June 2023 BECE Super Mock 2 Examiners’ Report

This post provides insight into the weaknesses and errors of BECE candidates in June 2023. The report covers issues of great concern to GEN Mock organizers. The report compiles observations from our BECE Home Mock candidates, School Registered Candidates, and Candidates who were enrolled by their churches for the second super Mock held in June.

We have advised candidates, churches, parents, and schools who registered their wards for the April and May BECE Mock examinations to have a careful look at our reports for the April and May mocks as they provide detailed information on the challenges of candidates.

June 2023 BECE Super Mock 2 Examiners’ Report

The English Mock Report

Some candidates are still not numbering questions or are numbering them the very wrong way. E.g. Some students number Q1, which is an essay question as Question A… However, A is the name of the section from which the question is picked and not the question number.

This way, the examiner is not able to tell which question the student is answering. Students who repeat this same mistake may end with zero to nothing for such questions.

Students threw marks away by failing to plan their essays. This showed in how their essays. Some candidates who chose question 1 in the essay category had no points to explain. It is important that brainstorming the questions and listing of points to explain precede writing.

Candidates are still struggling with the literature aspect of the English language paper.

Most candidates failed to provide accurate synonyms for underlined words in the passage. In some instances, the words were mere synonyms that could not provide the meaning carried by the word being replaced. Words provided must fit the context in which they are used in the passage, and not necessarily their traditional English language meanings.

Candidates who answered question 2 lacked the needed understanding of how a speech is written.

They wrote their speeches without elaborate titles and did not use the appropriate vocatives and in many instances no vocatives at all.

Candidates also fail to plan their essays hence they end up explaining points wrongly or raise very weak points which they also failed to explain well.

It is sad to note that, some candidates are, at this time, making mistakes because they do not know the features of the various types of essay questions (Formal letters, Informal letters, Narratives, Descriptive Essays)  they will be required to answer. 

The candidate must be able to tell if a question is a letter, and by extension whether it is a letter to the editor, a letter to someone in authority, a friend or an uncle, etc. This will present the candidate with the right way to approach the question. It is rather unfortunate that some students answered the letter to the uncle as though it was an official letter when in actual fact it was a semi-formal letter.

Some candidates write addresses to letters wrongly by not following the rules that go with date writing if they opt for the indented address approach. In the indented address, the date must be in line with the first letter of the first line of the address whiles the remaining address lines slant to the right. In our earlier report for May, we advised that candidates should master one of the two ways of writing Addresses and Dates and stick to it. 

Again, some candidates introduced “Thank you” either as their last paragraph in their informal letters or for reasons best known to them. Some centered it prior to the closing remarks. This should be avoided entirely.

The Integrated Science Mock Report

Examiner’s observations: 1. Candidates did not add the S.I Units

2. Candidates did not write the question numbers
3. Candidates answered questions by starting with ‘It’ and ‘By’
4. Candidates did not give simple and clear explanations of simple terminologies
5. Candidates repeated most of their points
6. Candidates were confused with ‘reflection’ and ‘refraction’
7. Candidates were confused with ‘epigeal’ and ‘hypogeal’
8. Candidates could not give a simple difference between science and technology

 READ: 5 Top Videos For Success Hungry WASSCE and BECE Candidates

Examiner’s recommendations: 1. Candidates should start every sentence with the given terminology of definition rather than using ‘It is’ or ‘By’

2. In listing or giving functions, candidates should begin with the major/strong points rather than the weak points.
3. With the differences, candidates should be more simple and plain
4. Candidates should write question numbers beside and on top of the given answer booklet.
5. Appropriate S.I units should be used

Concluding remarks: Out of 100%, the performance of these candidates will be gauged at 55%. This means candidates are urged and advised to put in more effort to pass the Integrated Science. Candidates should score at least 30 in section A and more than 75

The RME & Social Studies Mock Report

The examiner’s observed these petty errors whiles marking the scripts of candidates.

Examiner’s observations:

1. Candidates did not understand simple terms like ‘Christian Religion”
2. Handwriting was messy
3. Candidates did not leave at least two spaces between their answers
4. Candidates did not provide simple explanations.
5. Candidates did not explain where it was necessary to.

Examiner’s recommendations:

1. Candidates should understand questions before answering
2. Candidates’ answers, in terms of explanation, should be very short and must have the useful information the examiner wants to see and should come with examples attached.
3. Candidates should list their strong points first before their weak points.
4. They should leave at least two spaces in between the answers to each subquestion’s answers.

5. They should understand basic terms like, ‘State’, ‘List’, ‘Highlight’, Define, etc. Candidates are not able to distinguish what to do with these words

We hope that the information provided in this June 2023 BECE Super Mock 2 Examiners’ Report will go a long way to help candidates.