Even though I
know that SEAB is most likely not going to view this, but even if they view it,
they would ignore my comments for the assessment services, I still want to
voice out my thoughts regarding this issue. Worried over the possibility of irregularities
or charges over such posts, I shall not disclose my identify by sending a
suggestion email to SEAB.
Firstly, I
would suggest SEAB to do the following for the Structured Essay Questions or
even the future Structured Response Questions which may also have a possibility
of rote learning and ‘spotting’ topics.
SEAB should
have multiple setters to set the questions for the examination. There must be a
mixture of questions from ALL themes (the five examinable themes for the 2204
syllabus and the three examinable themes for the revised syllabus) with equal
amount of questions from each theme. After shortlisting the suitable questions,
SEAB shall produce a draft copy of all of the examination question (about 25
questions). SEAB shall then inform several external personnel to help the final
question paper formation. The external personnel can anyone in Singapore, be it
civil servant, employees from the private sector, foreign talent, etc. The
other requirement is that the external personnel must have no relationship to
MOE (be it employment, kinship with personnel, etc.), SEAB or the education
ministry in general. They would then be deployed randomly to pick a question
from the approved list of question shortlisted by the setters.
Upon picking,
they must declare that their decision is personal and not under the influence
or supervision of other parties, such as MOE teachers or friends. Any breach of
this declaration would result in fining or imprisonment or both for both the
person being influence and the person who influence the person to do so. This
would ensure of the random picking of the question that would come out for the
examination.
This even
though is considered as a harsh penalty of fine and imprisonment, it is
necessary for change. If termination of one’s national examination award is
considered harsh in a student’s point of view as it will ruin your reputation,
then the fine and imprisonment is necessary for people trying to break the
integrity of the examination and its conduct. I feel that this is an essential
move to stop the idea of rote learning and ensure fair meritocracy in the
education system.
Secondly,
replace typical source-based sub-questions with new quirky questions. For
example, for questions such as “What is the message of the source? ”, they are
usually 5-6 marks in the examination. They can replace them with other
questions that are also inference basic, but add another interesting part to
the question. Example of such a question is “One can interpret many messages
from Source A. Does this mean that all but one are wrong in this Case Study”.
By adding more concept and quirky questions (some schools call them hybrid
questions), students would then find the Case Study more enjoyable and pleasant
to work with, instead of just being rote learning and using formulaic
approaches to answer the question.
More example of such
quirky questions are
1. ‘Both sources are
biased sources’. How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer.
2. Both sources have
purposes. Does this mean that both of them are unreliable? Explain your answer.
3. ‘It is impossible
for two sources from different origination to be completely identical in
content.’ How far do these sources agree with this statement? Explain your
answer.
4. “It is impossible for
a source to be completely useful.” How far does Source D support the following
statement in consideration to Source E? Explain your answer.
5. USE ALL THE
SOURCES.
‘The Boko Haram Mass Kidnap Act in 2014 shows the rising threat of
terrorism.’ How far do these sources support this statement? Explain your
answer. Your answer should include the evaluation of biasness of at least one
tone.
Source Based Case Studies are meant to be entertaining and amusing
to the average student, but the uniform and mundane setting of the case study
has caused students to turn to rote learning to score high marks. Even if SEAB
publishes a marker’s report that states that ‘Candidates who answer the
question without relying on a formulaic approach were able to score the best in
the Case Study’, does not solve the problem. Changes to both the Case Study and
Section B is needed for objective assessment.
I would be
delighted to see meaningful changes to the Combined Humanities Assessment
Scheme. It is heart-warming to see the rote-learning frequented SEQ being
replaced by SRQ which aims to stop the rote learning process. But if change is
wanted, changes to how questions are set and given to candidate should be in
place.
If anyone would
like to comment on my suggestions given, do comment below or email to me @ littlebunniehellokitty@gmail.com.
I would be delighted to discuss regarding this issue with you.
THANKS!!! THANKS!!!
No comments:
Post a Comment