On 11 May 2026, the Caribbean Examinations Council reaffirmed that Caribbean students could use AI tools while completing their school-based assessments. I welcomed that decision in this column at the time. On 16 and 17 July, CXC announced it was phasing out the take-home SBA for most non-practical CSEC and CAPE subjects and replacing it with an invigilated exam called Paper 032.
Ten weeks is a short time to reverse a policy the council had just reaffirmed. My guess, and it is a guess, is that CXC's markers spent May and June reading SBAs and could not reliably tell which reflected a student's own thinking. That is a real problem. Removing AI from most coursework is the wrong answer to it.
What changed between May and July
| May 2026 policy | July 2026 reform | |
|---|---|---|
| AI in coursework | Allowed, with disclosure | Take-home SBA removed for most non-practical subjects |
| Integrity check | Originality report plus a teacher-completed CXC AI Disclosure Form; detection software not to be the sole basis for judging work | Invigilated Paper 032: topic released about a month ahead, extended time, reference notes allowed, writing done under supervision |
| Subjects affected | CSEC, CAPE and CCSLC | Non-practical subjects, including Mathematics, English, Caribbean History, Social Studies and Principles of Business |
| Subjects that keep the SBA | All | Agricultural Science, Visual Arts, Music, Physical Education, Technical Drawing, and Food, Nutrition and Health, with stronger moderation |
The May framework rested on three principles: fairness, human judgement and academic integrity. It relied on documentation and treated AI as part of the environment students already work in.
The timetable for the July reform: CAPE moves to Paper 032 from the May-June 2027 sitting. CSEC schools choose between the old SBA and Paper 032 in 2027, and Paper 032 becomes compulsory for May-June 2028. CXC says the reform followed consultations across 21 Caribbean territories.
The Core Argument
CXC's May policy tried to teach students to use AI honestly. Its July policy teaches them to sit an exam without it. The region's employers are not hiring for the second skill.
American, Slate Table, 1715–35. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, public domain.
Why CXC made the call
CXC Registrar and CEO Dr Wayne Wesley put the decision plainly: "CXC will always act in the best interest of the region, even when that requires difficult decisions." Director of Operations Dr Nicole Manning framed it around what the qualification is for: "A CXC qualification means something. It means something to employers, to universities, to parents, families and guardians." Both points are fair. An examination body that cannot vouch for a coursework grade has a credibility problem, and universities and employers have trusted CXC grades for decades.
Paper 032 solves verification by removing the conditions that made it hard. Move the writing into a supervised room and the question of who wrote it mostly goes away. What it does not answer is what a CXC grade should certify a student can do, and that is where Christopher Christie's critique lands.
The AI-Transparent SBA: Christie's alternative
Christopher Christie, a doctoral candidate in artificial intelligence and chairman of JaceOnline.org, told the Jamaica Gleaner on 27 July: "The problem is not AI. The problem is that our method of assessment has not evolved quickly enough to accommodate AI." He added: "Placing students in more examination rooms, under more controlled conditions, will not prepare them for the world they are entering. In the real world, our young people will work with artificial intelligence, automation, digital research tools and intelligent systems."
He accepts the integrity problem and proposes a different fix: "The strongest protection is not detection software. It is assessment design." His AI-Transparent SBA keeps the coursework and changes what a student submits:
- A declaration of which AI platform the student used, and for what.
- The research notes, outlines, drafts and teacher feedback that show how the work developed.
- A short oral session, about five minutes, in which the teacher questions the student on the work.
- A related supervised classroom exercise the teacher can compare with the take-home piece.
Under that model the offence is hiding AI use, and using it openly is allowed. Christie also makes an equity point: "Equity does not mean preventing every student from moving forward. It means ensuring that no student is left behind." Moving everyone into invigilated exams treats the students who followed the May rules the same as those who did not.
What regional employers and the CARICOM roadmap ask for
Christie's broader charge is generational: "We cannot prepare students for 2035 using an assessment philosophy designed for a world that no longer exists." The evidence is in what employers already say.
A 2026 study of employer expectations found that 53 percent of employers named finding AI-ready graduates as their main hiring challenge. In the same study, 78 percent of higher-education leaders believed their institutions already met employer expectations. The study is global, but the mismatch is the one CXC risks widening. The Inter-American Development Bank describes the Caribbean labour market as being in a dual transition: traditional service roles remain the largest employers, while digital and AI-intensive jobs grow fastest, and AI fluency is expected to become a baseline requirement within a couple of years.
