Tamer Shawky, education specialist and psychology professor at Ain Shams University\u2019s Faculty of Education, believes the ministry may be avoiding controversy if statistics are misunderstood or used to turn parents against it, particularly if scores do not resemble a bell-shaped distribution with most students in the middle. He nevertheless stresses the importance of public access, transparency and analysis.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
Shawky says the current minister considers the final secondary year an \u201cabnormal year\u201d in Egyptian education and wants to turn it from a life-defining hurdle into an ordinary year. He cites the minister\u2019s decision not to telephone top students as predecessors did, instead honouring them later in a ministry ceremony without media attendance, accompanied by a press release.<\/p>\n
\nAssem Hegazy, educational psychology professor at Cairo University, agrees that examination statistics are not the ministry\u2019s private concern. Public disclosure lets experts assess outcomes, guide parents on suitable systems, schools and streams, and offer feedback connecting ministry specialists with the public.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
After the results were approved, an XLSX spreadsheet circulated containing seat numbers, names, total marks and status\u2014passed, second round, failed or entirely absent\u2014for new-system and international-school candidates. Zawia3 obtained a copy.<\/p>\n\nResult status in Zawia3\u2019s cleaned dataset<\/h3>\n \n\n\nStatus<\/th>\n Students<\/th>\n Share<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n \n\nPassed<\/td>\n 624,332<\/td>\n 70.2%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nSecond round<\/td>\n 196,297<\/td>\n 22.1%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nFailed<\/td>\n 63,929<\/td>\n 7.2%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nEntirely absent<\/td>\n 4,452<\/td>\n 0.5%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>Total: 889,010. Source: circulated XLSX analysed by Zawia3; distinct from official eligible-candidate figures.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/svg><\/div>\nWhat the ministry announced<\/h2>\n The ministry reported 883,690 registered candidates under the new system, of whom 825,867 attended and 620,314 passed. In science, 543,120 registered, 507,415 attended and 382,720 passed: 75.4% of those who attended.<\/p>\n
Mathematics had 145,459 registered candidates, 139,302 attendees and 113,651 successful students, a pass rate of 81.6%. Humanities had 195,111 registered, 179,150 attendees and 123,943 successful students, a 69.2% pass rate.<\/p>\n\nOfficial new-system results by stream<\/h3>\n \n\n\nStream<\/th>\n Registered<\/th>\n Attended<\/th>\n Passed<\/th>\n Pass rate<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n \n\nScience<\/td>\n 543,120<\/td>\n 507,415<\/td>\n 382,720<\/td>\n 75.4%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nMathematics<\/td>\n 145,459<\/td>\n 139,302<\/td>\n 113,651<\/td>\n 81.6%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nHumanities<\/td>\n 195,111<\/td>\n 179,150<\/td>\n 123,943<\/td>\n 69.2%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>Source: Education Ministry announcement. Pass rates use attendees.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\nScience attracted the largest share because it opens pathways to medical faculties and more university options, followed by humanities and mathematics. Mathematics nevertheless recorded the highest pass rate.<\/p>\n
The ministry released equivalent figures for the old system, but this report excludes its 4,172 candidates because they were few and absent from the analysed spreadsheet.<\/p>\n
<\/svg><\/div>\nWhat the circulated spreadsheet shows<\/h2>\n The circulated file contained 919,397 rows, including new-system candidates and international-school students taking only national-identity subjects: Arabic, religious education and national education. Zawia3 cleaned the data, excluded international-school students because their curricula and university admissions differ, then grouped candidates by result status.<\/p>\n
The resulting dataset contains 889,010 candidates: 624,332 passed, 196,297 required a second round, 63,929 failed and 4,452 were entirely absent.<\/p>\n
A former secondary-examination official, speaking anonymously, says the ministry typically excludes entirely absent candidates and students with cheating reports when calculating eligible successful candidates and pass rates. Cheating sanctions can invalidate examinations despite high scores. The circulating file may still contain those students, particularly where legal decisions follow the initial results announcement.<\/p>\n
\nHe describes the gaps as around 6,000 candidates and 4,000 successful students and considers them small relative to the study population. The exact differences are 5,320 candidates and 4,018 successful students\u2014about 0.6% and 0.6% of their respective official totals. His explanation remains an informed account; only the ministry holds the legal-status data needed to reconcile the two sources conclusively.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
