@SG_KP1 Not sure if A level History would be suitable for those who didn’t take O level History. The learning curve would be particularly steep (compared to Literature - I think).

Secondary school History has changed since our time, when there was only the structured essay component - just memorize the content & you can score well. Nowadays in lower sec, memorizing content will only get u 50% of the marks. The other half is from answering source-based inferential questions. Many Science-inclined students struggle with those.

In upper sec History (O levels), it gets even tougher: the structured essays are no longer simple memorized content. The questions are Argumentative-type essay questions, ie. “(Opinion statement on X historical event.) How far do you agree (with this statement)?” So the student needs to (within exam time limit), formulate the For and Against arguments, and conclude with his own opinion (agree or disagree) and why. Again, there are students weaker in English who do not even choose this essay type in their English O level compositions (preferring Narrative type like PSLE style, where they can memorize flowery descriptive phrases). They would fail both the History structured essay AND the source-based essay (which moves on to an even wider variety of qn types at upper sec).

It’s perfectly okay to read A level History without taking O level History. A good number of A level History students did not take History at O levels / upper sec.

Whereas for Humanities, I don’t think there should be any prerequisites even at the uni level, for History, Geog, Lit or Economics. There isn’t a need to impose. Content knowledge is not exactly the key in these subjects The prerequisite skills needed are mainly in language and math. Those with prerequisite exposure may have an advantage at the beginning, but it’s not stacked learning the way it is for STEM.

@zac-s-mum When you hear of anything interesting, post on KSP? Could be a good chance to meet too! Especially since we will have money to spend!

Please do watch Hotel by Wild Rice if it is included in the Culture Pass!

Either way, I think both are good for reading and writing, neither of which seem like they are over practiced these days.

In contrast, the analytical skills required for Humanities (starting from Sec 1) are more difficult to teach and to learn. It requires a longer runway for mindset change/training. While i do not wish to suggest imposing an onerous pre-requisite for taking up A level Humanities, I’m starting to think that maybe removing the pre-requisites for science subjects will lessen the fear of not being able to take them at higher levels later on.

I think society and workplaces in general would benefit from having citizens who are trained in considering both sides of the coin, various points of view, and evaluating any grey areas, before making a considered decision for or against. This is a human element that AI cannot replace.

Secondary school History has changed since our time, when there was only the structured essay component - just memorize the content & you can score well. Nowadays in lower sec, memorizing content will only get u 50% of the marks. The other half is from answering source-based inferential questions. Many Science-inclined students struggle with those.

In upper sec History (O levels), it gets even tougher: the structured essays are no longer simple memorized content. The questions are Argumentative-type essay questions, ie. “(Opinion statement on X historical event.) How far do you agree (with this statement)?” So the student needs to (within exam time limit), formulate the For and Against arguments, and conclude with his own opinion (agree or disagree) and why. Again, there are students weaker in English who do not even choose this essay type in their English O level compositions (preferring Narrative type like PSLE style, where they can memorize flowery descriptive phrases). They would fail both the History structured essay AND the source-based essay (which moves on to an even wider variety of qn types at upper sec).

I guess it would be even worse for the non-science kids that want to take 2 humanities (1 full and 1 split with ss). At the As, I guess you could take whichever one you took in upper sec, Econ, and then ELL? Or take a swing at History (if you took EL Lit in upper secondary)? If one didn’t take in upper secondary, I feel like History is probably easier than Lit to take at the As.

Computing probably has a large self-selection bias of kids that can already do most of the stuff. I don’t think that many schools have a full computing class in upper secondary (I believe many have modules or ways to gain some exposure).

I’m also for more breadth at the secondary level. Unfortunately, the focus tends to gravitate towards exam scoring or perceived stress/workload rather than actual learning/acquiring different skills/knowledge.

Rgdg O level Computing, true that the kids were already quite proficient in it prior to Sec 3. For NT (G1) they have a compulsory N level subject called CPA (Computer Applications) which is a very different matter though.

In Zac’s school, the O level Computing classes are subject-banded classes. So the timetable for that period indicates Literature/Geography/Computing/POA in the double science classes. And Literature/Computing/POA in the combined science classes. Triple science classes do not take Computing.

One of my kids was from a Secondary School which made Literature a full compulsory, grade counting subject for all for years for IP kids. For O level kids, it is compulsory minimally as a half subject in upper Sec, and a full subject in lower Sec.

I was one of those who could not for the life of me understand why a School would stand by such a decision - shouldn’t it be to prioritize the L1R5 or overall grades of all their students at Sec 4? After all, Literature is subjective.

Or so I thought.

Gradually, I became a convert and now I hope the School can preserve this policy/tradition for as long as it can - though I know its hard as there will be many parents and kids who believe in choice and maximizing grades.

