Cheating learners get their results

The learners from a number of schools in Mpumalanga at the time sat for their National Senior Certificate exams during October/December 2022 and were accused of cheating. File

The learners from a number of schools in Mpumalanga at the time sat for their National Senior Certificate exams during October/December 2022 and were accused of cheating. File

Published Aug 22, 2024

Share

Matric learners who were accused of being part of a massive cheating scandal during the 2022 exams have at last scored a legal victory after the Mpumalanga High Court ordered the education department in that province to release their results.

The learners from a number of schools in Mpumalanga at the time sat for their National Senior Certificate exams during October/December 2022 and were accused of cheating.

Their exam results were withheld and declared null by the Mpumalanga Department of Education. This is after the department determined at the marking phase of the learners’ scripts and pursuant to an investigation that the learners had cheated.

The learners turned to the high court to overturn the decision by the department to withhold their results.

They enlisted lawyers to assist them after they claimed the cheating allegations were unfounded and called on the provincial education authorities to release their results. The education department, however, refused.

It has maintained that the learner’s results would remain nullified and gave the affected pupils the option to sit for their matric exams this year (2024).

The result was that the learners from more than 20 schools, who had their results in certain subjects nullified, could not study further until they had obtained their marks.

After the learners had some of their results for certain subjects blocked as the department flagged “irregularities” in their exam papers, their results were delayed to be released only at the end of February last year.

However, they fought for earlier release of results, saying they would have missed their opportunities to enter tertiary institutions during the first semester.

They approached the court at the time on an urgent basis to set aside the Department’s decision to nullify their results. That application, however, failed on technical grounds.

In their latest review bid, they said there were a number of irregularities, which should render the department’s decision not to release their results void.

They claimed that the department did not furnish them with adequate particulars of the charges against them and that the hearings they attended were not done properly, and there were no records of the hearings.

They argued that some of their rights were infringed, as the “nullification

letter” did not inform them of their right to appeal the decision. Some also complained that although some were under 18, they had to argue their case before a disciplinary hearing themselves.

The learners attacked the findings of the disciplinary irregularity hearings that were held at the schools with the learners that were implicated. The main gist of the attack was the procedure that was followed and that the investigations that were conducted did not indicate how they were alleged to have cheated.

The department argued that the irregularities were discovered at the marking phase and that the learners were notified that the irregularities were discovered during the marking of the scripts.

According to the department a panel of specialists found that some of the marks may not be approved as some answers lacked originality and were therefore not authentic.

The department said the disciplinary hearings it held into the cheating saga and the processes it followed, were all above board. This, in spite of complaints by the learners that there were a number of irregularities during these processes.

The court noted that the department did not rebut some of the accusations by the learners, which included that the disciplinary hearings were done in group form. By conducting the hearings in group form, the department has offended the learners’ right to a fair hearing, the court said.

It also noted that there were no recordings made of these hearings.

The court said it has no doubt that the learners have cheated and had deserved to be punished as they were. However, they were entitled to the prescribed procedure and fairness in the process of the department arriving at the decision.

“This did not happen. The learners must succeed. However, what the learners must appreciate is that cheating does not pay. Because they have cheated, they have lost two years,” the court said.

Pretoria News