Wednesday, 7th May 2008
Systems of Knowledge exam tests what students don't know
I'm writing in a personal capacity as assistant lecturer at the Junior College, as part of a team responsible for teaching Systems of Knowledge. I'm so utterly incensed by the SOK paper that our students took at Intermediate level on April 30. It has left me infinitely disappointed on their behalf and totally disenchanted and demotivated.
I've been asking myself why and what we're trying to teach 16-18-year-old students when they're then given questions more suitable for finals students in International Relations (having to decide, for instance, whether it is justifiable and possible to impose democracy by force, with Iraq as the example), more suitable for post-grads in History of Art who are better equipped to answer questions about art, literature, ethics and morality, for philosophy undergrads who would have a field day discussing the ethics and moral connotations of matters dealing with privacy, data protection and technology design and operation...I could go on.
Members of the SOK board and the paper setters, whoever they might be, have proved themselves year after year to be far removed, in their exalted cocooned world, from Sixth Formers and the level at Intermediate. Do they no longer mould humane paper setters? My contemporaries at University in the 1960s were so lucky to have been formed and influenced by the late Professor Beck, a fine gentleman whose memory is still so fondly cherished by all of us who were privileged to be his students. His maxim was that an exam is there to find out what a student knows not what a student doesn't know. Paper setters in all subjects at all levels please note. This year's SOK paper setters couldn't have made a better job at finding out what students didn't know (as they've often done in the past).
The irony of course is that the same proportion of students will pass as they do every year, and after that lecturers will receive an anodyne examiners' report which always serves to criticise the students and their perceived shortcomings, and by implication their lecturers', and is little more than an exercise in self-justification.
RSS
Comments
It would be impossible to take the exam on the knowledge we got during the lessons, based on the syllabus they published (attending De La Salle). For Science, I used what I know from my Computing knowledge, as data protection is not really covered in Module 3 at all...
Then again, today I sat for Advanced Pure Mathematics, and most of my classmates agree that normally Paper 2 is the harder one then Paper 1, this time it was the other way around! Only difference being that Paper 1 is compulsory questions, Paper 2 choose 7 out of 10... Only paper that went how I expected it to so far was Economics Advanced...
A subject such as SOK is totally unnecessary, if those who direct want to teach something worthwhile SOK is not one of those subjects. Malta is the only country, save some one or two countries who still teaches such a subject at this stage of studies. Isn’t it better to attend university upon presentation of three A LEVELS? More expertise in the relevant subjects and more job and university openings.
A note to the general education system. Although many ministers and MP make such a fuss about extra curriculum activities our education systems does not allow the young student to give attention to these events. Schools and colleges abroad have groups of various subjects such as astronomy, sports, writers clubs, own college newspapers and others which add credits to the final certificates. A similar system to that used at Junior college to pass from first year to second year. This type of system should be implemented on a national scale as not certificates that build up a man but the education and group work.
From a small age we are pressured by our parents to do well in our junior lyceum exams than in our O levels and so forth, it is essential that we have these achievements but isn’t it better that we learn by doing (as the logo of Young enterprise says). I attended a Silesian school for my secondary education and one concept that caught my attention was that their main aim if not to help us fully achieve our MATSEC secondary education certificate(which they did to the full) they were going to make us students into true youngsters that will become in the future strong men. This concept is truly not seen in our education system.
I do not intend to seem as I understand fully in how to coordinate the education system nor am I in any position to do so, but if the outside world is changing we must change with it further now that we have been part of the EU for five years
I don't see any changes to the fact that English A-level does not have an oral examination while all other languages do (Maltese included) Is this fair on the students? Or is it merely a product of the monopoly of the University of Malta.. controlling the import of students into the one University on the island?
There are many problems with the MATSEC board.. but no one stands up towards them. I would like to congratulate Ms Ann Gingell Littlejohn on standing up for her students.. however it's not just s.o.k that must be fixed.. but all of the examinations and marking structure.
Whether it is justifiable and possible to impose democracy by force in Iraq is a question that has no right and wrong answer but can be answered by a mix of a student's opinion in relation to the benefits of democracy and citizenship and their interrelation. It is just a matter of arguing theory into practice. What is wrong with such question?!
Obviously I can understand why such a question created frustration among students, and in my opinion the reason is that the majority of people are not aware about any current affairs happening around us, hence not updated on the Iraq war. If you know nothing about the Iraq war , then it is obvious that you do are tested on what you do not know. However if you know nothing about the Iraq war, should you be a university student?!
