Commentary: Turns out the stress of not having mid-year papers leads to mock exams

SINGAPORE: For the first time, no primary and secondary school student took a mid-year examination this year - not even those in Primary 6 and Secondary 4 who are due for national examinations in the coming months. My elder sons, in Secondary 1 and Primary 5, rejoiced that they only had formative weighted assessments instead.

I indulged in the reprieve, but dreaded term four when we’d have to face a final examination with almost 70 per cent weightage. Rather than proportioned battles each quarter, we would have to gear up for one major war come November.

So it was not too startling to read that students and parents have been turning to tuition centres for mock exams. Two centres interviewed by local media said they each had about 300 students signed up for their mock exams.

Significant changes to the Singapore education landscape have been made over recent years, in an effort to reduce overemphasis on academics and the resultant stress. Besides notable moves like the new Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) scoring system and full subject-based banding in secondary schools, another major change has been the removal of mid-year examinations.

Surely signing up for exams in tuition centres goes against the spirit of these changes? After all, why scrap school exams only to replace them with stress by another name?

NEED FOR CHANGES TO EDUCATION SYSTEM

The shift towards assessing students’ skills and competencies beyond academics has generally been welcomed, given that Singapore clocks in a fairly elevated level of student stress compared to the rest of world.

A 2017 study by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) found that students in Singapore experienced significantly higher anxiety levels: An elevated 86 per cent in Singapore were worried about poor grades at school compared with 66 per cent of students across OECD countries. Meanwhile, 76 per cent of Singapore students reported feeling very anxious for a test even if they were well-prepared, compared with the OECD average (55 per cent).

Changes to the examination landscape seemed timely and sorely needed. Or, so that was the intent.

Logic seems to dictate that the changing of how national examinations are scored, lowering the frequency of high weightage examinations, should free students more from the bondage of the harsh rigours of examination life. Shouldn’t students be reflecting a far better relationship with test taking and our education system?

POPULARITY OF MOCK EXAMS NOT SURPRISING

And yet, the opposite seems to be true. The reality on the ground is that students and parents alike - with the looming one-shot-only year-end examinations in view, find that some measure of check-in at the midpoint mark is needed, necessary and useful.

A child can be very good with his day-to-day work but crumble under the pressures of test taking, especially when the stakes are high.  Learning competency and proficiency do not translate into examination-taking competency and proficiency, which are also important in education and in life.

It's like being told that you’d have to do a competitive 10km race, but all you need to do to prepare are small daily jogs and stretches and occasional runs around the school.

All around the world, summative examinations provide a snapshot of a student’s achievement and is thus used as a benchmark for accountability and certification. Gearing up for them requires a different type of preparation.

Mock exams are the analogous trial run - a student at least gets a sense of their own fitness level ahead of the real deal or consider how to manage their time, pace and fatigue in a simulated environment.

Sure, a student could try and recreate this at home by setting their own timed session with a past year paper or plough though the 10-year series. But often, that simply adds to undue stress at home and it is hard to get a sense of a true examination setting when you are in the safety of your home study space.

The reality is, even if mock examinations could benefit more students, it is only available to those who attend tuition centres or those willing to fork out one-off fees to participate.

ARE PARENTS BEING HYPOCRITICAL?

It may seem hypocritical for parents to complain about the systemic stresses of school yet double down on examinations. But look at it from another perspective, there are still examinations - year-end and national ones - that have hefty repercussions if a child crumbles under the weight of the unfamiliarity of exam-taking stress.

Scrapping mid-year examinations feels like kicking the can down the road at best; or worse, intensifying the stress about the real deal come year end.

The fact is, all our national school examinations are major summative assessments. Even without intermediate assessments, students will still be expected to sit for one preeminent educational trial on which they will be measured, judged and streamed.

When junior colleges had grading for Project Work as part of the GCE A-Level exams, teachers were simply mobilised to coach the students further. With Project Work now graded as a pass or fail, it might simply diminish the importance of non-academic work.

SHIFTING EMPHASIS BACK TO LEARNING

Perhaps, then, the issue goes beyond just trying to shift the emphasis from academic rigour to “Learning” with a capital L.

The sheer academic load of what teachers have to teach, students have to digest, apply and master is what makes education exhausting.

While that surely is the reason for Singapore’s top global ranking in mathematics and science, and our ability to churn out diligent, hardworking and efficient students, it also means that we cannot really break free from the Mobius strip of high academic demands. We make changes that seem like we try to flip things on its head, but nothing much has actually changed.

Just as Singapore is praised for its rigour and strong science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) curriculum, other countries like Finland and Canada are equally lauded: The former for its ability to cater to individualised learning and a holistic approach that promotes creativity, critical thinking and student well-being; the latter for being inclusive and being a system that values diversity and is well-rounded.

Both still keep pulse on academic achievement, even though Finland only has a single standardised test at the end of secondary school and Canada has also shifted away from standardised testing. Closer to home, Japan’s system is praised for being able to balance academics, character development and extracurricular activities.

While we can perhaps have more unweighted formative assessments as milestone checks, there will continue to have a disjunct in alignment as long as our national examinations remain a singular summative one.

Exam taking, as with the ability to participate in competition - sporting or otherwise - is a skill set that is separate from simply being able to prove curriculum competency. Students need to be exposed to examination conditions to hone that ability.

Cherie Tseng is Chief Operations Officer at a local fintech company, a mother of three and editor with The Birthday Collective.