The timing is awkward. CARICOM's Council for Trade and Economic Development endorsed the UNESCO Caribbean AI Policy Roadmap on 7 July 2026, nine days before CXC's announcement. The roadmap has four pillars (Culture and Creativity, Governance and Transformation, Education and Upskilling, and Resiliency and Sustainability) and drew on consultations with more than 1,000 institutions and individuals across 20 territories. Education and Upskilling is one of those four pillars, and the region's main secondary examination is now moving the other way.
John Raphael Smith, Schoolboys Giving Charity to a Blind Man, 1781. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, public domain.
Where the May policy fell short
I stand by the premise of the May policy: AI is already part of every Caribbean student's working life, so make its use visible and checkable. The tools CXC chose to do that, a disclosure form and an originality report, were too weak, and they did not give markers enough confidence to last a single exam cycle. That failure is real and it sits in the implementation.
Christie's model is a tougher version of the same premise. Drafts, an oral defence and a supervised comparison exercise are all harder to fake than a checkbox, and they keep students practising what employers are already screening for: working with AI tools and being able to explain the result.
The weak point in my own argument is teacher time. Five-minute oral checks for a class of 35 take three hours per subject, and many Caribbean teachers already carry heavy loads. A pilot has to measure that cost honestly, or the model will fail in schools for the same reason the May forms did.
What CXC, schools and families should do before 2027
- CXC: pilot the AI-Transparent SBA in two or three affected CSEC subjects during 2027, when schools may still choose the SBA, and publish marker agreement rates and teacher hours per student alongside Paper 032 results.
- Principals of CSEC schools: decide by the start of the 2026-27 school year whether each affected subject stays on the SBA or moves to Paper 032 in 2027, and confirm the choice with your Local Registrar.
- Heads of department: start collecting process evidence now for every coursework piece: dated notes, drafts and teacher feedback. It helps under either system and costs only filing time.
- Teachers of affected subjects: run one practice Paper 032 this term under exam conditions, with a topic released four weeks ahead and notes allowed, so students learn to plan their notes.
- Ministries of education: fund teacher training on AI use and assessment design under the Education and Upskilling pillar of the CARICOM roadmap, starting with the teachers whose subjects are moving to Paper 032.
- Parents: ask the school in writing which system each of your child's subjects will use in 2027, and what the school allows students to use when preparing their Paper 032 notes.
Students will keep using AI whatever happens to their exams. The question for CXC is whether school still teaches them to use it well.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who submits a school's choice between the SBA and Paper 032 in 2027?
CXC deals with schools through a Local Registrar in each territory, usually a unit of the ministry of education. The school's principal or examinations officer registers candidates and subject components through that office, so the 2027 choice will be made there. Ask your Local Registrar for its registration deadline, because it is earlier than the exam date and a missed deadline can leave a school on the default option.
Can students use AI while preparing for Paper 032?
The reported announcement bans unsupervised writing, not preparation, and candidates may bring reference notes into the room. What the notes may contain, and whether AI-generated material counts, is set in CXC's subject guidance, which schools receive through the Local Registrar. Until that guidance is out, the safe course is for students to write their own notes by hand and use AI only to test their understanding.
Why are AI detectors weak evidence of cheating?
Detectors estimate how predictable a piece of writing is, and plain, careful writing by a student can score as machine-like. A 2023 Stanford study found that popular detectors flagged more than half of a set of essays written by non-native English speakers as AI-generated. That is one reason CXC's May policy said detection software should not be the sole basis for judging a student's work. A conversation with the student about the work is better evidence.
How can a teacher check understanding in a five-minute oral?
Ask the student to explain one choice they made and what they would change, to redo one calculation or define one term from their own work, and to say where a key fact came from. A student who wrote the work, with or without AI help, can answer those quickly. Keep a one-line note of each answer, so the record can be shown to a moderator.
Where can parents read the official rules?
CXC publishes notices and subject syllabuses on its website, and the syllabus for each subject sets out its SBA or Paper 032 requirements. Your school's examinations officer and the Local Registrar at the ministry of education can confirm how the change applies to your child. Newspaper summaries, including this one, are no substitute for the syllabus when a deadline or rule matters.
Further reading: my May column on CXC's original AI framework and where CARICOM's own AI roadmap stands on regional adoption. On the governance side of AI policy across the region, see the risk frameworks published by Caribbean AI Risk Management. On the AI training work I reference throughout, see StarApple AI.