Parents complaining about difficult PSLE maths paper
-
Im more afraid of the second group....they are the cause for increasing difficulty levels in examsOriginally posted by ditzy:There will always be two groups of people. They group that will never be pleased, and the group that will never be pleased and complain somemore.
-
I don't think that is a good way of seeing it.Originally posted by 798:bcos of him, now we got more advance maths to learn.
Problems will always exist, the diff. is how you solve them. 'cos of Gauss, we have techniques to solve some of these problems.
Many students don't realize what they learn in high school are tools to solve problems, some of them practical problems like those in engineering. -
i dun agree with u. i believe that most of the maths stuffs we learn now are totally crap. trigo, maclaurin, differentiation, etc. i dun see these stuffs in my future, perhaps i will if i decided to become a maths teacher. u may say about what rocket scientists or engineers will need these calculations, but shldnt these be embedded into the respectively fields instead of throwing all out at us in sch? although i have a flair in maths, i truely have no understanding in how all these craps work. just take it as a brain-teaser.Originally posted by Icemoon:I don't think that is a good way of seeing it.
Problems will always exist, the diff. is how you solve them. 'cos of Gauss, we have techniques to solve some of these problems.
Many students don't realize what they learn in high school are tools to solve problems, some of them practical problems like those in engineering. -
It will be too late to start learning calculus in your freshman year yeah?Originally posted by skyfoo:i dun agree with u. i believe that most of the maths stuffs we learn now are totally crap. trigo, maclaurin, differentiation, etc. i dun see these stuffs in my future, perhaps i will if i decided to become a maths teacher. u may say about what rocket scientists or engineers will need these calculations, but shldnt these be embedded into the respectively fields instead of throwing all out at us in sch? although i have a flair in maths, i truely have no understanding in how all these craps work. just take it as a brain-teaser.
Schools are here to give us a broad based educaton, with enuff foundation for you to tackle the stuffs in specialised institutes, be it poly or uni. -
This question will show whether you think out of the box or not.Originally posted by renorenal:The question:
Which came first, the chicken or the egg?
If a rat is able to lay 10 eggs everyday, how many eggs can it lay for 2 and a half days?
a) 10
b) 25
c) 40
d) 60
e) None
-
People can come out with all sorts of answer.Originally posted by renorenal:This question will show whether you think out of the box or not.
The problem is how do you assess all these "creative" answers. Objectivity is a problem. -
if that is the case, we will have a lot to learn then, besides maths. also, wouldnt it be a waste of time and efforts to those who wldnt touch maths at all in their post-education life and those who did poorly in maths?Originally posted by Icemoon:It will be too late to start learning calculus in your freshman year yeah?
Schools are here to give us a broad based educaton, with enuff foundation for you to tackle the stuffs in specialised institutes, be it poly or uni. -
well the broad spectrum of subjects covered during primary and secondary education was good but how broad is too broad?Originally posted by skyfoo:i dun agree with u. i believe that most of the maths stuffs we learn now are totally crap. trigo, maclaurin, differentiation, etc. i dun see these stuffs in my future, perhaps i will if i decided to become a maths teacher. u may say about what rocket scientists or engineers will need these calculations, but shldnt these be embedded into the respectively fields instead of throwing all out at us in sch? although i have a flair in maths, i truely have no understanding in how all these craps work. just take it as a brain-teaser.
I kena stunned when simple stuff like gears could become damn blardy complex systems like a planetary gearset and the gearbox and all the mechanical coordination to for correct fuel injection into the engine cylinder. cheem...heng all the physics and chem helped
but the real question is HOW BROAD IS TOO BROAD??? -
The question:
Which came first, the chicken or the egg?
If a rat is able to lay 10 eggs everyday, how many eggs can it lay for 2 and a half days?
a) 10
b) 25
c) 40
d) 60
e) None
See if your reaction is fast enough. If you put a to d, you are wrong. Rats don't lay eggs. -
Originally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:
You studied logic 101 or discrete maths?
[b]The question:
Which came first, the chicken or the egg?
If a rat is able to lay 10 eggs everyday, how many eggs can it lay for 2 and a half days?
a) 10
b) 25
c) 40
d) 60
e) None
See if your reaction is fast enough. If you put a to d, you are wrong. Rats don't lay eggs.[/b]
Questions like this do not need to make sense. This is the classical if-then-else question. -
If-then-else. VB programming?Originally posted by Icemoon:You studied logic 101 or discrete maths?
Questions like this do not need to make sense. This is the classical if-then-else question.
I studied logic 101. Maths not very good. -
Originally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:
Not true, its stated:"If a rat is able to lay eggs". Thus, you cannot justify against logic.
[b]The question:
Which came first, the chicken or the egg?
If a rat is able to lay 10 eggs everyday, how many eggs can it lay for 2 and a half days?
a) 10
b) 25
c) 40
d) 60
e) None
See if your reaction is fast enough. If you put a to d, you are wrong. Rats don't lay eggs.[/b] -
i believe moral education is equally important too. sch these days nvr look into it seriously... that's why social value is going downhill.
-
Correct. We have lots to learn. Or else no need to take humanities and science liao right?Originally posted by skyfoo:if that is the case, we will have a lot to learn then, besides maths. also, wouldnt it be a waste of time and efforts to those who wldnt touch maths at all in their post-education life and those who did poorly in maths?