Moreover one also has to consider the modules studied. 1st: RESPONSIBLE CITIZENSHIP, 2nd AESTHETICS, 3rd SCIENCE AND TECHNOLGY, 4th ENVIRONMENT. The 1st module is in my opinion the only module through which we can learn something benificial which will help us through all our lives. Aesthetics resembles more history of art. We had to study LOADS of Works of art and their creaters. I think that this is not SOK's aim. I can assure all of you readers that I will simply forget all those names I have studied within a month or so, proving the fact that SOK is just there to reach its primary goal: REGULATING THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE MAKING IT TO UNIVERSITY. One has to keep in mind that if a student would like to enter the Medicine and Surgery Course but fails in SOK he is not even allowed to enter the course after passing the re-sit , as this particular course requires B or better in Biology, Chemistry and any Intermediate (apart from SOK) in one session, and without having to re-sit for any subject. The other modules are just common sense and general knowledge and I do not personally think that us students should try to learn how to write about the scientific and technological aspects of a BUTTON (yes the one you use to close your jackets). Sadly enough the examiners who set up the technology part of the paper believe so.
Well I think those are all my view points about SOK. I really hope that someone in this country comes up with a solution to such problems and focuses his/her attention to improve the Maltese education system. If you, up there, do not have any.. I do!
I, too, like many others, "wasted" hours upon hours studying the material required for the exam, and while writing my 4 essays I did fall into the temptation of giving some of the unrequired information. However, I did my best to organize my work to include current issues, and information I gathered personally from podcasts, browsing through informative sites, and the news.
And, although this year's paper was unfair to many, surprisingly, I do believe that this is what SOK must strive to be. Students should be prepared to sit an exam of creativity, organization of general knowledge, and spontaneous thinking. They should be rewarded for the usually unexamined knowledge they acquire along the years.
To answer Mr. Joe Borg’s questions, what the questions asked for was included in our SOK book, however not in rigorous detail. Nonetheless, most of the information I included to “fill” my essay didn’t come from any book, but from news websites and magazines.
Finally, I do appreciate Mrs. Gingell Littlejohn’s effort to “open” the “blind” Board’s eyes. Throughout the four terms she taught me she stressed on being active participants and exercising our freedom of speech, and encouraged extra research at home. Thank you.
Below are some links I visited after going home on Wed 30th dealing with SOK topics we were examined upon:
http://ezinearticles.com/?Forced-Democracy&id=152386
http://www.uneptie.org/pc/tourism/sust-tourism/env-3main.htm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7256440.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7256440.stm
All I can do is eagerly await the unsolicited results, and in the meantime keep browsing
The biggest shock to me was that even though they gave us a specimen paper, which we had gone through with great detail with our SOK teacher, nothing in it resembled whatsoever what was asked of us in the question.
I hope this serves as a wake up call for next year's paper setters and might shine some light on what we actually have to go through to continue our studies.
With such a difficult exam, it is no wonder more and more students like myself are facing mental breakdowns. The only thing putting so much pressure on us is doing, is making us loathe studying. When I started out at sixth form, I enjoyed the idea of learning, loved studying and looked forward to years ahead of furthering my academic capabilities. Having gone through two years worth of learning subjects such as Systems of Knowledge, and actually going through the A levels right now, I can honestly say I am thoroughly put off by the idea of studying further. After all, if it is this hard at this current level, how difficult will it be at university level?
I am not alone in thinking like this. Most, if not all of my peers, tell me that whilst they find Systems of Knowledge an interesting subject, it is too much of a strain to focus on subjects like Biology, Chemistry, Philosophy or Physics (just to name a few) as well as focusing on an exam like Systems of Knowledge. The really beautiful thing about it, is that Systems of Knowledge is usually the exam that holds people back. It is a horrible fact that students manage to get the grades they need to get into their desired course, but do not succeed simply because they have not passed one subject that has absolutely nothing to do with their course. When is the MATSEC board going to realize the damage they are causing students by putting so much pressure on us? We are not fully formed adults. We are not able to cope with the stress levels as well as more mature university students are. Too much is expected of us. Yes, some of us manage to succeed, but the majority of us struggle to get there, and end up fighting depression and anxiety along the way. It is about time the MATSEC board realized this.
