SYNOPSES FOR CAPE – 2018

ACCOUNTING

In Unit 1, 83 per cent of the candidates achieved acceptable Grades, I-V, in 2018 compared with 85 per cent in 2017. There was a marginal improved performance on Module 1, Accounting Theory, Recording and Control Systems, and a decline on Module 2, Preparation of Financial Statements, while the performance on Module 3, Financial Reporting and Interpretation, remained consistent with that of 2017.

In Unit 2, 82 per cent of the candidates achieved acceptable Grades, I-V, in 2018 compared with 84 per cent in 2017.  Performance at Grades I-V declined on Module 3, Planning and Decision Making, in 2018 compared with 2017, while there was an improved performance on both Modules 1 and 2, Costing Principles and Costing Systems, respectively.

AGRICULTURAL SCIENCE

In Unit 1, there was an improved performance in 2018 compared with 2017. Approximately 89 per cent of the candidates achieved acceptable Grades, I–V, compared with 86 per cent in 2017. Candidates’ performance on Paper 01, the Multiple Choice Paper, and Paper 02, the Structured Paper improved over 2017. However, there was a decline in performance across all Modules. Candidates performed best on Module 3, Postharvest Technology and Innovation, while Module 2, Horticulture and Management, was the most challenging.

In Unit 2, there was a decline in candidates’ performance in 2018. Approximately 87 per cent of the candidates achieved acceptable Grades, I–V, compared with 97 per cent in 2017. There was an improved performance on Paper 01, the Multiple Choice Paper, compared with 2017. However, there was a decline in performance on Module 2, Animal Production and Management, and on Module 3, Livestock Production and Innovation. Candidates performed best on Module 1, Agriculture and the Environment.

ANIMATION AND GAME DESIGN

This is the second sitting of this examination.

Eighty-three candidates wrote the Unit 1 examination. Ninety-one per cent of the candidates achieved acceptable Grades, I-V, compared with 91 per cent in 2017.  Candidates performed best on Module 1, Understanding Animation and Game Design, while Module 2, Drawing and Layout, proved the most challenging.

Fifty-two candidates wrote the Unit 2 examination. Ninety-eight percent of the candidates achieved Grades I-V. Candidates performed best on Module 2, Game Design and Development, while Module 3, Animation for Games, proved the most challenging.

The performance of candidates in the School Based Assessment component was satisfactory and some of the projects submitted in both Units were very creative.

APPLIED MATHEMATICS

In Unit 1, the percentage of candidates achieving acceptable Grades, I-V, was 92 per cent compared with 98 per cent in 2017. There was a decline in performance on Paper 02, the Structured Paper. There was also a decline in candidates’ performance across all Modules this year compared with 2017. However, candidates performed best on Module 1, Collecting and Describing Data.

In Unit 2 the percentage of candidates achieving acceptable Grades, I-V, was 92 per cent compared with 87 per cent in 2017. There was a decline in candidates’ performance on Paper 02 in 2018. However, candidates’ performance across all Modules improved this year compared with 2017. Candidates performed best on Module 1, Discrete Mathematics.

ART AND DESIGN

In Unit 1, the percentage of candidates earning acceptable Grades, I-V, was 97 per cent compared with 99 per cent in 2017. This was the second year that Paper 01 was administered as a Multiple Choice Paper. There was an improved performance on Paper 01 compared with 2017. Candidates performed best on Module 2, 2D Art and Design, and Module 3, 3D Art and Design. There was an improvement in candidates’ performance on Module 1, Cultural Studies, in 2018.

In Unit 2, candidates’ performance in 2018 was consistent with 2017. Approximately 100 per cent of candidates achieved acceptable Grades, I-V, in 2018 and 2017. This was the first year that Paper 01 was administered using the Multiple Choice format. Candidates’ performance on Module 2, Applied Arts, and Module 3, Creative Projects, was consistent compared with 2017. However, there was a decline in candidates’ performance on Module 1, Design.

BIOLOGY

In Unit 1, there was a decline in the number of candidates achieving acceptable Grades, I-V. This year the percentage of candidates achieving acceptable Grades, I-V, was 89 per cent compared with 92 percent in 2017. Candidates performed best on Module 2, Genetics, Variation and Natural Selection.

