Any Updates As To When PSLE T-Scores Will Be Scrapped?
-
janet88:
for example, we all know how useless the science textbooks are.
I found most of the knowledge gain in schools very useful, even though I have never found a need to use Pythagorean theorem in real life. -
Actually I thought that the new system does reduce some stress.
T-scores pit children against one another. Even when a child gets 90 marks, his mark is benchmarked against other children’s, and depending on the whole cohort’s performance, average score and standard deviation, his 90 may or may not be an A*. In other words, this is 90 marks, but whether it’s a ‘good’ mark depends on how the rest perform. If many get 90, this 90 is not a good mark. You must get 91 to be ‘good’. However, the new system is such that if you are good, you are good. So children focus their energy on perfecting their craft, not think of ways to trip up their friends to get one up. I thought this is healthier for the children. I have had enough of children wishing their friends do badly at psle so that they will get a better mark than their friends.
It reminds me of the old system where raw scores were taken. Everybody wished one another luck at psle. Not ‘I hope you do badly (so that I can do well).’ -
rains:
Hmm.... No wonder why some parents/classmates in DD's class are so 'afraid' to share :siam:Actually I thought that the new system does reduce some stress.
T-scores pit children against one another. Even when a child gets 90 marks, his mark is benchmarked against other children's, and depending on the whole cohort's performance, average score and standard deviation, his 90 may or may not be an A*. In other words, this is 90 marks, but whether it's a 'good' mark depends on how the rest perform. If many get 90, this 90 is not a good mark. You must get 91 to be 'good'. However, the new system is such that if you are good, you are good. So children focus their energy on perfecting their craft, not think of ways to trip up their friends to get one up. I thought this is healthier for the children. I have had enough of children wishing their friends do badly at psle so that they will get a better mark than their friends.
It reminds me of the old system where raw scores were taken. Everybody wished one another luck at psle. Not 'I hope you do badly (so that I can do well).' -
The latest psle banding changes did not mention treatment to affliation
for affliated primary school students : is it minus 2 points ?
This means for 4 pointers (for 4 subjects), who wish to go back to affliated Secondary school for O level :
does it mean 4 - 2 (for affliation) = 2 points ?
From 2021 :
Gone are the days of the old T-score system where at 200, can go back to affliated Sec school, study O level Express stream ? -
nicnac:
Some schools' report card inside do not report on cohort / level mean, per subject.
Hmm.... No wonder why some parents/classmates in DD's class are so 'afraid' to share :siam:rains:
Actually I thought that the new system does reduce some stress.
T-scores pit children against one another. Even when a child gets 90 marks, his mark is benchmarked against other children's, and depending on the whole cohort's performance, average score and standard deviation, his 90 may or may not be an A*. In other words, this is 90 marks, but whether it's a 'good' mark depends on how the rest perform. If many get 90, this 90 is not a good mark. You must get 91 to be 'good'. However, the new system is such that if you are good, you are good. So children focus their energy on perfecting their craft, not think of ways to trip up their friends to get one up. I thought this is healthier for the children. I have had enough of children wishing their friends do badly at psle so that they will get a better mark than their friends.
It reminds me of the old system where raw scores were taken. Everybody wished one another luck at psle. Not 'I hope you do badly (so that I can do well).'
During parents meet Tr session : parents can ask their child's individual subject Tr, for the level mean
The level mean, per subject, is useful.
As for class mean (per subject) : it is \"extra\" info -
rains:
Yes, I agree with your points, but if I get 3A* and 1 F-, does it mean I'm more stupid than someone who gets 4As, and no A*? The new measure does nothing to resolve this issue. They should introduce the concept of L1R5 too, where students get to use their best subjects and not be unduely pulled down by their Archilles heel subject.Actually I thought that the new system does reduce some stress.
T-scores pit children against one another. Even when a child gets 90 marks, his mark is benchmarked against other children's, and depending on the whole cohort's performance, average score and standard deviation, his 90 may or may not be an A*. In other words, this is 90 marks, but whether it's a 'good' mark depends on how the rest perform. If many get 90, this 90 is not a good mark. You must get 91 to be 'good'. However, the new system is such that if you are good, you are good. So children focus their energy on perfecting their craft, not think of ways to trip up their friends to get one up. I thought this is healthier for the children. I have had enough of children wishing their friends do badly at psle so that they will get a better mark than their friends.
It reminds me of the old system where raw scores were taken. Everybody wished one another luck at psle. Not 'I hope you do badly (so that I can do well).' -
ChiefKiasu:
If you can pick your best subjects, knowing parents, they will start optimizing again
Yes, I agree with your points, but if I get 3A* and 1 F-, does it mean I'm more stupid than someone who gets 4As, and no A*? The new measure does nothing to resolve this issue. They should introduce the concept of L1R5 too, where students get to use their best subjects and not be unduely pulled down by their Archilles heel subject.rains:
Actually I thought that the new system does reduce some stress.
