Dunman High School (Junior High)

[WeiHan]

I think DHS kind of result is comparable to NJC in tern of percentage of 8 distictions and 7 dictinctions. NJC has 41 students with 7 distictions but they have a bigger cohort size. In term of percentage wise, the school probably beat Temasek JC and probably VJC too.


As for RI and HCI, didn’t anyone feel stange that their cohort size has suddenly increased to over 1000. In the past, it is used to be around 700 or 800.

Here is my explanation: If they are going to just maintain that kind of cohort size (700-800) with only students promoting from their secondary schools section (i.e HCI, Nanyang, RI and RGS) to the JC sections, their A level result is going to suffer. People have to get the fact right, not all students who did well in their PSLE is going to do equally well in standing when they reach A level. Fact is that there are pockets of good students who didn’t did as well in their PSLE but do very well in A level. Jia Li from HCI is a good example. She got 250 for her PSLE "only" and was from Bukit Panjang Gov High school and only join HCI for the 2 JC years. She is the top student in HCI with 9A. The extra 400 students that they add to their original IP cohort help to pull the A level result up further.

Remember that during the time when school ranking system was still around, the agg score for L1R5 for RI, RGS, HCI and Nanyang wer around 8 or 9. In other words, if they are going to just take this same batch of students into their JC sections, the JC cutoff will be just 8 not the 6 (before all the bonus). The reasoning is the same with DHS. They use to have a avegare L1R5 scores in the O level of approximately 9-10. That means the quality of the JC section, NOW, for DHS is around cutoff point of 9.

Schools like Dunman High and RV is going to suffer bcos they don’t have the luxury to take in another 100-200 promising good students after O level results. Lets face it, as I have said, students who have done well during their PSLE and got in to DHS may lose in standing after 6 years when comparing to some students who didn’t do as well in their PSLE.

[ezmum]

I think Jia Li’s PSLE score was 257 (not 250) - still she has done incredibly well!

[WeiHan]

ezmum:

I think Jia Li's PSLE score was 257 (not 250) - still she has done incredibly well!

I read from ZaoBao that she got 250 and cannot get into the special stream.

Anyway, my point is that students with relatively lower PSLE scores who didn't manage to get into the IP programme of their choice ultimately can still do better than many of the students that got into that IP programme. So if the IP schools don't add on with the intakes after O level, their A level result won't be as good before the schools go IP.

[ezmum]

Straits Times had her score as 257. But I do get your point.

[kevin1]

WeiHan:

I think DHS kind of result is comparable to NJC in tern of percentage of 8 distictions and 7 dictinctions. NJC has 41 students with 7 distictions but they have a bigger cohort size. In term of percentage wise, the school probably beat Temasek JC and probably VJC too.


As for RI and HCI, didn't anyone feel stange that their cohort size has suddenly increased to over 1000. In the past, it is used to be around 700 or 800.

Here is my explanation: If they are going to just maintain that kind of cohort size (700-800) with only students promoting from their secondary schools section (i.e HCI, Nanyang, RI and RGS) to the JC sections, their A level result is going to suffer. People have to get the fact right, not all students who did well in their PSLE is going to do equally well in standing when they reach A level. Fact is that there are pockets of good students who didn't did as well in their PSLE but do very well in A level. Jia Li from HCI is a good example. She got 250 for her PSLE \"only\" and was from Bukit Panjang Gov High school and only join HCI for the 2 JC years. She is the top student in HCI with 9A. The extra 400 students that they add to their original IP cohort help to pull the A level result up further.

Remember that during the time when school ranking system was still around, the agg score for L1R5 for RI, RGS, HCI and Nanyang wer around 8 or 9. In other words, if they are going to just take this same batch of students into their JC sections, the JC cutoff will be just 8 not the 6 (before all the bonus). The reasoning is the same with DHS. They use to have a avegare L1R5 scores in the O level of approximately 9-10. That means the quality of the JC section, NOW, for DHS is around cutoff point of 9.