In Unit 2, this year’s performance was consistent with the performance in 2017. The percentage of candidates achieving acceptable Grades, I-V, was 95 per cent in 2017 and 2018.  However, there was a decline in candidates’ performance on Module 2, Biosystems Maintenance, and Module 3, Applications of Biology.

BUILDING AND MECHANICAL ENGINEERING DRAWING

Option A
In Unit 1, 91 per cent of the candidates achieved acceptable Grades, I—V. In Unit 2, 95 per cent of candidates achieved acceptable grades.

There was reasonable performance on Unit 1, Paper 01, with 95 per cent of candidates achieving acceptable grades. Similarly, in Unit 2, Paper 01, 99 per cent of candidates achieved Grades I–V. However, there was a decline in performance on Unit 1, Paper 02 compared with 2017, with 26 per cent of the candidates achieving acceptable grades. 

On Unit 2, 57 per cent of candidates achieved acceptable grades.  Performance on Paper 03 was similar across the two Units, with 94 per cent of candidates achieving acceptable grades in Unit 1 and 98 per cent in Unit 2.

Option B
In Unit 1, 87 per cent of candidates achieved acceptable Grades, I–V. In Unit 2, 92 per cent of candidates achieved acceptable grades. Only two candidates achieved Grade I in Unit 1 of this option and no candidate achieved Grade I in Unit 2.

There was good performance on Paper 01, with 97 per cent of candidates achieving Grades I–V on both Units.  Performance on Paper 02 for both Units was unsatisfactory, with 12 per cent and less than one per cent of candidates achieving acceptable grades, respectively, in Units 1 and 2. Performance on Paper 03 was comparable across the two Units, with 94 per cent of candidates achieving Grades I–V in Unit 1 and 97 per cent in Unit 2. 

CARIBBEAN STUDIES

Overall, the performance in 2018 was consistent with 2017 as 97 per cent of candidates achieved Grades I–V.  However, the performance across modules differed. There was an increase in the percentage of candidates achieving Grades A–C on Module 3, Researching Issues in the Caribbean, from 74 in 2017 per cent to 81 in 2018. On Module 2, Issues in Caribbean Development, there was a decline with 45 per cent of candidates achieving Profile Grades down from 76 per cent in 2017. On Module 1, Caribbean Society and Culture, the performance remained consistent as 60 per cent of candidates achieved acceptable grades in both years.

CHEMISTRY

In Unit 1, 92 per cent of the candidates achieved acceptable Grades, I–V, compared with 89 per cent in 2017. Generally, there was an improved performance on all Modules for Unit 1.

In Unit 2, 94 per cent of the candidates achieved acceptable Grades, I-V, in 2018 compared with 96 per cent in 2017. There was a decline in the candidates’ performance compared with 2017 on Modules 1, 2 and 3. This decline was more pronounced on Modules 2 and 3. There was improvement of the candidates’ performance in the Paper 032.

COMMUNICATION STUDIES

Overall, the performance on the 2018 examination was consistent with 2017 as 98 per cent of the candidates achieved Grades I-V in each year. However, the performance on the modules varied.  While there was an increase in the percentage of candidates achieving Grades A–C on Module 1, Gathering and Processing Information, there was a decrease on Modules 2 and 3, Language and Community and Speaking and Writing, respectively. The percentage of candidates achieving Grades A–C on Module 1 increased from 53 to 62 per cent while that on Module 2 declined from 71 to 46 per cent and that on Module 3 from 83 to 63 per cent.

COMPUTER SCIENCE

Overall, the performance of candidates on Unit 1 improved compared with 2017 with 93 per cent of the candidates achieving Grades I-V, compared with 90 per cent in 2017.  The performance improved on Modules 1 and 3 but there was a slight decline on Module 2.

Performance on Paper 01, Paper 02 and Paper 03 also improved compared with 2017.

The performance of candidates overall on Unit 2 improved marginally compared with 2017, with 94  per cent of the candidates achieving Grades I-V in 2018, compared with 92 per cent in 2017.   There was a decline in performance on Module 1 but an improved performance on Module 2 and Module 3.

