Injustice, Part II
June 17, 2008
With reference to the previous post, I think I might have figured out several explanations to my No.3 position in class. Have yet to ask teacher regarding this matter, but I will soon... in an hour. The list is arranged probability-wise.
#1 -
Number of creditsBased on the position spread they pasted at the back of the class, I reckon they evaluate by counting the number of credits we scored. Credits are grade 6C and above, by the way. Whatever it is, those taking extra subjects will always be at the top, whether those people taking the base subjects scored straight A1s or not.
IF that's really the case, someone who scored all Cs downright beats the one who scored straight As. Why? Again
, just cause they have more subjects.
#2 -
No sub-grading systemThey make themselves blind to the significance of the sub-grading system. With their new 'spectacles', they
suddenly see A1 and A2 as peers, overlooking every tint of difference left. A1
used to be a better grade than A2. Now, there are no standards to differentiate a good from an average student anymore. Average sutdents get to
step on good students with their new retarded system. The average students don't even have to
try to be on top. They are purely encouraging students to study 'just enough' and not to 'do the best, be the best'. Send in a letter of suggestion to the Ministry of Education to abolish that system, I dare them.
#3 -
DIRE misdemenanourThe oxymoron sounds about right here. Either the school is dumb or stupid (I don't know which is worse), they just had to appoint a careless, clumsy, hagged, and oblivious HUMAN to do the job. I'm not going to say names here, in case there's a spy in here... somewhere. But, everyone knows who I'm talking about. Well, it's pretty self-explanatory from the title. I doubt this would be the reason why though. Still, it's probable.
That's it, I guess. I'm too sleepy to think of others. Busy planning a Jonestown with my fellow English-eds. Just kidding... or not.
... as said by Joo
at 6:27 am
Injustice
June 16, 2008
You know what's most disturbing about life? It's the fact that people are too dumb to understand simple things in life, specifically
school life. Apart from hiring croaking singers with a chalks, the school can't tell the grave difference between
fair and
unfair. Similar to colour-blindness? Maybe they're just
justice-blind. All this while, the positioning system had always functioned through the evaluation of GPM, or similar to the the Grade Point Average. The main idea is :
Sum of points / Total subjects = GPMThe points allocation goes from 1 to 9, 1 being 1A and 9 being 9G (which stands for 'fail'). Hence, the more subject you take, the better you have to perform to maintain a low GPM. Priority for the first place goes to the student with the closest GPM to '1'. Now, is that not fair? In my opinion, it's the fairest thing next to evaluation through percentage. It ultimately overcomes the confusion of deciding whether a person with 9/10 As is better than one with 9/12 As, which obviously, the former one is better. A person who scores 10/10 As is considered '
cemerlang' , 10/11 As are '
kepujian'. When one is willing to register and actually PAY for an extra subject, he/she is expected to score an A. Same goes to the school system. At least, how it it
used to be.
Now, the school is trying to implement a new
impractical system. They judge primarily based on the number of As. Apparently, it doesn't matter how many subjects you take anymore. If you took 20 subjects and scored 10 As, failing the rest of the 10 subjects, you're better compared to someone who only took 10 subjects but with straight As. Why? Just cause you took
more subjects, and thus have more Fs than him/her. Where's the rationality in that? And also, A1(75-100) is now put at the same level as A2(70-74). If then, why not just abolish the sub-grading system? Write a damned letter to the ministry to alter the gradings for public examinations. Are the efforts extended to score A1s in vain? By doing so, I suppose the school should change their MISI/Mission from 'producing quality students' to 'producing great
quantity, quality is second matter'.
All in all, the school is trying to convey a message across to us :
"Don't worry about failing your subjects; We'll make sure you'll get in the top 5 with our retarded system. You English-eds should just kill yourselves as we think you people are incompetent for taking the minimum number of subjects. Others pWnz j00 all. "Imagination rocks, though I reckon it's not impossible.
... as said by Joo
at 1:54 pm
