* Eunoia JC (EJC)
-
mindays:
I have already shown you many examples on why your premise is incorrect. You are too simple minded to think that a single factor can explain the entire point, without considering other factors that may cause an impact as well.
You have very much considered one person's quote to conclude an argument. You are not producing substantial evidence to debunk the fact that the higher percentage of distinction rates of Math and Physics as compared to English PROVES that it is easier to obtain an A in Physics and Math as compared to English. This is simply because if a greater proportion of students (express as percentage) has the capacity to obtain a distinction, it just means that it is easier to obtain a distinction in Math and Physics than English.
What is even more ridiculous is that you implied that smoking wont lead to cancer. On the contrary, it can accelerate your death! :evil: :evil: :evil:
The point of bringing up the cancer example is to show you clearly how you are arguing your case...which in your own words, may lead to your \"death\" if you continue with this single minded thinking.
Let me expand on the cancer example so that it is easy enough for you to comprehend
There is a mortality rate of 50% for cancer for people living in Bishan and a mortality rate of 70% living in Yishun. To you, it would mean it is easier to get cancer staying in Yishun than in Bishan ?
What it is made known to you that the 80% sample population for the study in Yishun are smokers where-else only 30% in Bishan are smokers. Do you still think it is easier to get cancer staying in Yishun ?
Please do not continue to mislead anybody in this thread that you have \"proved\" something. That is furthest from the truth and as Mark Twain says, a \"damned lie\" -
Under \"Passion Pursuit Independent\" which is one of the flagship programmes for the IP students, there is a work attachment in Year 4.
For those whose children are already in J1, can you all share what kind of work attachments your DC and their schoolmates have been to?
Thanks
-
thsheng99:
You are indeed smoking your way through. A fact is a fact in which a greater percentage of students obtain distinction for Physics/Math than English just simply means it is easier to obtain an A for the former. The probability translates into the ease of getting a distinction. Stop misleading others by giving erroneous and ridiculous examples to spread your ideology. It makes no sense and no link to the fact that smoking still cause cancer, be it that you smoke in Bishan or Yishun. Really wonder what you are thinking up in your head :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:
I have already shown you many examples on why your premise is incorrect. You are too simple minded to think that a single factor can explain the entire point, without considering other factors that may cause an impact as well.mindays:
You have very much considered one person's quote to conclude an argument. You are not producing substantial evidence to debunk the fact that the higher percentage of distinction rates of Math and Physics as compared to English PROVES that it is easier to obtain an A in Physics and Math as compared to English. This is simply because if a greater proportion of students (express as percentage) has the capacity to obtain a distinction, it just means that it is easier to obtain a distinction in Math and Physics than English.
What is even more ridiculous is that you implied that smoking wont lead to cancer. On the contrary, it can accelerate your death! :evil: :evil: :evil:
The point of bringing up the cancer example is to show you clearly how you are arguing your case...which in your own words, may lead to your \"death\" if you continue with this single minded thinking.
Let me expand on the cancer example so that it is easy enough for you to comprehend
There is a mortality rate of 50% for cancer for people living in Bishan and a mortality rate of 70% living in Yishun. To you, it would mean it is easier to get cancer staying in Yishun than in Bishan ?
What it is made known to you that the 80% sample population for the study in Yishun are smokers where-else only 30% in Bishan are smokers. Do you still think it is easier to get cancer staying in Yishun ?
