Example 1:
A tuition centre which claimed its PSLE (Primary School Leaving Examination) revision class is taught by an examiner who had set the paper for this year's PSLE has come under scrutiny.
In the same advertisement, the centre, SuccessNat, claimed the 'O' level revision class would be conducted by 'teachers from the Singapore Examinations and Assessment Board (SEAB)'.
When a parent, whose suspicions were aroused by the advertisement, called the centre to find out more, she alleged the person in charge of the centre, a Mr Lim, 23, stated that he works at the SEAB.
According to the Shin Min Daily, he further claimed that he had a 'five-year contract' to set exam questions for the PSLE, and that the tutors he employed were last year's examiners who had set the exam questions.
However, two employees who were interviewed at the time said that they were not examiners.
When contacted by reporters from the Chinese daily, Mr Lim was apologetic and admitted that the advertisement was 'misleading'.
In defence of the statement made about the PSLE revision being conducted by 'this year's question-setter', he said that it did not mean a PSLE exam-setter, but a teacher who had set exams for his or her school.
He also said 'O level revision by SEAB teachers' was misconstrued. He claimed he meant that tutors will observe guidelines and regulations set by SEAB.
In reference to his claims that he is an employee of SEAB, Mr Lim admits the statement was false, and he does not have any 'contract' with the Board.
In a statement from the SEAB, it stated that any person who sets exam papers at a national level, including teachers, are required to sign documents to ensure that the questions are kept confidential.
It said it was investigating the centre, SuccessNat, for its allegations. It also verified that Mr Lim is not an employee of SEAB nor is he a PSLE examiner.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment