(The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial stance of this publication.) We must first congratulate all candidates who achieved this major milestone in their lives, their 2026 CXC preliminary examination results. For those disappointed with their grades, we hope the grades are an accurate reflection of exam performance and that they receive the empathy and support they need from parents/guardians and teachers. Those who excelled have earned and deserve the commendation they receive. They should not be made to feel they must apologise for their achievements; we should encourage all students to strive for their fullest potential. Most importantly, students should be reminded that while academic results matter, they do not define them. These examinations are just one chapter in their book of life. We also thank the hardworking CXC staff, CARICOM Ministries of Education, schools, teachers, private tutors, students and parents. We are all part of the educational ecosystem that makes these examinations possible. There is much analysis still needed of the preliminary CAPE, CSEC, CVQ, CCSLC and other certification results announced by CXC. We hope education stakeholders and the wider public receive greater regional and national detail, along with comparative data. Based on the preliminary results released, several issues warrant closer examination.

1. Pass Rates: Improvement in Public Reporting Needed The 2026 regional pass rate (Grades 1-3) for CSEC was 72.18 per cent, while CAPE recorded a 93.5 per cent pass rate. However, passing grades at CAPE are classified as Grades 1-5. In reality, many employers and competitive universities do not regard Grades 4 and 5 as strong passes, and often even Grade 3 may not be sufficient. While the 93.5 per cent CAPE pass rate appears impressive, the public would be better informed if CXC also reported the percentage of candidates achieving Grade 1, as well as the percentage achieving Grades 1-3. This would align with international best practice.For example, the UK annually publishes the proportion of students achieving A and A* grades at A Level, along with detailed schoollevel performance data. It is encouraging to see the CSEC Mathematics pass rate improve to 42 per cent, up from 38 per cent in 2025 and 36 per cent in 2024. However, CXC was inconsistent in its reporting. In 2024, it publicly stated how many candidates achieved five CSEC subjects, including Mathematics and English A, a benchmark required for many education and employment opportunities. Less than five per cent of candidates met this standard. That statistic was absent from this year’s release. CARICOM countries should commit to providing this and other comparable national statistics annually. We must guard against presenting results in ways that encourage self-congratulation without providing a complete picture of regional and national academic attainment.

2. Challenges and Areas of Concern CXC’s annual report on exam challenges tends to focus primarily on student misconduct such as absenteeism, cheating, collusion, smartphone misuse and, more recently, the inappropriate use of AI in SBAs. The reported more than 35 000 absences among CSEC and CAPE candidates are concerning and require serious, solutionoriented analysis. How does this compare with previous years? More importantly, what support systems are needed to address the issue? Cheating is unacceptable. However, 128 reported irregularities, even if up from 80 the previous year, represent less than one per cent of candidates. Yet these incidents appear to receive disproportionate attention compared with other systemic issues. Significantly absent from the discussion is acknowledgement of challenges originating within CXC itself that affect reliability, validity and, above all, fairness. Example A: The January 2026 hybrid e-testing examinations for English A and Mathematics generated complaints from students and parents about delays, connectivity problems, device availability and access to paper backups. CXC subsequently described the January examination cycle as a success, reporting that more than 10 000 candidates across 17 Caribbean states completed the first examination session administered entirely through electronic and hybrid assessments. However, the complaints raised by students and parents should also form part of any assessment of that transition. Concerns have also been raised over the years about examination administration, grading transparency and the reuse of multiple-choice questions. Indeed, following the 2020 grading controversy, CXC’s Independent Review Team recommended replenishing and expanding examination item banks on a scheduled basis to avoid overuse and mitigate security breaches involving Paper 1. CXC subsequently outlined measures intended to address that recommendation. These concerns have been raised repeatedly over many years. Continued transparency about how such issues are being addressed is therefore important to maintaining confidence in the examination system. If we cannot consistently get the basics of examination administration right, we should be cautious about introducing additional layers of complexity into an already under-resourced system. The significant gender disparity – females account for 62 per cent and 59 per cent of CAPE and CSEC candidates respectively – is worrisome, supporting the concern that ourboys are in crisis. However, Dr Manning’s assessment that “men are born leaders, and we have to … help them to stay in that place” appears antiquated.