IT IS not just a lack of understanding of concepts or poor command of language that are making the learning of science a frustrating journey ("Ensure teachers can explain use of keywords" by Mr Victor Tan Siak Khian, May 7; "Focus on concepts, not standard answers" by the Ministry of Education and "Language skills first, then science" by Mr Tham Tuck Meng; both published last Saturday).
Very often, it is overly strict marking by schools that vexes both pupils and parents alike. Consider the following real-life questions and answers from a Primary 6 school practice paper:
1) Predict the colour of water at the end of the experiment.
Answer: It will be clear. (Wrong)
It will be colourless. (Correct)
2) Why is the experiment repeated three times?
Answer: It is to minimise human error and to ensure that it will be a fair test. (Wrong)
It is to minimise human error and to ensure that the results are reliable. (Correct)
For both the questions, the command of language is not lacking.
For Question 1, a dictionary will reveal that "clear" means "transparent" or "colourless". For Question 2, is there really a world of difference between the two answers?
Teachers tend to be overly strict in their marking as they are unsure of what answers will be accepted by the Singapore Examinations and Assessment Board (SEAB). Hence, out of good intention and time constraints, they would rather err on the side of caution.
Nevertheless, schools have to remember that overly strict marking is a double-edged sword. While it trains a child to be careful in answering questions, it kills their interest in the subject.
How can children develop an interest in science if they are penalised at every turn, and made to understand, right from the start, that there is only one way to answer every science question? Since the SEAB has set high standards for our pupils, it should help teachers, parents and pupils meet it.
Elizabeth Tan Boon Kwan (Ms)