One student illustrates the issue: the ministry website initially showed her as successful, but her school said her examinations had been cancelled. Her examination-control committee explained that a report for possessing a mobile phone led to cancellation, while the legal decision arrived after the results were approved.<\/p>\n
<\/svg><\/div>\nWhere successful students\u2019 scores fall<\/h2>\n Zawia3 divided successful students into ten score bands from 50% to 100%. A total of 160,868\u2014about 26%\u2014scored between 80% and 100%; 304,059, or 48.7%, scored between 50% and 70%; and 159,405, or 25.5%, between 70% and 80%.<\/p>\n\nSuccessful students by broad score band<\/h3>\n\n
50\u201370%: 304,059 students<\/span>48.7<\/strong><\/div>\n\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
70\u201380%: 159,405 students<\/span>25.5<\/strong><\/div>\n\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
80\u2013100%: 160,868 students<\/span>25.8<\/strong><\/div>\n\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>
%<\/figcaption><\/figure>\nSource: Zawia3\u2019s analysis of 624,332 successful candidates. The Arabic chart rounds the upper group to 26%.<\/small><\/p>\n
Shawky links the concentration at 50\u201370% partly to objective questions: a wrong marked circle earns zero even if the student understood the method but made a final error. Essay questions previously awarded marks for working, with separate marks for the answer.<\/p>\n
He also points to unequal entry requirements. He cites public-school secondary thresholds reaching 230 out of 280 preparatory marks, compared with 140, or 50%, for some experimental and private-school pathways. These are the thresholds cited by the interviewee, rather than a uniform national admission rule for every school.<\/p>\n\nSecondary-entry marks cited by Tamer Shawky<\/h3>\n \n\n\nPathway<\/th>\n Marks out of 280<\/th>\n Share<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n \n\nPublic-school example<\/td>\n 230<\/td>\n 82.1%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nExperimental\/private-school example<\/td>\n 140<\/td>\n 50%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>Difference: 90 marks. Interviewee\u2019s examples, not a universal threshold for all schools.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\nArabic and the first foreign language together account for 44% of the total, against 56% for specialist subjects, he adds. Weak language performance can therefore substantially reduce overall scores.<\/p>\n
The former official says an appropriate distribution would contain relatively few very high achievers and failures, with most students in the middle. He believes this year\u2019s results reflected that \u201cin some way,\u201d without being fully bell-shaped. A score distribution alone does not establish examination validity.<\/p>\n
Under the older memorisation-based system, he says, more than 30% of successful students scored 85\u2013100%, partly because examinations were predictable, driving university thresholds higher. In 2025\/26, roughly 94,500 students\u201415% of successful candidates\u2014were in that band, which he considers statistically appropriate.<\/p>\n\nHigh achievers scoring 85\u2013100%<\/h3>\n \n\n\nSystem<\/th>\n Share of successful students<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n \n\nOlder system<\/td>\n More than 30%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n2025\/26 new system<\/td>\n Around 15% (~94,500)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>Source: former examination official interviewed by Zawia3. Historical estimate is not a specific year-by-year comparison.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\nThe published distribution peaks between 60% and 75% and declines towards the highest marks. Its largest individual band is 60\u201365%, with 88,300 students.<\/p>\n\nSuccessful students in five-point score bands<\/h3>\n\n
50\u201355%<\/span>48326<\/strong><\/div>\n\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
55\u201360%<\/span>79684<\/strong><\/div>\n\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
60\u201365%<\/span>88300<\/strong><\/div>\n\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
65\u201370%<\/span>87749<\/strong><\/div>\n\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
70\u201375%<\/span>83086<\/strong><\/div>\n\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
75\u201380%<\/span>76319<\/strong><\/div>\n\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
80\u201385%<\/span>66334<\/strong><\/div>\n\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
85\u201390%<\/span>51830<\/strong><\/div>\n\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
90\u201395%<\/span>32383<\/strong><\/div>\n\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
95\u2013100%<\/span>10321<\/strong><\/div>\n\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>
students<\/figcaption><\/figure>\nExact values from the Arabic chart: total 624,332. This is the observed distribution, not a fitted normal curve.<\/small><\/p>\n
