GCE ‘A’ Levels 2011: A reflection

It’s been about three weeks since the release of the GCE ‘A’ Level results. I’ve been putting off writing this post, thinking that over time, additional insights and realisations will emerge from revisiting the results. I think it’s been long enough now.

The following observations express simple correlations and patterns that struck me – whether any of them prove an actual causation is debatable, especially since my sample size isn’t particularly large, and due to the many other factors involved that weren’t (and can’t) be taken into account in my analysis.

I tried to avoid creating correlations based on the results (i.e.  working backwards from the grades and ‘assigning’ strengths retrospectively). Instead, what my analysis did was to look for correlations between strengths that I had previously identified, over the course of 2011 (the year leading up to the A levels), and the actual results that students achieved. What struck me was this:

Personal voice and style matters

When considering the students who achieved an A grade, the most striking thing I noticed was that there was a strong correlation between having either personal voice, or a distinctive (but effective) style.

Of the students who I felt had personal voice or a distinctive (but effective) style, 50% achieved an A grade.

Some of the students who I felt had personal voice / style, unfortunately, lacked some key GP skills. After removing these students from the list, I found that 75% of those students got an A. In other words, of the students with solid GP skills and personal voice / style, 75% of them achieved an A grade.

Does this mean that one cannot get an A without personal voice or style? No – because 19% of the students who got an A were those who I hadn’t identified as having personal voice.

So having personal voice did not necessarily result in an A. Neither was it true that one couldn’t get an A without personal voice. However, a strong correlation was apparent, which leads me to believe that after mastering the basics of GP, it really is worth the effort to invest in finding your own voice and style.

A few other observations (some, retrospective):

Read, remember, practice, apply. Several ‘A’ Level essay questions had been covered in class, either in terms of the topic (e.g. Prejudice & Discrimination), or in terms of having done a very similar question (e.g. the place of books vs. The place of newspapers). Students who studied these topics, practiced essays on these topics or applied good arguments previously discussed in class tended to do well (A/B grade).

Master all the skills, not just the more common ones. Of all the school-based exams, the one with the strongest match between top students in that (school-based) exam and top students in the ‘A’ Level 2011 was the one where the Comprehension paper tested the same skills that came out in the actual ‘A’ Levels. In the 2011 ‘A’ Levels, there was a relatively higher proportion of language use and figurative questions (compared to previous ‘A’ Level Comprehension papers). The school-based exam that best matched this type of paper was also the one where there was the closest match in top scorers for both exams (school-based and ‘A’ Levels). So to be safe, master all the skills, including the ones that appear to come out less often.

Get help if you’re struggling. Miracles are rare. Students who consistently performed poorly in school exams tended to do poorly in the ‘A’ Levels. In other words, if you have been consistently doing badly for GP, get help soon. 

Language: Personal voice & Essay structure: CA-R structure

This piece illustrates a strong “you’re wrong” personal voice, which works well for the CA-R structure that is adopted. The parts in bold highlight how this strong personal voice is achieved.

Does the modern world place too much reliance on technology? (2003)

It is not true that far too much reliance is on technology in the modern world today. One can only say that we rely on technology too much if this reliance has detrimental effects on us. Two cases come to mind, one, if technology fails, we are helpless. Two, we use technology to do even mundane tasks which we can do by ourselves, and technology can fail us in this aspect.

First, saying that we are helpless if technology fails us, such as being unable to contact people if we lose our phones, is flawed. This is akin to saying that if planes did not exist, we would not be able to travel to other countries [1]. It is merely a cause and effect statement, since in no conceivable way can technology fail us to such an extent that we are truly helpless. Lose a handphone? Ask to borrow someone else’s. In essence, it does not matter since it will not happen.

Next, if people say that we use technology too much because we are using it for mundane tasks, like farming, it is because it is better than us at doing this. Yes, it can fail, but so can humans, often to a larger degree and therefore having larger, more dangerous ramifications than if a machine fails. For example, a combine harvester versus fifty men. It would not be unreasonable to say, the fifty men would tire out way before the harvester breaks down. Therefore, we do not rely too much on technology, instead using it to augment and improve ourselves

- Joel Ng, 2T28

-

Additional comments:

[1] The use of an extreme example shows the author’s attitude – that he disagrees strongly with the previous argument. This adds to the strong personal voice.

Essay skill: Personal voice

Personal voice is elusive, and it takes many forms. Essentially, it gives the essay a bit more ‘flavor’ by showing you the author’s attitude towards an issue.

To illustrate:

Less voice:
One problem with zoos is that they are created for human entertainment.

More voice:
Zoos must be rejected for they often seek to satisfy man’s selfish desire for entertainment.

-

Learning point:
Here, personal voice takes the form of a forceful statement. Note how using adjectives (“selfish”) help to give you more voice.