Umalusi – the national accreditation and quality assurance body for general and further education and training in South Africa – commissioned Ecctis to undertake an international benchmarking and comparative subject analysis for the South African National Senior Certificate (NSC). The NSC is the national school-leaving certificate in South Africa, forming the final three years of a national programme of education which follows a pattern of 4+3+3+3.

Ecctis designed the project to achieve the following client objectives:

• To support a deeper understanding of comparability between the NSC and the selected comparison programmes
• To identify any subject-level aspects of the NSC which significantly differ from comparison curricula internationally
• To establish comparability and the top-level similarities and differences between the NSC and the international comparison points.

Ecctis has deployed its established methodology for credential evaluation and benchmarking in order to ascertain the comparability of the NSC in the context of the Kenyan, Zimbabwean, and Australian (New South Wales) education systems, as well as in the context of the international qualifications offered by Cambridge Assessment International Education and the International Baccalaureate Organisation.

Specifically, Ecctis used the following upper-secondary qualifications as comparison programmes:

• The International Baccalaureate Diploma Programme (IB DP)
• The Kenyan Certificate of Secondary Education (KCSE)
• The New South Wales (NSW) Higher School Certificate (HSC)
• The Zimbabwean Forms 5–6 advanced level (awarded by ZIMSEC)
• The Cambridge Assessment International Education AS & A Levels

This research involved bespoke additions and modifications to the methodology, but the general approach is outlined in the figure above.

This figure below outlines the core qualification design components for analysis:

Comparative subject analyses were conducted in relation to the similarities and differences between NSC curricula and appropriate comparison points in each programme in:

• English (as an additional language)
• Mathematics
• Geography
• Life science (biology)
• Physical sciences (physics and chemistry)

The comparative subject analysis focuses on drawing out the similarities and differences between the NSC curricula and the international context of similar curricula (as represented by the curricula of subjects within the comparison programmes). Subject comparison centres on the following components:

• Structural features: Including subject-specific requirements; expected prior learning; duration of study; notable progression routes
• Subject aims: These articulate the intentions and purpose of the subject, often in a manner which touches on learning outcomes, content, and various other criteria, as prioritised by curriculum documentation
• Learning outcomes: These are used to identify the key knowledge, skills, and competencies that candidates are expected to be able to demonstrate upon successful completion of the qualification
• Content areas: This is a high-level view of the themes and topics to be taught and learned during the course
• Assessment objectives: These are used to identify the knowledge, skills, and competencies that students are assessed on
• Assessment methods: These are the methods through which both internal and external assessment takes place – focusing on summative assessment and including details such as the weighting of different exams and the types of questions used within papers

The deliverables for this research include:

• A summary evaluation report with the key qualification and overarching subject-level findings, accompanied by an executive summary
• Annexes for each subject, which present a detailed comparison of each of the selected subjects (English language, mathematics, physical sciences, life sciences and geography) with the NSC

The main report includes programme-level overviews of all qualifications explored in this research, followed by key similarities and differences at programme level. The report then presents key findings drawn from the contextual overviews and programme level comparisons, as well as from the in-depth comparative subject analysis which is showcased in the report’s appendices.

The focus of the key findings section is on the question of comparability and the top-level similarities and differences between the NSC and the trends which exist across the international comparison points. The section also features comparability statements which relate the NSC to the five international comparison programmes examined in the report.

Each subject appendix also has its own key findings section, which contains a discussion of how the compared curricula demonstrate similarities and differences in relation to skills development and assessment. Ecctis also presented a series of key recommendations regarding how the NSC can continue to sustain and develop its strengths and mitigate or overcome any identified challenges.

The outcome of the analysis carried out by Ecctis at both the programme and subject level is the greater understanding of the NSC’s comparability in the context of the international qualifications analysed in the report.

Umalusi may be in the position to cascade the subsequent recommendations, if judged appropriate, to the bodies with responsibility for aspects of NSC curriculum or documentation development. This would achieve improved clarity, consistency, or quality in the NSC