DIGITAL MEDIA

In Unit 1, 99 per cent of candidates achieved Grades I–V in both 2017 and 2018.  Candidates performed best on Module 1, Understanding Digital Media, while Module 2, Digital Media Ecosystem, proved the most challenging.

In Unit 2, 99 per cent of the candidates achieved Grades I–V compared with 98 per cent in 2017.  Candidates performed best on Module 2, Web and Digital Publishing, while Module 3, Web and Digital Publishing, proved the most challenging.

It was notable that many students were innovative and used brainstorming and other project management techniques to carefully select the project to execute in their School-Based Assessment.

ECONOMICS

There was an improvement in the performance of candidates on Unit 1 in 2018.  Eighty-three per cent of the candidates achieved acceptable Grades, I-V, in 2018 compared with 75 per cent in 2017. There was an improvement in the performance on Paper 01, the Multiple-Choice Paper, Paper 02, the Essay Paper and Paper 031, the School-Based Assessment. There was a decline in the performance and Paper 032, the Alternative to the School-Based Assessment. There were improvements in the performance on the three modules: Module 1, Methodology: Demand and Supply, Module 2, Market Structure, Market Failure and Intervention, and Module 3, Distribution Theory.

In Unit 2, 86 per cent of the candidates achieved acceptable Grades, I-V, compared with 92 per cent in 2017.  The performance on Paper 01, the Multiple-Choice Paper, and Paper 031, the School-Based Assessment, was consistent with that of 2017. However, there was a decline in the performance on Paper 02, the Essay Paper.  There was an improvement in the performance on Paper 032, the Alternative to the School-Based Assessment. There was an improvement in the performance on Module 1, Models of Macro Economy. However, there was a decline in the performance on Module 2, Macroeconomic Problems and Policies, and Module 3, Growth, Sustainable Development ad Global Relations.

ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONIC ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY

In Unit 1, 84 per cent of the candidates achieved acceptable Grades, I–V, compared with 90 per cent in 2017. However, performance on Paper 02, the Structured Paper, was weak.

Option A
In Unit 2, only eight candidates wrote the examination, of which seven achieved acceptable grades. In 2017, 90 per cent of the candidates who wrote the examination achieved acceptable grades.

Option B
In Unit 2, 97 per cent of the candidates who wrote the examination in 2018 achieved acceptable grades. This is consistent with performance in 2017 in which 97 per cent of the candidates also achieved acceptable grades.

ENTREPRENEURSHIP

In 2018, the performance of candidates in Unit 1 was consistent with 2017 with 98 per cent of candidates achieving acceptable grades in both years. Performance improved on Module 2, The Entrepreneurial Process, while it was consistent on Module 1, The Entrepreneurial Mindset, and Module 3, Creativity and Innovation.

In Unit 2, there was also consistent performance with 98 per cent of the candidates achieving the acceptable Grades, I-V.  Performance improved on Module 3, Managing and Growing the Venture, and remained consistent on Modules 1 and 2, Essentials of Business Ownership and New Venture Planning and Creation, respectively.

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE

In Unit 1, 96 per cent of candidates achieved acceptable Grades, I–V, in 2018 compared with 95 per cent in 2017. Candidates’ performance on all three modules was consistent.

In Unit 2, 98 per cent of the candidates achieved acceptable Grades, I–V, compared with 97 per cent in 2017. Candidates performed best on Module 1, Agriculture and the Environment, followed by Module 2, Energy and the Environment and Module 3, Pollution and the Environment

The overall quality of the School-Based Assessment continues to show improvement. 

FINANCIAL SERVICES STUDIES

Sixty-three candidates wrote the Financial Services Studies, Unit 1 examination this year, compared with eighty-two in 2017. Fifty-three per cent of these candidates achieved the acceptable Grades, I-V, compared with 62 per cent in 2017. Candidate performance on all the papers, Paper 01, the Multiple Choice Paper, Paper 02, the Essay Paper and Paper 03, the School-Based Assessment was consistent with 2017. While there was an improved performance on Module 3, Governance, Regulations and Ethics, there was a corresponding decline on Module 2, Portfolio Management and Investment.   