Please do not continue to mislead anybody in this thread that you have \"proved\" something. That is furthest from the truth and as Mark Twain says, a \"damned lie\" -
EthanEthan:
So what are you trying to say? Do you prefer a simple increment or a compound increment? Which gives you more in the long run? An increase of wage 20% yearly will definitely outbeat the increment of 10% yearly. So in another sense, using percentage to determine is more realistic than absolute figures. Do you get it? If I tell you that XJC has 3 students scoring 8 distinctions but have a cohort size of 1200 while YJC has 2 students scoring 8 distinctions with a cohort size of 600, which JC do you think is better? With the point your are making, you are saying that XJC is better because it produces more students scoring 8 distinctions than YJC (absolute figure). But in reality, YJC is stronger than XJC because the percentage of students scoring 8 distinctions is higher than XJC. So, don't mislead others with your ill thinking and self-proclaimed taught by professors. To me, it is a blatant lie :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:
I have given you the \"salary\" example to remind you to not look at statistics at the surface.mindays:
Or does it expose your naivety and ignorance when you said English was easier to get A1 than math and physics and it is easier to improve from a 80 mark than 60 mark
You have not even explain your rationale in using absolute numbers than percentage in determining the ease of obtaining a distinction
I am repeating the example below, if you have not got the chance to read it.
Let me give you a scenario, if you boss gave you a 20% pay increment but gave your colleague only a 10% increment, does it conclusively prove that you are performing much better than your colleague.?
What if you realise that your pay is only $1000 and your colleagues is $3000 before the increment, would that change your perspective that you are a better performer? In absolute term, your pay increment was only $200 where else your colleague's was $300 :evil:
On the surface, it seems like you have performed much better than your collegue. But the fact is that your base pay so much lower than your collegue that your boss has to try close the gap by giving you a higher pay increment percentage. So it is really not true that you have performed better than you collegue.
All you have done in this forum is make lots of unsubstantiated \"noise\" without backing your statements with facts.
I hope you understand what is empty vessels make the most noise -
mindays:
You are indeed smoking your way through. A fact is a fact in which a greater percentage of students obtain distinction for Physics/Math than English just simply means it is easier to obtain an A for the former. The probability translates into the ease of getting a distinction. Stop misleading others by giving erroneous and ridiculous examples to spread your ideology. It makes no sense and no link to the fact that smoking still cause cancer, be it that you smoke in Bishan or Yishun. Really wonder what you are thinking up in your head :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:thsheng99:
I have already shown you many examples on why your premise is incorrect. You are too simple minded to think that a single factor can explain the entire point, without considering other factors that may cause an impact as well.
The point of bringing up the cancer example is to show you clearly how you are arguing your case...which in your own words, may lead to your \"death\" if you continue with this single minded thinking.
Let me expand on the cancer example so that it is easy enough for you to comprehend
There is a mortality rate of 50% for cancer for people living in Bishan and a mortality rate of 70% living in Yishun. To you, it would mean it is easier to get cancer staying in Yishun than in Bishan ?
What it is made known to you that the 80% sample population for the study in Yishun are smokers where-else only 30% in Bishan are smokers. Do you still think it is easier to get cancer staying in Yishun ?
Please do not continue to mislead anybody in this thread that you have \"proved\" something. That is furthest from the truth and as Mark Twain says, a \"damned lie\"
I am really surprised that you can resort to a single piece of percentage to \"prove\" (your own words) a certain fact. Even MOE do not dare to make such a statement.
If you have nothing else more to contribute than repeating your misguided fallacies here, please leave this forum and do not flood this thread with your frivolous comments. -
mindays:
You are indeed smoking your way through. A fact is a fact in which a greater percentage of students obtain distinction for Physics/Math than English just simply means it is easier to obtain an A for the former. The probability translates into the ease of getting a distinction. Stop misleading others by giving erroneous and ridiculous examples to spread your ideology. It makes no sense and no link to the fact that smoking still cause cancer, be it that you smoke in Bishan or Yishun. Really wonder what you are thinking up in your head :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:thsheng99:
I have already shown you many examples on why your premise is incorrect. You are too simple minded to think that a single factor can explain the entire point, without considering other factors that may cause an impact as well.
The point of bringing up the cancer example is to show you clearly how you are arguing your case...which in your own words, may lead to your \"death\" if you continue with this single minded thinking.
Let me expand on the cancer example so that it is easy enough for you to comprehend
There is a mortality rate of 50% for cancer for people living in Bishan and a mortality rate of 70% living in Yishun. To you, it would mean it is easier to get cancer staying in Yishun than in Bishan ?
