What is the Purpose of Exams?

I was inspired to do this post after reading an article about how the A levels in Britain were becoming so easy, one official actually said, “A monkey could sit for the exam”. Of course, Singapore’s standards are slightly different, but there are still some important issues that are worth discussing, first, are our exams easy or difficult? Second, what is the purpose of exams? Third, which is better, easy-to-pass exams, or high-standard but difficult exams?

First, Singapore’s exams are well, doable. It is difficult to set a fixed conclusion on the level of difficulty of our papers, since there are different standards and levels of difficulty across subjects. The nature of subjects also creates challenges in determining the difficulty of the exam.

For instance, Chinese is fun, but dead. It’s not very difficult per se, but the way it’s taught makes it difficult.

Doing well for exams ultimately depends on a combination of personal effort, attitude, a passion for the subject, and a degree of personal aptitude.

As for whether or not exams in other countries are too easy, the problem is related to the issue of grade inflation (what Singapore students are familiar to as “moderation”). But there is a critical difference. Moderation refers to adjusting the results to reflect estimated performance during the actual exam, because for some schools (like my secondary school) in-house exams are ridiculously tough. Grade inflation is really inflating the grades so that more students appear to do well.

But it begs the question, are students really worthy of their grades?

Second, on the purpose of exams.

What is the purpose of exams? A measure of intelligence? A process to enable promotion within the educational system? A system of competition to reward the industrious and penalize the idle? All these reasons are possible, but they neither serve, nor support the true purpose of education, to impart knowledge and skills.

Some might argue that they test students whether they remember their stuff. But education isn’t simply remembering stuff. Given the ever increasing quantity of knowledge and information in the world today, it is practically impossible.

So what should exams be? Rather than test content, they could test skills. Skills need not be remembered, they should be internalized. To the point it really becomes “in the blood”.

Lastly, on the preferable exam system.

Perhaps exams really are a “necessary evil”, because we ultimately need some system of competition to enforce standards, to reward the industrious and penalize the idle. This is what makes our education system so tough, and yet so successful.

Therefore, rather than say “we don’t want exams” we should explore this question instead: “what kind of exam system do we want?”

In this post I brought up two possibilities, in response to the article I’ve read.

One, an easy exam, or a tough but high-standard exam.

Of course, there are problems with my definitions. “easy” and “tough” are fundamentally ambiguous and relative concepts. These two terms differ between two individuals within the same educational system, between different educational systems, and between students from different streams or faculties. A Singapore student might find a math problem a piece of cake, while an American student of the same level might struggle.

But nonetheless, there is still value in the notion of “easy” and “tough”. This has to do with the purpose of exams. If exams are meant to be competitive in nature, that they should be “tough”, the “tougher” the better. There is no point in passing students for the sake of passing them. This will have a detrimental impact on educational standards.

Of course, making exams tough doesn’t mean leaving students out to die. Teachers must have the means to teach as well, especially in teaching the necessary thinking skills which are of utmost importance. Besides, since exams shouldn’t be intellectual bulimia, wouldn’t a “tough” exam system where students simply have to remember and regurgitate yet more stuff defeat the whole purpose of education?

As I come to the end of my post, I’ve realized that I’ve gone quite far from the article. it’s exaggerating perhaps to say that a monkey can sit for a human exam and pass, but the idea is quite clear: that exams for humans probably no longer serve a human purpose.

"What Is" Series- What is Bullying?

After I came home last night, I checked my blog and AALT2’s chatbox and surprise surprise, I saw Jeannie’s renewed threats and her god sister (Qitong)’s claims that I have bullied Jeannie. I didn’t know calling Jeannie stupid on the basis of spelling my name wrongly 3x was tantamount to bullying. If anything, I was wondering how on earth the pair of them can achieve that many spelling errors- “irratating”, “distuarb” (that appeared 2x, so I can assume that’s how she thinks disturb should be spelt) and “prossitude”. I pointed that out, called her stupid for her spelling errors and bimbotic attitude- so now I’m a bully.

All I can say is HAHAHAHAHAHA. =P I always had a morbid sense of humor that is coated with a thick layer of mockery and cynicism. It is ironic how it can become a crime in the eyes of a bully with a huge ego who thinks everyone is jealous of her beauty. I think there’s nothing to admire about a bimbo who can’t spell and speak coherently. So today, I’ve decided to write a post about bullying.

