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

[sushi88]

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?

I also prefer the T-score for very detail results to 6 decimal places for clear comparison but I am ok for the new system if it reduces stress for the majority. Seriously in primary school, there is no need to measure kids to this level of granularity for the majority. Going to secondary school and do well still depends a lot on the child to cope with 7-10 subjects and excel in them, not so much the school they go to. There are many case studies of students with very high T-scores doing averagely in school now and it is not surprising at all...The PSLE exam does not factor in the growth factor of a child...some slow down in sec school and nothing guarantees in a better school means all would be well. The govt is not playing down on meritocracy but the current issue to cool down the heat of PSLE is very real as the children are indeed suffering the stress exerted on them with tonnes of tuition just to squeeze into a better T-score with 6 decimal places for the majority.

[CatMoon]

phtthp:

janet88:

i'm just curious whether the affiliation COP will be affected or MOE will still allow individual schools to decide.

we know the verdict of affliation details, is not announced by MOE, yet.
They are still in discussion, still \"negotiating\".
those from mission schools, from Clan schools : more to negotiate

But for chit-chat, just suppose if MOE were to standardize across the board, by giving the affliated mission schools' students minus 2 bonus points : don't you think is generous ?

example

let's suppose one popular mission Secondary school AL Cut off point, is set at 10.

if the affliated primary school students apply with AL 12 points, plus on condition that they list this school as #1 choice, in their list of 6 choices :
means these students can goback Secondary school for \"O\" level, liao.

isn't it, great ?
with AL 12 (discounted 2 points), in this case : affliated students can go back, for O level
in contrast, outsiders need a higher score (AL 10), then can enter this school.
if outsiders like this popular school very much : \"die-die\" minimum they must achieve AL 10, before can apply.

2 bonus points : is a lot, already
(better than nothing)


currently, quite a number of Catholic mission Secondary schools listed, can enter Catholic Junior College for \"A\" level, with discounted 2 points

http://www.cjc.edu.sg/about/our-history

I bet MOE will not be giving the 2 points for affiliation. Most likely the scenario would be -
If you want affiliation, put that school as your first choice.

[jetsetter]

ngl2010:

jetsetter:

This part (i.e. simulation) the author was right, but the para in which he used the same figure 256 of the \"old system\" to compare with the raw marks of 256 was flawed. Under the old system, 256 has factored in the Std Dev and has been transformed. Apples must be compared with apples.

To the parents that have gone through PSLE, we know that the t-score is raw marks x 0.75 plus minus 10.

So, 256 raw marks will translate to t-score 192 plus minus 10. And 220 will translate to 165 plus minus 10. In the current system, children with t-score more than 188 will have a shot at Express while children with t-score more than 152 will be in Normal Academic/Technical. In the new system, the first child will be in Normal and the 2nd child will be in Express. Both will be placed in wrong stream. So how?

[quote]For the student who would have scored 256 marks in the old system, would score 24 points in new system which qualifies him only for Normal stream. Another pupil who would have scored 220 marks in old system would score 22 points which qualifies him to opt for Express or Normal stream.[/quote]Ah, ok I finally see why I saw oranges instead of apples I thought author's \"256 marks in the old system\" meant T-score, but Mr Chee meant raw marks. Now that you've helped transform 256, it's no longer confusing Tks ngl!


Well, MOE needs to conduct more rigorous testings and simulations to minimise deviant scenarios of this sort.

[grimm]

CatMoon:

I bet MOE will not be giving the 2 points for affiliation. Most likely the scenario would be -
If you want affiliation, put that school as your first choice.

You have to do that today anyway to enjoy the affiliation benefit.

From MOE website: \"Students of such primary schools who want to continue education in the affiliated secondary school must indicate that school as their first choice.\"

https://www.moe.gov.sg/admissions/secondary-one-posting-exercise/considerations

What we don't know is:
1) Will there be additional discount for affiliation?
2) How much that discount will be? Will it mandated by MOE or the school?

An alternate scenario could be affiliation will have priority over those with the same choice (which works for me but my son benefits from affiliation so I am hardly neutral here)

[pirate]

Zappy:

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.

But even if a way can be found to expand enrollment until there is no cut-off, those same parents will no longer want their kids there anymore. The desirability comes from difficulty in getting in.

