I'm pretty sure most people with the adequate education will feel a similar notion as me,
"I like to read and study history, but I don't like to do history exams."
Why?
Because history exams, the standard thought which we will have is that it'll be filled with dates, locations, and facts which had to be memorised in detail. So it's kinda like you have to know when Hitler actually started the genocide, when did Singapore started their independence, and how did Singapore became known as "Singa-pura" and not "Babi-pura".
Because I'm pretty sure there's no lion in Singapore at that point of time, but wild boars very likely.
I'm a fuking lion!!
So the concept is straightforward, admit it, we don't like exams that require as to memorise diehard information unless we REALLY need it. As least, I DON'T LIKE IT.
Take it that such things, which can be taken off wikipedia, are known to be as factual examinations.
In the recent exam of financial planning, I found that paper rather difficult. Why? Because I... seriously... SERIOUSLY dislike memorising facts. So for the test, I had to memorise like CPF system, not what it does, but like percentages of interest etc.
Erm... you can like get the main picture from a simple picture in CPF in which even Aunties and Unkers like me can understand?
Because CPF knows the typical Aunties like Serene, and typical Unkers like Desmond won't understand words and difficult stuff, so it's done in a very Malay-ish type of picture.
Kinda portrays what they CPF board thinks about Malays. :P They only know how to shower their flower. :p
While cute Chinese girls introduce the products... :D
The bitching I have is that, what is the use and practicality of an examination, if what it does, is ask you to recite such factual answers, and not ask the use of it? I won't mind if the question goes...
1a) What is the interest rate of the OA of a CPF account?
b) From this interest rate, will it be wiser to top-up your CPF account, or to invest it elsewhere? State reasons why.
See? A professional question from Takahina. Sure to make students wanna long pia their head one konfirm.
Instead of asking a question like:
1) What is the interest rate of the SA of the CPF.
Full-stop.
WTF? You expect me to answer this question?... Ok I answer. After I answered, I check the points allocated.
A fucking 2 points.
When I did such a question in the exams, my head was cracking...
IS THIS A FUCKING TRICK QUESTION??? ARE THERE ANYTHING ELSE I HAVE TO ANSWER?!?!
Either it's me, or it's the JC effect that every question has to be answered in an essay form. But I believe, super kiasu aunties whose name goes with the initial SY, will write a whole page essay out of even 1 mark.
And well, Takahina wrote this, for the 2 points.
"The interest rate for the Ordinary Account is 3.5% for the first $20000, and the following 2.5%."
Some people I heard... wrote.
"2.5%"
So you get 1 point for writing "2", and ".5" for the other mark? Groovy.
The gist is that, what is the point, for asking such question, when in real life you could just check the internet and get answers out of it? I understand if the paper is a very specific paper like "CPF paper", or "GST Paper". But no, it's financial planning, surely the setter can do better. Plus it's at a Uni level.
To be frank I was taken aback a bit. Econs paper and Law paper is fine, since the questions are very applicable and requires less or no recitation, but the finance and marketing papers are somewhat hilarious. I'm not saying the paper is easy, but the paper has questions which I hadn't expect at all. Asking the specific date on when do people submit their income tax is not what I expected.
Well, kinda my fault too since I pick questions.
So I wanna ask, what's the point, in giving exams whereby it's just recitation? I loved the law paper, even though it's the toughest one I had among the 4 papers. Because it's relevant, and made me think.
Exam paper should question on skills, application, usages to real life, or maybe relevant information vital to the exam which the one studying MUST KNOW about, like relevant information in the industry itself and not readily available to people of the public. CPF is certainly easily obtainable. I mean even Aunties know about it... I have a feeling my father knows more about it than me too.
ZOMG, I fucking fail.
And how about the foreign students? You think they give a shit about CPF, Australia has their own superannuation which Singapore students could give less than a piece of crap about, you think China students wanna care about CPF? Unless they wanna stayover in this saturated land, as compared to China...
I'm not saying all the papers epik fail overall, but just wanna question, is there a need for factual questions? And if so, why?
And also, is there a need for every subject to have a theory paper?
