent on Unit 2 achieved Grades I-V in both years. However, the performance at the level of the modules showed some variation for each of the two units.

For Unit 1, there was an increase in the number of candidates achieving Grades A-E on Module 1, Caribbean Legal Systems. This figure increased from 78 per cent in 2015 to 98 per cent in 2016. For Module 2 and Module 3, Public Law and Criminal Law, respectively, there was a decline in performance from 75 to 63 per cent and from 94 to 82 per cent, respectively. For Unit 2, there was consistency in the performance for Module 1, Law of Tort, with 90 per cent of candidates achieving Grades A- E. There was, however a decline in the performance on Module 2, Law of Contract, and an improved performance on Module 3, Real Property.

LITERATURES IN ENGLISH

Candidates’ overall performance in Unit 1 in 2016 declined. Approximately 85 per cent of the candidates achieved Grades I–V compared with 87 per cent in 2015. There was a slight decline in performance at Grades A–E in Module 1, Drama and Module 3, Prose Fiction. There was, however, some improvement in performance in Module 2, Poetry.

Candidates continue to demonstrate a thorough knowledge of the texts but their analysis of the texts was unsatisfactory. Additionally, candidates continue to use the wrong texts to answer questions. For instance, they attempted to use the Drama texts to answer questions in the Prose Fiction section of Paper 02. This negatively impacted their performance. It was noted also that in Paper 01, candidates struggled to provide adequate responses to questions set to assess dramatic function and dramatic significance as well as the effect created by the writer’s techniques.

Performance on Unit 2 was quite consistent. Ninety-one per cent of the candidates achieved Grades I–V in 2016 compared with 90 per cent in 2015. There was a slight decline in performance at Grades A–E in Module 1, Drama, and Module 2, Poetry. There was, however, an improved in performance on Module 3, Prose Fiction.

The same challenges that candidates experience in Unit 1 continue to be seen in their performance in Unit 2.

LOGISTICS AND SUPPLY CHAIN OPERATIONS

This was the first examination of the CAPE Logistics and Supply Chain Operations syllabus.

In Unit 1, one hundred and sixty-four candidates wrote the examination, with 71 percent achieving acceptable grades, Grades I–V. In Unit 2, four candidates wrote the examination. Of these, two candidates achieved acceptable grades, Grades I-V.

MANAGEMENT OF BUSINESS

In Unit 1, there was an improved performance of the candidates in the 2016 examination compared with 2015. Ninety-five per cent of the candidates achieved Grades I-V compared with 88 per cent in 2015. There was a marked improvement in candidates’ performance on Module 1, Methodology: Demand and Supply, while there was a slight decline in performance on Module 2, Market Structure. However, performance of Module 3, Business Finance and Accounting remained consistent when compared with 2015. Improved performance was noted on Paper 01, the Multiple-Choice Paper and Paper 02, the Essay Paper. Performance on Paper 031, the School-Based Assessment was consistent with previous years while there was a decline in performance on Paper 032, the Alternative to the School-Based Assessment.

In Unit 2, there was an improved performance of the candidates in the 2016 examination compared with 2015. Ninety-eight per cent of the candidates achieved Grades I-V when compared with 96 percent in 2015. There was a decline in performance on Paper 01, the Multiple-Choice Paper, Paper 031, the School-Based Assessment and Paper 032, the Alternative to the School-Based Assessment. However, there was a marked improvement in performance on Paper 02, the Essay Paper. Improved performance was also noted on all three modules: Module 1, Production and Operations Management, Module 2, Fundamentals of Marketing, and Module 3, Small Business Management, when compared with 2015.

PERFORMING ARTS

Performance of candidates on Unit 1, Business for the Creative Arts, was good. Ninety-four per cent of the candidates achieved acceptable grades. The performance on all three modules: Module 1, Business Feasibility, Module 2, Business Development and Planning and Module 3, Project Planning for the Arts was commendable. However, candidates’ submissions for the School-Based Assessment component of the examination showed a general lack of understanding of the requirements for this component.

The candidate entry was small for all four options of Unit 2.
Option A — Cinematic Arts
Three candidates registered for this Option. All three candidates achieved acceptable grades. Two candidates achieved Grade IV and one candidate achieved Grade V. The quality of worked on Paper 02, the written component, was weak compared with 2015. Additionally, the submissions for Paper 03, the School-Based Assessment were also of a lower quality than those submitted in 2015.

Option B — Dance
Twenty-two candidates wrote the examination for Dance and all received acceptable grades ranging from Grade I to V. It was noted that the performance on each of the modules: Module 1, History and the Dancing Body, Module 2, Technique and Performance Skills, and Module 3, Choreography and Performance was good.

Option C—Drama
Twenty-eight candidates wrote the examination. All of the candidates received acceptable grades ranging from Grade I to IV. The performance of candidates’ on each of the modules: Module 1, Caribbean Theatre and the World, Module 2, Forming the Performer, and Module 3, The Art of Performance was good.

Option D—Music
Three candidates wrote the examination and received grades ranging from Grade I to III. One candidate received a Grade I, another a Grade II and the third a Grade III. Candidates’ performance on the written examination showed much improvement compared with 2015.

