[ad_1]
- It has been alleged that the Maths Paper 2 and Physics Paper 2 matric exams were leaked.
- Now AfriForum and others are taking Umalusi and the education department to court to avoid a rewrite.
- Umalusi, however, says the leak was widespread and requires a rewrite.
The decision to have Matric students rewrite the Math 2 and Physical Science 2 exams was not made rationally and was the result of “intimidation” tactics from quality insurer Umalusi, who “speculated” using a preliminary report on the leaks.
This was the crux of arguments presented at the Gauteng High Court in Pretoria on Thursday in a request by several students, the South African Union of Democratic Teachers (Sadtu) and AfriForum for the decision to rewrite the exams to be overturned.
Last week, Basic Education Minister Angie Motshekga announced that the Maths Paper 2 and Physics Paper 2 exams would be rewritten after the articles were leaked.
READ | A Lower Tuition Pass Rate Won’t Be A Train Hit, Says Motshekga At The Beginning Of Tuition Exams
Lawyer Quintus Pelser SC, representing AfriForum, argued that Umalusi effectively forced the department and the minister to make the decision to rewrite the exams when he announced that he would not recognize the results of the two leaked subjects.
Pelser said Umalusi had made a decision on December 1 with nothing more at his disposal than a preliminary report, which was compiled after six days of investigation. He further told the court that the preliminary report, released on November 30, did not determine the full scope of the leak.
‘Almost impossible’
The report allegedly stated that it would be nearly impossible to determine the full extent of the leak. Instead, the preliminary report found that around 200 enrollment students, 195 of whom were part of a high-performing WhatsApp group, had access to Maths Paper 2.
They were the best mathematics students in all of South Africa, who were being instructed by Stellenbosch University. Pelser said the scope of the leaks was prejudged by Umalusi, with the investigation at a stage where it could not be proven whether the leaks were widespread or not. “They are the bully who walks around telling the parties what to do,” Pelser said.
READ | Registrants Talk About Rewriting: ‘It’s Unfair’
AfriForum further argued that no other possible remedies were considered, such as the qualification of the investigation, the statistical analysis of the examinations or the mandate of a private IT forensic investigation to follow the trail of the leaks to establish spread. Pelser also noted that students could easily persuade a court that they were harmed by an administrative action, and that students who could prove their innocence should be able to do so and correct their exams.
Arguments
Advocate Thys Strydom SC, for several Ermelo students, had similar arguments about Umalusi, but went further and questioned who had made the decision to rewrite the exams.
Judge Norman Davis also sought an answer to this because the Department of Basic Education held that the CEO made the decision, but this was not contained in his documents.
Strydom said the minister and department had not weighed Umalusi’s position in the face of the students’ circumstances and instead submitted to the will of the quality insurer. He said that thousands of students cannot be demanded a ransom for what Umalusi dictates, using a preliminary report that has its own limitations.
These limitations included the time allowed for the investigation, with the concession that it was impossible to collect all the data, given the time frame, or the fact that analyzing the leak data was a complex exercise, making it impossible to identify with how many students had access to the exams.
Strydom argued that any claim that the leaks were widespread could only be speculative, as the data did not support such an opinion. If the decision to rewrite had been made after the papers were marked and analyzed, then the situation would have been different, Strydom told the court.
He then referred to the psychological impact on students and said that this could not be exaggerated or overlooked, especially given the pandemic and the effect that the confinement had on them and their ability to go to school.
There was also the problem of students who had already turned in their school textbooks and destroyed their notes, which is common practice as soon as the matrices have finished a subject.
Minister and department
Advocate Chris Erasmus, from Motshekga and the department, explained that the leak was not localized and was identified as having spread across the provinces. Erasmus said that because the leaks were spread using social media platforms, such as WhatsApp and Facebook, the leak would be massive.
“WhatsApp is a monster, you don’t know how far it goes,” argued Erasmus. He told the court that the investigation could take months to complete before it could be determined how far the leak of the documents had extended.
Waiting for the outcome of the research would have had a devastating effect on the students, who needed to have its results to move on with their lives and apply for higher education, Erasmus said.
If Umalusi did not certify the results, it would also mean losing the academic year, he added.
Rational
Attorney Dennis Fine SC, of Umalusi, however, maintained that the decision was rational and based on the extent of the leak, even though it was compiled in a preliminary report. Fine said the leaks went “viral.”
He said the decision to rewrite was reasonable because the consequences would be much more dire if the papers were marked now and, sometime in 2021, it was determined that the papers should be rewritten due to the leak.
Umalusi argued that this would harm parent companies, who were seeking to study more and enter the labor market, and would also mean that the credibility of the results would be questioned.
When making the decision by means of a preliminary report, it was argued that any other arrangement would have caused significant delays in the process, causing the same type of damage to the students.
It was argued that both articles were hopelessly compromised and that the decision to have the students rewrite was rationally connected. The ruling is expected to be handed down on Friday afternoon.
