Who Is Responsible for the Degradation in SSC Examination Results?

This year’s results of the Secondary School Certificate (SSC) and equivalent examinations have once again created an urgent need to rethink the state and direction of Bangladesh’s education system.

This year, the average pass rate across the country’s 11 education boards stood at 62.25 percent, which is 6.20 percentage points lower than the 68.45 percent recorded in 2025.

At the same time, the number of students achieving GPA-5 declined from 139,032 in 2025 to 116,676 this year a decrease of 22,356 students within a single year. Even more concerning is that this year’s pass rate is the lowest since 2007.

However, if these results are viewed simply as a case of “poor performance,” their deeper significance may be overlooked.

The more important question should be: Do these results reflect the actual learning capacity of Bangladeshi students, or are they the combined outcome of long-standing weaknesses, instability within the education system, and problems in the assessment structure?

At the same time, it is also necessary to ask whether these results are a warning sign of a deeper crisis in the education system or whether they have exposed long-accumulated problems and created an opportunity for necessary reforms.

This year, a total of 1,829,485 students participated in the examinations.

Of them, 1,138,877 students passed, while 690,608 failed. In other words, approximately 38 out of every 100 students who took the examinations were unable to pass. The gender-based results also reveal an important pattern.

The pass rate among boys was 57.86 percent, whereas the pass rate among girls was 66.68 percent. The number of girls achieving GPA-5 was also higher than that of boys: 63,896 girls received GPA-5, compared with 52,780 boys. Thus, girls outperformed boys in both the overall pass rate and the achievement of the highest grade.

Significant disparities are also evident among the different education boards. Among the nine general education boards, Dhaka recorded the highest pass rate at 71.63 percent, while Mymensingh recorded the lowest at 57.39 percent.

The pass rate under the Madrasah Education Board was 55.49 percent, while the Technical Education Board recorded a pass rate of 58.20 percent.

These figures once again highlight the considerable disparities in educational outcomes among students from different regions and educational streams within the same country.

One of the most significant and alarming aspects of this year’s results is that not a single student passed from 312 educational institutions. In 2025, the number of such institutions was 134.

This means that within only one year, the number of zero-pass institutions increased by 178, representing an increase of approximately 133 percent. In contrast, the number of institutions achieving a 100 percent pass rate declined from 984 in 2025 to 669 this year.

These figures cannot, under any circumstances, be explained solely as the result of students’ individual weaknesses. If not a single student from an institution is able to pass, serious questions must be raised regarding the number of teachers, the quality of teaching, subject-based competence, regularity of classes, student attendance, infrastructure, administrative supervision, and the local socioeconomic environment.

An individual student certainly bears some responsibility for failing an examination. Irregular study habits, absence from the classroom, poor use of time, negligence in examination preparation, and, in many cases, excessive use of mobile phones or social media can negatively affect academic performance.

However, the discussion cannot end there. A 15- or 16-year-old student does not control the entire environment of his or her educational life.

The family in which the student grows up, the school he or she attends, the teachers from whom the student learns, the social and economic environment in which the student lives, and the national education policies under which the student sits for examinations all of these factors directly influence academic success.

Therefore, when a student fails, the first response should not be to label that student as a “failure.” Instead, it is necessary to ask why the student failed.

Was the student’s foundational knowledge weak? Was the student able to attend school regularly? Did the teachers provide sufficient attention and support? Were there enough qualified teachers in the school? Was the family able to provide a suitable environment for studying? Or did a long-standing learning gap eventually become visible at the SSC examination stage? Without seeking answers to these questions, blaming students alone may offer an easy explanation, but it cannot provide an effective solution.

The role of teachers is extremely important in determining the causes of student failure. Particularly, deficiencies in students’ foundational knowledge and skills that develop between Classes Six and Ten can become major problems by the time they reach the SSC level if they are not identified and addressed in time.

Weaknesses in fundamental mathematical concepts, the inability to read and write English effectively, a lack of understanding of the underlying concepts of academic subjects, and an excessive dependence on memorization cannot be considered acceptable standards of education.

When teaching becomes primarily focused on memorization and obtaining marks rather than developing genuine understanding, responsibility for such an approach must also rest significantly with the teaching process and those responsible for delivering it.

The family cannot be excluded from the discussion when determining responsibility for student failure. Many families do not provide adequate attention to their children’s education.

On the other hand, some families create intense pressure for good results without attempting to understand their children’s actual academic weaknesses. In some cases, financial hardship forces students to work alongside their studies.

At the same time, many parents believe that regular schooling is not sufficient and that students must attend coaching centers or private tutoring in order to achieve good results. This creates a crisis of confidence in the formal education system and places additional pressure on students.

Therefore, the responsibility of parents should not be limited to asking about examination results. They should also pay attention to what their children are learning, where they are experiencing difficulties, and what type of support they require.

Particular attention should also be given to addressing the declining academic engagement of male students. Families and educational institutions must work together to develop regular study habits among boys both at home and in school.

Parents should pay closer attention to their children’s punctuality, discipline, and regular study practices.

Secondary education is one of the most important foundations of an individual’s educational journey. If this foundation becomes weak for any reason, future human development and national prosperity will inevitably be affected.

Therefore, the poor performance in the SSC examinations should not simply lead to a search for someone to blame.

Instead, it should compel all stakeholders to examine their respective responsibilities and work collectively to build an education system that ensures genuine learning, equal opportunities, effective teaching, and meaningful academic development for every student.

(Author: Professor, Institute of Social Welfare and Research, University of Dhaka)