Mid-year exams to be scrapped in all primary, secondary schools by 2023
-
MrsKiasu\" post_id=\"2062739\" time=\"1648364294\" user_id=\"43981:
Muahahaha this funny! Besides nagging, I guess some threats will work too!
Got eat cane? Or the floor / wall eat on behalf
-
Zeal mummy\" post_id=\"2062746\" time=\"1648370143\" user_id=\"58173:[quote=\"Zeal mummy\" post_id=2062746 time=1648370143 user_id=58173]
Wait those against caning come and scold me lol.. dd2 very afraid of cane so only got very few to date.. Sometimes cannot stand her..I nag her and I cane the floor, the wall in front of her
Muahahaha this funny! Besides nagging, I guess some threats will work too![/quote]
-
bbbay\" post_id=\"2062666\" time=\"1648281075\" user_id=\"175278:
between \"students are given only the knowledge of their own score or grade, often described as “knowledge of results.” and \"students are given information about the correct results, some explanation, and specific activities to undertake in order to improve.\"
Tks for sharing. So the scrapping of MYE is after years of observing good outcomes from “assess for learning” method.
No need years of observing ... LOL,
or between \"knowledge of low score, student may consider tuition\" vs the later. -
00skyblue00\" post_id=\"2062758\" time=\"1648380068\" user_id=\"143605:
I read this from that article “… this follows changes to assessment policies over the last decade.…”
between \"students are given only the knowledge of their own score or grade, often described as “knowledge of results.” and \"students are given information about the correct results, some explanation, and specific activities to undertake in order to improve.\"
No need years of observing ... LOL,
or between \"knowledge of low score, student may consider tuition\" vs the later.
I believe any changes in policy will be after much deliberations, plus, seeing good experimental outcomes.
-
bbbay\" post_id=\"2062761\" time=\"1648383388\" user_id=\"175278:
See good experimental results over the years of “teach less and learn more/deeper” methodology?
I read this from that article “… this follows changes to assessment policies over the last decade.…”
I believe any changes in policy will be after much deliberations, plus, seeing good experimental outcomes.
Who can be sure the good results produced when teachers teach less is not the outcome of increased external tuition? Have we seen a substantial decrease of children going to tuition/enrichment if we compare today and a decade ago? Cause and effect is not very clear.
For example, a Science teacher brings the P4 students to backyard garden to explore different types of insects/plants. Maybe the experiential learning will motivate the children to be curious about the world. Teach less learn deeper I suppose is to cultivate the love of learning and develop a sense of curiosity in children. But what if the child instead of going go to the library to pick up a related book to read and find out more, rather choose to play computer games at home, how the child can learn deeper?
In the end, parents might blame the school teachers for not teaching this and that, plus if you see the classmates doing well in Science with tuition, parents will just send kids to tuition. -
lee_yl\" post_id=\"2062785\" time=\"1648430715\" user_id=\"17023:
From those articles, the reasoning for it, is due to the intention to shift the orientation, from results oriented, to drive for learning oriented (with the new assessment method): the intention is not only about getting good results but learn how to learn/passion for learning. The orientation is different. As for your example of child play game instead of going library, I believe this is what that orientation may help to fix.
See good experimental results over the years of “teach less and learn more/deeper” methodology?
Who can be sure the good results produced when teachers teach less is not the outcome of increased external tuition? Have we seen a substantial decrease of children going to tuition/enrichment if we compare today and a decade ago? Cause and effect is not very clear.
For example, a Science teacher brings the P4 students to backyard garden to explore different types of insects/plants. Maybe the experiential learning will motivate the children to be curious about the world. Teach less learn deeper I suppose is to cultivate the love of learning and develop a sense of curiosity in children. But what if the child instead of going go to the library to pick up a related book to read and find out more, rather choose to play computer games at home, how the child can learn deeper?
In the end, parents might blame the school teachers for not teaching this and that, plus if you see the classmates doing well in Science with tuition, parents will just send kids to tuition.
Seem like your orientation is to achieve good results and comparison, then your concerns may be valid. But that is not the orientation for the changes. -
bbbay\" post_id=\"2062789\" time=\"1648433426\" user_id=\"175278:
I wonder if MOE or anyone has a quantitative way of measuring the success (or failure) in instituting the shift on orientation from exams to learning? If MOE can measure the amount spent on tuition/enrichment by parents decade on decade, a dip in spending would be a positive sign (and vice versa) that the shift in orientation is working. Otherwise, in the absence of quantifiable measures, we are only talking in the abstract with empty slogans.
From those articles, the reasoning for it, is due to the intention to shift the orientation, from results oriented, to drive for learning oriented (with the new assessment method): the intention is not only about getting good results but learn how to learn/passion for learning. The orientation is different. As for your example of child play game instead of going library, I believe this is what that orientation may help to fix.
Seem like your orientation is to achieve good results and comparison, then your concerns may be valid. But that is not the orientation for the changes.
To shift the orientation, many things need to change. For one, the marking matrix for grading Primary School Science papers need to change from looking out for specific keywords to something more free text. I know of children who love Science but ended up disliking the subject as they can’t score during Sc exam. Poor exam techniques / the need for specific keywords as answer keys put them off.
While I applaud the vision of developing children’s curiosity and passion for learning, reality bites when good results still determine the route of progress. How to measure a child’s passion by learning and curiosity? Wouldn’t it be ironical if results are still used as the closest proxy? -
Schootopia\" post_id=\"2062891\" time=\"1648506395\" user_id=\"143961:
While I agree with you, I think there is still a huge, gaping mismatch between the intended aims & the marking schemes which the teachers and SEAB hold in their hands.
Science has never been about key words and answering techniques. These are misnomers from parents that come from a different domain, and maybe from some tuition centres trying to sell you 膏药。
At the level of learning in schools, they want students to demonstrate an understanding of long-established scientific concepts and facts (e.g. light and shadow), and some basic skills (e.g. compare, contrast, describe) used in evidence-based science. Written in simple correct scientific vocabulary.
Ditto for Maths. There's no proprietary methods or special hocus-pocus. Just a matter of whether you truly, clearly understand the fundamentals.
I can tell you from experience that if my child (who does indeed understand the fundamentals of the science and math syllabus) does NOT fill in those expected keywords and use those shortcut Math techniques, he will just barely pass the exams. And barely pass leads to Normal Tech stream.
The system (marking scheme) is still solely rewarding the kids who churn out these pat, tuitioned techniques (which are very quickly skimmed over in school). -
On the Science, need ‘keywords / answering skills’ I tend to gree from the experience of working together with elder kid previously. Just knowing fundamental then useown explanation may not be enough.
On the Math, is there any specific formula to be applied to specific qn? How abt those not following the ‘techniques’ strictly/no tuition just revise randomly? Will these kids still get full marks if answers are correct, for the PSLE? -
Hi MKS, for the P5/P6 math qns, they need to practise the list of heuristics methods (these are not in the textbooks, but some schools will teach during supplementary lessons after school. All tuition centres will teach).
If child does not know the heuristics methods at the back of their hand, just using the fundamental knowledge of the topic, can eventually work out how to do…eventually…meaning take longer than the exam time limit. Thus it is impossible to fare well or even pass Maths exams if didnt “memorise” these shortcut techniques.
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 Login
Online Users
Statistics
Popular Topics