Twenty-four candidates wrote the first examination of the CAPE Financial Services Studies, Unit 2 in 2018. Of these, 50 per cent achieved Grades I–V. No candidate achieved a Grade I or a Grade II. Candidates performed best on Paper 031, the School-Based Assessment. With respect to module performance, the best performance was recorded on Module 2, Compliance, Legislation and Statutes, followed by Module 1, Offshore Financial Services Environment, then Module 3, Financial Reporting.

It is believed that a general lack of solid knowledge of the objectives tested and availability of resources may have continued to affect candidate performance. To this end, it is proffered that teachers form online professional groups and explore the content and vast information relating to the subject on the Internet.

FOOD AND NUTRITION

In Unit 1, the overall performance in 2018 was very good.  Ninety-seven per cent of the candidates achieved Grades I–V in 2018 compared with 95 per cent in. Candidates performed best on Module 2, Food Selection and Planning.

In Unit 2, overall performance in 2017 was also very good. Ninety-eight per cent of the candidates achieved Grades I–V compared with 98 per cent in 2017. Candidates performed best on Module 3, Food Preparation, Service and Management. 

Candidates continue to perform satisfactorily on all aspects of the School-Based Assessment.

FRENCH

In 2018, there was a slight improvement in performance in Unit 1 compared with 2017, with 99 per cent and 97 per cent of candidates achieving Grades I–V, respectively.  In 2018, performance on Module 1 improved slightly; however there was a decline in the performance on Modules 2 and 3.  The performance of the candidates on Paper 01 in 2018 was consistent with 2017 with an improved performance on Paper 02.  The performance on the School-Based Assessment, Paper 04, was consistent with 2017.

In Unit 2, there was an improvement in the overall performance of the candidates in 2018. The percentage of candidates achieving Grades I–V improved from 98 per cent in 2017 to 100 per cent in 2018. There was an improvement in the performance of the candidates on Paper 01 and Paper 02 when compared to 2017. The performance on Paper 03 and Paper 04 was consistent the performances in 2017.

GEOGRAPHY

In Unit 1, the percentage of candidates achieving Grades I–V was 99 per cent in 2018, as in 2017.  The candidates’ performance on Paper 01 was consistent with that of the previous years There was marginal improvement in Papers 031 and 032. However, there was a decline in the overall performance in Paper 02.

For Unit 2, the percentage of candidates achieving Grades I–V decreased compared with the previous year, with 91 per cent in 2018 and 98 percent in 2017.  Performance on Paper 01 and Paper 031 was consistent to that of 2017. There was moderate improvement in Paper 02 over the previous year.

GREEN ENGINEERING

UNIT 1
Fifty candidates wrote the Green Engineering Unit 1 examination this year. Approximately 95 per cent of these candidates obtained the acceptable grades, I-V, as against 98 per cent in 2017. Candidate performance on Paper 01 – Multiple Choice and Paper 02 – Essay, showed marked improvement when compared with 2017, while there was a sharp decline in performance on Paper 03 – The School-Based Assessment.  Performance on all three modules, Module 1– Concepts and Issues, Module 2 – Theoretical Framework of Green Engineering and Module 3 – Green Engineering in Practice, showed marked improvement when compared with 2017. 

UNIT 2
Thirty-six candidates wrote the first examination of the Green Engineering Unit 2 in 2018. Of these candidates, approximately ninety-four per cent of them achieved Grades I–V. Candidates performed best on Paper 031 (the School-Based Assessment), followed by Paper 01 (Multiple Choice) then Paper 02 (Essay). Candidate performance on all modules was satisfactory with the best performance being recorded in Module 1 – Utilisation of Sustainable Materials and Energy, followed by Module 2 – Sustainable Designs then Module 3 – Green Engineering Solutions.

HISTORY

In 2018, there was an improved performance of the candidates taking the 2018 Unit 1 examination. The percentage of candidates achieving Grades I–V in 2018 was 91 per cent compared with 79 percent in 2017.   The performance on Module 1 remains consistent with that of 2017, however performance on Modules 2 and 3 improved.