Schools like Dunman High and RV is going to suffer bcos they don't have the luxury to take in another 100-200 promising good students after O level results. Lets face it, as I have said, students who have done well during their PSLE and got in to DHS may lose in standing after 6 years when comparing to some students who didn't do as well in their PSLE.

I foresee that the Joint Admission Exercise will be opened to Dunman High and RV soon when MOE believes their fledging Senior High Section are ready. After all if NJC is allowed to offer a 6-year program, I don't see why DHS and RV should be closed to the flow of non-IP talents. I just hope that by the time MOE do so, DHS (my alma mater) will still maintain its A levels results and it's still not too late.

I'm seeing a rather unhealthy development here because of the IP : that RI and HCI has the best of both worlds by being able to take in the best students at both PSLE and O Levels and therefore further entrenching their positions as the \"Big Two\". The way i see it, DHS is not very well-positioned to compete against RI and HCI as we are being bogged down by two words that's already in the school name : 政府.

[kevin1]

sunnydaysingapore:

hmm...............


compared with RI, we then have 57 out of 1200+ students

compared with HCI, we then have 48 out of 1000 students

in an ideal world, where IP students are supposed to be better than normal O-level students, dunman high should be able to beat both RI and HCI though.

:stupid: what went wrong?

I don't understand your logic. In any case, I think a fairer comparison should be made in PERCENTAGE terms against the other old Top 5 JCs : VJC, NJC and TJC.

[WeiHan]

kevin1:

I foresee that the Joint Admission Exercise will be opened to Dunman High and RV soon when MOE believes their fledging Senior High Section are ready. After all if NJC is allowed to offer a 6-year program, I don't see why DHS and RV should be closed to the flow of non-IP talents. I just hope that by the time MOE do so, DHS (my alma mater) will still maintain its A levels results and it's still not too late.


I'm seeing a rather unhealthy development here because of the IP : that RI and HCI has the best of both worlds by being able to take in the best students at both PSLE and O Levels and therefore further entrenching their positions as the \"Big Two\". The way i see it, DHS is not very well-positioned to compete against RI and HCI as we are being bogged down by two words that's already in the school name : 政府.

That being said, we still need to be fair, it takes two hand to clap. Very good mainstream O level students are willing to choose RI and HCI. That it.

With this IP introduced, at first, I anticipate that good students will not be so polarised and concentrated in 1-2 schools but I am wrong because certain schools have more resources to expand their intake and squeeze out other schools of good students. It is like doing business, you know....if you have more resource than your competitors, cut the price of your products and squeeze all your competitors out of busines first, then you have a monopoly.

[WeiHan]

sunnydaysingapore:

hmm...............


compared with RI, we then have 57 out of 1200+ students

compared with HCI, we then have 48 out of 1000 students

in an ideal world, where IP students are supposed to be better than normal O-level students, dunman high should be able to beat both RI and HCI though.

:stupid: what went wrong?

Nothing went wrong....RJC's principal was saying that their good A level result proves the success of IP. I bet to differ in opinion and I think she is to rash in jumping into conclusion. With 1/3 of RJC joining after O level, they should make a comparison of the two groups of students before jumping into conclusion. Moreover, they already have the best PSLE batches to start with.

[WeiHan]

sunnydaysingapore:

so you are saying that in dunman high, the IP students are worse than normal O-level students?


then what's the point of having IP program ah? :?

In term of examination ability, some IP students may be worse off than the best of normal O-level students.

What is the point of having IP? Well..the point is exactly, to be less focus on examination result, but be more creative and broad-based in education. In my opinion, people with the most As may not be good in other aspects....but this is complicated.

[CoffeeCat]

sunnydaysingapore:

so you are saying that in dunman high, the IP students are worse than normal O-level students?


then what's the point of having IP program ah? :?

The point of IP isn't so much as mainintaining \"the standing\" of the IP students in A level as to allow them to the chance to use their time in sec4 more effectively to pursue their talents, etc. When those bright students apply to overseas universities and scholarships, the extra achievements they racked up because of IP might plays a factor.