Skip to main content

Thinking Questions, Tuition Questions and the Owl Questions

(The thinking questions of PSLE exam are mostly likely ended up as tuition questions at tuition centres.  Perhaps, more specialised tutors are needed for this niche market. Who say the government is not enterprising?  It is indirectly growing the industry. However, after all the thinking, the owl still cannot find his way out, why?)

The PSLE exam is now shifting to test thinking skills and how much learning a candidate obtains.  Ironically, these thinking questions will become the challenging questions for the tuition centres.  Each will compete with each to come out with the best solutions to the thinking questions.

So, the Ministry of Education is giving tuition centres another marketing tool for promoting themselves.  Really, do we need a tough and high standard of thinking questions to distinguish students?

An owl question
May I ask this funny question? When the owl flied into the office of the Prime Minister the other day, what was this bird thinking or did the owl do a thinking calculation at all before entering the Istana?  Oh!  This becomes a difficult and challenging question.  Perhaps, with his mathematical minds, our PM can give an answer on why the owl flied into his office.

The owl might think too hard on the route to the PMO but unfortunately she was not able to calculate the exit route. So, is the owl thinking inside or outside the box? Most likely the owl was thinking inside the box as she finally needed assistance to fly out of the Istana.

Challenging thinking questions
According to the Education Minister, this year PSLE examination questions are to test students’ thinking skills.  There are challenging questions to test the learning of a candidate: 
[Some of the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) questions this year were crafted differently to guide the students’ thinking, Education Minister Heng Swee Keat revealed on Facebook today (Nov 22).
 “One small refinement we’ve made is to craft the more challenging exam questions in a way that lets our children show what they’ve learnt, while keeping the PSLE standard high,” wrote Mr Heng.] #1
What is the meaning of ‘keeping the PSLE standard high’?  If you want to score A*, you will have to solve these challenging exam questions.  Every school is a good school but not every school is equipped to solve the A* questions.  So, tuition centres come to the rescue.  

In fact, there are many young parents complaining about the difficult thinking questions of primary one or two. So, one can imagine how challenging are the PSLE questions? 

PSLE is a one-way thinking, just like the owl. http://www.straitstimes.com/sites/straitstimes.com/files/psl3110e.jpg
One-way thinking
I am afraid we are training students thinking only one side of the story, just like the flying owl thinking (inside the box) the one-way mission to the Istana.  After taking the one-way exam, the owl could not find a way out.

The owl must have proper education, not necessary taking challenging exam, about what is wrong or right at the first place.  It is wrong to enter a room without permission.  If you are a hacker or intruder, you will be arrested and charged in court. PSLE candidates should know about this before and after taking the exam.  Scoring A* is a one- way traffic and knowing the right and wrong is a two-way traffic.    

Still exam smart
Unfortunately, the schools focus too much on solving challenging questions.  The tuition centres and parents are also too busy preparing students for the exam. So, it ends up with students thinking inside the box – chasing the A*.  Once achieving A*, students go further into another exclusive narrow box in search of more A*.   

Primary school students should be free to think and have fun. Setting challenging questions to maintain high standard for PSLE is dividing ‘have’ and ‘haven’t’. No wonder some tuition teachers can become a millionaire who certainly can help the 'have' to solve the difficult exam questions. 
[Acknowledging that the school-leavers examination may sometimes be more pressurising than desired, he told parents to "find the right balance". He said: "We don’t want to have excessive pressure. Where there is, we have made adjustments, toned it down. But we must not compromise our strengths in developing our children and in preparing (them) for the world, which is going to be very competitive, and for (their) jobs, which will not be easy.”] #2
Preparing our students the high moral standard is far more important than solving the challenging exam questions.  The ‘right balance’ and ‘excess pressure’ that PM referred to is just solving the challenging questions and scoring between A* or A.  It has not solved the fundamental problem.   