There was a slight decline in the performance of the candidates on Paper 01, the Multiple Choice Paper.  However there was an improved performance on Paper 02, the Essay Paper and Paper 031, the School-Based Assessment compared with 2017.

In Unit 2, the performance in 2018 remained consistent with that of 2017. The percentage of candidates achieving Grades I–V in 2018 and 2017 was 88 per cent.  However, there was a decline in performance across all Modules in 2018 when compared to 2017.

There was a decline in performance of the candidates on Paper 01, the Multiple Choice Paper.  However, there was an increase on the Paper 02, the Essay Paper and Paper 032, the Alternative to the SBA. Paper 031, the School-Based Assessment, showed an increase in performance when compared with 2017.

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

In 2018, of the candidates who wrote the Unit 1 examination, 97 per cent achieved acceptable Grades, I-V, compared to 94 per cent earned in 2017. Performance on Paper 01 and Paper 03 declined while there was an improvement in the performance in Paper 02, compared with 2017.

Ninety-eight percent of the candidates who wrote the Unit 2 examination in 2018 achieved acceptable Grades, I-V, which was consistent with 2017.  Performance on Paper 02 and Paper 03 improved while there was a decline in the performance on Paper 01, compared with 2017.  Candidates’ performance improved on Module 1 and Module 3 but declined on Module 2, compared with 2017.

INTEGRATED MATHEMATICS

This is the third year of examinations of the new syllabus. Seventy-five per cent of the candidates achieved Grades I-V, compared with 68 per cent in 2017.  Candidates’ performance in 2018 significantly improved across Paper 01 and Paper 031 but declined across Paper 020, compared with 2017. Candidates’ performance in 2018 improved on all Modules compared with 2017.

LAW

Overall, there was an improved performance on Unit 1 as the percentage of candidates who achieved Grades I–V increased from 90 per cent in 2017 to 92 per cent in 2018.

The increase in performance was evident on both Modules 2 and 3, Principles of Public Law and Criminal Law, respectively. Fifty-five per cent of candidates achieved Grades A–C on Module 2 compared with 45 percent in 2017 and 75 per cent on Module 3,  from 66 per cent in 2017. The performance on Module 1, Caribbean Legal Systems, was consistent with 2017 with 79 per cent of candidates achieving acceptable module grades.

In Unit 2, there was a decline in performance in 2018 when compared with 2017 as 87 per cent of candidates achieved Grades I–V compared with 95 per cent in 2017. The decline in performance was evident on all three modules. Eighty-one per cent of candidates achieved Grades A–C on Module I, Law of Tort, a decrease from 85 per cent in 2017; on Module 2, Law of Contract, 39 per cent from 77 per cent and for Module 3, Real Property 60 per cent down from 73 percent.

LITERATURES IN ENGLISH

In Unit 1, candidates’ performance at the acceptable Grades, I–V, increased by a 3 per cent in 2018 compared with 2017. In 2018, 98 per cent of the candidates achieved Grades I–V, compared with 95 per cent in 2017.  

Performance on Module 1, Drama, declined by 3 per at Grades A–C.  In 2018, 94 per cent of the candidates achieved Grades A–C compared with 97 per cent in 2017. However, performance on Module 2, Poetry, and Module 3, Prose Fiction, improved. 

Candidates’ performance in Unit 2 improved by 6 per cent at the acceptable grades.  In 2018, 97 per cent of the candidates achieved Grades I–V, compared with 91 per cent in 2017.  Performance on Module 1, Drama, was consistent with 2017. In both 2017 and 2018, 95 per cent of the candidates achieved Grades A–E. However, performance on Module 2, Poetry and Module 3, Prose Fiction both showed an improved performance.

LOGISTICS AND SUPPLY CHAIN OPERATIONS

This was the third examination of the Logistics and Supply Chain Operations syllabus. 

