The Jump from 'O' to 'A'

Hi Guys!

  It has been a while since I last blogged about something. JC life really is taking the life out of me... Any ways, for all those who are interested in going to a JC to peruse your tertiary education, here are some of my opinion of how JC has been like and how different is it from my O Level life.

General Comment:
1. One thing for sure is that in JC, lessons end much later than in Secondary School. For my class the earliest time that we are actually released from school is 4.15pm which I had a hard time coping with previously as I had always been released from secondary school at 2.30pm, which gave me more time to study after school.
2. Content is much more in depth and scope than in O Level. In O Level, we built up on our knowledge in the subjects that we had learnt in PSLE. If that's considered a lot in your case, then I strongly recommend that you not go for the JC curriculum that will scare the lights out of you after you enter.
3. Lessons are much more fast paced than in O Level. For example in H2 Bio, our lecture only had 2 lectures, that is one week of school to finish the chapter of enzymes, a chapter that used up almost 2 weeks of 6 lesson in secondary school to finish. Therefore, A level also has a lot of self directed learning.

In a specific note, for the various subjects...

O Level English-->A Level General Paper
In O Level English,

• Candidates are only required to read, understand, write, talk and listen in Internationally Acceptable English. Hence, as long as your language is on par, you will have no problem in scoring well, regardless of how mediocre your content is.
• It is easy to pass O Level English, as long as your essays do not have too much 'exp' OR 'ss' or 'sp' or 'ww' etc. on them.
• Time constraint is not much of a concern in O Level English, as plenty of time is given to evaluate the text and answer the questions.

However in GP,

• Candidates are now not only require to read, comprehend and communicate effectively in Internationally Acceptable English, they are also required to think critically and communicate their ideas in a mature and sophisticated manner in order to score well.
• Time Constraint is always a problem that you experience as 1 hour 30 minutes is never enough to finish 8 SAQ (Short Answer Question), one 120 word Summary and one 2 page Application Question.

I have not recalled any instances where I actually managed to pass my GP essay due to the perceived lack of  maturity of understanding and appreciation towards worldly affairs.

O Level A Math and Math--> A Level H2 Math
In O Level Math,

• Presentation is always the determinant between the A1s, A2s and B3s.
• All questions can be done through thorough analysis and formulaic approaches.

In H2 Math,

• Presentation, even though is one thing that affect marks, is not much of a concern as it can only be penalised if you even attempt the question! Once you cannot understand the question OR even know which chapter this question is testing you on, you cannot even answer the question! Many people suffer in J1 due to the lack of practice and appreciation towards the Mathematical Concept.
• Time is also a main concern, as long workings may be needed for even a 2 mark question.

O Level Biology-->A Level H2 Biology

O Level Biology

• Looks at the physiological component of life. (human body system and its functioning to sustain life).
• Split into 4 themes.
• Each theme requires at most two hours to revise before exams.
• Exam does not require detailed explanation if not prompted.   

A Level H2 Biology

• Dive further into the body and towards the molecular basis of the body. Amplified specification of some topics, such as Biological Molecules (Nutrition in Humans) and Molecular Genetics (one entire theme dedicated to this topic).
• Greater understanding and appreciation towards the half truths that O Level Biology provide.
• Split into 6 themes for new syllabus.
• Requires answering techniques that, when not applied may cause one to score 0 marks for the 20 marks essay question.
• One theme require the entire day in order to revise.
• Detailed explanation is encouraged and demanded for all questions in the Bio Paper.
• Time Constraint is a Huge Issue due to a lot of information needed to be written.

O Level Chemistry-->A Level H2 Chemistry

O Level Chemistry

• Foundation knowledge on Organic and Inorganic Chemistry
• Questions are highly predictable.
• Data Analysis questions can be answered using information from text.

A Level H2 Chemistry

• Go into depth for ALL the O Level Topics and teaches that many concepts learnt in O Level does not hold in reality in A Level H2 Chemistry.
• New Topics are included.
• Time Constraint is an issue, especially for MCQ Question.

O Level Combined Humanities--> A Level H2 Economics

O Level

• Limited skill set required (Usefulness, Reliability, etc...)
• Time Issue easily resolved, especially with revised syllabus 2267.
• Writing something with key words and just inferring sources will pass you immediately.
• Formulaic Approach are despired, but get you the A1 for CH.
• NAQ may give you 1 mark.

A Level H2 Economics 

• High level of Maturity of thought needed to tackle all questions.
• Skills are a more diverse range, must be trained and not taught.
• Formulaic Approach cannot hold in reality for Economics, and will even give you 0 marks for NAQ.
• Time Issues always a concern.

If you need more information on the JC curriculum or sample pages on notes on some of the H2 subjects, email me at littlebunniehellokitty@gmail.com

  Thank you!

For GP Students, GE2015

As this is an education blog, I would like to share my opinions that I would be making for the vote swing amongst Singapore for this General Election, and hope that it would be relevant for the General Paper, such as for your application question, etc...

