Can through-train school work in kiasu Singapore?
-
The TT school cannot be an existing popular school due to the reasons everyone knows. It will push down the popularity to even crazier levels at P1 registration.
Hence I suggested converting an existing unpopular 2CS school to TT. Or maybe not, if the name already has the undesirable label. New school with a new name may be better. Only those parents who truly want a stress-free, no PSLE thru-train experience for their kids will apply. It’s not going to be overwhelmingly oversubscribed, which is fine for a new pilot school until they prove that the TT system produces fine end-goal after 10 years. It’s not gonna cost MOE much more to run this test-bed school at all. If it really fails after 10-20 years, what’s the opportunity cost? Nothing worse than a 2CS school with falling enrolment what. -
We should not put the cart before the horse, it is more worthwhile for MOE to establish how many parents/students actually prefer the pri-sec thru train system compared to the current offering. If the take-up rate is not high, then it's game over.
Don't waste time discussing something that does not have high demand if there are enough kiasu parents/kids to support the PSLE system that is already offering a 2-way branch off to an IP and secondary system.
Sometimes, people may just spend time whining but when they think deeper, they will stick to the current choices instead of asking for another route. However, if the concern is a genuine one with significant numbers wanting a 10 year education before a national exam, then we can discuss further. -
sushi88\" post_id=\"2100920\" time=\"1678714494\" user_id=\"100857:
Suppose the cohort size at primary 1 is 400, by the time the same cohort is promoted to S1, the student population may shrink to around 200 assuming 50% chose PSLE with the intent of switching to another school. With a shrinking and erratic cohort size, it will be difficult for TT secondary schools to operate unless its ACS where there will be no shortage of takers due to ACS boy brand association.
https://postimg.cc/bZwwLM2D -
The through train schools will be a small number as I am sure majority of the parents prefer taking PSLE. I am looking at a maximum of 12 through train schools spread across different parts of Singapore and around 8 schools for unsure parents.
Although I suggested affiliated schools to be used as through train schools, we can look at other non affiliated schools to have more choices. Another criteria we can apply is the secondary should be beside or very near to the primary school. So schools like eg CHIJ Toa Payoh, Fairfield Methodist, Montfort, Maria Stella, Xinmin, Canberra etc a mixed of single/co-ed/reputed/SAP/different location schools.
The IP schools will stay as it is. But there is a need to standardise the COP for IP schools with O level AND affiliated primary schools. Schools like MGS and SCGS with a COP of 17 for affiliated for O level is too low for an IP status school. I suggest a COP of 12 for all IP schools with affiliation for O level, since CHS and SJI is in that range. -
sushi88\" post_id=\"2100952\" time=\"1678760219\" user_id=\"100857:
This is my thought too because those members of parliament who advocate TT program have in fact benefited from the PSLE system themselves. They study hard, they did well for PSLE, and they apply and are accepted into IP schools such as St Nic (Hazel Pua), RI (Jamus Lim) , RGS (Denise Phua) etc purely through their own merit via a transparent school posting process.
We should not put the cart before the horse, it is more worthwhile for MOE to establish how many parents/students actually prefer the pri-sec thru train system compared to the current offering. If the take-up rate is not high, then it's game over. Don't waste time discussing something that does not have high demand if there are enough kiasu parents/kids to support the PSLE system that is already offering a 2-way branch off to an IP and secondary system.
Sometimes, people may just spend time whining but when they think deeper, they will stick to the current choices instead of asking for another route. However, if the concern is a genuine one with significant numbers wanting a 10 year education before a national exam, then we can discuss further.
So that leads me to question, why did they choose fast-paced and high-stress schools like RI, RGS or St Nic out of all schools? Would their life be better or worst if they didn't put in the hours? Perhaps yes perhaps no. But in my view, it's more no than yes if they desire to step into politics.
With the TT system that they advocate, where students skip PSLE and forgo any chance for IP schools, I think most parents will not be warm to it. -
zac's mum\" post_id=\"2100951\" time=\"1678760115\" user_id=\"53606:[quote=\"zac's mum\" post_id=2100951 time=1678760115 user_id=53606]
What is 2CS? I think it is cheaper to do a poll.
The TT school cannot be an existing popular school due to the reasons everyone knows. It will push down the popularity to even crazier levels at P1 registration.
Hence I suggested converting an existing unpopular 2CS school to TT. Or maybe not, if the name already has the undesirable label. New school with a new name may be better. Only those parents who truly want a stress-free, no PSLE thru-train experience for their kids will apply. It’s not going to be overwhelmingly oversubscribed, which is fine for a new pilot school until they prove that the TT system produces fine end-goal after 10 years. It’s not gonna cost MOE much more to run this test-bed school at all. If it really fails after 10-20 years, what’s the opportunity cost? Nothing worse than a 2CS school with falling enrolment what.[/quote]
We should not create a system when people may feel that it is eventually a stigma for kids taking this route if it is a lesser group.
