Singapore's educational edge.

Singapore has an educational edge, over its erstwhile imperial master. About twenty years ago, the UK dropped the rigorous O level examination, in favour of the more democratic GCSE. By "democratic" I mean that it is an exam meant for everyone, and not for the better students, as O level was. Singapore, however, wasn't fond of the democratic idea of the GCSE and continued to favour the elitist O level. The results are clear.

Twenty years later, Singapore continues to use the O level examination. (This is the one that Ainan took. He is the youngest person to have done so.) I think this is a promising situation for Singapore - and the other former colonies and members of the Commonwealth that use the O level - and a terrible situation for the UK.

The O level challenges the student on two levels: in terms of the level and detail of knowledge required - and in terms of the level of reasoning needed to use that knowledge to solve the problems set. GCSE is much weaker. Less knowledge and less reasoning are required - so much less, in fact, that those who pass the GCSE with good grades probably wouldn't pass the O level at all.

Now, this is a serious problem for the UK. Their students have been set a bar that is too low. This means that the more able students are not being stretched up to the age of 16. The bar was deliberately lowered because only the top 20 % of students were able to handle the O level at 16. This was was thought unfair, so the bar was lowered, with a new exam which more people would be able to cope with. In Singapore (and many other countries around the world), the decision was made to keep the bar high and challenge the students to reach it. Their thinking was not that things should be made easy for the students, but that the students should just get on with meeting the challenge. (However, Singapore did recognize the situation in its own way, not by scrapping O level, but by bringing in a second-tier exam, the N level, for the kind of students who would need GCSE in England. This meant the standard was preserved, at O level, and all were happy.)

I rather think that, in substituting an easier exam, for a harder one, the UK is undermining its own national competitiveness. By lowering the bar, they have lowered the potential of an entire nation.

The rest of the world did not follow the UK's lead. The old style UK exams of the O level (and A level) are still popular around the world. This means that the rest of the world is leading the UK, in educational standards, simply by keeping the standards that the UK once had. It seems somewhat ironic that the rest of the world could overtake the UK simply by aping what the UK once was - but the UK no longer remains.

My sons will take the O level. I don't want them to be underchallenged and I see no point in taking an exam that lowers the bar. There is no achievement in achieving less than they could achieve.

In the UK, however, when Ainan is mentioned, they say that he passed his "GCSE". This is wrong. He took O level - a much harder exam. However, I understand why the newspapers do that. It saves them from having to explain to their readers that the rest of the world did not dumb down by adopting the GCSE when the UK did - and that much of the rest of the world still takes O levels. It would, of course, be rather embarrassing, to have to explain that.

I do not want to see the nation of my childhood go into long-term decline. Yet, I cannot help but feel that by lowering its own internal standard, by dropping the "elitist" O level, in favour of the "democratic" GCSE, it is ushering in age of just such a decline. I rather hope that something is done to reverse it before it is too late.

Isn't it funny that the rest of the world remembers the standards of UK's bygone age...while the UK itself has forgotten them? In that memory, will the rest of the world find success, while the UK finds a long slow decline.

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged eight years and seven months, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, five years exactly, and Tiarnan, twenty-eight months, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of gifted education, IQ, intelligence, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, College, University, Chemistry, Science, genetics, left-handedness, precocity, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, wunderkind, wonderkind, genio, гений ребенок prodigy, genie, μεγαλοφυία θαύμα παιδιών, bambino, kind.

We are the founders of Genghis Can, a copywriting, editing and proofreading agency, that handles all kinds of work, including technical and scientific material. If you need such services, or know someone who does, please go to: http://www.genghiscan.com/ Thanks.

This blog is copyright Valentine Cawley. Unauthorized duplication prohibited. Use Only with Permission. Thank you.)

The decline in science.

Does science have a future? I ask because science is in decline - the young simply aren't studying it anymore.

I have seen three different studies of scientific decline in the UK recently.

One piece of evidence was the number of A level students (equivalent to part of a college degree in America), studying Physics. In 1985 there were about 46,000 A level Physics students in the UK, by 2005 that number had declined to 28,000.

