CSSPS explains how raw scores can override aggregate in SHS placement

The Coordinator of the Computerised School Selection and Placement System (CSSPS), Sherif Sulemana, outlined the process through which candidates are assigned to their preferred senior high schools, programmes and residential options on the Joy FM Super Morning Show. Initially, candidates are ranked according to their aggregate scores, detailing the system's ranking from a top aggregate of six down to the lowest of 54.

When candidates express preferences for specific schools, programmes and whether they desire a day or boarding arrangement, the CSSPS reviews these preferences alongside the candidates' aggregate scores to determine suitability for each option.

In cases where candidates possess identical aggregate scores and vie for the same limited slots, the raw scores come into play to break the tie. For instance, when two candidates both have an aggregate of six and are applying to Tamale Senior High School for General Science with a preference for boarding, the raw scores will be utilized to decide which candidate receives the available spot.

Sulemana emphasized that the aggregate score remains the primary factor in ranking candidates, while raw scores are reserved for resolving ties. He also clarified a nuanced aspect of the placement process where a candidate with a higher aggregate could potentially secure a place over one with a lower aggregate if they are competing for the same school, programme, and residential option, and their raw scores are considered.

This occurs due to the grading system’s intricacies, where a candidate might receive a higher grade if they scored lower but outperformed others in that subject. For example, a candidate who scored 90 and received a grade two would be ranked higher than a candidate who scored 60 and received a grade one. Sulemana provided an example of two candidates with aggregate scores of six and eight competing for the same slot in the same school, programme, and residential status.

The candidate with the higher raw score, in this case, eight, would be placed over the candidate with six. This explanation underscores the importance of raw scores in reflecting a candidate’s true performance when aggregate scores are equal. Sulemana also noted the necessity for better public understanding of raw scores in the placement process and expressed concerns about the current grading system, hinting at the possibility of a review.

Despite these considerations, he assured that the placement exercise was prepared for release, with final adjustments underway by Friday, September 4.