However, I am ok to see a 70/30 kind of vote in support of this, meaning 70% of people will take this route leaving 30% to dash for the over-the-edge crazy kind of academic competition and rigors like the physical 100. Normalisation is best felt with big numbers. Current NA and NT is nothing normal because the numbers are not saying it, how can they be known as normal? It's like Singapore is full of super-beings.
I find the current common PSLE and a choice of IP and secondary will at least give people a balance in their heart emotionally especially when Express, NA and NT are further removed. 心理平衡. Taking an exam at year 6 for some and year 10 for minority others may possibly tip the balance again :siao: right?
The cost is humongous for the kids who are enrolled for this pilot suggested!! :yikes: That is serious damage control for a group of kids if this pilot system does not do any good for them. OMG... -
Veyron\" post_id=\"2100957\" time=\"1678761726\" user_id=\"30663:
If there is only 1 way to the top, of course majority will choose that. But if there are different ways to reach the top, what will happen then?
This is my thought too because those members of parliament who advocate TT program have in fact benefited from the PSLE system themselves. They study hard, they did well for PSLE, and they apply and are accepted into IP schools such as St Nic (Hazel Pua), RI (Jamus Lim) , RGS (Denish Phua) etc purely through their own merit via a transparent school posting process.
So that leads me to question, why did they choose fast-paced and high-stress schools like RI, RGS or St Nic out of all schools? Would their life be better or worst if they didn't put in the hours? Perhaps yes perhaps no. But in my view, it's more no than yes if they desire to step into politics.
With the TT system that they advocate, where students skip PSLE and forgo any chance for IP schools, I think most parents will not be warm to it. -
kaisuism\" post_id=\"2100954\" time=\"1678760730\" user_id=\"199574:
In terms of take-up rate, I think there are possible 2 scenarios and both will also lead to problems.
The through train schools will be a small number as I am sure majority of the parents prefer taking PSLE. I am looking at a maximum of 12 through train schools spread across different parts of Singapore and around 8 schools for unsure parents.
Although I suggested affiliated schools to be used as through train schools, we can look at other non affiliated schools to have more choices. Another criteria we can apply is the secondary should be beside or very near to the primary school. So schools like eg CHIJ Toa Payoh, Fairfield Methodist, Montfort, Maria Stella, Xinmin, Canberra etc a mixed of single/co-ed/reputed/SAP/different location schools.
The IP schools will stay as it is. But there is a need to standardise the COP for IP schools with O level AND affiliated primary schools. Schools like MGS and SCGS with a COP of 17 for affiliated for O level is too low for an IP status school. I suggest a COP of 12 for all IP schools with affiliation for O level, since CHS and SJI is in that range.
Scenario 1
Low take-up rate as most parents will prefer to PSLE path. And after 2 or 3 years, MOE decided to stop this TT pilot program because the school doesn't have enough students to support the program.
Scenario 2
As you suggest, throw in some not affiliated well-known primary schools for TT program. Take up rate overwhelm and shortage of vacancies make TT primary school enrolment become super high-stake for parents. P2A 1km ballot, P2B 1km ballot, P2C 1km ballot. Which means driving up property prices and benefiting the rich and disadvantaging the low-income.
I think all the troubles of turning the entire school system upside down may not achieve the desired outcome (ie, no PSLE stress and yet do well for O-level) and may even make the education system more stressful and confusing. -
Veyron\" post_id=\"2100953\" time=\"1678760514\" user_id=\"30663:
There are a few ways to resolve this:
Suppose the cohort size at primary 1 is 400, by the time the same cohort is promoted to S1, the student population may shrink to around 200 assuming 50% chose PSLE with the intent of switching to another school. With a shrinking and erratic cohort size, it will be difficult for TT secondary schools to operate unless its ACS where there will be no shortage of takers due to ACS boy brand association.
1. Those PSLE takers who do not make it to the IP route would return to the pri-sec TT program. Unfortunately, they would be the ones who have to take 2 national exams but it was by choice. So the vacancies in the secondary would be taken up.
2. The pairing for secondary schools for this TT should perhaps be by cluster of schools(all operating the same way) instead of just fixing 1-1 school, that would help to manage the erratic numbers? -
lee_yl\" post_id=\"2100946\" time=\"1678754806\" user_id=\"17023:
Hmm…. The education system is relatively sound already. On my part as a parent, this is what I will do: If my child need help with tuition, I would tell them just try their best on what they can control (keep trying to learn) and don’t worry too much about what they cannot control (what others are doing). I choose these focuses. Sounds simple but it takes lots of discipline. And I believe this will be where the fine lines are: separating more sustainable efforts/outcomes/less likely to burn out, from overwhelmed stress from constantly chasing others’ tails
I don’t doubt that we have a good education system. We even have a billion dollar tuition ecosystem! 😂
The key consideration is, this successful education system comes at what cost to the parents and the kids.
One key statistic that is often missing from discussion is the teens/children suicide rate. Compare to 20years ago, what is the trend. Upward?
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