Another item of data is comparative statistics for O level (an exam no longer taken in the mainland UK, though still popular overseas) and GCSE physics. At its height, there were FOUR times as many O level Physics candidates as there were GCSE (a weaker replacement exam of much lower standard) Physics students in the UK in 2006. Thus, if we think of the educational process as a funnel, there were four times fewer people entering that funnel for the physical sciences in 2006, than there were in the 1980's. That is a huge loss in scientific potential and understanding.

The final piece of evidence comes from data on the relative decline in doctoral science degrees in the UK. Over the last ten years, the proportion of doctoral degrees (PhD and the like) that were in science has declined from 65% to 59% of the degrees. This occurred against a backdrop increase of 79% in doctoral degrees, in general, in the UK in the same period. Physics, Chemistry, Engineering and Technology degrees were all affected by this decline.

I found these three pieces of evidence very disturbing. You see, they indicate a decline in interest in pursuing science at all levels and ages of the educational system in the UK. I have detailed figures for the UK, but the UK is not the only country facing challenges in this area: I have read of complaints of similar problems in the US. No doubt, other developed nations face similar issues. Quite simply, the enlightenment that science brings will soon be no more. A new darkness of ignorance threatens the happy future so many envisage for our civilization.

Think about this. In the UK, there is only a quarter of the former levels of people receiving an education in Physics, at O level. That means that almost all those who would once have come to understand the basic workings of the world, now no longer do so. They study other things instead: perhaps "mass communications" and the like. These non-science students, become adults who do not understand how the world works. They do not value or respect science. They will not understand it and may not support it. They cannot make scientifically informed decisions about what is meaningful in the things they are told. In all, it means that science will become ever more marginalized - both science and scientists, seen as something unnecessary, "uncool" and perhaps even undesirable. The fact that science underpins the entire edifice of modern civilization will be overlooked by most of them.

The big problem with declines in understanding of science at the population level - as this is - is that it denudes the future generations not only of scientists, but of science teachers. Fewer people will be equipped to prepare future generations of scientific thinkers - and so fewer children will get the opportunity to be taught science by those who understand it - and so it goes on, in a self-pertuating cycle. Each generation threatens to become more ignorant than the one before it.

At first, the effects may be unnoticeable, because not so long ago, it was difficult for every scientist who wanted to work in science, to do so: there was too much competition for jobs. Well, that competition will diminish. Yet, there will still be people, at first, to fill the jobs. They may, however, be of lesser quality (since the pool from which they are drawn is now four times smaller). The quality of their output may not match their predecessors. Science as a discipline will begin to decline.

In just two decades, the UK has shown a four fold decline in basic physical science education. That is a trend that very quickly leads to complete ignorance, should it continue. What is even more telling about this is that there once were four times as many students taking a MUCH MORE DIFFICULT Physics exam (which the O level is, compared to the GCSE). So, not only is there a decline in numbers, but there is a decline in standard of knowledge, too. How is it that just a generation ago, four times as many students met a more difficult scientific challenge than today's children are meeting? It is all very worrying.

I am surprised that so little is being done about this, by the UK government. I see no concerted effort to reverse this trend. What they appear to be oblivious to is that what is being lost is the very expertise needed to support a technological civilization. The older, scientifically educated generation will retire and die - and in their place, there will be a much smaller generation of scientifically educated Britons. Will they be enough to sustain the UK's technological base? Perhaps not...so Britain will import Indians and Chinese - just like the Americans are doing. Yet, that is no solution, for there are only so many of those to go around - and they have many other nations enticing them, too.

Science is dying, in the UK. I do not say this lightly or without justification. I draw your attention to one other fact. In the last 8 years, 30% of Britain's Universities have closed their Physics departments, owing to a lack of students and consequent support. Anyone who cares about the future of science and technology should be very alarmed by that. There is a steep contraction in Britain's science base, underway. It remains to be seen what long-term effects this will have on the British nation as a whole.

There are, no doubt, many reasons for this decline. One is that science is hard and so many other things are much easier. Many students decide to take the easy options, lured by the promise of glamorous careers and high salaries. Then again, science offers relatively poor pay and career progression. If this trend is to be reversed, students must see science as attractive: it must be a well-paid career that offers intellectual rewards, glamour, security, benefits and prestige. If that were so, this decline would soon be reversed. However, if this is to be so, there must be a genuine change of priorities in society: from the highest levels, science must be prioritized and valued. Science must become the career that kids dream of - for then the scientific and technological future of the modern world would be assured. If this is not done, in the UK and, perhaps in other countries, too, science doesn't seem to have much of a future.