#1

#2

Comments

  1. First, the owl must take extra English lessons. She (he?) flew instead of flied. Maybe she's fried?

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Sub-standard PAP and the Singapore education system

I make a 'policy shift' when I hear the debate of right politics, constructive politics and sub-standard opposition. My original aim is to discuss about “Su Dongbo, Zhang Juzheng and Singapore education system”. The discussion will end with a sub-standard PAP, in particular from the assessment of the quality of PAP potential candidates. Another policy shift is to discuss it like a play, a drama and make it more entertainment rather than a sub-standard political discussion. Act 1 Gangster’s demand Imagine a sense in the Hong Kong's gangster movie (or a godfather movie), the gangsters' master is shouting at his poor opponent and demand him to give a price for his wrong act. The poor guy without any resources can only offer his body or his service to work for the master. Back in his own chamber, the master is still not satisfied and continues to shout 'don't play, play, you think you are hero, you think you are tiger, or superstar or acting ...

Is Prism Project Another Central Planning of the PAP?

There are 3 scenarios under the Prism Project#1 of Institute of Public Policy.  However, it looks more like the central scenario planning of the People’s Action Party. From the instructional menu of Prism Project Primer #2, participants were guided to a situation in 2022 and they have to imagine, within the Primer framework, to come out with 3 possible scenarios in Jun-Aug 2012.  2022. What a coincidence! Not long ago, PM Lee declared that he would like to hold the prime minister post for another 10 years. The other coincidence is the similarity between the 3 scenarios and the candidates of PE2011. How competitive and sustainable are the 3 scenarios to the people of Singapore and to the PAP?   Will the scenarios produce competitive and sustainable Singapore, Singaporeans or the PAP?  Perhaps, as what the Chinese say: planning cannot always catch up with changes.   And planning sometimes turns out the wrong, bad and unexpected results, espec...

对话一定要有共识吗?还是求取多元性来丰富自我?

全国对话喊到现在还一直高喊全国要有共识,尤其是全国对话的结果就是要寻求新加坡人的共识。不然,行动党就会说,我国的政治将会出现分裂,新加坡就变成一个不团结的国家。 全国对话一定要取得共识吗?文明对话的目的难道就是为了取得全国共识吗?如果是共识,那就一定有取舍。是不是说强势的人就领头共识,而落势的就落得一无所有。这不又走回老路,一条行动党独大的旧政治框框吗?看来,行动党对于过去,仍然依依不舍,行动党的共识,就是国家的共识,新加坡人的共识。 对话是要加深双方的了解,尊敬并且互相学习,吸取对方的优点,填补自己的缺点。这就是多元性的好处。然而全国对话的结果,如果只是强求共识,而忽略多元性和不同的意见,甚至否定他人的意见,那么,这个共识,是否具建设性,破坏性,还是分裂性,那就很难说了。 行动党似乎忘记了多元性。文明的对话并不是要把自己的 意见,信仰和理念强加给对方。即使这些意见,信仰和理念都是好的,善的。但是,对方未必会欣赏,未必会接受。因此,对话的结果应该是吸取对方的意见,改进自己的治国方针,然后,交给人民去决定,而这个决定也不过是大多数人的共识,而不可能是全国人民百分百的共识。 (乐观的看,行动党的全国对话,也不过是改进自己的治国方针,通过自己的小圈圈,自我讨论,研究,更新和改良行动党的政治策略,然后,在下一次大选时,拿出来让选民决定。因此,所谓的共识,在全国人民还没有决定前,仍然不是全国大多数人的共识。很可惜,行动党原本应该通过全国对话这个平台,吸收更多对手的意见,不同的观点,将它们纳入自己的政治策略中,然后在大选中让选民选择这个纳入反对意见的新政纲。可惜的是,行动党没有这个雅量,也或许根本看不起反对的意见。因此,它只能企图通过全国对话,硬要说这是全国共识。所以,充其量这只能说是行动党小圈圈的改良版政治策略,绝对不能说是全国共识。) ‘己所不欲,忽施于人’我们不喜欢的,不要强加他人身上。同样的,我们喜欢的,也不可以强加于他人身上。例如,有些人不喜欢吃有些食物,我们却很喜欢吃这类食物,但是,我们要尊重个人的喜好,不要强迫他人接受我们的建议。了解了这点,下一回提供食物时,就会通过多些选择,而不是只提供自己喜欢的食物。这点一般新加坡人都有这个敏感度,我们会了解马来族的要求,尽量避免他们敏感的食物。 为何行动党过去能够了解国人...