<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR>PSLE can never be a level playing field
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->THE recent arguments on whether the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) is a level playing field are not new. Like any written and structured exam, it is only a matter of time before students and teachers find legitimate ways to score ever higher marks. Whether it is enduring gruelling tuition sessions or mugging through thousands of pages of assessment exercises, only the fittest will survive and excel. This is the essence of a meritocratic society, even if it applies here to 12-year-olds.
=> Correction. Late teen PRC kids are allowed take PSLE together with Sporns. FAIR?
The only way to end all argument is to scrap the PSLE and allocate secondary schools by location, as it is done in Taiwan and Japan. In these places, the first major test of students' academic ability comes only when they are 15, that is, at the high school entrance exams. Is it a level playing field for them? Of course not. In a free society, Japan or Singapore, it will never be a level playing field as there is nothing to stop people spending huge amounts of their own resources to achieve their goals, even if it is only a child's written exam.
So why do parents complain that the PSLE is not a level playing field? I can only conclude that they have finally realised that they live in Singapore, where academic achievement typically underpins individual success.
In feudal China, scholars took the imperial exams once every three years to fight for a place in the imperial court. It was common see scholars spend their whole life to achieve this sacrosanct goal of being a court official, which normally implied glory and wealth to the individual and his family.
The PSLE is probably more cruel than the imperial Chinese exam, because everyone usually has only one shot at it in his lifetime. The good news is that life does not end with a mediocre PSLE result. Nor does it mean a top PSLE student will succeed in the future. The battle may be lost but there is still a war to be won, a war of trying to live a meaningful life.
On a personal note, I detest the PSLE because it puts too much stress on parents and especially children at such a young age. However, I am not against O levels or A levels as they are still the fairest means to identify the cream of the cohort. Are O levels and A levels a level playing field? No. Exams will always be a war of resources but fear not, as historically, only those who use their limited resources wisely will win and not those who have the most resources. Goh Jong Hou
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->THE recent arguments on whether the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) is a level playing field are not new. Like any written and structured exam, it is only a matter of time before students and teachers find legitimate ways to score ever higher marks. Whether it is enduring gruelling tuition sessions or mugging through thousands of pages of assessment exercises, only the fittest will survive and excel. This is the essence of a meritocratic society, even if it applies here to 12-year-olds.
=> Correction. Late teen PRC kids are allowed take PSLE together with Sporns. FAIR?
The only way to end all argument is to scrap the PSLE and allocate secondary schools by location, as it is done in Taiwan and Japan. In these places, the first major test of students' academic ability comes only when they are 15, that is, at the high school entrance exams. Is it a level playing field for them? Of course not. In a free society, Japan or Singapore, it will never be a level playing field as there is nothing to stop people spending huge amounts of their own resources to achieve their goals, even if it is only a child's written exam.
So why do parents complain that the PSLE is not a level playing field? I can only conclude that they have finally realised that they live in Singapore, where academic achievement typically underpins individual success.
In feudal China, scholars took the imperial exams once every three years to fight for a place in the imperial court. It was common see scholars spend their whole life to achieve this sacrosanct goal of being a court official, which normally implied glory and wealth to the individual and his family.
The PSLE is probably more cruel than the imperial Chinese exam, because everyone usually has only one shot at it in his lifetime. The good news is that life does not end with a mediocre PSLE result. Nor does it mean a top PSLE student will succeed in the future. The battle may be lost but there is still a war to be won, a war of trying to live a meaningful life.
On a personal note, I detest the PSLE because it puts too much stress on parents and especially children at such a young age. However, I am not against O levels or A levels as they are still the fairest means to identify the cream of the cohort. Are O levels and A levels a level playing field? No. Exams will always be a war of resources but fear not, as historically, only those who use their limited resources wisely will win and not those who have the most resources. Goh Jong Hou