In Unit 1, there was an improvement in the overall performance of candidates compared with 2017. Eighty-nine per cent of candidates achieved acceptable Grades, I-V, compared with 76 per cent in 2017. An improvement in performance was noted on Module 3, Customer Service in Shipping and Port Operations, while there was a decline in performance on Module 1, Logistics and its Role in the Economy. Candidate performance on Module 2, Supply Chain and the Global Economy, was fairly consistent with that of 2017.

In Unit 2, there was a marked improvement in the overall performance of candidates with approximately 74 per cent achieving acceptable Grades, I-V, compared with 46 per cent in 2017. An improvement in performance was noted on Module 2, Port Operations and Module 3, Logistics Transforming Economies. Candidate performance on Module 1, Commercial Shipping was consistent with that of 2017.

MANAGEMENT OF BUSINESS

For Unit 1, the percentage of candidates achieving Grades I-V declined over the previous year: 97 per cent in 2017 compared with 95 per cent in 2018. There was a decline in performance on Papers 01 and 02 compared with the previous year. However, there was some improvement in the quality of Paper 031, the School-Based Assessment, as well as the Paper 032, the Alternative to the School-Based Assessment.

In Unit 2, the overall performance of candidates achieving Grades I-V also declined. This decline was evident on all written papers.  However, there was an improved performance on the Paper 031, the School-Based Assessment.

PERFORMING ARTS

There was a marginal increase in the performance of candidates on Unit 1, Business for the Creative Arts. Nintey-seven per cent of the candidates achieved acceptable grades in 2018 compared with 95 per cent in 2017. The performance on all three modules: Module 1, Business Feasibility, Module 2, Business Development and Planning and Module 3, Project Planning for the Arts was commendable. Candidates’ performance in all three modules reflected an increase over that of 2017. 

Similar to 2017, the candidate entry was small for all four options of Unit 2.

Option A — Cinematic Arts
One candidate registered for this Option. This candidate achieved a Grade III.  

Option B — Dance
Seventeen candidates registered for the Dance examination and sixteen wrote the examination. Two candidates achieved Grade I; 2 achieved Grade II; 5 achieved Grade III and 7, Grade IV.  It was noted that the performance on each of the modules: Module 1, History and the Dancing Body, Module 2, Technique and Performance Skills, and Module 3, Choreography and Performance was good.

Option C — Drama
Fifty-seven candidates registered for the examination and forty-five wrote the examination.  All of the candidates achieved acceptable grades.   Eight candidates achieved Grade I; 14, Grade II; 12, Grade III; 8, Grade IV, and 3, Grade V. The performance of candidates on each of the modules: Module 1, Caribbean Theatre and the World, Module 2, Forming the Performer, and Module 3, The Art of Performance was good.

Option D — Music
Twelve candidates registered for the Music examination and 11 wrote the examination.  These candidates achieved grades ranging from Grade I to IV. Two candidates achieved Grade I, 7, Grade II; 1, Grade III and 1, Grade IV. The quality of work on the written examination showed some improvement compared with 2017.

Similar to Unit 1, performance in all three Modules, improved. Unlike Unit 1, however, most improvement was noted on Module 3, Prose Fiction. Performance on Module 1, Drama, increased from 43 per cent at Grades A–C in 2017 to 58 per cent in 2018. Approximately 59 per cent of the candidates achieved Grades A–C in 2018 in Module 2, Poetry, compared with 44 per cent in 2017, while in Module 3, Prose Fiction, 66 per cent of the candidates achieved Grades A–C in 2018 compared with 41 per cent in 2017.

PHYSICAL EDUCATION AND SPORT

In Unit 1, overall performance in 2018 was consistent with 2017 with 99 per cent of candidates achieving acceptable Grades, I–V in both years.  Candidates performed better on Module 2, Sociological Aspects of Sport, than on Module 1, Functional Anatomy and Training Theory, and Module 3, Sport Psychology.

In Unit 2, overall performance in 2018 was similar to that of 2017 with 99 per cent of candidates achieving acceptable Grades, I-V.  Candidates performed better on Module 2, Sport Management followed by Module 3, Technology and Innovation and Module 1, Biomechanics.