If there is a UOT (University of Takahina), subjects like marketing will be based on practicality, and application of skills into the field. And have like a small paper with minor percentage onto the theory part of it. Because not all subjects are like maths, in which you can knock yourself out trying to do out the questions.
Some subjects/modules, are very practical. I'm not saying that exams no need theory, but the weightage should differ.
I still remember in last sem there is this customer service module.
Rant no.1: FIRE THE FUCKING LECTURE PETER KIDNEYSTONE!
Rant no.2: YOU BASE OUR ROLE-PLAYING ACT, ON THE CONTENT WE PRESENT, NOT ON HOW GOOD WE ACT ON STAGE! YOU THINK WHAT, WE IN ACTING COURSE AR?!
Rant no.3: You fucking fail me, you fucking fail lecturer. The worse ever man, even worse than my boss who speaks incoherent english due to her being malay.
If I was the lecturer, I would have based a higher percentage of the role-playing side, because it's an actual application on how we should face our customers. But, nope, the main percentage is on theory (naturally >_>), whereby question like...
"When you face an angry customer, what should you do?"
If I was an Ah Beng I will fucking punch the customer in his fuck face.
But no, I'm a cultured Beng, so I said,
"I will smile and try to calm him down, listening to his complains and try to solve the situation. In the meantime take out some goodies like water, biscuits, and maybe vouchers to please him."
Yeah! So I write this, and I pass! I have a diploma in customer service. Well, then in real life I'll be either a fucking beng a punch the customer's lips off his face, or be an auntie and serve tons of water and biscuits.
The thing is that examinations rigid us. The standard education route has always been that the last theory paper will be the one most looked at, for most if not all subjects. That is the thing which needs a change. Just simply, it's not logical to base certain subjects on just theory itself.
Most subjects now, throw a high percentage of around 50% for final paper. Do we need that high?
I know people who can write damn well on paper in Japanese, but when you talk to them, they are totally... TOTALLY blur. So in the end? Do they even know Japanese? Tell them to go to Japan after getting a JLPT 3, will they even converse or try to converse in Japanese with the locals? You lack confidence in general conversation, and all you can do is write Japanese.
To me, that is not knowing the language at all. That is you learn how to write symbols of another country's. That's all.
But, if the weightage for... maybe oral for example is much higher, let's say 40% even, I'm pretty sure people learning the language will converse more in it, to improve more in it, to gain more confidence, and thus so when you get to a real life case, you CAN converse normally, be it sub-standard as compared to the locals, but at least you understand them, they understand you.
Language learned.
Summarise up the whole post, examiners please don't be dead and just simply make a "theory" paper the most important part of the subject, just because it's THEORY. Use the brain a bit, and think of what is more "crucial" in what you hope the student can take home with.
Secondly, Peter Hardstone you suck. Seriously. Takahina is a better lecturer than you, take my words man. I don't care if another Pikachu incident happen, you just SUCK. _l_
....................................................................
Song Recommendation:
Capsule - Love or Lies
I have meant to intro this song since a long time ago, but I kept forgetting about it.
By Capsule, the man behind Perfume's songs. This song has been out for a while now, and from my knowledge it's the theme for the Liar Game SP.
The groove is quite catchy, and has a more adult feel to it as compared to that of Perfume. Standard Capsule stuff, although I like this more, because it's catchy.
The lyrics needs a bit of digesting, but look more into it, it's somewhat similar to that of a "clubbing mood", the "love" you make in a club, is it love? Or just a deception.
3 comments:
ya i think CAs a way better indication of ability than the final exam !!
universities after all, engage its students as young academics, not as future units in the workforce. This being its traditional role.
For me, i sure like the way its done, but I don't know how relevant is it for most people who are actually going to do real work in real jobs.
ya i think CAs a way better indication of ability than the final exam !!
universities after all, engage its students as young academics, not as future units in the workforce. This being its traditional role.
For me, i sure like the way its done, but I don't know how relevant is it for most people who are actually going to do real work in real jobs.
ehh... wat are CAs?? lolll
Post a Comment