If anyone has figures for other nation's regarding science education, I would welcome them: please post them below.

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged eight years and seven months, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, five years exactly, and Tiarnan, twenty-eight months, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of gifted education, IQ, intelligence, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, College, University, Chemistry, Science, genetics, left-handedness, precocity, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, wunderkind, wonderkind, genio, гений ребенок prodigy, genie, μεγαλοφυία θαύμα παιδιών, bambino, kind.

We are the founders of Genghis Can, a copywriting, editing and proofreading agency, that handles all kinds of work, including technical and scientific material. If you need such services, or know someone who does, please go to: http://www.genghiscan.com/ Thanks.)

Singapore Book of World Records

Today, Ainan, 7, is front page of the Berita Harian, Singapore's leading daily Malay newspaper.

The breaking news is that Ainan Celeste Cawley is, now, officially the youngest person ever to take an O level exam. The Singapore Book of Records, Singapore's answer to the Guiness Book of World Records, has officially recognized that it cannot find anyone younger than him, who has passed this level of examination, at anytime. It is an official record.

Ainan's record entry is entitled: "Youngest to attain an O level certificate" and will appear in the new edition of the Singapore Book of Records, in January 2008. Ainan was seven years and one month old when he sat the O level paper in January 2007.

For those who do not know, the O level Chemistry exam that Ainan took is at or above American High School graduation standard. Indeed, by observation of the first year courses at such Universities as Berkeley it is above first year University science courses that I have seen, in America. American Universities recruit O level students directly onto their courses.

So as to preserve the article, I am posting it down below.


Singapura : 22 Oktober 2007


Mudah cetak

BUKU REKOD S'PURA IKTIRAF BUDAK PINTAR

Oleh Halifi Hussin

BUDAK pintar yang lulus mata pelajaran Kimia dalam peperiksaan GCE 'O' tahun lalu pada usia tujuh tahun telah dinobatkan sebagai pelajar termuda Singapura yang berjaya berbuat demikian oleh Buku Rekod Singapura.

Ainan Celeste Cawley diberi pengiktirafan itu selepas mendapat Gred C bagi subjek tersebut, walaupun ketika itu dia baru berusia tujuh tahun satu bulan.

Rekod tersebut telah pun disiarkan dalam laman Internet Buku Rekod Singapura dan akan diterbitkan dalam bentuk buku Januari depan.

Dibentuk dalam 2004, Buku Rekod Singapura mempunya matlamat untuk memberi `peluang kepada warga Singapura mencatatkan rekod dunia.

Ainan merupakan anak kacukan keturunan Irish dan Melayu.
Kepintarannya dalam subjek Kimia mula disedari selepas dia sebelum ini berjaya menjawab buku latihan subjek tersebut, walaupun masih setahun jagung.

Bapanya, Encik Valentine Cawley, 39 tahun, yang merupakan ketua jabatan Bahasa Inggeris di Sekolah Linguaphone Education di sini, mendaftar anaknya dalam peperiksaan itu sebagai calon privet di British Council setelah mendapat tahu tentang kepintarannya.

Ditanya perasaannya tentang rekodnya itu, Ainan, anak sulung tiga beradik dengan tersipu-sipu menjawab: 'Saya gembira dan bangga.'

Ibu Ainan, Cik Syahidah Osman Cawley, 28 tahun, adalah seorang artis yang dapat melukis dengan kedua-dua belah tangannya.

Selain Ainan, pasangan tersebut mempunyai dua lagi anak - Fintan Nadym, empat tahun dan Tiarnan Hasyl, satu tahun.

Namun, bagi Ainan, pencapaiannya itu tidak berhenti setakat peringkat GCE 'O' sahaja.
Pelajar darjah dua yang menuntut di sebuah sekolah kawasan Bukit Timah itu kini mahu pula memecah rekod sebagai pelajar termuda yang lulus mata pelajaran Kimia peringkat GCE 'A'.
Encik Cawley berkata, persiapan telah pun bermula tetapi Ainan menghadapi hambatan sedikit kerana kurang latihan praktikal di makmal.