  Why the power swing happened, I shall share my opinions:

1) Loss of a great leader

2015 marked the demise of a great leader, which was Mr Lee Kuan Yew. Mr Lee has led the country for the first 50 years of independence and after 50 years of independence, he has passed on. The demise of the leader had led to Singaporeans feeling afraid and insecure about the future of Singaporeans. This has made Singaporean feel that they must vote for the ruling party, which Mr Lee has groomed and helped nurture to prepare the next generation of PAP members to continue governing Singapore with his efficiency. This mentality that Singaporeans had would definitely make them vote for the PAP to secure a presumed brighter future for Singapore rather than the opposition that does not have that experience in parliament and hence may not bring good future to Singapore for the next 50 years.

2) Loss of strong opposition candidates from GE2011

GE2015 has been met with a loss of many key strong personnel from GE2011. For example, Nicole Seah from the NSP declared that she will not take part in the general elections. She was the beating heart of the NSP Marine Parade team in GE2011, evident from Nicole Seah talking most of the time in the NSP Rallies in 2011. The loss of this key candidate caused the NSP to lose majority of its votes and even a possible seat in Parliament, if Nicole Seah were to consider contesting in MacPherson SMC or something to that extent. Another was Mr Chiam See Tong, which had the MP for SPP Potong Pasir Stronghold. After the deterioration of Mr Chiam's health, he now is unable to contest in any SMC or GRC. This is added on to the inability of him to do the simplest of thing, such as to speak effectively in rallies. The lack of the strong leader has made the team seem feeble and hence unable to lead Singapore probably. These two were only some of the example of people losing confidence of political teams and hence not voting for opposition.

3) Complacency amongst opposition

Due to the excellent performance in GE2011, the opposition scene in Singapore has been with complacency and many opposition personnel have started their own political parties, such as SingFirst and PPP. The divided amount of famous opposition personnel in GRCs have made the team look very weak, compared to those stronger ones, like the WP Aljunied Teams. This caused the people to not be confident of these new political parties, as many of the candidates introduced were new and not well known among Singapore in the political arena, hence not being able to vote for the opposition.

4) Increasing confidence of Singaporeans by PAP diligence

The PAP has been very concerned about the future of Singapore due to GE2011. The decrease in vote percentage in PAP has caused them to step up their campaigning game for GE2015. By clearly describing the facts and their plans for the future of Singapore, they have made people convinced that they are the ones that would be the best to lead Singapore. Also, they have displayed their incorruptibility by informing Singaporeans their care for Singaporean, regardless of social background. The dilligence made Singaporeans feel that they will work hard and lead Singapore effectively and to the best of ability for the next 5 years, hence vote for them, causing the vote swing.

5) Unnecessary fighting amongst the Opposition

The most prominent example is the fighting between Han Hui Hui and the Reform Party. The party accused Ms Han for attempts of character assassination and her being a Socialist Front sponsored candidates. All these attempts were used to maintain the integrity of the respectively personnel, but these were viewed by the public as forms of childishness and bring about problems and conflict unnecessarily. These made Singaporean feel that these parties that argued about one another and not work together as one solid opposition made them feel that the leadership qualities of these parties were questionable and hence caused Singaporeans to not vote for the opposition, evident from the 78% given to PAP Radin Mas Candidate, Sam Tan, as compared to 2011, which was 67%.

Why did MOE change the criteria for JAE Appeal, without explicitly telling students?

The 2016 JAE Appeal has just started. However if some of you have noticed, there is a new policy that one must meet the COP before being eligible to appeal. Anyone who did not meet the COP would have just wasted paper and their energy as they would have no possibility of entering the school they appealed to if they were unable to meet the COP. Why did MOE do this? Without announcing this to the students, they were met with nothing but disappointment, when they were told that they were unable to get into the school definitely after submitting the application form.

  This small sentence was small and unnoticeable amongst the large paragraph on the MOE JAE Website, but caused so much disappointment to students who eyed for another school that they preferred, including me. It is understandable that the change in ministers may have caused this policy to be made, but the inability of the MOE to inform students directly was very uncalled for. Is the new operational system of the MOE causing this inability? I think that the minister should make an effort to change this lacking areas, or else it would cause much problems in the education system just by inability to conveying these small but important information. These are not like in an army where the military must infer the in charge, but students who examinations are so important that they one must EXPLICITLY inform the students of these changes. These shortcoming must stop as it affect the future of students indirectly!

  If this is the attitude of the minister no longer priorities the needs of the students as first, then I will definitely not vote for him in the upcoming Elections where I am able to vote in if he is in my constituency. Unfortunately, he is not, and he will not lose one precious vote to the opposition.

Why not H2 Combined Humanities?

Since I had not been posting much, let me make a bold statement?

  Why not offer H2 Combined Humanities as a A Level subject in Singapore? Since O Level has it, why not A Level? Its a great way for students to have a much bigger scope of Humanities, if they are in the Science stream.

  The subject can have a mixture of syllabus from two H1 subjects and two papers that have the same assessment format as both counterparts will be examined for an overall 100%. Its the exact same idea as O Level Combined Humanities.

  If it allows the Science stream students to have the opportunity to read a wider range of subject that they can offer, why not? I sure hope that this subject can be offered for 2016-2017 A Level Subject, because I would definitely want to take up the subject...
Just a suggestion for MOE. What do you think? Comment below.

Suggestions for SEAB for fixing the major shortcoming of Social Studies Assessment

 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!!!