A fresh wave of concern followed Uganda National Examination Board’s move to tell schools to scale down reagent volumes during the chemistry practical on day two of the UACE exams. The alert followed reports from centers that the reagents, labelled as unknowns in exam language, failed to reach the listed quantities once dissolved. The issue surfaced as candidates prepared to start the paper, forcing the board to push out new instructions to supervisors.
After confirming the problem, UNEB sent new instructions on the exam day advising supervisors to scale down the reagent volumes. “Reduce the volume per candidate as indicated below. FA2-55cm3 FA3-55cm3 Instruction for preparation remains the same,” the circular signed by the board’s Executive Director Dan Odongo read in part.
Godfrey Birungi, the Mbarara city UNEB area coordinator, said the matter was identified after teachers weighed the material and found that the unknowns would not produce the required volumes for all candidates once dissolved. He said the original guide told schools to mix the unknown and issue 100 cm3 to each candidate. Schools with large numbers saw the gap immediately.
They alerted the area office, then UNEB. The adjustment took time. The first groups lost about an hour before they started the paper. “At first the instruction was to mix the unknown and give 100 cm3 to the learners. Schools with big numbers saw at once the reagent would not be enough for all candidates if they followed those quantities. When we contacted the board, the guidance changed. The process delayed the first groups by about an hour before they started the examination,” he said.
Onesmus Rukundo, headteacher of Kihanga Secondary School, said it was troubling that the UNEB instructions contained errors, noting that such issues disrupted teachers setting up the exams and affected students’ confidence. Rukundo noted that the board needs to be more attentive and precise in preparing examinations to avoid such interruptions. He recommended that UNEB implement quality assurance measures, including pre-testing in different settings, to ensure assessments are accurate before reaching candidates.
Another headteacher in Wakiso, who wished to remain anonymous, noted that the instruction to use 100 cm³ was likely an error on the exam paper. He said UNEB had misstated the figure, and once the quantities were adjusted to 55 cm³, the problem was resolved. “I would say that UNEB errored with that figure. The moment the quantities were reduced to 55 cm³, everything cleared,” the headteacher added.
The incident coincided with another error in the same day, when the Economics paper mistakenly bore the year 2024 instead of 2025. However, teachers interviewed by our reporter suggested that the board might have overlooked critical details during the preparation process. They all had a common advise that moving forward, UNEB should ensure greater precision in setting examinations, treat pre-testing of exam items as essential, and confirm that adequate quantities of materials are available before releasing a paper.
Wilber Bernard Lwagula, a Chemistry teacher at City High School in Kampala, emphasized that pre-testing is critical for science papers, as it helps identify potential issues. “What I am sure of is that UNEB always pre-tests the assessments and samples several schools for this purpose. I am not sure what happened in this instance, but there must be a reason and an internal check should be made to ensure that in coming papers such things are avoided” he said.
UNEB has remained largely tight-lipped about the Tuesday incident. Several officers declined to comment, referring our reporter to the spokesperson, who has yet to respond. The silence has raised further questions about the board’s handling of the matter. Some headteachers, scouts and invigilators also declined to speak, saying they had been cautioned against sharing examination-related information with the press.
The Tuesday incident followed an earlier disruption during the UCE physics practical, which caused panic in schools nationwide. Teachers scrambled to secure a 10-centimeter focal lens specified by UNEB, but many laboratories did not have it, and suppliers struggled to provide the item. Many schools ended up borrowing and improvising at the last hour.
For the physics incident, Some headteachers, have placed the responsibility on schools rather than UNEB. For instance Rukundo noted that while some teachers and headteachers complained, schools are expected to have all required equipment in advance rather than waiting to see what appears on UNEB’s list days before the practical.
Joseph Ankwansa of Rukole Secondary School echoed this view, adding that some schools delay purchasing laboratory equipment until exam season. He argued that such resources should be available year-round to allow students to gain hands-on experience with each practical outlined in the syllabus.
Regarding the focal lenses, UNEB spokesperson Jennifer Kalule had explained at the time that advance instructions are sent to headteachers through the UNEB portal at least a week before practical exams. Headteachers were expected to inform subject teachers about the materials needed so schools could prepare or purchase the necessary equipment. Kalule added that, in addition to these specific instructions, UNEB issues a general circular through the Ministry of Education and Sports listing all required laboratory apparatus.
This list is released about two months before exams to give schools sufficient time to acquire the items. Kalule further said that some schools ignore the general list and only begin sourcing materials after receiving the advance instructions. “They should have bought all the required apparatus earlier instead of waiting until the last minute and then panicking,” she said.
Overall, the two incidents in the same exam cycle have exposed gaps in planning and supply management at both UNEB and school levels. The events have fueled debate beyond the chemistry lab, prompting stakeholders to question whether practical exam planning aligns with standards and the realities faced by schools in the different settings.
The performance of science subjects in national examinations has generally been weak, with practical exams often cited as a key challenge. UNEB has attributed the problem to schools, arguing that students receive insufficient exposure to practical equipment. Schools, in turn, have pointed to shortages, high costs of laboratory equipment, and gaps in teacher skills. Adding to these challenges are errors, miscommunications, and disruptions originating from the board itself.
***URN***