New L1R4 system for JC entry
-
@bbbay said in New L1R4 system for JC entry:
I think what MOE mean is, the number of subjects available will still be the same. But the number of subjects taken into account when computing entry score for JC is reduced.
MOE hopes to encourage students to take on subjects (which will still be available for them to choose I think) that interest them intrinsically( so does not matter if they don’t score well), and not because they are easier to score. Those academically able students can choose subjects that intrinsically interest them and also score well in them too - Those that can managed that you were saying. Maybe the “piling concern” of MOE is, students that are struggling, yet does not heed the 1 subject less requirement in O level result tabulation, continue to choose/work on subject as if it will be a safety net subject that may be use in L1R4 tabulation. Yes it will be akin to parents rushing to enroll their child to popular primary schools and not accepting every school is a good school. So to some degree, MOE concern is still valid: mindset has to change in line with education system changes.
OK, I see what you are saying. I would just add:
#1. Schools have already reduced what kids can take, so it may not be that everything is still available.
#2. People respond to incentives. How many kids are really going to spend both the time, and possibly more importantly, the effort to do something that isn’t used in some calculation? Some will but most will make sure their other subjects hit the mark and all of the other portfolio blah blah blah stuff.
#3. Even if everything is available and many learn for the sake of learning, I don’t think what’s causing the stress has changed (limited vacancy).Anyways, it’s already possible to be as stressed or as stress free as you want to be (and not all stress is bad). More messaging may help but there’s already an off ramp. Most people just don’t want to take it.
-
This post is deleted! -
@slmkhoo said in New L1R4 system for JC entry:
@bbbay said in New L1R4 system for JC entry:
I think what MOE mean is, the number of subjects available will still be the same. But the number of subjects taken into account when computing entry score for JC is reduced.
MOE hopes to encourage students to take on subjects (which will still be available for them to choose I think) that interest them intrinsically( so does not matter if they don’t score well), and not because they are easier to score. Those academically able students can choose subjects that intrinsically interest them and also score well in them too - Those that can managed that you were saying. Maybe the “piling concern” of MOE is, students that are struggling, yet does not heed the 1 subject less requirement in O level result tabulation, continue to choose/work on subject as if it will be a safety net subject that may be use in L1R4 tabulation. Yes it will be akin to parents rushing to enroll their child to popular primary schools and not accepting every school is a good school. So to some degree, MOE concern is still valid: mindset has to change in line with education system changes.
I wonder if schools will now refuse to allow students to take more than 7 subjects? After all, they can then focus on 5 + 2 spares! I hope not, at least for those who are more able.
I think there is also a need to encourage students to learn a subject just for a broader education - they may or may not want to be examined in it, and they should be allowed that choice. For e.g., a student may want to take Lit, attend lessons, do homework, but in the end decide not to take the exam so he can focus on a fewer no. of exams? I know there are parents and students who will not want to spend time on subjects that are “not necessary”, but hopefully there will be some who do!
To me I think a wise approach is to stick to the status quo of each school on the number of subjects each student can take on: if a school has been allowing their students to take on 8 O level subjects now, continue to allow 8 subjects under L1R4 system too, for students that want it. Plus additional option, for students who want to reduce to lesser than 8 subjects.
On the other hand, I think all schools can increase their subjects options (not the same as increase number of O level subjects to take on), to support the MOE vision of intrinsic learning. For example, schools that do not offer literature now should start offering it to their students who want to explore it and not too concern about score. -
The ground experience on the reduction in offerings is very apparent to me.
I know of many kids who could not take full History or Literature in upper Sec, because the School doesn’t have teachers to teach those subjects. I believe full Literature is not even offered in some Secondary Schools now for O levels.
Students also need to ‘qualify’ for triple Science or A maths and it is not always open to all students. This has possibly always been the case.
If not in secondary school, when then do our kids get breadth exposure when our primary school syllabus is already narrower than in many countries?
Anyway, when the kids enter universities like NUS, many degree programmes require students to read a core or common curriculum which require you to take subjects you may be weaker in.
I don’t see trying out subjects or being made to study subjects as a bad thing - you can’t only be doing what you like in life - it is a life lesson. It’s the stakes of it all.
The stakes are now reduced - you only need to include 5 subjects in the L1R5. So I hope the options to pursue more subjects for interested students (without having to count in L1R4) will remain.
Many IP students take 9 or even 9+1 subjects in upper sec. I can imagine this is a different intellectual and academic training, be it in breadth or capacity, compared to an O level student who read 6 subjects. Not saying that the O level student cannot do well for A levels, of course the student can do well subsequently. But there may be a difference in the way a more widely trained student can make cross inferences for GPs, and they can relate to a wider range of knowledge and issues in interviews and the list goes on. I hope O level students who are able and interested, continue to have the opportunity to read more subjects as well.