School categories also matter, the former official says: public Arabic-medium, experimental public language, private language, private Arabic-medium and home-study candidates differ in intake and learning environment. Experimental and private language schools usually achieve higher scores, he says, while lower-entry private Arabic-medium and home-study groups tend to score less. Public Arabic-medium schools lie between them, depending on location and students\u2019 level.<\/p>\n
Only the ministry can analyse score bands against those school categories using its full records, he adds, as it previously did in published statistics.<\/p>\n
<\/svg><\/div>\nHigh scores, but a second-round or failed status<\/h2>\n A second-round or failed status does not necessarily imply weak achievement. Around 1,200 second-round candidates in the file scored 288\u2013316 out of 320\u201490% to approximately 99%\u2014but failed one or two subjects that do not contribute to the overall total.<\/p>\n
Some failed candidates scored as high as 286.5, or about 89.5%, after missing or failing three non-total subjects. Under the rules described in the report, failing at most two subjects permits second-round examinations; failing three requires repeating the year.<\/p>\n
\nSome specialists suspect cheating where students excel in physics but fail second foreign language, religious education or national education. Others suggest they concentrated on total-counting subjects and neglected the rest. No conclusion of cheating can be drawn without evidence, and the ministry had not released totals of students with cheating reports.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\nHigh marks do not always mean a passed status<\/h3>\n \n\n\nStatus<\/th>\n Observed marks<\/th>\n Context<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n \n\nSecond round: around 1,200 students<\/td>\n 288\u2013316 \/ 320 (90\u2013~99%)<\/td>\n Failed one or two non-total subjects<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nFailed: highest mark cited<\/td>\n 286.5 \/ 320 (~89.5%)<\/td>\n Absent from or failed three non-total subjects<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>Source: circulated results file analysed by Zawia3. High marks alone do not prove cheating.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/svg><\/div>\nThe top student\u2019s centre and 200 high achievers<\/h2>\n After the only student scoring 100% was identified in Faqous, Sharqia, people examined neighbouring seat numbers. In a sequence of roughly 230 numbers, about 200 students scored above 90%, provoking debate about the examination centre\u2019s results.<\/p>\nThe original Arabic results extract cited in the report: around 200 of 230 consecutive seat numbers scored above 90%. The ministry said its review found no cheating or examination violations. (Original document in Arabic; its relevant contents are explained in the English text.)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\nMP Ashraf Saad submitted an urgent parliamentary question about what he called repeated failures to secure examinations, calling for a comprehensive review to restore trust, protect diligent students and preserve the certificate\u2019s credibility.<\/p>\n
The ministry responded that it had taken all necessary steps to verify the results and review students\u2019 performance in previous years.<\/p>\n
It said the students concerned had distinguished basic-education results and maintained strong performance in their first and second secondary years. It also reviewed examination procedures at the school and cheating reports, finding no cheating or violations compromising the examination system.<\/p>\n
\nShawky says unusually similar marks can raise suspicion, and earlier achievement alone is not sufficient reassurance because differences exist both among individuals and within one person\u2019s performance across stages. He nonetheless emphasises that cheating cannot be asserted without official evidence.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
Hegazy argues that small differences in scores do not establish cheating. The environment may include selective admission, effective teachers and strong educational support. \u201cWhy did we accept the idea of schools where nobody passed, but not now a school containing high achievers?\u201d he asks.<\/p>\n
He considers a single 100% score, without a 3\u20134% near-perfect group, a warning sign worth examining. Question wording, similar options or reliance on guessing may be involved, he says, linking those concerns to an insufficiently scientific examination system. These are expert interpretations rather than proof about the disputed school.<\/p>\n
<\/svg><\/div>\nDoes the examination system deliver fairness?<\/h2>\n The final secondary examinations, central to university admission, comprise 85% objective multiple-choice questions and 15% essay questions. Students mark circles on bubble sheets for machine grading without human marking of those answers.<\/p>\n\nExamination question composition<\/h3>\n\n
Multiple choice<\/span>85<\/strong><\/div>\n\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
