2022 PSLE Discussions & Strategies (born in 2010)

[chenlaoshi]

phtthp\" post_id=\"2091088\" time=\"1669872929\" user_id=\"35251:

The article mentioned one third refer to the 11 kids, inside that class 6A. Not one third of the entire P6 cohort student population, inside Nan Hua primary.

So, just get these 11 kids to go and request for a Psle review. Maths paper is easy, to review. Whether answers right or wrong, students got show proper working step by step properly inside their answer workings, or not, all these are very clear cut.

If indeed after review,
these 11 kids' Maths answers do show some consistent pattern in getting their answers marked wrongly, then SEAB really need to go and investigate, what happened ? Is it SEAB's marking fault, or what ?

So, go and review !
Go and investigate, what's wrong, with these 11 kids' answer script ? Bring the truth to light, so that everyone will know

In the article SG_KP1 shared, it was mentioned:

\"我们同时也被告知，家长查分只能看到申诉科目试卷各部分分数相加得分是否正确
* for the review, they (this group of parents when they enquired via the school) were told can only get to see if the addition of all the various tested components (for the subject that they are appealing for) are correct

，而不能看到学生纸质的试卷答题卡，
* unable to see their answer booklets

因此没有办法核实试卷答题卡是否会因为读卡机故障，或者答题卡有污渍等等意外情况发生，而出现分数误判。\"
* unable to find out if there's error of judgment (in marking) due to issues such as machine failure, soiled paper etc.

So paying for review is more like checking for calculation error in marks rather than marking error :oops:

[skii]

mystique_j\" post_id=\"2091083\" time=\"1669869119\" user_id=\"39431:

I really wonder what could have happened. I believe now it’s digital marking.
Nan Hua is a good school and GEP, so their test papers std is not low. For kids who score consistently AL1, 95 and above, to drop to AL3-5, is really quite shocking.
The article mentions 1/3 of them affected but I wonder what about the 2/3.

GEP school also have kids taking Foundation level


but 11 in a class is a little too many for comfort.
(then again, we can only trust the parent's claim of \"consistently scoring 95)\"

[00skyblue00]

Not sure about other pri schools, but ours will have two teachers marking each paper separately.

If in psle, each paper is marked by teachers from two different schools somemore, unlikely to have marking errors.

[phtthp]

chenlaoshi\" post_id=\"2091093\" time=\"1669873634\" user_id=\"162894:

In the article SG_KP1 shared, it was mentioned:

\"我们同时也被告知，家长查分只能看到申诉科目试卷各部分分数相加得分是否正确
* for the review, they (this group of parents when they enquired via the school) were told can only get to see if the addition of all the various tested components (for the subject that they are appealing for) are correct

，而不能看到学生纸质的试卷答题卡，
* unable to see their answer booklets

因此没有办法核实试卷答题卡是否会因为读卡机故障，或者答题卡有污渍等等意外情况发生，而出现分数误判。\"
* unable to find out if there's error of judgment (in marking) due to issues such as machine failure, soiled paper etc.

So paying for review is more like checking for calculation error in marks rather than marking error :oops:

Yes,
this part about P6 parents and affected kids not able to see their own answer scripts, this is common knowledge.

Why ?

Because
this review had been discussed before, in so many PAST years PSLE thread(s), before. Is not that suddenly only come to this year 2022, then start to bring up review.

My highlight, is this -

Those of you who already paid $ for review, definitely those Psle reviewers will come back to these parents, to tell them what the new outcome is. If reviewers reply them,

\"Yes, indeed after the paid review, your kid's Maths still remain as AL 5, no change from before.\"
Then,
just accept the truth and move on. But at least, u won't regret anymore in future, because u have already paid $, to get a review done. To get a peace of mind, u already done your part ( review ). What else, can u fo ?

But, if this type of below scenario were to arise, how to rectify ?
What Is SEAB going to do, to this appealing student?

All your MCQ answers for Maths are actually correct,

except that

you started shaded the answers, from the wrong row, onwards & downwards ....
But, if u were to look at the one vertical column downwards, all the MCQ answers are actually correct, one by one. So how ? How is the SEAB reviewer, going to address this ?

[lee_yl]

“简单以系统总是准确为由敷衍了之，这种缺乏透明度的操作，恐怕很难让人们信服。” Zaobao.


Is SEAB always correct? Recently there was an error in the Chemistry A level paper…

[phtthp]

.

[doodbug]

Can someone ask Auditor General to also go check on SEAB and its processes?

wahahahah!

[Mr.025413Clumsy]

00skyblue00\" post_id=\"2091099\" time=\"1669874746\" user_id=\"143605:

Not sure about other pri schools, but ours will have two teachers marking each paper separately.
If in psle, each paper is marked by teachers from two different schools somemore, unlikely to have marking errors.

I thought that's the case too, i.e. that 2 teachers mark the same paper but do so separately. Then their scores are compared to ensure that there's consistency in marking and scoring.

[phtthp]

.

[chenlaoshi]

phtthp\" post_id=\"2091100\" time=\"1669874776\" user_id=\"35251:

My highlight, is this -

Those of you who already paid $ for review, definitely those Psle reviewers will come back to these parents, to tell them what the new outcome is. If reviewers reply them,

\"Yes, indeed after the paid review, your kid's Maths still remain as AL 5, no change from before.\"
Then,
just accept the truth and move on. But at least, u won't regret anymore in future, because u have already paid $, to get a review done.

But if this type of below scenario arise, how to rectify ?
What Is SEAB going to do, to this appealing student?

All your MCQ answers for Maths are actually correct,

except that

you started shaded the answers, from the wrong row, onwards ....
But, if u were to look at the one vertical column downwards, all the MCQ answers are actually correct, one by one. So how ? How is the SEAB reviewer, going to address this ?

Although they didn't mention if they have appealed for review, I think they do know or are trying to highlight (from the translated parts in my earlier posts) that SEAB will not provide further details but rather, just a brief statement of whether there are any errors in calculation of marks.

My understanding of the \"公正、公平、透明\" which they highlighted in this particular write-in is not just on the marking process but more on the reviewing process. Hopefully, this will be the catalyst to change for more details to be provided to those who appeal for review.