Anglo-Chinese School (Independent)

[bbbay]

A separate query: why only 2 MOE IB schools? Why not more?

[00skyblue00]

lee_yl\" post_id=\"2127842\" time=\"1706055170\" user_id=\"17023:

If we take HCIS for example, looking at their website, more than half the school cohort scored at least 38 points at IB. Which means an average kid inside international school student can meet most UK medical schools’ entry requirements of 36 points. Not something we can claim for most JCs.

So I would think an average kid, or those who didn’t do too well in PSLE and O levels, would benefit from IB

I agree too. But average common folks comprise largely of average with means and average without means. Some of those with means to switch to local international schs, also decided to stay in moe schs. Why? Hefty fees. Dollars and cents. After A levels, there are plenty of overseas undergrad programmes to choose from with average results as long as one has the means.

But most sg students common folks do not have means to go UK to study without full or partial scholarship.

[autolycus]

bbbay\" post_id=\"2127844\" time=\"1706055539\" user_id=\"175278:

A separate query: why only 2 MOE IB schools? Why not more?

Because MOE doesn't control the IB exam board, but they have full control over the SG-Cambridge curriculum and exam setting parameters. At the same time, it is good policy to have some diversification in any portfolio. So when Tharman ran JCUSE in 2002/3, exceptions were carved out for 1-2 IB schools, a sports school, an arts school (also IB, it turned out, but technically not MOE), and a maths/science school. RI qualified to be an IB world school but that would have been a bridge too far for MOE.

[autolycus]

lee_yl\" post_id=\"2127842\" time=\"1706055170\" user_id=\"17023:

If we take HCIS for example, looking at their website, more than half the school cohort scored at least 38 points at IB. Which means an average kid inside international school student can meet most UK medical schools’ entry requirements of 36 points. Not something we can claim for most JCs.

So I would think an average kid, or those who didn’t do too well in PSLE and O levels, would benefit from IB

Yeah, but we don't know the subject distribution for those 38 points, including 0-3 bonus points. We don't know if they qualify for medical school, considering many UK medical schools like triple-science candidates and the IB doesn't normally allow those. Apples, durians. We do however know that the vast majority of JC students are double-science and can technically qualify for a local medical school (chemistry plus one other science). The JC distribution is much larger, you will see a kind of regression to the mean; the MOE IB schools (SJI, ACS(I)) and SOTA are pretty selective.

Maybe it just means that HCIS (per your example) has a lot of breadth in its educational offerings, or that these kids are scoring amazingly well at their SL subjects (sort of equivalent to acing your H1s but stumbling a bit in your H2s).

[lee_yl]

autolycus\" post_id=\"2127847\" time=\"1706058034\" user_id=\"16143:

Yeah, but we don't know the subject distribution for those 38 points, including 0-3 bonus points. We don't know if they qualify for medical school, considering many UK medical schools like triple-science candidates and the IB doesn't normally allow those. Apples, durians. We do however know that the vast majority of JC students are double-science and can technically qualify for a local medical school (chemistry plus one other science). The JC distribution is much larger, you will see a kind of regression to the mean; the MOE IB schools (SJI, ACS(I)) and SOTA are pretty selective.

Maybe it just means that HCIS (per your example) has a lot of breadth in its educational offerings, or that these kids are scoring amazingly well at their SL subjects (sort of equivalent to acing your H1s but stumbling a bit in your H2s).

Maybe you are not aware, even if I were to take double Sc at a lower tier JCs or MI, very likely I only have a 30% chance of making it to a local Uni. If you do a search, you will be surprised that only few students from lower tier JCs manage to score RP90.

I am very sure my rich friends who sent their kids to international schools to do IB rather than doing A levels at mid/lower tier JCs, with the intention to gain access into local Uni have done their research before they fork out the money.

[lee_yl]

00skyblue00\" post_id=\"2127845\" time=\"1706055971\" user_id=\"143605:

I agree too. But average common folks comprise largely of average with means and average without means. Some of those with means to switch to local international schs, also decided to stay in moe schs. Why? Hefty fees. Dollars and cents. After A levels, there are plenty of overseas undergrad programmes to choose from with average results as long as one has the means.

But most sg students common folks do not have means to go UK to study without full or partial scholarship.

There are 101 reasons why parents send their kids to international schools for IB.

From a practical perspective, if one doesn’t have an extra $300k+ to send a kid to overseas Uni (non medical course), it maybe cheaper to send the kid to an Int Sch to do IB in yr5/6. Even with an average score of IB 38pts, one should be able to get into most courses in NUS/NTU (just not law/med).

[autolycus]

usaik881\" post_id=\"2127867\" time=\"1706062914\" user_id=\"199461:

You have said it very well. Thank You.

The primary reason for the IB advantage = the moderating hand of MOE is off.

MOE by its national development policies penalizes our academically average youths unnecessarily (artificially restricting many deserving from a local U education). Mockers might want to argue. They forget that the world average is not the Singaporean average. The Singaporean average, when pitted against the world average, is top class. The Singaporean average is only average under the MOE moderating hand. The IB advantages, as things stand, are real.

I totally agree with you about these points; our (formerly streamed) Normal is the world average. But one thing I am curious about is your use of the word 'mockers'... who are these mockers? What kind of mockery are they engaging in? What are they mocking? I really want to know.

[autolycus]

lee_yl\" post_id=\"2127853\" time=\"1706059727\" user_id=\"17023:

Maybe you are not aware, even if I were to take double Sc at a lower tier JCs or MI, very likely I only have a 30% chance of making it to a local Uni. If you do a search, you will be surprised that only few students from lower tier JCs manage to score RP90.

I'm fully aware of this; it is my research area after all. This is why I used the phrase you highlighted: it is technically possible based on subject choice. The range is huge, at RJC it's only about 25% getting RP90, it seems. Roughly one in four. RP90 is no mean feat, of course; and based on the subject distribution (best proxy, see how many people do H2 chemistry), a lot of potential candidates for something like medicine. I'm not surprised at all.

(Well, actually it might be argued that people with a 30% chance of making it to a local university end up in a lower tier JC doing double science.)

[00skyblue00]

Ya, why must call names?

[00skyblue00]

For entry to SG tertiary, the advantage of taking SG A or O levels is precisely the SG standard, brand, or whatever we wish to call. This is the price we "pay" to be living, studying and working in SG. Our edu is heavily subsidised from pri, sec, JC, poly till uni. We live in a real world, with constraints, no boundless resources. Either we spent on only the top 10% or spread out thinly on 40% or only help the bottom 40%.

We can transfer the subsidies from local uni to sec/jc to provide IB edu for the mass and then students are on their own thereafter. Will this be better? Have it easier first then go on own ways?
Ib edu is a luxury, not necessity at the moment. Teacher students ratio is smaller. Fees are higher. Imo, i am no edu expert or moe, just a parent.