I have some comments.
1. Not many people can accurately predict what they will do in their post education life.
2. Even in an unrelated field, you may also need some Maths.
3. Maths can teach you to think and approach problems.
4. Did poorly in Maths. Well too bad I guess we all have to clear the hurdle. Some pple are good in Maths but suck at English. If you are poor in everything or most of them, then you go Normal tech or academic where things are easier. Fair enuff to me. -
Never notice the "If" word. Guess I am like any other Singaporean students.Originally posted by ditzy:Not true, its stated:"If a rat is able to lay eggs". Thus, you cannot justify against logic. -
hanor. i saw that too.Originally posted by ditzy:Not true, its stated:"If a rat is able to lay eggs". Thus, you cannot justify against logic.
make sure before answering that kinda question must stated reasoning too. -
This is a Maths qns from the PSLE paper given to me by my younger brother who tooh the exam. Another brother(Sec 3) and I could not solve it. Here goes:
A man went down a flight of stairs by walking a few steps and running 14 steps, taking a total of 41s. He repeated this by walking a few steps and running 6 steps, taking 65s to do so. What would be time taken if he only walked down the flight of stairs? -
Well done!Originally posted by ditzy:Not true, its stated:"If a rat is able to lay eggs". Thus, you cannot justify against logic. 
-
He got too much timeOriginally posted by student 17:This is a Maths qns from the PSLE paper given to me by my younger brother who tooh the exam. Another brother(Sec 3) and I could not solve it. Here goes:
A man went down a flight of stairs by walking a few steps and running 14 steps, taking a total of 41s. He repeated this by walking a few steps and running 6 steps, taking 65s to do so. What would be time taken if he only walked down the flight of stairs? -
Agreed... that's why the fair question for subjective reply on which comes first, the chicken or the egg... These two questions were a comparison... Good that you can see the point that objectivity is a problem... Never like objective papers anywayz... too many things to argue with the teachersOriginally posted by Icemoon:People can come out with all sorts of answer.
The problem is how do you assess all these "creative" answers. Objectivity is a problem. -
A very long time.Originally posted by student 17:This is a Maths qns from the PSLE paper given to me by my younger brother who tooh the exam. Another brother(Sec 3) and I could not solve it. Here goes:
A man went down a flight of stairs by walking a few steps and running 14 steps, taking a total of 41s. He repeated this by walking a few steps and running 6 steps, taking 65s to do so. What would be time taken if he only walked down the flight of stairs? -
2nd time - 1st time = 8 steps(running) in 24s. thus, 1 step in 3s. if walk, 65 + ( 6 x 3 ) = 83s. not sure thoughOriginally posted by student 17:This is a Maths qns from the PSLE paper given to me by my younger brother who tooh the exam. Another brother(Sec 3) and I could not solve it. Here goes:
A man went down a flight of stairs by walking a few steps and running 14 steps, taking a total of 41s. He repeated this by walking a few steps and running 6 steps, taking 65s to do so. What would be time taken if he only walked down the flight of stairs? -
i agree with u on these. my point is that some of the maths topics are seriously useless. i guess perhaps if before we're taught, we shld know how and when to apply all the stuffs. maybe that will justify our learning. i simply just hate it when i realise that i'm been learning maths for more than a decade and the more advanced ones can hardly be applied to my life.Originally posted by Icemoon:Correct. We have lots to learn. Or else no need to take humanities and science liao right?
I have some comments.
1. Not many people can accurately predict what they will do in their post education life.
2. Even in an unrelated field, you may also need some Maths.
3. Maths can teach you to think and approach problems.
4. Did poorly in Maths. Well too bad I guess we all have to clear the hurdle. Some pple are good in Maths but suck at English. If you are poor in everything or most of them, then you go Normal tech or academic where things are easier. Fair enuff to me. -
same answer here.Originally posted by skyfoo:2nd time - 1st time = 8 steps(running) in 24s. thus, 1 step in 3s. if walk, 65 + ( 6 x 3 ) = 83s. not sure though
My reasoning is this.
Assuming he walk same no. of steps each time (have to, or else over-constrained problem?), the diff is 24s shaved for 8 more running steps. so 1 running step should SAVE YOU 3s.
then you imagine if you not running and only walking. you will waste time on walking .. and there you get total walking time.
-
Originally posted by skyfoo:
Bingo. x999
i agree with u on these. my point is that some of the maths topics are seriously useless.i guess perhaps if before we're taught, we shld know how and when to apply all the stuffs. maybe that will justify our learning. i simply just hate it when i realise that i'm been learning maths for more than a decade and the more advanced ones can hardly be applied to my life.
That's the time subjects like Maths should be taught. Not go into class and tell students "today we will learn differentiaton .. flip to textbook .."
If educators cannot grasp this simple fact, no use espousing on "teach less learn more" and the use of IT.
Another part is to help students see the relationship between diff Maths topics. Those familiar with mathematical history will no doubt marvel at the insight in relating algebra and geometry (is this the correct term? skyfoo pls confirm). Descartes linked algebra to geometry. Fermat linked geometry (the cartesian graph) to algebra.