* Nanyang JC (NYJC)
-
bbbay\" post_id=\"2129689\" time=\"1708838247\" user_id=\"175278:
I feel other than Nyjc effective Modes of teaching methods,
It has been on my mind for sometimes. Can we draw any conclusions from NYJC’s performance: Are we saying PSLE results is a predictor of all future academic results such that all JAE students (outside top 10% according to PSLE) should not expect to do better than IP students (top 10% according to PSLE) in A level? Because of this belief, NYJC being a pure JAE intake JC, doing better in A level than many IP JCs , is an unexpected big achievement? Or PSLE is not a final predictor as we think, and students can still over take those that did better than them during PSLE, later in life? There will alway be exception but I looking at in general, what will happen to the majority. Or NYJC doing better than many IP JCs is a combination of PSLE is not deterministic plus its curriculum is better than IP JCs?
I fee if there is a significant insight from what is happening in NYJC, future generations will benefit from this insight and be happier , less stressful?
no Elitism breeding inside Nyjc unlike some, a humble culture, No overly crazily fun culture, conducive study campus, no IP/JAE division contribute to Nyjc sitting firmly up there. -
bbbay\" post_id=\"2129689\" time=\"1708838247\" user_id=\"175278:
In order to prove a hypothesis of: “PSLE results are an accurate predictor of future A level results”, we would need to look at the PSLE results of the student group (X percentile of the entire cohort), versus the A level results of the same student population (Y percentile of the entire cohort).
It has been on my mind for sometimes. Can we draw any conclusions from NYJC’s performance: Are we saying PSLE results is a predictor of all future academic results such that all JAE students (outside top 10% according to PSLE) should not expect to do better than IP students (top 10% according to PSLE) in A level? Because of this belief, NYJC being a pure JAE intake JC, doing better in A level than many IP JCs , is an unexpected big achievement? Or PSLE is not a final predictor as we think, and students can still over take those that did better than them during PSLE, later in life? There will alway be exception but I looking at in general, what will happen to the majority. Or NYJC doing better than many IP JCs is a combination of PSLE is not deterministic plus its curriculum is better than IP JCs?
I fee if there is a significant insight from what is happening in NYJC, future generations will benefit from this insight and be happier , less stressful?
If X is similar to Y, then yes we can say it is an accurate predictor.
However, i don’t think that was the premise for setting up IP schools. The premise was that the top 10% of the PSLE cohort is predicted to score well enough to enter university (or “clearly university-bound”. Ref: https://web.archive.org/web/20120124212708/http://moe.gov.sg/education/secondary/other/integrated-programme/)
There was nothing postulated about the non-top 10% being university-bound (or not), and there was also nothing postulated about those who were top-10% but chose to take O levels. -
bbbay\" post_id=\"2129659\" time=\"1708746935\" user_id=\"175278:
There are other jc taking in academically strong students too. Outcome vary.
For discussion sake: My child told me 90% of CCHM students in his cohort took HCL O level. Assuming on an optimistic assumption, 90% of them passed HCL O level, = 81% of the cohort pass HCL O level. majority of CCHM students do not have to rely on affiliation bonus point, even if they choose NYJC - most of them already have the HCL bonus point. My opinion is, it will be just like any students with HCL from any schools and uses it bonus point to enroll into RI/HCI/EJC/NJC. Getting into NYJC primarily with affiliation bonus (deem as non academic merit), is small %.
that is my reason NYJC, taking in mostly students with strong academic merits , achieving such good A level performance, is in line with statistical outcome. Of course I am not taking away the recognition of hard works of the teaching staffs of NYJC, to realise the statistic potential of its students. Maybe realise it with more efficiency/even more care than other schools’ curriculums
Methods of teaching and school emphasis differ for different JCs. -
There is no suggestion that good psle results definitely translate to good A level results. Children even change as they grow up as many distractions come along the way, nothing is permanent. Even adults change.
