- Joined
- Jul 24, 2008
- Messages
- 33,627
- Points
- 0
Mar 22, 2010
Relook the O-level process for reviewing art grading
<!-- by line --><!-- end by line -->
<!-- end left side bar --><!-- story content : start -->
MY DAUGHTER sat for her O-level Art examination last year. She had scored an A1 in her preliminary but received a C6 in the actual examination.
There were three other students who had the same results. On receiving the results, and supported by the school, we appealed and had to pay a fee of $102.70 for each appeal.
The result of the appeal, received a few weeks later, was that the grade was correct and remained unchanged. However, we were surprised to learn that the artworks were not viewed by the Singapore Examinations and Assessment Board (SEAB) nor the Ministry of Education (MOE) during the appeal process.
The artworks had all been returned to the school after marking for the O levels and the review was done by looking only at photographs. (These photographs were submitted by the school together with the artworks for the O levels.)
We started an e-mail correspondence with SEAB on this, copied to MOE.
My questions were specific: In an appeal review on grades, can artworks which are three-dimensional and interactive be reviewed by looking at photographs? If so, how? If not, what is SEAB doing about its procedures?
SEAB, in all its correspondence, stated that it had followed procedure, looked at the photographs and its markers were experienced in their field. My questions were not answered. However, we surmised from its e-mail that SEAB is saying that artworks which are three-dimensional and interactive can be reviewed by looking at photographs.
In the past, artworks were only two- dimensional drawings and paintings. Reviews could then be done by looking at photographs. These days, there is coursework which is done on boards, some three-dimensional, some interactive and some both.
We ask that SEAB review its process for review of art so future students can benefit.
This will be in tune with MOE's greater emphasis on art, music and physical education ('Schools to develop 'soft skills''; March 10).
Jen Wee-Almodiel (Mrs)
Relook the O-level process for reviewing art grading
<!-- by line --><!-- end by line -->
<!-- end left side bar --><!-- story content : start -->
MY DAUGHTER sat for her O-level Art examination last year. She had scored an A1 in her preliminary but received a C6 in the actual examination.
There were three other students who had the same results. On receiving the results, and supported by the school, we appealed and had to pay a fee of $102.70 for each appeal.
The result of the appeal, received a few weeks later, was that the grade was correct and remained unchanged. However, we were surprised to learn that the artworks were not viewed by the Singapore Examinations and Assessment Board (SEAB) nor the Ministry of Education (MOE) during the appeal process.
The artworks had all been returned to the school after marking for the O levels and the review was done by looking only at photographs. (These photographs were submitted by the school together with the artworks for the O levels.)
We started an e-mail correspondence with SEAB on this, copied to MOE.
My questions were specific: In an appeal review on grades, can artworks which are three-dimensional and interactive be reviewed by looking at photographs? If so, how? If not, what is SEAB doing about its procedures?
SEAB, in all its correspondence, stated that it had followed procedure, looked at the photographs and its markers were experienced in their field. My questions were not answered. However, we surmised from its e-mail that SEAB is saying that artworks which are three-dimensional and interactive can be reviewed by looking at photographs.
In the past, artworks were only two- dimensional drawings and paintings. Reviews could then be done by looking at photographs. These days, there is coursework which is done on boards, some three-dimensional, some interactive and some both.
We ask that SEAB review its process for review of art so future students can benefit.
This will be in tune with MOE's greater emphasis on art, music and physical education ('Schools to develop 'soft skills''; March 10).
Jen Wee-Almodiel (Mrs)