Namun, untuk mengatasi masalah itu, Raffles Institution (RI) dan Maktab Rendah Raffles (RJC) telah menawarkan Ainan peluang untuk melakukan kerja-kerja praktikal di makmal kimia mereka.

'Kami telah membuat persiapan seperti dahulu, iaitu belajar di rumah. Tetapi masalah sekarang adalah kekurangan latihan praktikal di makmal, namum kami yakin Ainan mampu mencapai kecemerlangan,' kata Encik Cawley.

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged seven years and ten months, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, four years and three months, and Tiarnan, twenty months, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of gifted education, IQ, intelligence, the Irish, the Malays, College, University, Chemistry, Science, genetics, left-handedness, precocity, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, gifted adults and gifted children in general. Thanks.)

People Tonight, Philippine News

On Saturday, 16th May, 2007, People Tonight, a Philippino mass circulation newspaper, carried an article on Ainan. It has just appeared today on their website http://www.journal.com.ph/ in the miscellaneous section, though it may only be there for a day.


Child prodigy, 7, passes tough UK chemistry exam

THIS is one seven-year-old boy that would make both Asians and Europeans proud. Ainan Celeste Cawley, of Asian-Irish parentage, recently passed his Chemistry O Level exam from the London Edexcel Board, an exam normally taken by British 16-year-olds.

Considered a child prodigy and the youngest chemist on record worldwide, Ainan has been to school in both London and Singapore.

His father, Valentine, was educated at Cambridge University.

The exam that the younger Cawley passed, his father said, was a “rigorous one and at a level equal to or higher than American high school graduation.”

The father pointed out that “American universities recruit O level students directly onto their degree courses. It is still taken all over the world by former commonwealth countries as a benchmark academic exam.”

He disclosed that Ainan picked up a level textbook only on July 18, 2006, and took his exam six months later at the British Council in Singapore as a private examinee.

“Taking an exam alongside him were four rather surprised adult candidates. Ainan was just seven years and one month old when he took the examination,” the proud father said.

Walking at six months, as a toddler, Ainan would seek out science books in the library, showing a preference for dense texts with complicated illustrations of scientific matters. “These he would absorb quietly and comment on later,” the elder Cawley said.

By the time he was three or four, Ainan was interested in “hyper-dimensional shapes” and would draw their shadows in two dimensions as a form of “intellectual play,” he said. “Some of these shapes had hundreds of sides.

This was not a surprise to his mother, Syahidah Osman Cawley, an ambidextrous artist,” he added.

This interest in structure in the abstract developed into an interest in the structure of molecules as he discovered chemistry on the Internet. Through self-guided surfing, Ainan educated himself in science.

When he was six years old, he was given a chemistry book to look at on a whim. Ainan sat and read the text and indicated that he understood it.

His family gave him a chemistry test paper to do from the book and to everyone’s astonishment, he answered the questions correctly.

His father, Valentine, a former physicist, promptly presented him with a chemistry O level textbook.

For daily updates on Ainan, please read Valentine’s blog at www.scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com.

La Vanguardia, Spain (Barcelona)

La Vanguardia is the most widely read newspaper in Catalunya, in which Barcelona is to be found. It is also one of the papers which covered Ainan in recent times. To preserve these articles I am going to copy and paste them, one by one, over the next few weeks, onto this blog - or at least those I can still find - since newspapers do not keep these articles active for long on their sites, in general.

Below is the article from La Vanguardia. It is dated the 22nd of May 2007. It refers to the fact that O level is sufficient to gain access to American universities.


Un niño prodigio de Singapur aprueba con siete años un examen de Química de nivel preuniversitario

22/05/2007 Actualizada a las 13:25
Madrid. (Europa Press).

- Ainan Celeste Cawley, un niño de Singapur de siete años de edad, ha aprobado un examen de Química del nivel 'O', que corresponde normalmente a jóvenes de 16 años de edad y que tanto en Estados Unidos como en los países de la Commonwealth sirve de referencia académica para acceder a la Universidad.

