WAEC’s 2026 plan: A recipe for disaster?

BY OLANREWAJU AKINOLA

The Federal Ministry of Education’s recent announcement of a revised national curriculum and the plan of the West African Examinations Council (WAEC) to examine it from the 2026 WASSCE has sparked widespread concerns among students, parents, and educators. The present SS 3 students who will take WAEC’s exam in the next six months will be disadvantaged as they have not been taught the subjects they are being compelled to take. Any external examination like WASSCE and BECE on the basis of the new curriculum should start in 2028 when the present SS 1 and JS 1 students would be in in SS 3 and JS 3 respectively since the new curriculum ought to have started with them.

The changes to the curriculum include the introduction of new subjects such as Citizenship and Heritage Studies and Digital Technologies, as well as the streamlining of over 30 trade subjects to six practical areas. While the intention behind these changes may be applaudable, WAEC’s plan to examine it from 2026 is ill-thought-out, unfair, unjust, and should be jettisoned. A major concern is that the present SS 3 students who did not study Digital Technologies in SS 1 and SS 2 will be examined on it in 2026. Also, students who have been offering Tourism, Storekeeping and other previous trade subjects since SS 1 are now being forced to switch to one of the new six trade subjects. Moreover, students who have been offering certain subjects since SS 1 are now being told they can no longer take them in WASSCE. For example, science students cannot take Economics, while business students who have been offering Government since SS 1 are being forced to take Marketing instead, even though they were never taught it. In any case, where will schools get continuous assessment marks from SS 1 to SS 3 for the new subjects which they are expected to upload on the WAEC exam portal?

Furthermore, WAEC and Federal Ministry of Education should reconsider making CBT compulsory for WASSCE from 2026, given the lack of infrastructure, accessibility and logistics to support it. Students will be required to travel to CBT centre multiple times, which may be located far from their homes, to take their exams, including practicals. The implications of these changes are far-reaching, particularly for students in rural areas who may not have easy access to CBT Centres or reliable internet connection. Unlike JAMB, WAEC’s exams are not just objective or a one-time 2-hour test, making it to be more challenging.

The best approach is for the government to first set a timeframe to equip schools with necessary facilities to enable CBT exams to be conducted within school premises, rather than shifting the burden to private entities and parents. This would eliminate the need for students to travel multiple times to CBT centre, ease financial burdens on the parents and reduce logistical challenges.

In conclusion, the implementation of the new curriculum and WAEC’s plan to examine it from 2026 is a recipe for disaster. It is imperative that authorities reconsider their plans and prioritise the interests of students. Deferring the examination on the basis of the new curriculum to 2028 is a more sensible approach, allowing students to be adequately prepared and avoiding unnecessary disadvantage. Also, the decision to make CBT compulsory for WASSCE from 2026 should be revisited, considering the significant challenges it poses. The more practical approach is for the government to equip schools with necessary facilities to conduct CBT exams on-site. This will make the students to focus on their exams without undue stress and financial burden. The future of our children is at stake, and we must ensure they are not shortchanged.

Akinola, a concerned parent writes from Lagos.