EXAMINER’S GENERAL COMMENTS The standard of the paper compared favorably with previously administered ones. There were no serious ambiguities typing or typographical errors. All the questions were of required standard. They were also fairly spread across the syllabus thus any candidate who decides to confine himself to a particular area had himself to blame.

GENERAL PERFOMANCE The general performance still falls below expectations even though one gets few outstanding candidates. The main reason for this is that some candidates come into the examination hall unprepared. Apart from that, it appears that some candidates do not take their time to read over the questions to appreciate the requirements from the questions. One other issue is that some candidates do not relate their answers to the marks allocation. For instance if the allocation of marks gives (4 marks) to a particular question this implies that the candidate is only required to give a short answer instead of writing copiously. By so doing a candidate will be able to make time to answer other questions that may require detailed analysis. If candidates would take their time to read through the whole questions, they would be able to allocate their time properly for each question. Turning to the strengths and weakness it is difficult to state that high performance or low performance is concentrated in a particular center. Because in each pack you would get cases of high performance and low performance but the bottom line is the level of preparedness of the candidates, I believe that if candidates learn in syndicates, this will benefit them in future.