What it is made known to you that the 80% sample population for the study in Yishun are smokers where-else only 30% in Bishan are smokers. Do you still think it is easier to get cancer staying in Yishun ?
Please do not continue to mislead anybody in this thread that you have \"proved\" something. That is furthest from the truth and as Mark Twain says, a \"damned lie\"
I am really surprised that you can resort to a single piece of percentage to \"prove\" (your own words) a certain fact. Even MOE do not dare to make such a statement.
If you have nothing else more to contribute than repeating your misguided fallacies here, please leave this forum and do not flood this thread with your frivolous comments. -
mindays:
You are again showing your naivety and your ignorance. I am not saying that using absolute figures is more realistic.I am telling you that you should consider all factors and all aspects when doing your analysis. Is that a very difficult concept to accept ? You have simplistically said that you have 'proven\" a certain fact just by looking at a single percentage statistic. Isn't that a very presumptious and erroneous assertion ?
So what are you trying to say? Do you prefer a simple increment or a compound increment? Which gives you more in the long run? An increase of wage 20% yearly will definitely outbeat the increment of 10% yearly. So in another sense, using percentage to determine is more realistic than absolute figures. Do you get it? If I tell you that XJC has 3 students scoring 8 distinctions but have a cohort size of 1200 while YJC has 2 students scoring 8 distinctions with a cohort size of 600, which JC do you think is better? With the point your are making, you are saying that XJC is better because it produces more students scoring 8 distinctions than YJC (absolute figure). But in reality, YJC is stronger than XJC because the percentage of students scoring 8 distinctions is higher than XJC. So, don't mislead others with your ill thinking and self-proclaimed taught by professors. To me, it is a blatant lie :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:
So are you saying that just because your boss gives you a 20% raise and gives your colleague a 10% raise, that your performance in your work is \"proven\" to be better than your collegue ? I know for a fact that this is not true because I have given a subordinate higher pay percentage because he had a lower base pay compared to his peers, so as to bring him up to par
You have just shot yourself in the foot -
FanFanX:
I think those years it was not easy to get distinction for English, compared to nowadays.EthanEthan:
If you get 10 points 30 years ago, meaning that each subject ( divided by 5 subjects) is an A2 which is 70-75 marks. This is good but hardly brilliant. If you were from VS, with 2 points affliation bonus, you would be able to get into VJC with 12 points COP
Many people get 4 A1s plus English grade which determine their L1R4.
Excuse me..why are you guys still talking about this after 2 weeks?! All FanFanX had postulated was that 30+ years ago, it was more difficult to get A1 for EL1, so this subject would pivotally determine how high their final L1R4 was.
Most candidates were able to score A1 or A2 for their 4 relevant electives if they mugged or crammed hard enough 30 years ago, but their points were usually pulled down by their EL1 grade as their command of EL1 wasn't good enough for Cambridge. Hence, the higher L1R4 in some top JCs like VJC (10 points) in those days, as argued by FanFanX.
You must put FanFanX's comments in the correct context. He was right because 30+ years ago, many O level students came from Chinese-speaking or Malay-speaking families. Getting A1 for EL1 was an uphill task or feat for those from such families.
Yes, some of you said you scored an A1 easily, but could it be you were from SCGS, RGS, RI, ACS or SJI, or are Peranakans, Eurasians or Indians yourselves, hence your command of English was higher than your peers in the 70s (when you were in primary school) thru the 80s (when you sat for O levels)??
However, those from e.g CHS, SNGS, SAP schools and neighbourhood schools might struggle with O level EL1 in the olden days.
