SOMEONE had the nerve to alter scripts completed by pupils at a closely-supervised national examination this year.

But an anonymous whistleblower alerted The New Paper of the tampering - allegedly done by a teacher who corrected wrong answers in the scripts of three pupils before they were submitted to the chief invigilator.

This is the first known breach of the tight security in the conduct of the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE).

It happened after the Mother Tongue (Tamil language) exam was completed in a school in the northern part of Singapore in early October.

The Ministry of Education and the Singapore Examinations and Assessment Board (Seab) confirmed the incident in response to queries by The New Paper.

It is not known what prompted the tampering. The Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) is now conducting a probe.

In a statement to The New Paper, a spokesman said: 'CPIB has interviewed teachers and relevant persons involved and investigations are ongoing.'

The incident has come to light just ahead of the PSLE results, expected to be released later this week.

To allay fears, Seab said 'the scripts of all pupils have been fairly and accurately marked based on their own work'.

The teacher who allegedly committed the act altered both the composition and the grammar papers. An Seab spokesman said: 'Parts of the pupils' original answers were crossed out and rewritten.

'The pen used was of a different colour and the handwriting did not match that of the pupils'.'

This must have been done during the short period available when invigilators collect the completed scripts from pupils, bundle them and submit them to the chief invigilator of the examination centre - usually the school of the candidates.

It is understood that although external invigilators are sent to schools, the invigilation itself is done by the teachers from the same school.

Most schools hold the exams in classrooms.

As a rule, a teacher is not supposed to invigilate a class that he or she teaches.

Just before the exam, the external invigilators hand out the scripts to the invigilating teachers.

When the time is up, the invigilator collects and counts the scripts before handing them back to the external invigilators.

HOW ACT WAS EXPOSED

The act of tampering was uncovered during the centralised marking of PSLE papers, from 16 to 19 Oct.

Markers at Farrer Park Primary School, which was a marking centre for the subject, found that the answers in a composition paper of a pupil had been partly altered.

When the markers tracked down the pupil's Paper 2, they found that some answers in the fill-in-the-blanks section had also been cancelled and replaced with other answers.

It is understood that the pupil was given 10 marks for the section when he or she would otherwise have scored zero, an anonymous source said.

A thorough check was done and similar changes were found in the Paper 2 transcripts of two other pupils.

The anonymous caller who alerted The New Paper said: 'You could tell it was an adult's handwriting. It was even written in a different shade of blue from the pupils'.

'It looked like the answers were scribbled in a hurry.

'Even if you didn't understand Tamil, it was very obvious.'

The Paper 2 transcripts of all three pupils had already been graded by then, with marks awarded to the altered answers.

The caller said the markers would have to base the score on what's written on the script.

The affected scripts have since been re-marked by Seab's Chief Examiner for Tamil language, based on the pupils' original answers, the Seab spokesman said.

'The pupils' original answers were clearly visible despite being crossed out,' he added.

SYSTEM OF CHECKS

It is the practice for two markers to grade each transcript.

But The New Paper understands that in marking, they are likely to focus on content, and there are many scripts to go through and deadlines to meet.

Thus, the three altered scripts were not red-flagged until discrepancies were spotted in the composition paper.

The Seab spokesman said this is an isolated incident.

'The conduct of the PSLE at the school level is entrusted to teachers.

'Over the years, teachers have discharged their duties responsibly and exercised a high level of integrity,' the spokesman said.

REACTIONS

'It was quite bold of the culprit to change the papers,' a teacher commented when interviewed.

'Cheating is very serious. And for an adult to cheat and change the scripts is terrible.'

So what could have made the culprit take the chance?

To maintain a good teaching scoresheet for his or her own pupils, or to do this in return for some inducement by another party?

No answers were available, pending the CPIB probe.

A Ministry of Education spokesman said it takes a serious view of this matter, and that any staff member involved in compromising the integrity of the examination system will have to face disciplinary action.

Scripts re-marked based on original answers

What the Singapore Examinations and Assessment Board (Seab) says:

'During the recent PSLE marking exercise, markers for the Tamil language paper observed some irregularities in the scripts of three pupils and brought this to the attention of Seab.

Seab's investigations revealed that some of the answers in these pupils' scripts have been altered. Parts of the pupils' original answers were crossed out and rewritten.

The pen used was of a different colour and the handwriting did not match that of the pupils.

These scripts have since been re-marked by Seab's Chief Examiner for Tamil language, based on the pupils' original answers. The pupils' original answers were clearly visible despite being crossed out.

The conduct of the PSLE at the school level is entrusted to teachers.

Over the years, teachers have discharged their duties responsibly and exercised a high level of integrity. This is an isolated incident which has no precedence in the PSLE.

Nevertheless, Seab takes a serious view of this alteration of pupils' answer scripts and investigations are ongoing.

Seab would like to assure parents that the scripts of all pupils have been fairly and accurately marked based on their own work.

This has been achieved through the multiple levels of checks and tight supervision during the marking exercise and the vigilance of all our examination personnel involved in marking.'