T-scores pit children against one another. Even when a child gets 90 marks, his mark is benchmarked against other children's, and depending on the whole cohort's performance, average score and standard deviation, his 90 may or may not be an A*. In other words, this is 90 marks, but whether it's a 'good' mark depends on how the rest perform. If many get 90, this 90 is not a good mark. You must get 91 to be 'good'. However, the new system is such that if you are good, you are good. So children focus their energy on perfecting their craft, not think of ways to trip up their friends to get one up. I thought this is healthier for the children. I have had enough of children wishing their friends do badly at psle so that they will get a better mark than their friends.
It reminds me of the old system where raw scores were taken. Everybody wished one another luck at psle. Not 'I hope you do badly (so that I can do well).'
And may neglect some basic education for 6 years. Can you imagine if someone decides a child doesn't need to pay any attention to Math for 6 long years because he's not good at it?
For example, I will give up on MT in a heart beat for my son and save money on enrichment classes. Fail, fail because it doesn't matter
Joking aside, I think there's a need to keep an even focus across all subjects for the purpose of ensuring our children have a basic education and understanding in English, Math and Science. (I still think the whole MT concept is outdated but I can't see it changing, otherwise culturists will be out in arms) -
Besides, who is telling the kid that 3a* and 1 f means he is stupid?
I agree with rains that it reduces competition. There is no perfect system and this is a move in the right direction ceteris paribus. -
grimm:
The concept of a T-shaped, well-balanced individual is a myth perpetuated by idealists who have no idea of the stress it generates for a meritocratic society. It is the equivalent of saying that one must be good in everything before one gets to be rated amongst the best, and hence given the coveted opportunities like entry into elite schools. Specialisation - striving for excellence in what one is passionate about - is what creates the exceptional people who moves the world forward. We all remember Einstein as a genius in physics, but I doubt he will know what to do when his car breaks down on a deserted road.If you can pick your best subjects, knowing parents, they will start optimizing again
And may neglect some basic education for 6 years. Can you imagine if someone decides a child doesn't need to pay any attention to Math for 6 long years because he's not good at it?
For example, I will give up on MT in a heart beat for my son and save money on enrichment classes. Fail, fail because it doesn't matter
Joking aside, I think there's a need to keep an even focus across all subjects for the purpose of ensuring our children have a basic education and understanding in English, Math and Science. (I still think the whole MT concept is outdated but I can't see it changing, otherwise culturists will be out in arms)
Until our society learns how to respect and properly recognise skills and talents of all shapes and sizes, changing the granularity by which we measure academic excellence will in no way reduce stress. Unless, of course, we subscribe to the mantra that ignorance is bliss. -
ChiefKiasu:
I thought the new system is an attempt to resolve that issue although it's not perfect. I see the new system as being more transparent than a mere T-score. Perhaps it's too early to say now, but my overall feel is, for T-scores, we focus on the number. It doesn't matter what grades you get for each subject. We hear people saying 'Student X's 4As is better than Student Y's 2A*s and 2As' bcos Student X's T-score is higher. I thought people neglect Student Y's strengths in those 2A*s but instead, give praise to Student X's supposedly weaker As when in actual fact, nobody knows exactly how many marks those A*s and As stand for. And then we anyhow guess: A* is 90 and above and A is 75 to 89. And we 'cleverly' conclude Student Y's As must have been very low A*s and As while Student X must have very high As. But actually nobody knows what went on behind that number.
Yes, I agree with your points, but if I get 3A* and 1 F-, does it mean I'm more stupid than someone who gets 4As, and no A*? The new measure does nothing to resolve this issue. They should introduce the concept of L1R5 too, where students get to use their best subjects and not be unduely pulled down by their Archilles heel subject.
The new system has narrower bands and we can gauge the marks more accurately by the grades given, and bcos it doesn't pit children against one another, the grades will reflect the actual strengths of the child.
For now, I feel that the new system aims to move away from focusing on a number which leads us to think getting 3A* and 1F is more stupid than getting 4As. Perhaps when the first batch of students under the new system get their psle results, we can then capture the sentiment more accurately ie whether people still feel that way.
We only have 4 subjects. How can we introduce the L1R5 system? If only L1R2 is needed, then everybody will focus on their best 3 subjects. It's as good as throwing a subject out of the window. Haha, I can see many students throwing Math out (I certainly would!)! But that would mean they don't have the pre-requisite to study Secondary Math. Primary school subjects lay the foundation for secondary school subjects and are pre-requisites to study those subjects.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login