There're no online stats on number of A1 or A2 for those subjects in dispute, but here are some on the Number of Passes for EL1, MT and MA (Not A Math btw) in early 80s. Early-Mid 80s was the period when you guys attended secondary school, since you entered JC in the mid-late 80s.![](\"https://s24.postimg.org/a7ydxsxn9/ENG.png\")
https://s24.postimg.org/a7ydxsxn9/ENG.png\">
![](\"https://s1.postimg.org/x37yb49zj/ENG2.png\")
![](\"https://s24.postimg.org/xym8577at/image.png\")
![](\"https://s7.postimg.org/6pcetght7/MT2.png\")
![](\"https://s11.postimg.org/ln27hsodf/MATH.png\")
![](\"https://s28.postimg.org/4k2iru2m5/MATH2.png\")
Did you notice the % passes was lower for EL1 compared to MT and MATH? The % passes should be telling enough, even though we don't have the A1 stats for this period. This could be cos many Singaporean O level students were raised in predominantly Chinese-speaking families and didn't have ready access to English storybooks and assessment books, nor did they watch Channel 5 or listen to BBC in the early-mid 80s. Their parents probably tuned in to HK Dramas or Rediffusion everyday.
To score an A1 for EL1 in O levels required a lot of hard work as the environment then was not conducive enough.
20+ years ago, the overall language acquisition environment started to improve when more public libraries were opened and new EL textbooks, LC practices were introduced by MOE. That was how more Singaporeans could score A1 for EL1 in the following years. -
jetsetter:
Not trying to prolong discussion of this lame topic any longer but 30 years ago, there were already proportionally more families speaking English at home ...its not in the 1960/70s which I would agree that English language proficiency would be much lower. And we cannot just extrapolate passing rates to distinction rates.. We are talking about ease of getting distinctions, not ease of passing.
Excuse me..why are you guys still talking about this after 2 weeks?! All FanFanX had postulated was that 30+ years ago, it was more difficult to get A1 for EL1, so this subject would pivotally determine how high their final L1R4 was.
Most candidates were able to score A1 or A2 for their 4 relevant electives if they mugged or crammed hard enough 30 years ago, but their points were usually pulled down by their EL1 grade as their command of EL1 wasn't good enough for Cambridge. Hence, the higher L1R4 in some top JCs like VJC (10 points) in those days, as argued by FanFanX.
You must put FanFanX's comments in the correct context. He was right because 30+ years ago, many O level students came from Chinese-speaking or Malay-speaking families. Getting A1 for EL1 was an uphill task or feat for those from such families.
Yes, some of you said you scored an A1 easily, but could it be you were from SCGS, RGS, RI, ACS or SJI, or are Peranakans, Eurasians or Indians yourselves, hence your command of English was higher than your peers in the 70s (when you were in primary school) thru the 80s (when you sat for O levels)??
However, those from e.g CHS, SNGS, SAP schools and neighbourhood schools might struggle with O level EL1 in the olden days.
There're no online stats on number of A1 or A2 for those subjects in dispute, but here are some on the Number of Passes for EL1, MT and MA (Not A Math btw) in early 80s. Early-Mid 80s was the period when you guys attended secondary school, since you entered JC in the mid-late 80s.
Did you notice the % passes was lower for EL1 compared to MT and MATH? The % passes should be telling enough, even though we don't have the A1 stats for this period. This could be cos many Singaporean O level students were raised in predominantly Chinese-speaking families and didn't have ready access to English storybooks and assessment books, nor did they watch Channel 5 or listen to BBC in the early-mid 80s. Their parents probably tuned in to HK Dramas or Rediffusion everyday.
To score an A1 for EL1 in O levels required a lot of hard work as the environment then was not conducive enough.
20+ years ago, the overall language acquisition environment started to improve when more public libraries were opened and new EL textbooks, LC practices were introduced by MOE. That was how more Singaporeans could score A1 for EL1 in the following years.
The crux of the contention is somebody cited a statistic ( which is current, not even 30 years ago) and thereby claimed that he has \"proven\" that getting a distinction in Physics is easier than English
Anyways, we should stop discussing this and let the constructive posts to continue -
Exactly stetan…Careermum has an outstanding question on Passion Pursuit. Can’t someone pick that up instead of bickering over something FanFanX had long lost interest in?
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login7
Online211.4k
Users34.6k
Topics1.8m
PostsMaths
English
Chinese
Multiple subjects