Seguir leyendo noticia
PALABRAS CLAVE
Singapur, Internet, Universidad, Commonwealth, Estados Unidos, Reino Unido, British Council, Londres, Madrid, Cambridge

Ainan, mitad irlandés y mitad malayo, ya pronunciaba algunas palabras con apenas dos semanas de vida, gateaba a los cuatro meses, caminaba a los seis y ya corría con ocho meses, según informaron sus propios padres a través de su propia página de Internet.El niño, que ha asistido a escuelas de Londres y Singapur, obtuvo el nivel 'Ò en Química por el London Edexcel Board. En la actualidad, Ainan es el químico más joven mundialmente reconocido y se cree que es el único químico prodigio conocido en el mundo. Su padre, Valentine Cawley, es licenciado en Física por la Universidad de Cambridge.El Nivel 'O' es el examen al que tradicionalmente se presentan en Reino Unido los jóvenes de 16 años de edad. Según los padres, el nivel de este examen es similar o incluso superior a los exámenes de graduación preuniversitaria estadounidense, ya que las universidades norteamericanas suelen enviar a los estudiantes de niveles 'O' directamente a los cursos de titulación. En los países del Commonwealth el examen de nivel 'O' suele servir de referencia académica. Aunque nunca había leído un libro de texto de nivel 'O' antes del 18 de julio de 2006, Ainan se presentó al examen el pasado 18 de enero, exactamente seis meses después, en el British Council de Singapur. Junto a él había otros cuatro candidatos adultos. Ainan tenía sólo siete años y un mes de edad cuando se presentó al examen.Cuando era pequeño, Ainan buscaba libros de ciencias en la biblioteca de la casa, mostrando preferencia por textos difíciles con complicadas ilustraciones sobre temas científicos, los cuales absorbía calladamente para luego comentarlos.Hacia la edad de tres o cuatro años, Ainan estaba interesado en las formas híperdimensionales y dibujaba sus sombras en dos dimensiones a manera de juego intelectual. Algunas de estas formas tenían cientos de lados, lo cual no fue una sorpresa para su madre, Syahidah Osman Cawley, una artista ambidiestra. Este interés hacia las estructuras abstractas se desarrolló posteriormente en un interés por las estructuras de las moléculas a medida que fue descubriendo la Química en Internet. A través de la navegación por la red, según los padres, Ainan se educó a sí mismo en la ciencia.Cuando tenía seis años de edad recibió un libro de Química, y Ainan se sentó y leyó el texto, mostrando que lo entendía. Su familia le dio a resolver un examen de Química relacionado con el mismo libro y para el asombro de todos, Ainan contestó las preguntas correctamente. Su padre, Valentine Cawley, le dio inmediatamente un libro de texto de nivel 'O' en Química.De momento, según sus padres, el niño ya ha leído un libro de texto en nivel 'A' y se espera que se presente este mismo año a un examen de ese nivel. Para ello requiere de experiencia en laboratorio, lo cual de momento no ha sido posible. En caso de conseguirlo, el jovencísimo científico podría presentarse al examen, propio de jóvenes de 18 años, antes de lanzarse a objetivos mayores, como la Universidad y la investigación científica.

The incommensurability of education systems

I have discussed this before, but it deserves to be addressed again, in another way and through the lens of another experience.

Education systems are not the same, the world over. The clearest divide is between the American education system and the old, traditional British one, still common throughout the Commonwealth and former colonies.

The American system prides itself on breadth. At every stage from first grade to "College" - there is breadth. The British system goes for depth: at every stage from the first year of school to the last year of University, there is greater depth, than in the American system. This leads to much incomprehension when Americans seek to understand the achievements of British style educated kids - and vice-versa. Quite simply: is it possible to compare breadth with depth? Are they commensurable?

My belief is that they are not readily comparable - for where the American loses in depth, they gain in breadth - and where the British/Commonwealth/European loses in breadth they gain in depth.

There is however one way we can compare them: cognitive complexity. The cognitive demands of an old-style British education of O Levels and A Levels followed by a single subject University degree are greater than at any given age in the American system. This is not a controversial statement. It is readily seen by looking at any online US based course designed for a given age and comparing what would be demanded under the traditional British style education at the same age.