Basically, it defines bullying as “saying and doing things to hurt a person. It is usually done on purpose and repeatedly.” The video goes on to describe the types of bullying- relational, verbal and physical; the results of continuing to be a bully- friendless and getting scolding; the possible reactions of the victim- freeze in fear, fight back or walk away and complain to the teacher; the types of bystanders behavior- ignore the bullying, encourage the bully, support the victim or avenge the bully.

I think this is a very interesting video, but it is too optimistic and stereotypical for my liking. The bully is type casted as the typical “kiam-pah-bin” Ah Beng with his arrogantly, sour face and standing collar. And the victim is the typical village nerd… The points they highlighted were good, but they didn’t have to explore deeper expects of bullying. I’ll be highlighting some in my post.

Anyone who has an edge over others in terms of money, influence or knowledge can be said to be bullies. I would take it further through the exploration of a bully's desire for control and self gratification, and the malicious consequences.

This wasn’t highlighted much upon- most bullies have insecure personalities; they have to belittle others to feel good. Unfortunately, they belittle others the wrong way- for example, they call other people stupid when they are more stupid than others. And most bullies run in a pack- “birds of a feather flock together”. They need emotional and physical support in their actions, especially when they are at the losing end. They can only summon the courage to bully others with the backing of others. Ironically, when someone stands up to them, they go around crying for help claiming they have been bullied. Well, all I can say is, don’t look for trouble and complain when trouble finds you.

Bullies need to have control to feel good- people must scrape and bow before them. Once you demonstrate that you are not afraid of them, they normally react by ignoring you and saying stuff like you aren’t worthy of their attention. Alternatively, they switch tactics and embark on greater attempts to discredit you (relational bullying). I will be focusing a lot more on relational bullying because it is more common in today’s context than physical bullying and its effects are a lot deeper and long lasting. In the video, the example used was “don’t be friends with him!” In life, it goes way beyond that. As mentioned earlier, another form of relational bullying can come in the form is discrediting you. That means they go about spreading malicious tales about you. I.e. you are gay/lesbian, a gossip, a backstabber, a liar, a promiscuous bitch, etc. In the cyber world, you get criticisms about how fat and ugly you are if you post up your pictures and an “enemy” happens to see it.

In the working world, relational bullying is so prominent that it’s a norm. I’m sure you have heard of many stories of people resigning from their jobs because of bosses or colleagues from hell. These are due to the prevalence of certain factors.
a.EGO - Big ego means greater need to be a bully to feel good and powerful.
b.AMBITION – Big ambition means climbing up the corporate ladder FAST. If you don’t have the means to achieve promotions the “natural” way, backstabbing and sabotage is required.
c.BITCHY COLLEAGUES – “When in Rome, do as Romans do” you need to be a bigger bully than others to survive.
d.AGGRESSION – Some people are just plain aggressive, they are just hostile to everyone so that they feel superior to others.

Bullying has the most severe impact on people’s lives especially during their teenage years. This is the critical point in everyone’s life where there are many self doubts and insecurities regarding their looks. Many have committed suicide due to the unrelenting pressure exerted by bullies and themselves. To me, it takes two hands to clap- bullies get tired once they realize they have no hold over you.


Will I feel guilty if Jeannie jumps of the nearest HDB flat? Nah, I don’t have sympathy for weak people. If fact, I admire courage. Look at Yu-Kym, she got nominated for most insightful blog awards. I like her because she has the courage to stick to her guns. She openly posts pictures of herself on her blog and people just avidly criticize her for being a slut, how old she is, how ugly she is, what a copy cat she is, etc. Instead of being upset and shutting down her blog, she stands firm and continues to post her thoughts. I think she is a fantastic blog that all adolescents should read for the purpose of sex education and BGR experiences. I particularly like this proverb that she pasted on her blog: “Pigs are afraid of becoming fat, people are afraid of becoming popular."- meaning a healthy pig will be killed and eaten; a successful person will be a target. At least she has something to be successful about. She doesn’t brag; she relates that’s the reason why I will support her anytime over other promiscuous girls. It’s the ATTITUDE, something that the Ah Lians and Ah Bengs will never understand.

So back to the question- do I consider myself a bully? Maybe, what's your opinion guys? =) I insult everyone equally and fairly (including myself). I’m way too cynical I guess. No one is ever perfect enough for me to call pretty/beautiful- having a pretty face doesn’t mean that your fart will smell of roses nor does it mean you have the personality or intelligence to match your looks. Criticism should never be classified as bullying, especially when it is based on facts. I find it fitting that the real bullies in life find their own bullies in cyberspace, call it Karma if you will.