In fact, I think if MOE were to set up an 'elite' secondary school and restrict enrollment to the top 100 students of any batch (say 3 classes tops), but staff it with the laziest, most undedicated teachers available who only teach the bare minimum and tell all the students to go get tuition, these parents will still fight hand, tooth and nail to get their kids in. Even if the teachers throw markers at the students in class, and say to them every other day that they suck, are an embarrassment and do not deserve to be in such an elite school... :razz:

[grimm]

pirate:

In fact, I think if MOE were to set up an 'elite' secondary school and restrict enrollment to the top 100 students of any batch (say 3 classes tops), but staff it with the laziest, most undedicated teachers available who only teach the bare minimum and tell all the students to go get tuition, these parents will still fight hand, tooth and nail to get their kids in. Even if the teachers throw markers at the students in class, and say to them every other day that they suck, are an embarrassment and do not deserve to be in such an elite school... :razz:

That's a fantastic idea! Maybe they should do it now to the top X schools not tell anyone...... :rotflmao:

[pirate]

jetsetter:

Well, MOE needs to conduct more rigorous testings and simulations to minimise deviant scenarios of this sort.

So long as bands are used, there will always be deviant scenarios.

Makes me wonder why MOE didn't just add up all the raw scores, and then chop the total up into sorting bands instead. For example:

AL 1: >360 (equivalent to 4 points)
AL 2: 355 - 359.5 (equivalent to 5 points)
AL 3: 350 - 345.5 (equivalent to 6 points)
AL 4: 345 - 349.5 (equivalent to 7 points)
etc...

Maybe the idea is that it is preferable that the children work on what they are weak at, instead of trying to wring a few more points out of what they are already good at in order to make up for what they are weak at.

Then again, can always cap the number of points from each paper to 90 so that even if a student gets 91, 95 or even 100 marks for a paper, it only counts as 90.

[sembgal]

English, Math, Science and get above 92, that is confirm 3 X AL 1 = 3 points. Now, if the child is weak in Chinese, she just get 4 points for AL4 for scoring 75 marks. 4 + 3 = 7 points! If you were to compare it with another child with AL 1 X 4 = 4 points for all subjects, the child with 4 points will get priority to go first choice sec sch as compared to the 7 points.


Being weak in any one subject will definitely pull down the overall score for AL Score as this is RAW score.

Under the T-score system, can use the marks for stronger subjects such as English, Maths and Science to make up for the weakest subject Chinese. But under the new PSLE AL system, you cannot do this anymore.

There is equal emphasis for all subjects now. You cannot just focus on other subjects and neglect Chinese. Please brush up your child’s Chinese standard while time is on your side now. ( For Parents with children born in 2010 and after.)

[zulu]

sembgal:

English, Math, Science and get above 92, that is confirm 3 X AL 1 = 3 points. Now, if the child is weak in Chinese, she just get 4 points for AL4 for scoring 75 marks. 4 + 3 = 7 points! If you were to compare it with another child with AL 1 X 4 = 4 points for all subjects, the child with 4 points will get priority to go first choice sec sch as compared to the 7 points.


Being weak in any one subject will definitely pull down the overall score for AL Score as this is RAW score.

Under the T-score system, can use the marks for stronger subjects such as English, Maths and Science to make up for the weakest subject Chinese. But under the new PSLE AL system, you cannot do this anymore.

There is equal emphasis for all subjects now. You cannot just focus on other subjects and neglect Chinese. Please brush up your child's Chinese standard while time is on your side now. ( For Parents with children born in 2010 and after.)

My only child is 15 this year so i am just being kaypoh here but i do empathize with parents who are struggling with chinese. Both my wife and i are illiterate when it comes to chinese so we sent our DD to a chinese language kindergarten and started her on both chinese enrichment and personal tuition from young. What more could have been done?

She did well enough to do HMT but 'only' scored an A in her PSLE. With the other subjects being A*s, her T score still qualified her for any school she wanted (she actually DSAed via academics but that is another topic for another time)

Would she be where she is today under the new system? Will the school she goes to really make a difference or will the cream always rise to the top? Question parents like us have to grapple with......

[zac's mum]

http://hedgehogcomms.blogspot.sg/2016/0 ... r.html?m=1