to irs
it's mugging season!
that time of year
where some students start revising
others take target at existing papers
and angst when they pull 82.13755
that time of year
when some heap on the pressure
others tell us to relax gently
and still exude some mystic aura
that time of year
when we read about glorification
others condemning the same subject in war
and in nature, in algebra, in itself
that time of year
when some people cry a tear or two
others offering comforting words
and perhaps veil their own stress
ah, that time of year
when we all need some reassurance
so this poem goes out to you from me.
thanks.
jk
I was talking to Kevin, Shaun and Kyle to some extent with regard to the concept of mugging today. I have also discussed this issue with Hsieh Wen before.
"If I don't mug, I'll DIE." - Shaun Lee
Why do we mug?
For purposes of this discussion, I have delimited mugging as referring to intensive, thorough, large-scale and often mindless memorisation of facts, formulas and concepts in preparation for an upcoming exam. The term
mugger here has been defined as referring to one who practices mugging to a greater extent than a large, arbitrary proportion of students in the class. Hence, by my definition one who studies consistently throughout the year, but does not carry out an arbitrarily disproportionate amount of revision in an arbitrary period leading up to the exams is
not considered as a mugger.
Despite being often regarded as a mugger, I am actually against the concept of mugging, for several reasons.
Firstly, the practice of mugging often leads to large amounts of stress, which can lead to poorer retention; this poorer retention can stress the student more
ad infinitum. This stems largely from personal experience, and possibly also from my dealings with some fellow muggers.
Secondly, mugging and the present examination system are based primarily on three things - memorisation of facts, application of concepts and application of critical thinking. I am fine with the second and third; but often, the memorisation of facts is needless once one passes the exam. For example, take a look at a Chem question I picked out of one of the practice papers:
If I react potassium(VI) dichromate with chlorine gas, what colour will it change to?
(A) green (B) orange (C) blue (D) colourless
I know the answer is
A because of my mugging; then again, in the distant future (university, or if i get a job in which I need to know this), I can look the information up in the Internet easily - hence why would I need to know this? Perhaps an understanding of how redox reactions work is useful, but this factoid?
Thirdly, the present examination system, in my opinion, is not a very good reflection of a student's ability in the subject, especially with subjects where the practical work one does professionally in the future is likely to be very different. In my opinion, laboratory practicals are a step in the right direction; yet, a large percentage of marks are still awarded to and can be earned by a person who mindlessly mugs.
Finally, there are other factors that influence one's performance in an exam that have little to do with the subject itself - for example the presence of "exam smarts". Typical MCQ strategies come to mind, such as Seng Wei's Theorem of Cloze Passages for Chinese (choose the most complicated answer) or the principle of contradiction (if there are two diametrically opposite choices, the answer is probably one or the other). This actually ties in largely with the previous point about written examinations not being a very accurate reflection.
Now I have put forth all these points against mugging and the exam system, you might be wondering - if I bash mugging so much, why do I still engage in it? If I question the exam system so much, why do I still care to compete on it? Well, I shall now explain this...
Though I believe that the examination system is not a very good reflection of the student's ability to perform professionally, there appears to be a lack of a feasible alternative. Jarrel has suggested attachments - and though I think that these are significantly better in measuring a student's grasp of concepts and connections, it is s probably not feasible due to the sheer volume of students who are taking a certain subject at our level, as well as the liabilities the relevant companies might incur if they accepted hapless candidates who might cause trouble to the company.
Hence, seeing that the exam system is about the best feasible system I can conceive, I think it is more pragmatic to merely go with the flow and mug rather than oppose it; this seems to hint of "If you can't beat them, join them". Though there have been mentions about muggers merely showing a facade of knowledge and understanding, and this can be valid, I find that the sad reality is that this facade is important as it can affect where we go for our tertiary education, and in doing so possibly affect what others might think of us ("o.o he's an Oxford graduate. super pro."). Notice the repeated theme of appearance and reality here - we seem to create appearance for appearance, because not creating the appearances can make others believe that we are inferior to those who do.
It seems to remind me, to some extent, of the game of the prisoner's dilemma in game theory. This is based on three big assumptions and simplifications - that reality is better than appearance, appearance will outshine reality and that our realities and appearances are similar in level. We reach the Nash equilibrium of (appearance, appearance), for we are afraid that showing the reality might produce a poorer result to our competitor; and in doing so, we miss out on the globally optimal point of (reality, reality).
Hence, I guess it will be back to mugging for me.
jk