[Read more about relational bullying here]

"What Is" Series- What is Forgiveness?

What is Forgiveness?


I’m going to discuss the meaning of forgiveness today- no, I’m not going to preach; no, I’m not a Christian and no, I don’t intend to convert to Christianity after this video. I HATE all religions; I worship money, reason and logic though. =P Back to the topic- what is forgiveness? How capable are you of rendering forgiveness?

This video is extremely interesting not because I learnt of a new “ulu” place; rather, it is about unconditional forgiveness. How many of us are actually capable of that? Complete forgiveness of the murderer of your child is something quite beyond me. Those who have experienced the loss of a child would understand the psychological and emotional pain that a parent will undergo, especially the mother; they will start the blame everything from God, to the murderer and themselves for putting their child into danger. Over time, thoughts of revenge would start creeping up on them- irrational thoughts about killing their murderer’s children so that his soul will feel the pain, cursing him to rot in hell for what he has done, etc.

So what is forgiveness? Let us examine the word “forgive”. According to Merriam-webster, it has two meanings: to give up resentment of or claim to requital or to cease resentment against (an offender). It brings a question into mind, are all the forgiveness for all the hurts in the world like this? I doubt so, I seem to identify grudging forgiveness (due to peer pressure or fear of divine reprisal), veneer of forgiveness (i.e. the heart and mind doesn’t follow the mouth) and complete forgiveness. To me, to forgive a person is to trust a person again. If I can’t trust the person, forgiveness is out of the dictionary.

So what influences the type of forgiveness that you might bestow on an offender? I have identified a few:

Personality- agreeable, trusting and optimistic people are always more willing to render complete forgiveness, they are more willing to believe that offenders are capable of change and improvement, and will make attempts to consciously avoid making the same hurtful mistakes. Cynical, distrustful and depressive people like me are typically incapable of complete forgiveness, once the trust is violated, we move on and dump the offender for good because we believe in the saying “a leopard can never change its spots”. Once hurt, twice shy- the offender has just done something that we were expected him/her to do over in time.

Nature of offense- there are some things that cannot be forgiven. Having a mental breakdown and murdering kids is probably more forgivable than a depraved person who raped a 5 year old kid to death. Personally, I can grudgingly forgive a murderer but I will never forgive a person who insults me or harms my reputation with intention of malice. If forgiving a person once doesn’t help, I think they shouldn’t be given another chance if they repeat the same “unforgivable” mistake for the fourth time (don’t say I didn’t give the offender a chance to reform).

Personal Beliefs- beliefs/ideals have a very strong influence on a person’s outlook in this world. In video, the Amish community belief in unconditional forgiveness is so strong that they just forgave the murderer unconditionally, regardless of his actions. In fact, they convinced themselves that he shouldn’t be blamed. People who come from cultures who believe in the concept of vengeance and revenge are less open to the idea of forgiving and offender. Furthermore, their enmity doesn’t end with the death of the offender. It can be extended to his family, his children or his entire clan- the feud can last across generations…

Duration of offense- I think the longer you stay pissed at a particular offender, the harder you’ll find it to forgive him/her. Imagine those stories of people from the workforce- bitchy colleagues who backstab and snub that at every available opportunity. From attempts to spill their coffee on you by “accident”, missing files when you need them urgently, being supplied false information to work with only to be told of the error one day before your presentation, etc. Many adults can tell you stories of having to put up with colleagues from hell just because they want to keep their job. When it is time to leave or when that particular offender repents and tries to seek forgiveness, it’s almost impossible to completely forgive him/her for the hell you’ve been put through. I guess the resentment builds up over time until it mutates into bitterness and hatred, turning the victims into the next Mt. Krakatau.

I remember seeing this TVM [i] quote of the day “The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is the attribute of the strong.” I must say I disagree with it. When we talk about forgiveness, it is not a matter of how strong you are it is about how magnanimous you are. There are some sins that cannot be forgiven- i.e. the violation of a child’s innocence, torturing of animals, etc. If you can forgive murderers, rapists, serial drug addicts, you are either very magnanimous or very stupid. When you forgive a person, it is no guarantee that he/she will not turn around and rob or kill you to feed their fetishes. I prefer not to take the chance. I’m not magnanimous enough to want to say I “died happy and at peace” after getting killed by the person I just forgave two days ago. I’m making this stand not because I’m a coward, but because I want to die of a heart attack. The worst possible way to die as far as I’m concerned it to be killed by someone you trust (and forgave).