What do I mean by cognitive demand? Well, the difficulty of a subject comes in the depth: the level of concepts and techniques, skills and knowledge that must be mastered. It is in the depth that this is to be found. In breadth, one is held largely to an introductory level of knowledge, simply because so many things are being looked at. In this way, the challenge doesn't deepen - and grow, thereby.

The American system probably catches up in Graduate School (I am not sure but that seems more specialized) - but a taught Graduate degree in the US is probably little more than a taught Undergraduate degree in the old-British style single subject system. This seems obvious because it CANNOT BE OTHERWISE when the Undergraduate US degrees have such breadth in them. Because of that breadth, they are limited in depth.

I will give you a practical example of the incommensurability of these systems at work. A few months back, Ainan and I sat through a University of Berkeley, California, Physics lecture. I presume it was a first year lecture because it was so very simplistic that Ainan, six at the time, who had no formal physics background, thought it very simple indeed. In fact, I would say it was pre-O level. That is the level it was pitched at was below a course of study normally started by 14 year olds and finished by 16 year olds in the old traditional British style education. It wasn't even hard enough to be called O level. It was late primary/early secondary level - and yet that was Berkeley. This set me thinking about the nature of education systems. Raymond Ravaglia's remark that the American system "teaches to the left of the distribution" also opened my eyes as to what was happening here.

This phenomenon of great breadth and little depth in the American system - and great depth but little breadth in the traditional British system - leads to the impossibility of either side understanding the academic achievements of the other, fully. There will always be some failure to understand what it is that the other has done and can do.

American Universities recruit students directly after O level, in Singapore. That shows that O level is equal to or above High School graduation standard. The Berkeley lecture makes me wonder how much above that standard it might be.

Yet, all is not lost for the American system. The great breadth means that an American educated child should be able to handle a great variety of tasks - and there is merit in that, too. It just depends on what the culture needs.

(If you would like to read about Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged seven years and four months, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, three and Tiarnan, fourteen months, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of gifted education, IQ, intelligence, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, the creatively gifted, gifted adults and gifted children in general. Thanks.)

The differences between examining boards.

Ainan sat for the O level at the London Edexcel examining board. However, the Board we prepared for was the Singapore Cambridge Board.

Why did we do this? Well, we didn't know that there were any real differences. Indeed, we were told at the outset by someone who should know, that the Boards were much the same. This did not prove to be the case.

Ainan studied Singapore Chemistry textbooks for his O level. They cover the Singapore Cambridge syllabus. He did not study the London Edexcel syllabus - the one he actually went on to take.

About a week or two before the exam, we got a chance to look at the London Edexcel papers and syllabus. We were shocked at what we saw. The papers were VERY different in style and content. The London Edexcel questions were more difficult in many ways: they demanded greater chemical understanding and they covered topics and areas that are NOT covered in the Singapore Cambridge syllabus. As a result, I did not know whether it would be possible for Ainan to sit the exam at all. It was too late to do anything about it.

We tried to get London Edexcel textbooks to see if he could cover the major differences between the syllabuses at the last moment. We tried every major bookshop in Singapore - but NONE of them stocked ANY of the recommended texts. We thought this strange - but it just goes to show how major the differences between the two syllabi are. Clearly, the bookshops judged the London Edexcel recommended books useless for the local Singapore Cambridge syllabus - and vice-versa presumably, since they had elected not to stock any of them. We asked at Borders to check their ordering system - and not one of the books was available even to be ordered by Borders.

We elected, after some heartache, to go ahead with the exam, because Ainan would get bored if forced to wait another six months to sit for it. He went ahead and passed. So, it was a good decision. Yet, had the Board been the one he had prepared for - and not one distinctly different, I think he would have had a lot easier time of it.

We have learnt a lesson though: all exams are not the same - and the syllabi may differ greatly, contrary to expectations.

Anyway, Ainan passed the London Edexcel Chemisty O Level without even having seen the right textbooks. How did he do it? Well, he told me that he had to work out some of the questions himself, using his knowledge of chemistry in general as a guide, with no prior experience of the areas in question - in other words, he had to "wing it", as we used to say when I was younger.

(If you would like to read more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged seven years and four months, and his gifted brothers, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of gifted education, IQ, intelligence, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, the creatively gifted, gifted adults and gifted children in general. Thanks).

