Any Updates As To When PSLE T-Scores Will Be Scrapped?
-
A picture in this report shows the balloting algorithm.
http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/e ... igger-role -
ChiefKiasu:
While the old system is also based on aggregates of 4 subjects, if you understand the formula used to compute t-scores, it does reward those who are especially outstanding in specific subjects with higher t-scores, allowing to stand out of the crowd.
I seriously doubt that even 100% scores for PSLE maths and/or science is necessarily an indication of being 'outstanding' in those subjects in the grand scheme of things. It is still only PSLE, remember?
And if you don't do well for the languages at this level, it basically means that you don't even have a working knowledge of that language. -
With this new banding we still need to change the hardware and software in our school system . I hope they don’t just pat their back and think they have met the kpi. They just change the yardsticks of the psle grouping/sorting exercise but whether the students need to have excessive tuition to come to this stage or whether their potential will be matched after this sorting exercise has still not be addressed . so far there is a perception that many teething problem may arise and students may be unfairly sorted if not carried out properly . we don’t exactly know the main purpose of this banding criteria too.
-
I am curious why did MOE not do a "L1R2" style of banding, take best language and 2 others to determine the score. AL grading bands remains the same.
Something like O-level’s "L1R5".
This allows students to have one weakness, and not be unduly penalized by it. If a system wants to promote less stress, it should allow for such weaknesses, no? Currently in this new system, a student can’t have even one weak subject, it will drag their entire score down. Rather than reducing tuition, probably parents will have to send their kids to tuition to pull up that weak subject.
If too many students get the same score due to only 3 subjects in the total score, the 4th subject can be used as tie-breaker. -
mathtuition88:
Because all subjects are R. Relevant. Mother tongue usually not relevant for poly or jc education, but very relevant for sec school. Same as math n sc. Iless stress now n how to cope in sec sch later on? The current system of using strong to pull up weak is not bad IMO. Why they can't just use that then band the kids after computing the raw score.? I think someone mentioned before.I am curious why did MOE not do a \"L1R2\" style of banding, take best language and 2 others to determine the score. AL grading bands remains the same.
Something like O-level's \"L1R5\".
This allows students to have one weakness, and not be unduly penalized by it. If a system wants to promote less stress, it should allow for such weaknesses, no? Currently in this new system, a student can't have even one weak subject, it will drag their entire score down. Rather than reducing tuition, probably parents will have to send their kids to tuition to pull up that weak subject.
If too many students get the same score due to only 3 subjects in the total score, the 4th subject can be used as tie-breaker. -
Blurryburger:
Well said! But we differ in viewpoints. I've been to several companies that insist on employees being t-shaped individuals - people who are both broad and deep - and these are the companies that invariably have very high stress levels and turn-over rates because it is literally impossible for most people to achieve such lofty aims. In the same vein, I don't believe any rational person can say that individuals who having both soft and hard skills is a bad thing.My personal approach to education is that all children are born intelligent. That sense of curiosity, that spark of questioning how a toy works, that initial years of life convinced me of this view.
Of course that intelligence level could be measured by different yardsticks and hence you might rank them differently based on different yardsticks. The new banding is but a different yardstick and so when we try to draw concordance between the two yardsticks, we will naturally see different rankings for specific cases.
But the overall picture in terms of academic merit offered by the two schemes would conceivably be quite similar. I doubt anyone would view a 8-pointer as not being a good student (well, we shouldn't). It's a student with an average score of between 85-89. That's an accurate picture of the student's average proficiency level in all subjects. They are 12 year-olds, I think \"specialization\" at such a young age is...for a lack of a better word, \"uncalled for\". We have the DSAs, the GEP for the exceptional mathletes.
I think with this new banding, the signal I'm receiving is thus: \"even if you are a scientist or a mathematician, we want you to be able to have a general level of proficiency in terms of linguistics, you'll need that in the future to be able to communicate your ideas\", and similarly for a child who's great with the languages, \"We want you to be able to understand and analyze data and maybe work with the scientists/techies in the future\". I think to be able to form good and sound arguments, you need to have a strong foundation and be proficient in the 4 subjects. You look at articles of Forbes, Fast company on the kind of talent the Silicone Valley is looking for: it's someone with both good hard and soft skills. I see the goal of PSLE as a means to assessing the proficiency levels (though I don't understand why some questions are so badly worded and convoluted).