[i] TV Mobile- free television broadcasts that are aired on the public buses in Singapore.

"What Is" Series- What is Intelligence?

This is probably the last of my “What is” series of posts. This post is written by the recommendation of De Maitre, who wants me to take on the questions created by the Intellectual Snob saga (refer to post, The Veneer of Legitimacy in Varsity Elitism, and the response).

Let’s once again recap what Intellectual Snob (Int Snob) had to say about locals and local universities.

“Frogs”. That’s referring to the students.
Couldn’t stand the culture of “stupidity” in the local universities.
That only people with good family backgrounds could possibly afford education overseas, the rest relying on scholarships of varying prestige, and the people without scholarships stuck in the so-called “frog schools”


So, what is intelligence?

Actually, to some extent I sympathized with Int Snob. I had a horrible experience in class, where I had to work with someone who is not “stupid” per se, but try too hard to be intelligent. Throwing in jargon; utilizing complex philosophical ideas, without paying attention to the relevance to the lesson or the course in general.

Like I said, one can be articulate without being intelligent, and be intelligent without being articulate. Eloquence is not the only, nor the most accurate assessment of intelligence.

Take for example politicians. I have no doubts about the ability of Singapore’s political leaders, but in other countries, it’s a very different story. Politicians are eloquent, but they do not necessary deliver, nor do they necessarily understand the complexities of the issues they are dealing with.

Of course, you can credit this to partisan politics, but my point is, eloquence without the ability to deliver is hardly intelligent.

To explore the issue a little deeper, just what is the kind of stupidity was Int Snob talking about? People who are “irrelevant”, like the experience I had above, was one, students who aren’t “creative” probably the other.

What is the problem? That Singapore students suffer from intellectual bulimia? That Singapore students only learn through rote learning?

True perhaps, but it will not be accurate to blame the problem on the varsity system of Singapore. We are all products of the JC system, so if there was anything to blame, the JC system should be blamed instead.

So is there anything of the JC system to blame?

It ultimately depends on your teacher. JC is still a teacher-centric level of education, unlike university, where independent learning and lecturers as facilitators are emphasized instead. So the teacher’s ability to teach, and the teacher’s approach to teaching determines the kind of education one gets out of JC.

I had two History teachers in JC (both of them were good, so there is no debate about ability here!).

One took the varsity approach towards teaching, emphasizing independent learning, and creative understanding of issues. I remember my friends complaining that he “didn’t quite teach”, but I always reply, “That’s what you get in uni.”

The other took a structured approach to teaching, teaching using a structured and organized method, and emphasizing coverage of arguments and exam skills. The same friends who complained about the previous teacher were obviously happy with this one.

Actually, there was value in both teachers. The former taught me to be independent, and to be creative. The latter taught me valuable thinking skills, and taught me how to plan in studies.

So to say that the JC system was flawed is inaccurate at best, erroneous at worst.

This is because the value in learning comes from what is derived from the learning experience.

The real trouble with the JC system is that we learn using the lecture-tutorial system as our framework, but still sit for just one written paper (the A Levels) at the end of the course. The emphasis is thus diverted to scoring for the A levels, sacrificing the exposure of academic culture in varsity education.

In addition, Int Snob’s comments about the Singapore high-school / JC system kind of exposes a lack of travelling, or at least reading.

If Singapore’s education system was bad, what about other countries?

Just read my previous posts (On Exams and Moral Character, and Some Horror Stories) to find out more about high school in other countries.

Then, what about cramp schooling in Japan and Korea? They are not much different from the “rote learning” we have here in our JC.

Ultimately, if Int Snob hasn’t been to Yale or Harvard, how would she know how different the US system is from Singapore’s?


I agree that these are elite colleges, reserved for those with excellent academic results, and probably with some class background. But remember there are other, “second tier” universities in the US. Foreign ≠ Better.

And the top twenty places in university rankings of Asian universities for NUS and NTU aren’t bought with money, they are the combined effort of their students and academics. To doubt that means really, to doubt yourself, Int Snob.

"What Is" Series- What is a Superpower?

