Evaluation

Perhaps this is a little late, but right now, I'm going to evaluate all the A level exam papers I took last year. Sure, it's already an issue one and a half months behind, but still, I recently thought about (in a sketchy, vague way) my performance, how I felt I did. Certainly, most of us (I think everyone, probably) would acknowledge the fact that we could have done better and all that, but I think, just for the sake of it, as well as to bring some sort of closure, it would do me well to go over the motions and evaluate each and every paper. To those who may be reading this and who went through the same examination as I did last year, apologies, and if you want to, you may stop reading now. To those who don't care a bit about the last statement, do continue on.

Just a little note: while I may sound a little regretful later on, I still do know that I tried a good deal of my best in each paper, and whatever the outcome may be, I will be satisfied in that knowledge. And even if I do garner good results in papers I might appear not to be entirely happy with, please do not think that I'm being a little too modest or even that I'm overly critical of myself; the following evaluations are truly my honest perspectives on each paper. I say it as it is.

General Paper 1 (Essay): Okay, for this paper, I realised that the 12 questions set were unconventional, to say the least. Though there were familiar topics, there were also a few that were entirely foreign, in that we were never much exposed to these areas of content knowledge. On my part, I chose an essay question that I felt I had an edge in, in terms of content knowledge e.g. examples and all. But structure-wise, I felt that I could have done a better job on hindsight (but that's almost always the case for every GP essay I do). All in all, I felt it was a job well done, considering the circumstances i.e. question-wise. While it didn't examine me on my pet topics, neither did it confound me to no end.

General Paper 2 (Comprehension): It was a surprise as well, in terms of the passage that was given to us. While some may say that the content knowledge in this case would come easier to arts-inclined students like myself, I wouldn't agree entirely. The passage tested more on whether one could glean knowledge and understanding from the text, and not on whether one knew a lot about the content itself, except perhaps in the Application Question section. But even then, it was certainly do-able. I felt quite alright for this paper, and some of my peers would even say that I SHOULD feel more than alright; I acknowledge that my competency in this subject is much above average. But even then, anything can happen; it's up to God's will. (:

Mathematics Paper 1 (Pure Maths): Well, I'd thought that even with just the merely adequate grasp of the subject that I had, I'd be rather prepared for the paper. Unfortunately though, there were some questions in the paper that were, to me, overly centred on trigonometry, which under the A level syllabus here, rates only as assumed knowledge. Compared to the paper in the previous paper, the first of its kind in the revised syllabus, it had much less focus on trigonometry. Given that I'm in the IP, I'll admit that I'm a little less well-adjusted to trigonometric concepts than mainstream students are, because trigonometry, as a whole, is considered a very primary topic in the O levels, but much less so in the A levels. But that shall not be an excuse. Previously, I had only been practising other schools' preliminary examination papers as advised by my Maths teacher, but the A level paper turned out to be rather different from those. So, as you can guess, I got pretty much a rude shock that day. I felt really dejected after that paper, and yes, I would say that I also cried over it, trying to overcome a tumult of emotions. But silly me, I know I shouldn't have, because it would also affect my mental strength. I also tried not to let this on to too many people as well, given that it would not be very nice of me to also affect them during that crucial period. But this really got me working extra hard for the next Maths paper, and also got me started on the ten-year-series (a little late, but better late than never) (which I don't specifically remember being reminded to do, only the prelim papers), in a bid to prepare me for the kind of questions that would come out in the next Maths paper. And so I worked hard, and really depended on God in that space of three days.

Mathematics Paper 2 (Pure Maths and Statistics): Well, I had set myself a pretty high aim for this paper, given that I was eager to make up for whatever I had lost in the last paper. And thank God, the paper was much more manageable this time. I managed to do all the questions if I remember correctly, but of course, in trying to guesstimate my score, I left room for the potential errors. This greatly boosted my morale at that time, along with encouragements from some friends. Just want to say that, here and now, whatever my Maths grade, I will be satisfied with it. I know that I did my best with whatever I had, and the rest will be up to Him.

Literature in English Paper 1 (Reading Literature): I went into the exam hall with a little mixed emotions, no doubt I had already entrusted it to God, because no one really knows what to expect from Lit papers. But I say that, on the whole, the three essay questions were manageable. Though, the question I chose to do for the Pride and Prejudice section was a little, hm, weird. Hard to say. Again, it was not the typical kind of question I would see in the papers set in school.

Economics Paper 2 (Essays): Okay, Econs has been an up-down-up-down subject in which I'm never quite certain of the grade. One moment I may get an A, another, a C or even a D. It perhaps reveals that even though I may be quite adept at the subject in certain areas, in others, my foundation may not be so strong after all. Anyway, all that I have to say is that for this paper, the questions set were rather tricky, and were phrased in a manner that was quite different from what I was used to. For the microeconomics question, I felt that that answer was the most unsatisfactory, relatively. I felt that I answered the second part perfunctorily, and that the first part was below par as I did not cover enough ground. For the two macroeconomics questions, I felt that one was answered well, because I believed enough content and analysis and even evaluation were portioned out. The other one I had at first thought to be entirely off-point, but later on, as in I think a few weeks later on, I chanced upon the notes for that topic, and realised I had actually answered quite satisfactorily. Well, it depends. For this paper I can never be sure of my grade. Again, and I don't care if it sounds repetitive, it has been given up unto God. (:

China Studies in English Paper 1 (Case Study): After the paper I felt quite confident. Surprisingly, during practice in class, we also did some practice on the exact same topic of the case study that was examined. But later on, our CSE teacher mentioned that a certain question was rather tricky as it required us to identify as well that 2002 was the year in which power was transferred from Jiang Zemin to Hu Jintao, which I didn't quite identify (and I think the rest of the class), so that was a little bummer-ish. But all in all, I still felt alright.

Economics Paper 1 (Case Studies): Time wasn't quite on my side here, as I would have liked to finish up the last question of the second case study in a more full and polished manner. Anyhow, I felt that I actually understood most of the questions this time round (sometimes in school exams I never really quite answered to the point), and managed to provide pointed answers. So that was good. Other than that, the content material was quite understandable as well.

China Studies in English Paper 2 (Essays): The content knowledge that was required for the six essay questions was familiar to me, but again, the phrasing of certain questions left quite a lot of doubt due to the ambiguity generated. Nonetheless, I chose only the questions that I felt I was more capable in. The compulsory question was the most challenging for me, because it required analysis based on social and economic factors, and I wasn't sure whether to analyse them separately or in tandem, so I did both. The essay structure which I adopted for I think all of the questions was also slightly different. Instead of the factor-aligned structure which had been stressed upon the most during class, I opted for a more analytical approach, trying to inject more depth as and when I could, instead of only at the conclusion. It felt a little experimental, but I also felt more secure in doing that, especially since its the subject's first major appearance in the local A level syllabus.

Literature in English Paper 4 (Imagining Other Worlds): There was a rather lengthy break between this final paper and the previous one, but I tried to put the time to good use to study and just gear up for the final leg in this race. The questions were understandable, but I felt that my answer to the Practical Criticism component was a little too simple, though very understandable. I felt that the other two essays were more well-done, in that I actually put in more of what I learnt into them.

Okay, so there it is, my humble evaluation of the papers. Whatever the results, to God be the glory. (: