Another dot in the blogosphere?

Posts Tagged ‘electronic

I would like to critique this move fairly, but I cannot as the rest of the article is behind a paywall.

However, the SEAB has a track record of siding with caution. It moves so slowly, if at all, that molasses in a jar looks like speed demon.

Article screenshot: More trials before switch to electronic marking of exam scripts.

The SEAB seems to favour changing the medium and not the method, and as a result, not change at all.

This example of electronic marking would presume electronic test-taking were simple transitions from paper to screens. This is what happened with early e-books. Going electronic in this manner did (and does) not take advantage of hyperlinking, searching, and collaborating.

To push the boundaries where they need to be, the method must also change. The test should not just be about individual accountability, but also about the ability to communicate, cooperate, and collaborate. The challenge should not just be about low level thinking, but about contextual application, evaluation, and creation.

The superficial change in medium and not the method reveals this: The SEAB is neither prepared (state of mind) nor ready (state of being) to design and implement meaningful change. It is about jogging on the same spot to create the impression of work, but not move in any particular direction.

If you do not point out that something is odd or wrong, it soon becomes the norm. This is another way of saying what Jon Stewart said in his final episode of The Daily Show:

The best defense against bullshit is vigilance. So if you smell something, say something. -- Jon Stewart

The oddities or wrongdoings do not have to be outlandish or major crimes. They can be seemingly mundane events that we choose to ignore or forget to question.

Take our need to pay before you actually pay. In Singapore, this happens for simple things — like when you wish to buy a cinema ticket online or when you want to pay for a cab ride with your a phone app.

I was reminded of the latter when my family took a cab ride home from the airport. I noticed that the NETSPay QR code scheme was available. I opted to try it as every retailer I had asked before was not ready (even those that had the scan here sign or a QR code on point-of-sale devices).

However, the cabbie warned me that there was a 30-cent surcharge. Service and sales providers call this a “convenience fee”.

Really. I had to pay to go cashless. I should charge an inconvenience fee for forcing me to withdraw money from an ATM and for miring me in the past.

How are the authorities, retailers, and providers to encourage widespread adoption of cashless payments when we are penalised by paying in order to pay?

What else does the Goods and Services Tax (GST) do if not to also improve the sale of products and services — seamless and secure being one area improvement?

Imagine if our banks, utility services, and telecommunication providers charged a “convenience fee” for electronic statements. We might go backwards to snail mail-based statements because people want to get and feel something for their money.

In schooling and education, I imagine a ridiculous scenario of attending a class where you can see the teacher talking but you must pay extra to hear what s/he is saying. The teaching resources are also blurred or redacted and you must pay to see it in entirety.

The scenario is as silly as the convenience fee is stupid. The providers who charge this fee are greedy and the regulators inattentive. Collectively, we are stupid to pay in order to pay. We have a long way to go to be a Smart Nation if we cannot get something that is as mundane and mainstream as cashless payment.

I shake my head in disbelief sometimes when I think about how inflexible some schools or teachers can be.

I know of some schools who have more liberal mobile device policies. As part of a consulting gig, I visited a primary school whose policy was to allow all students, even the youngest ones, to bring smartphones to school as long as the devices were kept in lockers.

Other schools have Amish-like policies on smartphones. I am very familiar with one that disallows cassettes, CD players, walkmans, VCDs, and pagers amongst other devices (see portion of handbook below).


Even the Amish might remark that they do not use these devices not because they are against them but because they might have to rob a museum to get them!

The first type of school is more progressive in that it recognizes the modern demands of their stakeholders. Both parents are likely to be working and their child might have to find their own way home on arranged or public transport. Phones are critical for such daily updates.

That same school does not yet allow the use of the phones for lessons. However, they will have will not have to fight the battles of resistance among teachers, low buy-in among parents, or early “exploratory” use among students when the time comes for them to make that decision.

The second school will have a tougher time pulling itself out of the educational dark ages.

A rigid, backward, or disconnected policy also has a way of affecting the mindset of teachers. It can breed group think, inflexibility, and a fear of risk-taking.

My wife reminded me of something we experienced in the middle of the year. My son had answered a comprehension question on a passage about Elizabeth Choy being tortured during the Japanese Occupation of Singapore [1][2].

The correct answer to a question was that she was given “electric shocks”. My son did not get the full marks because he answered that she had been “electrocuted”. His teacher did not give him the full marks because he did not write down exactly what was in the passage.

This incensed my wife, an English teacher, who discussed it with my son’s teacher. My wife also asked her colleagues in school for their comments. Everyone except my son’s teacher agreed that getting an electric shock was the same as being electrocuted.

To be fair, there could have been more to the argument. Perhaps there was some comprehension skill that was tested that my son did not perform.

But perhaps the equivalent of copying and pasting was more important than interpretation and exercising vocabulary. Perhaps schooling was more important than education.

And perhaps these are examples of how teachers and schools risk losing relevance. The rest of the world sees the point of change and moves on, but teachers and schools do not.

Click to see all the nominees!

QR code

Get a mobile QR code app to figure out what this means!


Usage policy

%d bloggers like this: