Any Updates As To When PSLE T-Scores Will Be Scrapped?

[sushi88]

pirate:

various people:

As a kiasuparent...

As such a kiasuparent, I am afraid nothing can be done to reduce the child's stress. The child will just have to blame his or her bad luck. :razz:

I agree... :rotflmao:

[janet88]

I wonder how Mr Ng worked out this new grading system.

[mum_sugoku]

pirate:

mum_sugoku:

To resolve this issue, how about lowering the requirement for AL1, from requiring a score of 90+ to, say, 75+ (ie AL1 for 75 and above, AL2 for 70-74, so on and so forth), just for MTL only?

So for those who are strong in MTL and weak in, say maths, can reduce the AL1 requirement for maths to 75+ etc, just for maths only?

Just wondering how is a suggestion like this even fair to other children who are wired differently from those who are weak in MTL? Sounds like nothing more than \"make the subjects my kid is strong at count for more, and the subject my kid is weak at count for less\". :roll:

When I made such a suggestion, I was looking at the issue from a different angle, completely overlooking the issue of fairness.

My consideration is, under the new system, the likelihood of AL score being (drastically) dragged down by Chinese will get very much higher, causing more and more (kiasu) parents/students to resent the subject and wish it excluded from AL score. We'll then see more and more parents petition for the exclusion. Ultimately, it could get so overwhelming that government just yield to the pressure (in order not to lose votes :evil: ). If that happens, students will pay less attention to the subject, causing the (already lousy) standard of Chinese to deteriorate further.

But if you just lower the bar, the resentment will not be that great, so less chance of parents wanting it excluded, less chance of government yielding, students still need to pay attention to Chinese to do well for decent score, win win, right?

[sushi88]

The bigger stress of parents come from:


1. Not able to get the kids to be consistent in their performance (yo-yo in attitude)
2. Kids who always perform borderline to the stellar level (so near and yet so far..just missing that extra bit..so frustrate the parents)
3. Non-motivated kids due to either immaturity, life-is-too-good-to try-hard, lack of interest.
4. Not recognizing a kid has other talent precious other than academic (which is not the strength)
that can be developed. Primary school education is basic so at least must pass.
5. Kid has no other talent and no talent in studies (this case seemed the worst but every kid has some form of talent, just gotta look hard enough)

Can a change in the PSLE system change any of these?

A system is dead once set....the kids are alive.

The way I see the new system can reduce stress is the \"face factor\" and mind you, this is an important factor for stress relief in our competitive society.

Under the neck-to-neck ranking system, it is starkly obvious when a child does not get into a \"good enough\" school...people will directly attribute it to results, like it or not.

In the new system, if a child is in any school, it is attributed to choice. Even if one does not get into their choiced school, parents can say \"sway lor...kenna balloted out\"... So stress is reduced right?

[grimm]

mum_sugoku:

pirate:

[quote=\"mum_sugoku\"]To resolve this issue, how about lowering the requirement for AL1, from requiring a score of 90+ to, say, 75+ (ie AL1 for 75 and above, AL2 for 70-74, so on and so forth), just for MTL only?

So for those who are strong in MTL and weak in, say maths, can reduce the AL1 requirement for maths to 75+ etc, just for maths only?

Just wondering how is a suggestion like this even fair to other children who are wired differently from those who are weak in MTL? Sounds like nothing more than \"make the subjects my kid is strong at count for more, and the subject my kid is weak at count for less\". :roll:

When I made such a suggestion, I was looking at the issue from a different angle, completely overlooking the issue of fairness.

My consideration is, under the new system, the likelihood of AL score being (drastically) dragged down by Chinese will get very much higher, causing more and more (kiasu) parents/students to resent the subject and wish it excluded from AL score. We'll then see more and more parents petition for the exclusion. Ultimately, it could get so overwhelming that government just yield to the pressure (in order not to lose votes :evil: ). If that happens, students will pay less attention to the subject, causing the (already lousy) standard of Chinese to deteriorate further.

But if you just lower the bar, the resentment will not be that great, so less chance of parents wanting it excluded, less chance of government yielding, students still need to pay attention to Chinese to do well for decent score, win win, right?[/quote]Don't worry, at the moment they will probably lose more votes if they exclude Chinese as the conservatives / traditionalists will be fuming. Maybe another generation later we will have a shot say removing it completely.

[anxious.01501dad]

mum_sugoku:

When I made such a suggestion, I was looking at the issue from a different angle, completely overlooking the issue of fairness.

My consideration is, under the new system, the likelihood of AL score being (drastically) dragged down by Chinese will get very much higher, causing more and more (kiasu) parents/students to resent the subject and wish it excluded from AL score. We'll then see more and more parents petition for the exclusion. Ultimately, it could get so overwhelming that government just yield to the pressure (in order not to lose votes :evil: ). If that happens, students will pay less attention to the subject, causing the (already lousy) standard of Chinese to deteriorate further.

But if you just lower the bar, the resentment will not be that great, so less chance of parents wanting it excluded, less chance of government yielding, students still need to pay attention to Chinese to do well for decent score, win win, right?

I think the MTL is a recognised \"problem\". Hence, this subject has always been graded using a different curve compared to EMS, as shared by Hope21 above. Under the current system, the mean t-score is at 50, yet the % of \"A\" scorers is more than 70% for MTL including Chinese. To me, that will translate to at least 20% of \"A\" grade scorers getting a t-score of <50 for their MTL whereas an \"A\" grade scorer in the other 3 subjects can be assured of a t-score of >50. To me, an \"A\" for MTL in the current system is a \"feel good\" grade as it may well be the subject that drags down the overall t-score if it is a weak A. With the rising of China, this should provide more motivation to learn Chinese as it will impact the child's future.

[floppy]

sushi88:

In the new system, if a child is in any school, it is attributed to choice. Even if one does not get into their choiced school, parents can say \"sway lor...kenna balloted out\"... So stress is reduced right?

The root cause of the stress faced in PSLE isn't in the exam per se. The stress comes from the parents and their level of expectations. Changing the system that the exam is graded won't reduce any stress or anxiety as long as the parents eyes are dead set on one or two schools and comparison between their peers.

[Zappy]

floppy:

The root cause of the stress faced in PSLE isn't in the exam per se. The stress comes from the parents and their level of expectations. Changing the system that the exam is graded won't reduce any stress or anxiety as long as the parents eyes are dead set on one or two schools and comparison between their peers.

Fundamentally, it all boils down to a single equation.

There is a limited number of slots at highly-desired schools, (be it top tier, 2nd tier or whatever you want to categorize them into )with a much larger number of students that want to get into those schools.

So unless you have a situation where anyone can get into any school and they will expand the enrollment in an unlimited way, there has to be a cut-off somewhere.

If T-scores are not desired as a cut-off, a new method AL is born.
If AL turns out to be more stressful, then another way will be created in future.

Whichever way it is, with demand > supply, a cut-off will need to be determined and parents / students will devise some ways to gain an advantage, be it more tuition to boost academic scores, special classes to ace interviews, renowned coaches to groom sports/ artistic/ musical talent.

So the stress levels will always be there - just a matter of how it is channeled based on what system is in place during that time. And the arguments of how some people are advantaged over others will persist too.

[Blurryburger]

sushi88:

In the new system, if a child is in any school, it is attributed to choice. Even if one does not get into their choiced school, parents can say \"sway lor...kenna balloted out\"... So stress is reduced right?

The ST reported that \"Based on past cohorts' performance and choice patterns, about one in 10 pupils would have to undergo balloting, according to MOE.\"

I want to know more about that 1 in 10 statistic. In what hypothetical band are these 10% students coming from? What type of choices would effect such a predicament?

And why is MOE allowing arbitrariness into the system in, what I would consider, a big way. Isn't it bad that p1 registration already allows privileges to only some families while the others had to contend with arbitrary balloting? Why does MOE think that a 10 percent statistic is a tolerable percentage to our children and citizens? Why is this 10 percent of arbitrary chance better than the current meritocratic system? It's not about an entitlement mentality. Above all, shouldn't the Ministry care about creating an environment that is as safe as it is certain for our children to learn and grow? Life throws up all kinds of challenges to us. But why should policies add on to more uncertainty?

What signal does it send to our kids? \"Too bad? This is life?\" By the way, this would be life with a qualifier - it is life that will be caused by the education policies.

I cannot comprehend why policy makers would consider introducing more arbitrariness into a system a good policy, especially in education. If I hadn't grown up in this country whereby meritocracy is so ingrained in me, I would have concluded that MOE is using balloting as a cop-out. I still believe that the past scholars working in MOE and public service are worthy of their positions. But, please tell me why is this considered good policy-making?

[civic6228]

The root cause of the stress faced in PSLE isn’t in the exam per se. The stress comes from the parents and their level of expectations. Changing the system that the exam is graded won’t reduce any stress or anxiety as long as the parents eyes are dead set on one or two schools and comparison between their peers.[/quote]



Parents often forget that the kids are the one taking the exam. At the end of the day, what happens at the examination hall is what that really matters. Support your kid, not stress them. Stop comparing which secondary school they are going compared to the kids of your peers. As long as the kid has done his/her best, good enough. I have issue with my DD as she is not doing her best (Not hardworking enough) and I am sure that she is capable of better results.

However, I will always tell her as long as she has done her best … good enough for me.

I recall that all I get for my PSLE is which school that I was being posted to … no grades, no score just the school. There were brilliant, average and not so smart kids in the school.

I pity the kids nowadays … I would rather MOE get rid of all grading, scoring etc. Let kids be kids.

In case, you are wondering, our President came from my secondary school.