PHYSICAL EDUCATION AND SPORT

In Unit 1, overall performance in 2016 was similar to that of 2015 with 98 per cent of candidates achieving acceptable grades, Grades I–V. Candidates performed better on Module 1, Functional Anatomy and Training Theory, and Module 3, Sport Psychology, than on Module 2, Sociological Aspects of Sport.

In Unit 2, overall performance in 2016 was very good with 99 per cent of candidates achieving acceptable grades, Grades I-V. Candidates performed better on Module 2, Sport Management and Module 3, Technology and Innovation, than on Module 1, Biomechanics.

PHYSICS

For the 2016 Unit 1 examination, 16 percent of candidates earned Grade I compared with 13 percent in 2015. Ninety-four percent of the candidates achieved acceptable grades, Grades I-V, compared with 93 per cent in 2015. For the 2016 Unit 2 examination, 19 percent of candidates achieved Grade I compared with 18 percent in 2015. Ninety-five percent earned achieved acceptable grades, Grades I–V, in 2016 compared with 93 percent in 2015.

For each unit, the performance on Paper 032, the Alternative to the School-Based Assessment, was unsatisfactory. However, the performance on the School-Based Assessment was satisfactory.

PURE MATHEMATICS

In 2016, there was an improved performance in both Units. Seventy-one per cent of the candidates earned acceptable grades in Unit 1 compared with 65 per cent in 2015. This was reflected in an improved performance in all modules.

In Unit 2, approximately 90 per cent of the candidates achieved acceptable grades compared with 87 per cent in 2015. In Module 2, Sequences, Series and Approximations, 40 per cent of the candidates earned the highest grade, compared with 20 per cent in 2016. The percentage of candidates achieving acceptable grades in Module 1, Complex Numbers and Calculus II and Module 3, Counting, Matrices and Differential Equations, was consistent with 2015.

SOCIOLOGY

Candidates’ performance in 2016 showed a slight improvement when compared with that of 2015. Eighty-nine per cent of the candidates who wrote the Unit 1 examination achieved Grades I–V compared with 86 per cent in 2015. While performance on Paper 01, the Multiple Choice Paper, and Paper 032, the Alternative to the School-Based Assessment, remained consistent with 2015, there was a noticeable improvement in the performance on Paper 02, the Essay Paper. Performance on Module 3, Social Stratification, showed a slight improvement but there was a decline on Module 1, Sociological Concepts, Perspectives and Methods. Candidate performance on Module 2, Social Institutions: Family, Religion, Education remained consistent with 2015.

In Unit 2, candidates’ performance in 2016 showed a slight improvement when compared with that of 2015. Ninety-six per cent of the candidates achieved Grades I–V this year, compared with 94 per cent in 2015. There was a marked improvement in candidate performance on Paper 02, the Essay Paper, while performance on Paper 01, the Multiple- Choice Paper and Paper 031, the School-Based Assessment, remained consistent with 2015. While there was consistency in candidates’ performance on Module 2, Crime and Deviance, there was a slight improvement on Module 1, Population and Development, and a decline on Module 3, Caribbean Social Issues: Poverty, Health and Environment, compared with 2015.

It is recommended that more emphasis be placed on the application of sociological concepts and theories to the topics across both units. This application should extend as well into candidates’ essay writing strategies.

SPANISH

Overall, candidates’ performance this year was consistent with 2015 with some 92 per cent of candidates achieving acceptable Grades I–V, compared with 93 per cent in 2015. This year, 12 per cent of candidates achieved Grade I, a notable decline from 20 per cent in 2015. When compared with 2015, there was a decline in performance on Paper 02, the Structured Paper, and the School-Based Assessment while performance was consistent on Paper 01, the Listening Comprehension. There was an improved performance on Paper 03, the Literary Analysis and Themes.

The performance of candidates on Unit 2 was consistent with 2015 – 95 per cent achieved acceptable grades compared with 92 per cent in 2015. Candidates’ performance at Grade I declined from 19 per cent in 2015 to 12 per cent in 2016. There was a significant decline in performance on Paper 01, the Listening Comprehension, an improved performance on Paper 02, the Reading and Writing Paper, and a slight decline in performance on Paper 03, the Literary Analysis and Themes. The performance on the School-Based Assessment was consistent.

TOURISM

This year, 2016, was the second sitting of the CAPE Tourism examination. In Unit 1, 91 per cent of the candidates achieved acceptable grades, Grades I-V compared with 98 percent in 2015. There was a decline in the performance of candidates on Paper 01, the Multiple-Choice Paper, Paper 02, the Essay Paper, and Paper 032, the Alternative to the School-Based Assessment. However, there was an improved performance on Paper 032, the Alternative to the School-Based Assessment.
A decline in performance was evident on the three modules: Module 1, Concepts and Issues, Module 2, Linkages with Key Sectors and Module 3, Sustainable Tourism.

In Unit 2, the performance of candidates on Unit 2 in 2016 was consistent with that of 2015. Ninety-five per cent of the candidates achieved Grades I-V in 2016 compared with 94 per cent in 2015. There was an improved performance on Paper 01, the Multiple-Choice Paper. However, candidates’ performance declined on Paper 02, the Essay Paper, Paper 031, the School-Based Assessment, and Paper 032, the Alternative to the School-Based Assessment. Performance was consistent across Module 1, Product Development and Module 2, Marketing. However, performance improved on Module 3, Entrepreneurship.