As the other poster mentioned, skipping O level is to allow students have more time to go beyond std curriculum. Like GEP. But ultimately, everyone takes A levels, which test std curriculum. There are mainstream students who score better in psle than gep students. Gep does not predict better performance in psle. Most gep students I know still go for tuition for std curriculum in order not to lose out. -
Jerold\" post_id=\"2129677\" time=\"1708782311\" user_id=\"203353:
Yes, correct !
Estimated figure? Check this.
https://postimg.cc/DW9DP4q8
Vjc result stellar ah, nope, Vjc didnt do that well.
Ejc result.... meh.
https://postimg.cc/7fmGjgtJ
These are ACTUAL figures reported by NYJC current Principal, Mr Pang Choon How, himself.
NOT estimate, but actual figures reported by him.
Mr Pang stood on the stage inside the school hall & flashed all these slides right in front of close to 700 2023 A level batch of graduated students (born 2005), seated down chit chatting excitedly beneath the stage, awaiting to collect their A level results anxiously on that Friday afternoon (23 Feb 2024),
2.30 pm.
Besides current Principal Mr Pang, who else were also present ?
Well !
The former (ex) NYJC Principal, Mr Low, was also there.
Besides these close to 700 graduates being witness(es) there & then to hear Mr Pang loud and clear standing on the stage, who else are also the witness(es), appearing there, on that afternoon ?
The other witness(es) are the
1) 2024 current (JC 1 + JC2) students, born in (2006 + 2007), sitting just right behind these 700 graduates
Plus also
2) their excited parents, sitting right at the back, who have accompanied their precious sons & daughters to collect their results.
So, all these are actual figures, reported by Mr Pang. Nothing to do with estimate -
zac's mum\" post_id=\"2129701\" time=\"1708851739\" user_id=\"53606:[quote=\"zac's mum\" post_id=2129701 time=1708851739 user_id=53606]
My primary intention, is to establish why NYJC is performing better in A level than IP schools. (Many considered it a surprise as they expect IP student to be better than non IP students JAE students academically. Yes some top 10 % will opt for O level instead, and plus other uncertainties. But these will be minority) One very obvious possibility is the curriculum of NYJC, which many people think is the case. The other one I explore, is the possibility of statistics significant, of prior relative academic performance of these students as an indicator of future relative academic performance. (In the grand scale of things, collectively all can be performing well) Or it’s a combination of these possibilities, or any other factor. Measure stop at A level performance and nothing beyond. I am not saying one group will proceed to Uni and another group will not.
In order to prove a hypothesis of: “PSLE results are an accurate predictor of future A level results”, we would need to look at the PSLE results of the student group (X percentile of the entire cohort), versus the A level results of the same student population (Y percentile of the entire cohort).
If X is similar to Y, then yes we can say it is an accurate predictor.
However, i don’t think that was the premise for setting up IP schools. The premise was that the top 10% of the PSLE cohort is predicted to score well enough to enter university (or “clearly university-bound”. Ref: https://web.archive.org/web/20120124212708/http://moe.gov.sg/education/secondary/other/integrated-programme/)
There was nothing postulated about the non-top 10% being university-bound (or not), and there was also nothing postulated about those who were top-10% but chose to take O levels.[/quote] -
bbbay\" post_id=\"2129727\" time=\"1708867284\" user_id=\"175278:
I see. In the reddit ranking list, NYJC is below RJC and HCJC but above the other IP JCs.
My primary intention, is to establish why NYJC is performing better in A level than IP schools. One very obvious possibility is the curriculum of NYJC, which many people think is the case. The other one I explore, is the possibility of statistics significant, of prior relative academic performance of these students as an indicator of future relative academic performance. (In the grand scale of things, all still can be performing well) Or it’s a combination of these possibilities, or any other factor. Measure stop at A level performance and nothing beyond. I am not saying one group will proceed to Uni and another group will not.
Are u intending to compare the quantum of value-add provided by each JC?