Passing Chemistry O Level aged 7

Ainan Celeste Cawley, passed Chemistry O level aged 7 years and 1 month. That is the news in Singapore...but what does it mean to pass Chemistry O level so young?

Firstly, for readers around the world, I had better explain what Chemistry O level is. O Level is a rigorous exam that tests knowledge and thinking skills in an exacting way. Why do I say "exacting" - well because it was designed for the more academic students - the top 20% of the population and thus most students would not be able to pass.

The Board Ainan took was the London Edexcel Board. This Board sets a high standard and requires a lot of thinking from the student - it is not simply an exercise in memory as some Boards are.

O Level is normally taken by sixteen year olds. The average candidate would, therefore, be sixteen and a half years old. Since the brightest 20% of students are the ones the exam is aiming at; to pass it one would need a mental age of 18.645 years. This is derived from the IQ score and the age thus: the deviation IQ of 113 is the same as the ratio IQ (in this case) of 113. IQ as a ratio is mental age divided by chronological age multiplied by 100. Therefore the mental age of O level students who pass would be expected to be: 1.13 times 16.5 years, which is 18.645 years.

Ainan is not 18.645 years old - he was seven years and one month when he took the exam - so passing means something interesting. It means that, in terms of his scientific reasoning capability his ratio to the norm is: 18.645/7 years 1 month. This equals a ratio of 2.63. That is Ainan is at least 2.63 times more precocious than average. In terms of IQ, were this a fair estimator of ratio IQ, which it is likely to be since it involves scientific reasoning which will have a large component of g, in it - the general intelligence factor - it would represent a ratio IQ of 2.63 times 100 or 263 IQ. This is a ratio IQ estimate which is different from a deviation IQ estimate.

Yet, this is likely to be an underestimate of his precocity - for he has already read the A level texts and is working on a University text. That latter text is suited to a 20 year old Chemistry student. The average IQ of a chemistry student is 124. This corresponds to a ratio IQ of 125. Therefore the average mental age of a 20 year old Chemistry student would be 25. Using this to generate a ratio IQ for Ainan giving his age as 7 years and three months - the time when he started to read the University book, would give a ratio IQ of 349.

This should be regarded as an accurate measure of precocity, at least - for it uses actual achievement as a marker for development.

As you can see, this gives an idea of how precocious a child is who passes exams so early. It is an indicator of prodigious development, simply because to pass them at all, one must show adult level intelligence, in the area of interest.

A child prodigy is a child who develops adult level ability/skill in an adult domain by the age of 11. Very few children do this. However, to find them, we might look to children who have shown that they can handle the complex demands of an adult academic subject, very young.

By the way, a comparison can be made to American High School graduation. O Levels are accepted for direct entry to American Universities, indicating that they are at least as challenging as High School is, academically. This should allow Americans to understand the achievement of passing O Level, at seven years and one month, therefore.

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged seven years and four months, or his gifted brothers Fintan, three and Tiarnan, fourteen months, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of gifted education, IQ, intelligence, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, the creatively gifted, gifted adults and gifted children in general. Thanks.)

Comparative education: America and UK style

Yesterday, in the Today newspaper, Singapore, there was a letter from a reader referring to a recent offer by an American University to accept students from Singapore directly after O level results. The initiative is part of a Singapore Institute of Management programme.

For readers in countries not familiar with O levels, let me explain. When I was growing up in the UK, there were two major exams taken before University - O levels (where O was for "Ordinary") and A levels (where A was for "Advanced"), there were also S levels which very few students took, where S stood for Special, I think. S level was considerably tougher than A level. In practice, hardly anyone ever took S level. (I did, along with at least one other from my school, but that is another story).

Now O levels were taken usually at 16 years old and A levels at 18 years old (and S levels too, at 18). O levels were a broad based exam with students taking many O levels. Most took at least 5, I think I took about 12. The A levels were more narrowly focussed, students usually taking only three subjects, though some, in schools like mine, took four or more.

As I understand it, American education is very different from the UK style education. In the UK specialisation occurs early, in America a high school education is a very broad affair indeed. So, too is an American college degree. In America, it is usual to study a buffet of subjects, mixing and matching in a modular fashion, with a typical student learning many different things. Not so in the UK (and many other countries which follow this style). There a student will generally study only one subject, with some exceptions, focussing narrowly and deeply on the subject matter.