I am no expert on N Korea; nobody in the world really is anyway, given the secretive nature of the state. But I am still very interested in this country, which really is a utopian project that turned into a political monster and human catastrophe.

I was inspired by this video on Youtube, which is typical N Korean propaganda.



The description says:

“A "superpower" should not be defined by its ability to dominate and project power, but to be capable of standing against every external threat. North Korea manages to do it successfully.”

The question that came to my mind is: “Really?”

First, to beg the question, what is a superpower? A superpower is a country with hegemonic power in the international system, with the ability to project power and influence beyond its political boundaries.
N Korea clearly isn’t a superpower. It doesn’t have that kind of influence. It never had. It never led the communist camp (it was the old Soviet Union) during the Cold War, nor was it a regional power (the regional communist power in Asia was, well, obviously, China).

Second, the ability to defend against any external threat. Well, any self-respecting country can do that. To be able to resist attack doesn’t quite count as being a superpower. If that was the case, then Singapore is a superpower. Of course, this is an exaggeration, but my point is, being a superpower has certain pre-requisites, and carries with it certain responsibilities.

Besides, if those propaganda videos were any good gauge of N Korea’s abilities, stock footage of the kind you see in the news (like the ubiquitous launch of the Taepodong missile, or the parades), outdated weapons and tactics are hardly a good indication of N Korea’s ability to defend itself.

Last, but not least, superpower status isn’t just military status, it’s economic status. Good try for N Korean propaganda, but stock footage from the 70s isn’t quite going to help, not to mention how far the rest of the region has gone ahead. S Korea, which was behind the north in the 70s and early 80s, China, after Chairman Deng’s reforms, and of course, Japan, which has gone beyond anyone could possibly imagine.

Just to digress a little, S Korea and Japan probably have N Korea to thank for their prosperity. The Korean War brought opportunities for both sides, especially Japan economically, as they became important for US interests.

Ultimately, superpower status is not something that can be fabricated from propaganda videos or political rhetoric. True power is something that can be exercised. Little wonder you don’t see the US needing to do all those military parades.

"What Is" Series- What is Beauty?

There have been quite a number of posts about the whole notion of beauty in our society. I thought it’ll be my turn to explore the idea of beauty, and what it means for life in the modern world.

Most of the issues that revolve around the concept of beauty have to do with cosmetic surgery. Double eyelids, a sharper nose, a sharper chin, down to the chest, then the waist, then the hips, then the thighs… you get the idea.

So, why would people want to go to such lengths to change themselves… anatomically, if I can say that? There are two reasons in my opinion, one that is sociological, and one that is practical.

Society sets ideals on gender in many ways. Females are supposed to be, well, feminine. In addition to behaviourial expectations, they are also given “standards” for appearance in figure, what sociologist Naomi Wolf calls the “Beauty Myth”.

Basically, the beauty myth creates the situation that women judge themselves, and are judged by others, by their appearance. Being better looking means more opportunities in life.

That brings me to the second reason I’m going to talk about, the practical reason. Society is increasingly demanding in terms of appearance. Having looks means more job opportunities in the service industry, more opportunities to attend social or corporate events, and all these translates into better prospects.

Given modern society’s obsession with speed and convenience, cosmetic surgery is seen as the fastest solution that can produce the quickest results.

Well, compare running 10km everyday to a session at the slimming centre once a week. Which is better?

Of course, there are consequences to this obsession of the superficial. In the pursuit of beauty, people don’t realize that a double standard is at work in our society. Women are forced to make themselves attractive, but men do not feel the same pressure to do so. Of course, there are men who take great lengths to enhance their “beauty”, but unlike females, there is no social impetus for men to do so.

Hence the “Beauty and the Beast” stories in our society today.

The second consequence is that of our society’s value towards beauty. There is such a thing as “inner beauty”, a good character, personal ability, intelligence, etc, and in a society that over-emphasises physical appearance, is there still value in these qualities?

Just imagine going out, and seeing a really pretty girl. But to your horror, when she speaks, she spews out a whole range of vulgarities. Is that still pretty, I ask everyone?

Mencius, the Chinese philosopher, argued that beauty is a combination of inner and outer beauty. they complement each other.

Finally, to end off, Zhuge Liang, the genius strategist and Prime Minister of the State of Shu during the Three Kingdoms Period, had a very average-looking (some say ugly, but there is no conclusive evidence), but brilliant wife.