If so, which prior academic performance are u intending to compare? PSLE (S1 intake) or O levels (JAE intake)? -
zac's mum\" post_id=\"2129728\" time=\"1708868455\" user_id=\"53606:[quote=\"zac's mum\" post_id=2129728 time=1708868455 user_id=53606]
IP JCs in this discussion exclude RI and HCI
I see. In the reddit ranking list, NYJC is below RJC and HCJC but above the other IP JCs.
Are u intending to compare the quantum of value-add provided by each JC?
If so, which prior academic performance are u intending to compare? PSLE (S1 intake) or O levels (JAE intake)?[/quote]
It has to be S1 + JAE , because all IP JCs consist of students from both intakes, and NYJC is 100 % JAE intake. Further complication is different IP JCs has different IP/JAE % mix. was having a pm discussion with another parent on it. I am thinking , with a back of the evelope types of estimation: NYJC does not take in any IP students but 100 % of its intake are relatively stronger O level result students. other IP JCs, although consist of “stronger prior S1 result” IP students, may be “diluted” by a large % of relatively weaker than NYJC’s JAE O level results students . I know it’s coarse but treat it as just a coffee shop talk. the net , “prior academic performance” of NYJC students could be better than say EJC. (This Is debatable on how accurate my way of working out is).
For this moment let’s treat my conclusion is the case, of NYJC is having academically stronger student than EJC. If NYJC is having stronger student to begin with, it is entirely expected for it to perform better than EJC. Not bcos its curriculum is better than EJC.
If my way of calculate the net , “prior academic performance” of NYJC and EJC is wrong, and instead, EJC is having stronger students to begin with, then NYJC better A level performance than EJC is indeed commendable. And NYJC’s curriculum could be the reason and worth praising.
Or, it could be combination of NYJC students’ strength plus its curriculum. Or none of them- I am totally off the track -
bbbay\" post_id=\"2129729\" time=\"1708870577\" user_id=\"175278:
Dont make it sound 'ma chiam' like Rocket Science. Dont need compare.
IP JCs in this discussion exclude RI and HCI
It has to be S1 + JAE , because all IP JCs consist of students from both intakes, and NYJC is 100 % JAE intake. Further complication is different IP JCs has different IP/JAE % mix. was having a pm discussion with another parent on it. I am thinking , with a back of the evelope types of estimation: NYJC does not take in any IP students but 100 % of its intake are relatively stronger O level result students. other IP JCs, although consist of “stronger prior S1 result” IP students, may be “diluted” by a large % of relatively weaker than NYJC’s JAE O level results students . I know it’s coarse but treat it as just a coffee shop talk. the net , “prior academic performance” of NYJC students could be better than say EJC. (This Is debatable on how accurate my way of working out is).
For this moment let’s treat my conclusion is the case, of NYJC is having academically stronger student than EJC. If NYJC is having stronger student to begin with, it is entirely expected for it to perform better than EJC. Not bcos its curriculum is better than EJC.
If my way of calculate the net , “prior academic performance” of NYJC and EJC is wrong, and instead, EJC is having stronger students to begin with, then NYJC better A level performance than EJC is indeed commendable. And NYJC’s curriculum could be the reason and worth praising.
Or, it could be combination of NYJC students’ strength plus its curriculum. Or none of them- I am totally off the track
Simply Nyjc has performed very well, kudos to NYJC students’ strength + its excellently crafted Nyjc curriculum. -
Saying one group is academically strong just for their better A level results is too broad stroke.
A level result is only one-off measurement. There is still a long journey ahead after A level. Studying for exam requires discipline and effort, for students in same abilities level that is. There is no magic or secret formula.
Unless we have more evident to suggest that after A level, and after tertiary education and even into workforce, these students continue to do better.
What’s remarkable is nyjc’s mean this yr, very close to ri’s and even more so hci’s.
From their median and mean and the general hearsay, (no firsthand info), the sch’s effort played a crucial role.
I believe all jcs provide same std curriculum for A levels. It’s the method use to deliver this same curriculum and their emphasis that differ.
RI has higher median, is expected. Their intake of top students are supposingly distinctive.
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
Statistics
Popular Topics