This is becoming an annual affair. Last year it was the Science paper, I believe.
TODAY reported that the some students couldn't finish the Math paper, some questions were unclear, and there were non-standard questions. However, a Math teacher who invigilated the exam felt that the paper was alright, though it did contain some non-standard questions, and she didn't see anyone crying at the end of the paper.
Some questions I have:
1. Is it the norm these days to include some non-standard questions in the papers?
2. If it is the norm, are schools given adequate information, e.g. if it is indeed the intention of the setters to include some of such questions, the nature of these questions (e.g. application-type, 'IQ-type', as the teacher quoted called them, etc), what percentage of the paper would be given to such questions, etc?
3. If schools do indeed have this information, do they adequately prepare the children for a paper like that?
4. Are parents (and private tutors) aware of this information?
5. In any case, whether it is the norm or not, are children mentally and psychologically prepared for instances when they come across questions that are non-standard, non-'routine', 'not so direct', etc?
6. Are assessment books partly to blame?
7. If everyone knows the exam rubric well, why should the children find the paper so unexpected that they are reduced to tears or cannot finish the paper, or both?
From what I understand, test and exam papers are meant to test people on what they know / can do (including applying what they know). So either the paper was not set according to this principle, at least from some students' perspective, or some children really were disadvantaged because, for whatever reason, they didn't know or couldn't do what they were supposed to be able to.
I must say I feel very sorry for the kids because these days there is such a high premium attached to their performance in the PSLE. Not that it wasn't important in our time, but back then, you were probably just thinking of moving on to your affiliated secondary school or a school near your home. Today, the affiliated or nearby school is not always a good enough choice for some parents and children. A very sad state, indeed. Causing unnecessary stress, I feel.
As for me and Math, I have no recollection of my PSLE paper or if it was difficult, easy, etc. Have a hard time now just figuring out those idiotic number bonds that they must use for addition and subtraction. Some of you will know what I'm talking about. Those who don't, don't worry about it. By the time you look at P1 Math, there will probably be some other new-fangled concept to figure out. Anyway, I'm told those number bonds help develop skills for mental calculation. Well, we shall see...
TODAY reported that the some students couldn't finish the Math paper, some questions were unclear, and there were non-standard questions. However, a Math teacher who invigilated the exam felt that the paper was alright, though it did contain some non-standard questions, and she didn't see anyone crying at the end of the paper.
Some questions I have:
1. Is it the norm these days to include some non-standard questions in the papers?
2. If it is the norm, are schools given adequate information, e.g. if it is indeed the intention of the setters to include some of such questions, the nature of these questions (e.g. application-type, 'IQ-type', as the teacher quoted called them, etc), what percentage of the paper would be given to such questions, etc?
3. If schools do indeed have this information, do they adequately prepare the children for a paper like that?
4. Are parents (and private tutors) aware of this information?
5. In any case, whether it is the norm or not, are children mentally and psychologically prepared for instances when they come across questions that are non-standard, non-'routine', 'not so direct', etc?
6. Are assessment books partly to blame?
7. If everyone knows the exam rubric well, why should the children find the paper so unexpected that they are reduced to tears or cannot finish the paper, or both?
From what I understand, test and exam papers are meant to test people on what they know / can do (including applying what they know). So either the paper was not set according to this principle, at least from some students' perspective, or some children really were disadvantaged because, for whatever reason, they didn't know or couldn't do what they were supposed to be able to.
I must say I feel very sorry for the kids because these days there is such a high premium attached to their performance in the PSLE. Not that it wasn't important in our time, but back then, you were probably just thinking of moving on to your affiliated secondary school or a school near your home. Today, the affiliated or nearby school is not always a good enough choice for some parents and children. A very sad state, indeed. Causing unnecessary stress, I feel.
As for me and Math, I have no recollection of my PSLE paper or if it was difficult, easy, etc. Have a hard time now just figuring out those idiotic number bonds that they must use for addition and subtraction. Some of you will know what I'm talking about. Those who don't, don't worry about it. By the time you look at P1 Math, there will probably be some other new-fangled concept to figure out. Anyway, I'm told those number bonds help develop skills for mental calculation. Well, we shall see...
Comments
later i found out from these two other boys that they found the paper easy. and they don't take tuition. they are just blessed all along with this gift in maths and science.
so what to make out of this? i think they are trying to spot the really gifted ones by looking at who can crack those tougher "IQ" problems (sounds like GEP). but that is really sad because all those kids who worked very hard but are not as 'gifted' would lose out. i agree with what u said about the goal of exams (testing what they have studied/know). but nowadays it aint the case anymore. the syllabus has become so volatile. maybe they should have 'higher maths' for brilliant maths pupils like the two boys i know. then at least the normal group of hardworking and intelligent pupils, whose parents have spent tons of money on workbooks, tuition, not to mention time spent on coaching them etc would not feel so devastated and demoralised that so much effort have gone to waste. worst, they may lose confidence and interest in learning and say, 'what for i practice and study so hard?' cannot score what!
mom with p4 boy (and having doubts whether shd continue sending son to maths tuition)
That is very interesting, indeed, about the 2 'gifted' boys who found the paper easy. Assuming that the majority of us ordinary mortals don't have that great an ability in Math, I can see how disconcerting it would be for a kid to sit for a paper that was skewed in favour of the brighter ones. My guess, though, is that some of the questions were of that nature. And so if you have been doing practice paper after practice paper that was set without such questions, you would be thrown off by these 'unusual' questions.
I am suprised that within the same school, two classes taught using different Math materials. M1 do a lot of exercises with tougher and IQ questions. While M3 doing only those general questions. My niece can't do a lot of questions when I asked her to try my daughter's Math homework.
So are the paper set based on the M1 standard or general standard?