So I see the benefit of the banding. I understand that banding is gentler when you don't have to fight over a percentage point (or basis point for the finance people out there). I see the balloting as forcing a parent's hand to look at our child and understand her intelligence when it comes to a choice of school. The child's unique and as a parent, being a primary caregiver, I need to look at her strengths and weaknesses objectively. I need to find a school that suits her and not blindly sign her up for enrichment classes based on word of mouth or fear of being or looked upon as a bad parent if I don't. I need to respect her need for a childhood and that her intelligence could be nurtured through meaningful explorations. She may need more time than others to get to that proficiency level (maybe not 6 years, maybe a little longer).
But I also need to find out as much as I can to avert that balloting situation. And we face that risk unequally.
What I don't like with what MOE has released so far, is that balloting stage and the lack of info with regards to the simulation they had done. Well, I've reiterated that too many times. *stepping down from the soap box*.
In any case, the new measure has nothing to do with soft or hard skills. One can have both soft and hard skills, be a master in English, Math, Science, and a complete klutz in Chinese. So he may score Band 1 for 3 subjects and a Band 7 for Chinese despite his best efforts. He is then doomed to 10-point schools when he could have been better challenged in 4-point schools.
Until I see MOE lean towards a more L1R5-like scheme with additional points for \"soft\" or extracurricular skills, I see the new measurement as nothing more than a cosmetic change that does nothing to reduce stress or remove the focus on academic prowess. -
If really want L2R3 where L2=languages, R1=Math, R2=Science, then R3 =Humanities, add Social Studies(why this? relevant to all kids) and Geography(why this? it is equivalent the environmental/climate change topics covered in primary school) new exam-subjects to make it 6 subjects and the SS or Geog can help to slant the points. The other 4 subjects are basic subjects. This also helps to measure kids' ability to cope with more subjects in sec schools and kids have less time for tuition...school hours can be longer to add 2 more subjects. Ai mai?
I think MOE will have problem coping too due to resources.
Long time ago...our primary school education has more than 4 subjects that is being tested....maybe a lot of people not aware of it. -
jedamum:
The new AL system change advocate ALL rounder, in 4 subjects.
Because all subjects are R. Relevant. Mother tongue usually not relevant for poly or jc education, but very relevant for sec school. Same as math n sc. Iless stress now n how to cope in sec sch later on? The current system of using strong to pull up weak is not bad IMO. Why they can't just use that then band the kids after computing the raw score.? I think someone mentioned before.mathtuition88:
I am curious why did MOE not do a \"L1R2\" style of banding, take best language and 2 others to determine the score. AL grading bands remains the same.
Something like O-level's \"L1R5\".
This allows students to have one weakness, and not be unduly penalized by it. If a system wants to promote less stress, it should allow for such weaknesses, no? Currently in this new system, a student can't have even one weak subject, it will drag their entire score down. Rather than reducing tuition, probably parents will have to send their kids to tuition to pull up that weak subject.
If too many students get the same score due to only 3 subjects in the total score, the 4th subject can be used as tie-breaker.
The 4-pointer IP school looking for students, who are All Rounder now.
The change made, or the move away from T-score, is towards All Rounder.
Not just All Rounder in the 4 academic subjects, but also All rounder in holistic assessment in your Cca, etc
That's why P1 students start taking Cca
With the change, It is not going to be easy to enter the dream school (4-pointer) :
if one does not have a DSA offer.
For average students :
If have affliated Secondary schools awaiting, safer to go back there, instead of run the risk of balloting -
Remember his speech ?
"You don’t need to enter university to get a U degree to be successful person".
Under new scheme, its either you are good or you are just average. There is no in between.
Parents need to change their mindset.
Target less degree holder so as to cover plently of jobs available which does not require U degree in the market. -
eastshore:
The words would be more convincing if we see the Ministers' children not going to Ivy League but take up a blue collar profession. :siam:Remember his speech ?
\"You don't need to enter university to get a U degree to be successful person\".
Under new scheme, its either you are good or you are just average. There is no in between.
Parents need to change their mindset.
Target less degree holder so as to cover plently of jobs available which does not require U degree in the market.
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