Anglo-Chinese School (Independent)
-
slmkhoo\" post_id=\"2127518\" time=\"1705726166\" user_id=\"28674:
I tend to think, it is still more advantageous to do As for this group, esp based on the most recent criteria. And IB is harder without strong support and coaching.
Those kids who are talented in academics would probably do as well in either system - A levels or IB. Some may do better in one or the other system, but it is likely to be marginal for most. In all cases, what matters more is that they learn and develop useful skills, and both systems provide that. -
00skyblue00\" post_id=\"2127530\" time=\"1705734527\" user_id=\"143605:
From my teaching experience, I think we as a population tend to think the IB is harder simply because most people don't have experience with the IB. Having tuition and slogging through A-levels is now the norm, so we think of the As as more advantageous when they aren't. Getting good A-level grades without strong support and coaching is as difficult as it ever was; getting good IB grades is roughly the same but in a different way.
I tend to think, it is still more advantageous to do As for this group, esp based on the most recent criteria. And IB is harder without strong support and coaching. -
slmkhoo\" post_id=\"2127518\" time=\"1705726166\" user_id=\"28674:
I think you may be right; but it is indeed a case of personal (and sometimes familial) preference. The margins can be quite large in one direction or the other, variance is great. Also, academic talent isn't just one thing, so it is possible that when you say 'do as well', it might even be 'do equally badly'.
Those kids who are talented in academics would probably do as well in either system - A levels or IB. Some may do better in one or the other system, but it is likely to be marginal for most. In all cases, what matters more is that they learn and develop useful skills, and both systems provide that.
-
autolycus\" post_id=\"2127670\" time=\"1705932530\" user_id=\"16143:
I tend to think, for the common folks who are academic able, with no tuition, A levels is their best chance. It is harder to go up against those with extra resources in ib.
From my teaching experience, I think we as a population tend to think the IB is harder simply because most people don't have experience with the IB. Having tuition and slogging through A-levels is now the norm, so we think of the As as more advantageous when they aren't. Getting good A-level grades without strong support and coaching is as difficult as it ever was; getting good IB grades is roughly the same but in a different way. -
00skyblue00\" post_id=\"2127713\" time=\"1705970239\" user_id=\"143605:
That's exactly the point. Singaporeans have had SG-Cambridge GCE exams for more than 100 years, so it is 'common'. But it is actually a very specialised and tough hyper-evolved regime. In fact back in the early 2000s, it was deliberately brought more in line with the IB because it wasn't good enough for modern education. The IB is more general, so normal humans have a good fighting chance of developing all-round skills and doing well in university; the A-levels need a SG mindset and ecosystem in order to excel.
I tend to think, for the common folks who are academic able, with no tuition, A levels is their best chance. It is harder to go up against those with extra resources in ib.
From an educator perspective (somewhat simplified), the A-levels are harder to study for without guidance, because of sheer material mass, but easier to score when adapted to because of narrow focus. The IB is easier to study for without guidance, because it generally follows normal human capability, but is harder to score in for those who can't adapt to normal breadth. Singapore students are truly sui generis in that regard. We can't really say in an absolute sense (as you seem to be doing) that A-levels are the best chance for common folks with no tuition: the failure rate is very high in such cases, which is one reason why over the years they have been shifted in the direction of the IB. -
autolycus\" post_id=\"2127718\" time=\"1705971217\" user_id=\"16143:
Common folks who are more academic able. I know and seen quite a number. As long as they choose subjects wisely to their own abilities, they can do well. Eg, one who is strong in Math, chose Math, F maths, Physics. Get 3 As without tuition.
That's exactly the point. Singaporeans have had SG-Cambridge GCE exams for more than 100 years, so it is 'common'. But it is actually a very specialised and tough hyper-evolved regime. In fact back in the early 2000s, it was deliberately brought more in line with the IB because it wasn't good enough for modern education. The IB is more general, so normal humans have a good fighting chance of developing all-round skills and doing well in university; the A-levels need a SG mindset and ecosystem in order to excel.
From an educator perspective (somewhat simplified), the A-levels are harder to study for without guidance, because of sheer material mass, but easier to score when adapted to because of narrow focus. The IB is easier to study for without guidance, because it generally follows normal human capability, but is harder to score in for those who can't adapt to normal breadth. Singapore students are truly sui generis in that regard. We can't really say in an absolute sense (as you seem to be doing) that A-levels are the best chance for common folks with no tuition: the failure rate is very high in such cases, which is one reason why over the years they have been shifted in the direction of the IB.