Finally I would like to ask the board why is it that in Malta exams tend to concentrate on failing the student in question instead of testing what is learned in the precess of studying for a set period of time? And why should a subject at intermediate be the cornerstone of the student's failure into university? Shouldn't one's mastery of his or hers A LEVEL subjects be enough? After all it is most probable that those two subjects chosen at a level are going to be the main areas of study later on in life.
With this i don't mean to say that intermediates such as SOK are detrimental or should be ignored bit I am of the opinion that instead on the Board doing its best to to restrict students entry to University it should focus its resources on setting up papers that allow students to pass through the knowledge that hey have gained at that level of education no more and no less. is it really such a difficult task to set an examination paper on a syllabus that you have developed or helped developed yourself at a level that is neither weak nor exceptionally difficult but just right so that those who have studied for their intermediates at an intermediate level get a decent pass mark?
It is a brilliant idea that exams are set in the school itself, with teachers preparing the papers on what the students actually studied along the 2 year period. Just like first years pass their end of year tests to become second year students, they can pass a final exam to achieve their matriculation certificate. But i believe that there is some latent agenda behind these government exams.
To prove my point entirely, i enquire, why arent student eligable to see their exam paper? Of course i have no right to the exam paper of Gianni tal haxix, but students should be entitled to see their paper, with a teacher if possible to understand what they have done wrong, and where they can improve. However, i doubt there is enough transperancy for this to occur.
Initially, i would like to show great appreciation towards, Ms Gingell Littlejohn that had the courage to speak her mind and say exactly her opinion. I am obviously aware that the lecturers might be put in a bad light due to these circumstances where the students seemed to be unprepared. But it is not the case, the syllabus says otherwise than questioned in the exam so no one can blame the lecturers, cause all they have done is an excellent job to help our students pass exams
It is utterly useless to compalin at the end of the year, when NSO publishes statistics of illiteracy in Malta. If instead of enouraging students and pushing forward for better education we make them face obstacles and hinder their way towards success. I do not mean that everyone should just pass, regardless if well deserved or not. My only point is that we pressure and stress students far too much, even when compared to other EU countries. In the end we re still behind according to Eurostat, are we behind or are we leaving them behind?
My motto is this and this is exactly what i tell my son. Id rather he learnt and graduated or obtained any certificates in his desired area and is unable to find a job for while. Rather than having him knowledgeless and in the end still jobless. So isnt it better to have a society, where the norm is to have well educated citizens even if jobs are a problem. At least we would have to solve one problem: the creation of jobs. And not two, creating jobs and illiteralism. ...
From your description it seems that Junior College students are expected to be ready to write their doctoral theses. Pity that the big heads who set such papers are in effect reducing the proportion of graduates in Maltese society. I was surprised to learn that here in Vienna the equivalent exams (matura) are set by the school teachers (as opposed to a national, regional or district board) and what is more the students have the option to choose to sit for a written paper or an oral exam for half each of the six or seven subjects covered.
Of course there are pros and cons to such a system - the possibility of personal antipathy affecting objectivity, for example - but it is certainly less stressful to be in familiar surroundings and with familiar people whilst these exams are under way. It's just like doing the usual annual school exams. I'm not saying we should do this in Malta but it is interesting to see the different attitudes that prevail.
The real issue here is that the exam may not reflect the syllabus set out at the beginning of the course, and in this respect, Ms. Gingell Littlejohn and all of the students have every reason to grouse. The SOK concept has so far not really reached its aim in my view; that of arming students with a wide base of knowledge outside of their chosen field of career, as well as intellectual analytical tools and so on. While the exam may be a step in the right direction, it needs to come AFTER the teaching syllabus and methodology has been revised and implemented.
Second of all, Mrs Gingell's statement that most of the time examiners seek to question what students don't know rather than what they know is totally justified. I think examination levels here are amongst the toughest in the European Union. In my good young years when I was a science student I took Biology at MATSEC level and at London level. MATSEC = C grade, London = A grade. Why? Or is it the norm to automatically give 5 people an A, 40 people a B, 200 people a C and so on?
I believe that the more you psychologically terrorize the student's mind (parents included) with having to study every day including countless of hours stretching into the early hours of the morning during exam period, the more the student will loathe the academic life and the more chance he/she has at breaking down.
A revision of the syllabus, teaching method, revised examination difficulties, and more space between one exam and another can make college and exam life easier, more enjoyable, and can still produce fine students if not more of them than there are now. Maybe then will we start to conform with the Lisbon strategy.