By Mr.Mpagi Josephat
As we analyze the results for the UACE 2025 ( Uganda Advanced Certificate of Education 2025 ) cohort, a critical question emerges about the true value of secondary education. Specifically, we must look at the accountability of high-cost private institutions, often called “First World Schools,” compared to the government-aided Universal Secondary Education (USE) schools.
This analysis is based on data from the secondary education department. It focuses on two key questions: Do First World Schools have proper, convincing, and effective accountability for their students’ performance? And, more importantly, is there real academic value added to the learners?
The UACE Admission Criteria: A Tale of Two Starting Points
To understand the final results, we must first look at where the students begin. The difference in admission criteria between First World Schools and USE schools is stark.
First World Schools typically admit learners who have scored an aggregate of 8 or 9 on their UCE (Uganda Certificate of Education) exams. This is generally considered the maximum aggregate performance expected at the S.4 level. For example, imagine a school admits 200 learners to S.5 with aggregates of 8, 9, or at worst, 10. They are starting their A’Level journey at the absolute peak of academic achievement.
Photo Credit: Youth Vibe Media
On the other hand, a typical USE school presents a very different picture. Consider a school with 100 learners, where the best candidate joins A’Level with an aggregate of 25, which is still a Division 1 pass. The rest of the students enter with aggregates ranging from 28 to 53. The starting point here is much more varied and generally lower.
The UACE Outcome: Comparing Performance and Value Addition
When the UACE results are released, the performance of these two groups tells a compelling story. It challenges the assumption that a high-cost, high-entry school automatically guarantees better results.
The “First World School” Reality Check
At the First World School, we might expect stellar results. Since the students scored a maximum aggregate of 8 or 9 at UCE, we would logically expect them to achieve the maximum of 20 points at UACE. However, the reality is often different.
When results are released, the school might proudly announce they had 20 candidates with 20 points. But this hides a much larger problem. A significant number of students, the other 180 out of 200, score below 15 points. This means the school’s success rate for maintaining or adding academic value is only about 10%. A full 90% of these initially bright learners have seen a decline in their performance.
This raises serious questions about accountability. Parents pay fees ranging from 1.5 million to 2.5 million shillings per term. Over six terms in S.5 and S.6, that totals 15 million shillings. Many families make huge sacrifices to afford this, sometimes selling assets. Yet, with such poor value addition, the child fails to make it to government sponsorship, and the financial burden on the family continues.
The USE School Success Story
Now, let us look at the USE school with its 100 learners. Their goal at the start of S.5 was realistic: to achieve the two principal passes needed to join university or tertiary institutions.
At the end of S.6, their UACE results were impressive in terms of value addition:·
5 candidates scored between 15-20 points.
40 candidates scored between 12-14 points.
45 candidates scored between 8-13 points.
8 candidates scored between 5-7 points.
Only 1 candidate scored between 0-4 points.
Most importantly, every single student received a result code of 5, meaning they all qualified for their UACE certificate. Their fees were just 70,000 shillings for lunch. The percentage of adding academic value and meeting their expectations was an astonishing 98%. This proves that improvement and success are not exclusive to expensive schools.
Comparing the Final Products: Who Is Better?
This brings us to a vital comparison. Consider two learners who both end up with 12 points at UACE. One is from a First World School, who entered S.5 with a stellar aggregate of 8. The other is from a USE school, who joined with a modest aggregate of 42.
Who is better prepared for the future?
The answer is the student from the USE school. The learner from the First World School will likely view themselves as a failure because they fell so far from their starting point. Their confidence may be shattered. In contrast, the learner from the USE school has made remarkable progress. They will see themselves as a winner. This mindset of resilience and achievement will serve them well in the world of work, and they will likely be better in service delivery.
Lessons for Parents: Rethinking Investment and Environment
As an education officer, I have seen many scenarios that should make a parent’s understanding and decision-making change. The choice of school is more than just a name or a high price tag.
First, meet the parent whose child began in a First World School but later changed to a USE school. They often see their child’s confidence and performance improve in a less pressured environment.
Then, consider the parent whose child passed well at a USE school but was then transferred to a First World School for A’Level. They might watch their star student struggle to keep up and lose their academic edge.
Finally, there is the parent whose child was advised to change schools due to poor performance at a First World School. This move is often seen as a step down, but it can be the best decision they ever make.
In conclusion, the administration and management of First World Schools must look at that large group of candidates scoring below 15 points. They must compare this outcome with the massive investment parents have made. True accountability is not just about the top 10%. It is about how you maintain and improve the academic value of every child you admit, especially with a competency-based curriculum. As this data from the 2025 UACE analysis shows, sometimes the greatest value is found in the most unexpected places.
The writer is an education officer in the secondary department and a professional Physics/Math teacher. He can be reached at mpagijosephat@gmail.com