But i admit, i like many parents are from A levels only era, so we are more familiar with A levels. But my kid made the call too. -
Ib has its merit, no dispute. I am no mocker, of any matter and everything.
Just to point out, its 70rp for A level from this yr cohort onwards.
Got to know a couple of ib local students got no where near 45.
For locals, to get 40 or so, yes I think the process is beneficial overall. Read that it prepares for Law well? so that’s why 40 can get in local law shared in reddit? Not sure how accurate tho.
Exactly. I also think it Is harder to get 45. -
usaik881\" post_id=\"2127727\" time=\"1705976281\" user_id=\"199461:
I am entirely sure you are likely to be correct about a candidate who can score 90 in the local A levels being likely to score at least 42 for the IB if the subjects are compared head to head. A 90 score for all subjects in one A-level cert, distributed over 3H2s and 3H1s (roughly the same distribution as for the IB), is truly impressive, if not easy to identify as a factual event.
MOE moderates the local A Levels. There are some 10k+ candidates each exams diet, all from within Singapore.
MOE does not moderate the IB. There are some 20k+ candidates each exams diet, from all over the world.
Simply put, it is far easier to score 45 in the IB than to score 90 in the local A Levels (or 70 if mockers want to argue). This fact is firm. No matter how mockers want to spin it, for the average Singapore student (a student brought up in the Singaporean way), it is far easier to score 45 in the IB than to score 90 in the local A Levels.
This fact alone explains why the Singapore IB candidates always outperform their peers worldwide. The Singapore IB candidates in the Nov 2023 exams diet have an average score of 37.76, far higher than the global average of 29.06 (as reported in the Straits Times Jan 4, 2024).
Many may be unaware. An IB score of 36 meets most UK medical school academic requirements whereas these same UK medical schools require AAA from the local A Levels with an A in Chemistry being mandatory.
In other words, the IB has far more advantages for the average Singaporean student than the local A Levels. As long as the IB remains independent of the MOE moderating hand, the IB advantages stay.
We end with this note. A candidate from anywhere in the world who can score 90 in the local A Levels shall most likely score 45 in the IB. But not vice versa. We are adamant about this fact.
Don't forget also that you are certainly not taking into account the subject distribution: your A-level student doing (for example) double maths, physics and economics and getting 90 for all four subjects may still not be the literary type. Not only that, but the IB results are transparent, and we have no idea if any specific student in SG is actually getting 90 for any particular subject.
As for, \"This fact alone explains why the Singapore IB candidates always outperform their peers worldwide\"? I think you are also forgetting that our IB schools are much more selective than other IB schools, in terms of the larger IB schools in SG. I would venture to say that just as our A-level students (selected often by PSLE followed by O-levels) outscore equivalent A-level students elsewhere, so too our IB candidates.
Your penultimate paragraph is probably the most accurate: \"In other words, the IB has far more advantages for the average Singaporean student than the local A Levels. As long as the IB remains independent of the MOE moderating hand, the IB advantages stay.\" -
\"...
In other words, the IB has far more advantages for the average Singaporean student than the local A Levels. As long as the IB remains independent of the MOE moderating hand, the IB advantages stay.
...\"
The keyword is highlighted... But has literary skills upper hands.
For a natural scholar, eg someone who got AL4D, currently in IP scoring 100 for math and high for sci in lower secondary, likely to do well in A levels, no reason not to stay with A level. -
00skyblue00\" post_id=\"2127766\" time=\"1705987141\" user_id=\"143605:
You've got to remember we also have scholars who aren't primarily in STEM fields. The term 'natural scholar' would indicate people naturally predisposed to study in schools. Brilliance is distributed over many areas, though. Humans are just more naturally inclined to language than they are to numbers or logic — especially since most people need language to understand numbers or logic.
\"...
In other words, the IB has far more advantages for the average Singaporean student than the local A Levels. As long as the IB remains independent of the MOE moderating hand, the IB advantages stay.
...\"
The keyword is highlighted... But has literary skills upper hands.
For a natural scholar, eg someone who got AL4D, currently in IP scoring 100 for math and high for sci in lower secondary, likely to do well in A levels, no reason not to stay with A level.
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
Online Users
Recent Topics
Statistics