Essay<\/span>15<\/strong><\/div>\n\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>
%<\/figcaption><\/figure>\nShawky says objective questions are widely used internationally, but in Egypt can help cheating when students obtain answers from teachers outside an examination centre and rapidly fill in circles. He argues bubble-sheet responses are harder to use to identify copying than essays reflecting individual expression.<\/p>\n
\nHegazy disagrees that objective questions or bubble sheets themselves should be blamed. The system was intended to improve fairness by reducing markers\u2019 subjectivity; he sees the problem in the lack of a rigorous scientific framework.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
The ministry prepares examinations through specialist technical committees working with the National Centre for Examinations and Educational Evaluation. Hegazy says multiple-choice testing should first build large question banks, trial items on random student samples across governorates and analyse validity, discrimination, difficulty, learning outcomes and cognitive level.<\/p>\n
Tested items can then generate different examinations with equivalent specifications, giving students different papers from their neighbours and improving both cheating prevention and fairness.<\/p>\n
Hegazy links objective testing to the electronic examination system begun under former minister Tarek Shawky after tablets were distributed. Infrastructure problems in many schools prevented completion, and the ministry shifted to paper bubble sheets graded automatically.<\/p>\n
He argues that objective questions can assess the knowledge targeted by secondary examinations. Essays additionally assess creativity, fluency, expression and organisation, skills he considers particularly relevant to students entering disciplines such as media, law, politics and economics and testable within those faculties.<\/p>\n
On complaints that final-answer marking ignores correct intermediate work, Hegazy invokes correction for guessing. In his illustrative example, a 100-question examination with 70 correct answers and guesses on the remainder might yield only 50% after statistical analysis. That result depends on the model, number of options and responses; it is not a calculation that follows automatically from those numbers. He says Egyptian secondary examinations do not apply the framework he advocates.<\/p>\n
He believes students aware of guessing corrections would answer only what they knew because blanks would not enter the correction in the same way as wrong guesses. \u201cBut reaching a wrong result after following correct steps indicates a problem: if a student knows the steps, they should answer correctly,\u201d he says.<\/p>\n
Hegazy concludes that, pending electronic testing with multiple equivalent forms, essay questions could expand to 50% to reduce cheating opportunities. He also proposes limiting review time to ten minutes, arguing that excess examination time can facilitate outside circulation of questions and return of answers.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
With detailed examination statistics withheld, Zawia3 analyses the circulated 2026 results file and examines a disputed high-scoring centre alongside the ministry\u2019s response.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":15983,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[413],"tags":[],"kateb":[15844],"class_list":["post-16912","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-society-en","kateb-yasmin-ali"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/zawia3.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/\u0627\u0644\u062b\u0627\u0646\u0648\u064a\u0629-\u0645\u062f\u0627\u0631\u0633\u060c-\u0637\u0644\u0627\u0628-1.png","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/zawia3.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16912","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/zawia3.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/zawia3.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/zawia3.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/zawia3.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=16912"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/zawia3.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16912\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":16913,"href":"https:\/\/zawia3.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16912\/revisions\/16913"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/zawia3.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/15983"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/zawia3.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=16912"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/zawia3.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=16912"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/zawia3.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=16912"},{"taxonomy":"kateb","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/zawia3.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kateb?post=16912"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}