Mid-year exams to be scrapped in all primary, secondary schools by 2023

[bbbay]

zac's mum\" post_id=\"2062976\" time=\"1648536000\" user_id=\"53606:[quote=\"zac's mum\" post_id=2062976 time=1648536000 user_id=53606]
I think u may have misunderstood?

Below is the actual provided text (data/evidence), where it is not explicitly said who won the election. Rather, the kids have to refer to the words “Valerie gave her victory speech.” to infer that Valerie had won. This is an inferential-type of Compre question.
[/quote]

The ABC rules given are:
Answer
Data
Reason

Valarie was the “answer”. “Give a speech” was the “observable data”. And need a reason why what is observed is the reason for the answer?

Without clear reason, Technical question that may arise: Valerie, giving a victory speech, victory for who? Or which of her victory?

[sharonkhoo]

zac's mum\" post_id=\"2062978\" time=\"1648536482\" user_id=\"53606:[quote=\"zac's mum\" post_id=2062978 time=1648536482 user_id=53606]
He is the sort to always question why the true need for this law & that law, this rule & that rule, can’t we have a better system, etc. I know it is simpler to say “because I say so!” Or “because that’s the way it is.” Which is pretty sad. For non-negotiable items like school rules & societal rules, of course I insist. For less important stuff, well…on principle I find it hard to explain compliance for compliance’s sake. Mankind did not progress by accepting status quo, nor do real scientific inventions & breakthroughs come from repeating the proven techniques.[/quote]

I understand. But kids at this age can start to learn that compliance for compliance's sake is just practical - you can't change the rules, so you just choose your battles. I don't expect my kids to comply with everything, especially when it's something we don't agree with, but there is a time for sticking your neck out, and a time for just doing what gets the result you want. A life lesson. [You should have heard us on the subject of English compos...]

[zac's mum]

Need to teach him the Serenity Prayer lol!

[phtthp]

zac's mum\" post_id=\"2062976\" time=\"1648536000\" user_id=\"53606:[quote=\"zac's mum\" post_id=2062976 time=1648536000 user_id=53606]


Below is the actual provided text (data/evidence), where it is not explicitly said who won the election. Rather, the kids have to refer to the words “Valerie gave her victory speech.” to infer that Valerie had won. This is an inferential-type of Compre question.

https://i.imgur.com/s4OWmJm.jpg\">[/quote]

Hi zac mom,

may we know Title of this book & the publisher ? Thanks

[zac's mum]

phtthp\" post_id=\"2062994\" time=\"1648546979\" user_id=\"35251:

Hi zac mom,

may we know Title of this book & the publisher ? Thanks

Here you go:
https://i.imgur.com/0kIoPKY.jpg\">

[bbbay]

Terrydad\" post_id=\"2062988\" time=\"1648541330\" user_id=\"193857:

You put it very eloquently. Thanks for the great background on the scientific method.

My concerns are a bit more prosaic. If the kid writes \"The opaque object is not transparent,\" or \"One cannot see through an opaque object,\" I believe the kid is penalised. The correct answer in the teachers key is \"The opaque object doesnt let light pass through.\" But aren't the two sentences synonymous in meaning?

If I may: the word “light” , contains the essence of the answer?

[00skyblue00]

Terrydad\" post_id=\"2062988\" time=\"1648541330\" user_id=\"193857:

You put it very eloquently. Thanks for the great background on the scientific method.

My concerns are a bit more prosaic. If the kid writes \"The opaque object is not transparent,\" or \"One cannot see through an opaque object,\" I believe the kid is penalised. The correct answer in the teachers key is \"The opaque object doesnt let light pass through.\" But aren't the two sentences synonymous in meaning? How far is show replication of word for word answers in a test taken? For eg, is \"The opaque object blocks light rays\" accepted? Why are such black and white lines delineated in the description of a fact? How is that rationalized in science education in primary school?

Dont misunderstand me. I love the Big Bang Theory, have scientist friends. The question is not on science. It's on science tests in primary schools. A fact is immutable. But surely the explanation of the fact takes mutable forms?

Thanks again.

Just saw this post and too tempting not to skip. only wish to chip in. do wish to get into any debate.

The opaque object is not transparent - this only states the property or description of the object
One cannot see through an opaque object - this only states the outcome
both the above do not explain the reason.

The reason why one cannot see the text behind the object is
light does not pass through opaque object and we can only see the text if there is light on the text entering our eyes.

[zeit.033699]

Terrydad\" post_id=\"2062988\" time=\"1648541330\" user_id=\"193857:

If the kid writes \"The opaque object is not transparent,\" or \"One cannot see through an opaque object,\" I believe the kid is penalised.
No no no! you cannot write like this. It's like you're playing with paradox - The tall girl is not short.
\"One cannot see\" has made a human the SUBJECT of your statement. You must refer to the set-up and the way the question is phrased. If it's asking about that object, you have to phrase it in such a way you're talking about it and not introduce a third redundant person.


The correct answer in the teachers key is \"The opaque object doesnt let light pass through.\" But aren't the two sentences synonymous in meaning?

For LIGHT topic, you must always have the key words \"no/some/most light\" and \" to pass through it\". You can add \"opaque/translucent/transparent\" too. Memorise them.

How far is show replication of word for word answers in a test taken? For eg, is \"The opaque object blocks light rays\" accepted?

\"block\" must be mentioned in shadow questions.

Why are such black and white lines delineated in the description of a fact? How is that rationalized in science education in primary school?

It's important because you cannot use flowery opinion statements in Science. That's why the comparatives (2 setups) and superlatives (> 2 setups) must be strictly factual/objective - \"greatest\" / \"least\", \"greater amount of time\" / \"least amount of heat\", not suka suka use \"best\" , \"worst\". \"quickest\", etc.

No changing of label names indicated on diagrams/graphs. Must remind your kid to monkey see monkey copy. If it's a \"metal rod\" in question, don't write \"rod\". Precision is key in Science OEQs. There could be more than 1 rod in question, must be that particular metal rod in that particular setup, not a universal rod statement. :rotflmao:

In PSLE Science, you must train the kid to identify the question types: Explain how, explain why, explain if, State, etc.
The Intro para must be annotated to pick out the AIM of experiment and the MV, CV, IV. Then you can craft your answers using the templates taught. E.g. Aim will tie to Conclusion question. Fair Test/ Control questions have template answers.

[zac's mum]

Yes, zeit has explained it very well.


Primary school exams have become a game of how to write what the markers are looking for. Way to kill the joy of learning, MOE.

Can remove some of the exams, but PSLE is still the same old, same old game. When will that change huh.

[Liew Nga Wing]

zac's mum\" post_id=\"2063006\" time=\"1648553321\" user_id=\"53606:[quote=\"zac's mum\" post_id=2063006 time=1648553321 user_id=53606]
Yes, zeit has explained it very well.

Primary school exams have become a game of how to write what the markers are looking for. Way to kill the joy of learning, MOE.

Can remove some of the exams, but PSLE is still the same old, same old game. When will that change huh.[/quote]

What are the changes which you want to have?
No more PSLE? Students are just given a place to different secondary schools by ballot? Or reform on the marking system of PSLE?