Untitled - Umalusi

marking was good. The marking guideline as agreed upon at the
The following was observed:
central memorandum discussion was adhered to. Although there were some
inconsistencies in mark allocation, these could be ascribed to errors made by
markers and moderators. The variation in mark allocation was small and
made no significant differences. Many of these errors were also picked up
during the internal moderation process. Many of the inconsistencies also
occurred at the beginning of the marking session. This points to the
importance of standardisation before marking commences.
• question 2.2, the grey shading in the graph and key did not print
clearly in some question papers in all provinces
• question 5.1.5, the mark allocation was changed from 4 to 2.
• question 5.1.7, the mark allocation was changed from 2 to 4.
• In KwaZulu-Natal, the layout of the paper was changed. As a result
part of question 3.1 appeared at the foot of page 12 and was
repeated at the beginning of page 13, with a new number. This
With the exception of question 5 in Accounting HG, there were no
altered the numbering of subsequent questions.
changes to the memorandum during the marking process. All assessment
bodies were notified of these additions.
These observations necessitated the following changes:
There was a remarkable consistency in the marks allocated. However
there was some inconsistency in the allocation of marks to the extended
piece of writing in English Paper 3 in KwaZulu-Natal. There was a
• All candidates were given full marks (3) for question 2.2.4.
• The mark allocation for questions 5.1.5 and 5.1.7 were adjusted so
that no candidate was disadvantaged.
tendency towards bunching of marks, with markers not recognizing
exceptionally good pieces of writing and overrating mediocre attempts.
In Physical Science Paper 1 and 2, there were changes made to the
original memo and these were accepted. It was, however, noted that the
For Biology P1 HG, it was observed that the final examination question
paper did not quite represent the final version of the moderated paper.
chief examiners and internal moderators had not received ample time to
hold pre-discussion sessions and also to mark a sample of scripts, as the
64