‘N’ LEVEL RESULTS: TELL SOME, DON’T TELL SOME?

I refer to the article “‘N’ Level results: 72.6% of NA students can move up to Sec 5” (Today, Dec 17).

“N” Level candidates’ statistics incomplete?

According to the Ministry of Education’s (MOE) press release last year “Results of the 2011 Singapore-Cambridge General Certificate of Education (Ordinary Level) Examination”, “This year, 4,548 or 34.8% of the 2011 Secondary 4 Normal Academic [Sec 4N(A)] students sat one or more subjects in the GCE O-level examination. Of these, 4,086 or 89.8% have obtained at least one O-Level pass.”

I find it somewhat strange that the report can give the number of overall candidates who passed 1, 3 and 5 or more O-Level passes, but only the percentage of Sec4N(A) candidates who obtained at least 1 O-Level pass.

Why not also disclose the Sec4N(A) candidates with 3 and 5 or more O-Level passes?

Could it be that these statistics are so poor that they may be quite embarassing?

Private candidates’ statistics also incomplete?

Similarly, for private candidates, it only said “A total of 3,932 private candidates sat the 2011 GCE O-Level Examination and 3,520 or 89.5% have been awarded certificates.”

So, how many private candidates had 3 and 5 or more passes?

Now, let’s come back to this year’s ‘N’ Level results.

It says that “Secondary 4 Normal (Academic) students who attempted the GCE Normal (Academic) examinations in 2012 and obtained an ELMAB3 aggregate not exceeding 11 points will have the additional option of enrolling in the Polytechnic Foundation Programme (PFP), instead of moving on to Secondary 5 Normal (Academic). The PFP is a new one-year foundation programme offering a practice-oriented curriculum taught by polytechnic lecturers, catering to students who have decided to pursue a polytechnic education. The polytechnics will offer about 1,200 PFP places across a range of diploma courses, with the first intake commencing in 2013.”

How many qualify?

So, instead of just saying that about 1,200 places will be offered, why not tell us how many candidates meet the criteria?

Similarly, instead of saying “Secondary 4 Normal (Academic) students who attempted the GCE Normal (Academic) examinations in 2012 and obtained an ELMAB3 aggregate not exceeding 19 points will also have the option of enrolling into the Direct-Entry-Scheme into Polytechnic Programme (DPP) at ITE. Instead of moving on to Secondary 5 Normal (Academic), students who accept the DPP will enroll directly into Higher Nitec courses at ITE, and are subsequently guaranteed a place in a polytechnic diploma course mapped to their Higher Nitec, subject to their meeting Grade Point Average (GPA) requirements. ITE will offer about 1,000 DPP places, with the first intake commencing in 2013. Successful applicants are required to attend a 10-week preparatory course prior to commencing their Higher Nitec courses”, why not tell us how many meet the criteria?

For example, the number who qualify may be less than the number of places? If so, then the places on offer may in a sense be “just for show”?

To illustrate this point, how many of the 9,082 candidates with an ELMAB3 aggregate not exceeding 19 points, qualify under the PFP criteria of 11 points (5 subjects), with 1,200 places on offer?

Or the number may be more than the places? So, how was the 1,200 and 1,000 places derived in the first place? Surely, the statistics on the number who qualify are available.

For example, with 9,082 (72.6 %) students in the Normal (Academic) course obtaining an aggregate not exceeding 19 points in English Language (EL), Mathematics and best three subjects (ELMAB3) and a Grade 5 or better for both EL and Mathematics, which is similar to the DPP qualifying criteria of an ELMAB3 aggregate not exceeding 19 points, will the 1,000 places be enough?

Instead of “All Normal (Technical) course students who have completed their secondary education in 2012 can apply to further their studies at ITE. Schools may also laterally transfer Secondary 4 Normal (Technical) students to Secondary 4 Normal (Academic) if they have obtained grade A for EL and Mathematics and grade B or better for one other subject at the Normal (Technical) Level”, why not also tell us the past statistics as to how many applied to further their studies?

‘N’ Level missing statistics?

Also, why is it that whilst the ‘O’ Level statistics give those who pass 1, 3 and 5 or more passes, whereas the ‘N’ Level statistics only give those who pass at least one subject and the NA (Academic) only also give the ELMAB3 not exceeding 19 points’ percentage?

Again, could the statistics be so poor that they may be embarassing?

Selective disclosure of statistics?

I hope our students do not learn from the above and, arguably in a sense, only tell the statistics that they want to tell when they become adults!

How many make it to the polytechnics?

Finally, perhaps the most important statistic that everybody may want to know is how many Normal Stream students make it to the polytechnics?

Ref:therealsingapore