PHYSICS

In Unit 1, this year, there was an improvement in the overall performance of candidates compared with 2017. Ninety-six per cent of candidates achieved acceptable Grades, I–V, compared with 94 per cent in 2017. Candidate performance improved on Module 1, Mechanics, and Module 2, Oscillations and Waves.  However, there was a slight decline in performance on Module 3, Thermal and Mechanical Properties of Matter.

In Unit 2, this year, there was also an improvement in the overall performance of candidates compared with 2017. Ninety-seven per cent of candidates achieved acceptable grades, Grades I–V, compared with 95 per cent in 2017. Candidate performance improved on Module 2, A.C. Theory and Electronics and Module 3, Atomic and Nuclear Physics and declined on Module 1, Electricity and Magnetism.

PURE MATHEMATICS

In 2018, 75 per cent of the candidates achieved acceptable Grades, I-V, in Unit 1, compared with 69 per cent in 2017.  In Unit 2, 85 per cent of the candidates achieved acceptable grades compared with 86 per cent in 2017. 

In both Units, the performance across Modules was consistent with 2017.  However, while there was a moderate improvement in performance on the Paper 01, the Multiple Choice, there was a decline in performance on the Paper 02, the Extended Response.

SOCIOLOGY

In Unit 1, candidates’ performance in 2018 has shown a marked improvement compared with the previous year. Ninety-five per cent of the candidates achieved Grades I–V compared with 90 per cent in 2017. While performance on Paper 01, the Multiple Choice Paper, remained consistent with 2017, there was an improved performance on Paper 02, the Essay Paper, Paper 031, the School-Based Assessment, and Paper 032, the Alternative to the School-Based Assessment. Performance on Module 1, Sociological Concepts, Perspectives and Methods and Module 2, Social Institutions: Family, Religion, Education, showed an improvement while performance on Module 3, Social Stratification, remained consistent with 2017.

In Unit 2, candidates’ performance declined compared with 2017.  Ninety-six per cent of the candidates who wrote this examination achieved Grades I–V, compared with 98 per cent in 2017. However, an improvement in candidate performance was seen on Paper 02, the Essay, Paper 031, the School-Based Assessment and Paper 032, the Alternative to the School-Based Assessment. There was an improved performance on all modules, Module 1, Population and Development, Module 2, Crime and Deviance, and Module 3, Caribbean Social Issues: Poverty, Health and Environment, compared with 2017.

SPANISH

In Unit 1, there was an improved overall performance compared with 2017. The percentage of candidates achieving Grades I–V in 2018 was 99 per cent compared with 95 per cent in 2017.  Performance on Module 1 remained consistent with that of 2017.  However, there was an improved performance on Module 2 and a decline on Module 3.  While there was an improved performance on Paper 01, the Multiple Choice Paper, and Paper 02, there was a decline in performance of Paper 03, the School-Based Assessment.

The percentage of candidates achieving Grades I – V in 2018 was 99 per cent compared with 87 per cent in 2017.  There was an improved performance on all three Modules in 2018 compared with 2017 as well as an improved performance on Paper 01, the Multiple Choice Paper, and Paper 03, the Literary Analysis and Themes.  However, there was a decline on the Paper 02. Paper 03/1, the School Based Assessment was consistent with 2017.

TOURISM

In Unit 1, 95 per cent of the candidates achieved acceptable Grades, I-V, in both 2018 and 2017. There was an improvement in the performance of candidates on all components of the examination: Paper 01, the Multiple-Choice Paper, Paper 02, the Essay Paper, and Paper 032, the Alternative to the School-Based Assessment. There was also an improvement in the performance on the three module: Module 1, Concepts and Issues, Module 2, Linkages with Key Sectors and Module 3, Sustainable Tourism.

In Unit 2, ninety-nine per cent of the candidates achieved acceptable Grades, I-V, compared with 87 per cent in 2017.  There was a decline in the performance on Paper 01, the Multiple-Choice Paper. However, there were improvements on Paper 02, the Essay Paper, Paper 031, the School-Based Assessment, and Paper 032, the Alternative to the School-Based Assessment. There was an improvement in the performance on Module 1, Product Development, while there was a decline in the performance on Module 2, and Module 3, Entrepreneurship.