So, how does American education compare with the UK/European style education? The American, at any given age, will have been exposed to a broad range of subjects, in what is, to a UK perspective, relatively little depth. The UK student, at any given age will have been exposed to a narrower range of subjects, in much greater depth.

What does this mean in comparing the education systems (and the students) of the two different countries? The story in the Today newspaper, yesterday, is very revealing. An American University is soliciting students after O level. This means, very clearly, that the standard of the first year of the American University begins at or below O level, in terms of depth and difficulty.
A UK A level, taken by 16 to 18 year olds, is beyond the level required to begin an American College Degree. Indeed, when I was growing up in England, it was commonly said that a UK A level, at that time, was equivalent to an American College Degree. It is important to know this when comparing a cultural phenomenon that exists in America with what exists in Europe.

In America, quite a few children appear to go to College early. In Europe very few do (and they are generally, but not always, somewhat older, when they do). Does this mean European children are less bright than American children? Not at all. It means that the European University degrees are more specialized, and require a higher standard in greater depth, than an American Undergraduate degree, certainly in the UK (the system I know of, from experience). A child passing a UK A level, when I was a child, was equivalent, in terms of academic demand, to a child passing an American College Degree. I don't know how American Graduate degrees compare to UK Graduate degrees, or indeed to Undergraduate degrees, but it is clear that they will be different, from the different foundations on which they are built.

The situation has changed somewhat over the years, since my childhood, but certain things remain the same. The UK system (and those that follow something similar) remains more specialized than the American system. The academic demand is narrower at any given age than the American system, but deeper in content. The American system remains broader and more flexible, in terms of choice of subjects studied.

O levels are still studied around the world, but generally not in the UK anymore, where most students take the GCSE (which is quite different, though the syllabuses are similar to O level). A levels have become modular, but still remain specialized.

It is important to understand these differences so that, when we read of the academic achievements of a particular nation, or a particular individual student or child prodigy, and the like, that we know what they mean. The American University recruiting in Singapore, has implicitly acknowledged that the O level exam equals or exceeds the standard of High School Graduation - otherwise they would not be recruiting O level students into their first year programmes. So, if one reads of a child who takes an O level at a very young age, this is equivalent in cognitive demand, one would think, to a child of the same age, completing High School Graduation in America. Similarly, a child passing A levels, at a young age, is comparable to a child passing an American College Degree, at a young age.

This situation allows us to understand why it is so rare for children to enter University in UK style University programmes, compared to the situation in America. Like is not being compared with like. The UK style University is narrower, deeper and simply a lot harder than the American University Undergraduate programme: it is a higher rung to achieve, and so fewer achieve it at a young age.

Then there are variations between Universities. The first year of the University of Cambridge's Natural Sciences course (which I took) was much, much more challenging than A level. Yet in some Universities the first year is similar in demand to A level. Again, one must understand the circumstance of each institution and situation to be able to compare one education system with another.

So, which is better, a broad American education, or a narrow, deeper UK/European one? I think it very much depends on what you are preparing for. If you want to be able to handle a wide range of situations in life, and have a broad perspective on things, perhaps the American system has the edge. If you want to be able to meet a difficult challenge, equipped with the deepest of knowledge (such as might be required in many professional situations), I feel the UK style University has the advantage, at least at the Undergraduate level, assuming that particular challenge doesn't require knowledge of more than one discipline.

I debate the merits of each system, because I face a choice for my sons: how do I want them to be educated - American style - or UK style? The choice exists because American style programmes are spreading around the world, as outposts of American Universities - reaching even here, in Singapore.

The first step in making a choice is in understanding the differences. I hope this article has made some of those differences clear.

(If you would like to read about Ainan Celeste Cawley, my scientific child prodigy son, aged seven years and one month, or his gifted brothers, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of child prodigy, child genius, adult genius, savant, the creatively gifted, gifted children and gifted adults in general. Note that I am unable to update the guide at present because of problems with my blogger interface, which doesn't allow me to edit posts. I am trying to resolve the situation. In the meantime, you will find recent posts in the sidebar. Thanks.)