Every other subject taken in school that is examinable, is a language or a STEM subject, to build immediately ‘useful’ foundations or skills. But which subject at the Secondary School level allows one to explore human themes, emotions, situations? Which subject allows you to engage with the material to build empathy, draw connections between various points, and have you immersed in certain circumstances and settings? A single subject, even if you score a C5, will pull your L1R5 down unless it is your single humanities.

The engagement with reading and with text, goes a little further with taking Literature throughout Sec School.

Computing probably has a large self-selection bias of kids that can already do most of the stuff. I don’t think that many schools have a full computing class in upper secondary (I believe many have modules or ways to gain some exposure).

I’m also for more breadth at the secondary level. Unfortunately, the focus tends to gravitate towards exam scoring or perceived stress/workload rather than actual learning/acquiring different skills/knowledge.

This was a play that I’d brought my son to watch, the performance of which was excellent. The subject content, very relatable for teens, and for parents - a lens into their teenager’s world.

It would have benefitted a whole generation of O level students to study this Lit text in school & have some soul-searching discussions on the themes. I am still crying.

“We are thrilled to learn that HARD MODE, written by Associate Artistic Director and playwright Faith Ng, will be offered as an examinable text for the GCE ‘O’ Levels Literature in English! It will be the sole Singapore text included in the 2028 syllabus for Paper 2: Drama.

We have always felt it crucial that our youth are immersed in our own narratives, language, and issues – and for them to see Singapore stories represented on an international stage. Having HARD MODE on the syllabus showcases an important voice of contemporary Singapore writing, and provides an entry point to Literature, English, and Drama that’s immediately relevant to all Singapore students.

We are incredibly proud of Faith, the entire Checkpoint Theatre team, and the HARD MODE creatives who have worked tirelessly to bring this original Singapore story to the stage, including director Claire Wong and dramaturg Huzir Sulaiman.

We extend our heartfelt thanks to the National Arts Council for commissioning the work and to the Ministry of Education for taking this hugely significant step.

And thank you, dear audience, for the support you’ve shown this original Singapore story, allowing it to reach and touch the lives of many more young people, and for supporting the work we do at Checkpoint Theatre.”

(Quoted from Checkpoint Theatre’s Facebook page)

It’s really sad if students cannot take more humanities subjects at O levels unless they choose to drop sciences. That’s even worse than in my day, before the Humanities scholarships were introduced! Like reversing the past 40 years. I hope there will be enough sensible pro-Humanities people who will make a fuss about this. Why do we have so many experts in the field of education who can come up with this kind of policy?

And given the recent articles about how students are using gen AI to write, and students who use more gen AI are less creative, it really does seem that the human race is going backwards rather than forwards!

Sigh. I heard that some schools are considering not offering any pure Humanities for next year’s sec 3 batch (the first batch using L1R4 for JC entry). Their assumption is that double science combis will still be more popular & therefore no demand expected for double Humanities. What a sad consequence of this system.

What? possibly no option to take even a single full Humanities? That is really sad to me.

In the UK where higher education is known to be pretty narrow/in depth, the norm is to do 8 to 10 GCSEs (i.e. O level subjects). I’m a big advocate on broad exposure in the early years. Singapore’s primary school education is already narrow to me, and would prefer that students get more opportunities for academic breath in Sec School.

How many kids would have the courage to read Lit, History or Geog at A levels if they had not done so at O levels? Ditto with Physics, Chem, Bio and arguably Computing.

Is this a drastic reduction of workload for teachers then? First, school assessments have reduced by much. From CA1/SA1/CA2/SA2 full exam papers, now teachers are setting and marking much smaller tests. Second, if students take 7 instead of 8 subjects, does this mean each school need fewer teachers?

Good thing is that there are many online resources these days, but this just favours those who are in the know, resourceful, self-motivated, etc.

I take it the standard will be seven subjects?

From 2028, students who want to go to a junior college will only need a total of five subjects instead of six. The change is meant to ease academic load, but whether it reduces stress for students and parents remains to be seen.

Singapore Education Minister Chan Chun Sing sits down with Steven Chia and Crispina Robert to unpack the changes.

0:00 Minister Chan takes the hot seat
0:58 Recap of changes to JC admission
1:36 Minister Chan discovers his love for …
4:23 Will the changes reduce stress?
9:43 Do our students have the joy of learning?
14:15 Don’t learn just for exams
15:40 Don’t compare your kids to others
21:12 Gap between JC and poly narrowing
24:20 Tuition gone wrong
29:25 Minister Chan scores 93 and is still not the best
34:00 Can a non-graduate become the PM

This is certainly quite a significant change that was recently announced. We have also shared an article on our website outlining our thoughts on the impact of this change.

You may find the article link here. Feel free to let us know your thoughts.

Best,
Educare Tutoring

The top A level students will want to do well in all 4H2s (including the contrasting subject) - some will even read H3 in the contrasting subject.

I certainly hope the move to RP70 will help relieve some stress of students who are not planning to chiong for 7 or 8As.