16/f/lonely is
in the army now, so yes, he's explaining from his past 'A' level
experience... which is almost entirely correct, except for that
fact that aqueous ions have ion-dipole interaction with water
solvent molecules, not dipole-dipole.
But 16/f/lonely's
explanation does bring up a point : 'O' level chemistry is
oversimplified and some (basic) 'A' level concepts are certainly
required for 'O' level students to properly understand chemistry
matters, as opposed to blindly accepting and memorizing
facts ("because the teacher/textbook said so.").
Nonetheless, the MOE/SEAB/UCLES syllabus is pragmatic and based
on overall "what works" for the majority of students. 'O' level
students will just have to be satisifed with the (over)simplified
limited explanations (at 'O' levels). But for students
with an innate interest and intellectual curiosity for a
deeper, truer, comprehension, they could do their
own research (the internet revolution has brought greater
power and capabilities to everyone... everyone with an internet
connection anyway).
(And/or they could come for my tuition. For
the benefit, understanding and enjoyment of my students, I do not
unreasonably limit discussions to syllabus contents. My 'O' level
students enjoy a gainful glimpse of 'A' level chemistry, and my 'A'
level students enjoy a gainful glimpse of University level
chemistry. Results have shown students fare better when they
understand (depth of which, may require going beyond syllabus
requirements, but of course only where still relevant and
helpful) rather than blindly accept and memorize. Which is an
unfortunately over-common instruction from school teachers, due to
a misplaced blind emphasis on paper exam results, leading to a
fallacious thinking that understanding be sacrificed to blind
memorizing for the end paper results).
So u can liao, anpanman? Cannot also must can. (army phrase).
Just kidding. Any more questions, anpanman?