-
@slmkhoo There are staffing issues in government schools. Humanities teachers (already few in number) are leaving, not sure to where - IP/IB schools? International schools? And niche subjects like O level Art as well, hard to find good teachers. One of those i know was quite disillusioned with teaching and left the profession. Also, A level Bio teachers (and to a smaller extent, O level Bio) are rarer and rarer, ever since local Medicine courses scrapped the H2 Bio pre-requisite.
-
This is how I see the situation:
- on top of the core syllabus that all secondary students must be prepared for, additional comprehensive exploration learnings should only be undertaken by students that meet the bar set out by MOE.
- Students that meet the bar, and are willing to undertake comprehensive exploration learnings may apply for IP schools. Students that meet the bar, but are not keen in comprehensive exploration learnings, may apply to mainstream secondary schools.
- Some mainstream secondary schools allow its students to take up 8 O-level subjects, other mainstream subject schools allow its students to take up 7 O-level subjects. The number of O-level subjects allowed likely determined by respective schools’ students academic capabilities, determined by each school’s cut-off point.
- For students taking O-level in 2027 and after, MOE is introducing 1 subject as basic exploration learnings into mainstream secondary schools with the new L1R4 system, by removing 1 subject from JC admission score tabulation.
- The number of O-level subjects each student can take up will not change. This way, 8 O-level subjects schools’ students will continue to have 2 backup subjects and the new 1 basic exploration subject under the new L1R4 system. 7 O-level subjects schools’ students will continue to have 1 backup subject and the new 1 basic exploration subject under the new L1R4 system.
- For students in the 8 O-level subjects schools who choose to turn the one basic exploration subject into another backup subject, they now have 3 backup subjects. For students in the 7 O-level subjects schools who choose to turn the one basic exploration subject into another backup subject, they now have 2 backup subjects. This will be their own choices of not taking up MOE’s offer to relax and explore a little.
- All mainstream secondary schools should start introducing a wider range of O-level subjects, such as literature, to allow their students more basic exploration subject choices.
-
@zac-s-mum said in New L1R4 system for JC entry:
@slmkhoo There are staffing issues in government schools. Humanities teachers (already few in number) are leaving, not sure to where - IP/IB schools? International schools? And niche subjects like O level Art as well, hard to find good teachers. One of those i know was quite disillusioned with teaching and left the profession. Also, A level Bio teachers (and to a smaller extent, O level Bio) are rarer and rarer, ever since local Medicine courses scrapped the H2 Bio pre-requisite.
Sigh! I guess we (collectively as a nation) can only blame ourselves for having developed this kind of mindset - that something is only worth learning if there is a decent payoff in terms of exam grades, career or fame; anything else is a waste time. I’ve been told more times than I can count how I should focus on things that bring tangible (i.e. career) benefits. I hoped that with increasing affluence and education, people would be able to appreciate learning for its own sake, but it seems to have gone the other way. I don’t mean that we shouldn’t keep in mind that we do need to feed ourselves and our families, but we don’t always need to try to be the best at, or have the most of, everything!
-
Idealism vs. Realism 101…
To be clear, I’m not saying all of what I responded with above is “right.” I’m just saying what I think is going to happen.
-
@slmkhoo said in New L1R4 system for JC entry:
@zac-s-mum said in New L1R4 system for JC entry:
@slmkhoo There are staffing issues in government schools. Humanities teachers (already few in number) are leaving, not sure to where - IP/IB schools? International schools? And niche subjects like O level Art as well, hard to find good teachers. One of those i know was quite disillusioned with teaching and left the profession. Also, A level Bio teachers (and to a smaller extent, O level Bio) are rarer and rarer, ever since local Medicine courses scrapped the H2 Bio pre-requisite.
Sigh! I guess we (collectively as a nation) can only blame ourselves for having developed this kind of mindset - that something is only worth learning if there is a decent payoff in terms of exam grades, career or fame; anything else is a waste time. I’ve been told more times than I can count how I should focus on things that bring tangible (i.e. career) benefits. I hoped that with increasing affluence and education, people would be able to appreciate learning for its own sake, but it seems to have gone the other way. I don’t mean that we shouldn’t keep in mind that we do need to feed ourselves and our families, but we don’t always need to try to be the best at, or have the most of, everything!
What about spending time learning what interest the student outside of school? No exam no score….
-
@SG_KP1 said in New L1R4 system for JC entry:
@bbbay said in New L1R4 system for JC entry:
I think what MOE mean is, the number of subjects available will still be the same. But the number of subjects taken into account when computing entry score for JC is reduced.
MOE hopes to encourage students to take on subjects (which will still be available for them to choose I think) that interest them intrinsically( so does not matter if they don’t score well), and not because they are easier to score. Those academically able students can choose subjects that intrinsically interest them and also score well in them too - Those that can managed that you were saying. Maybe the “piling concern” of MOE is, students that are struggling, yet does not heed the 1 subject less requirement in O level result tabulation, continue to choose/work on subject as if it will be a safety net subject that may be use in L1R4 tabulation. Yes it will be akin to parents rushing to enroll their child to popular primary schools and not accepting every school is a good school. So to some degree, MOE concern is still valid: mindset has to change in line with education system changes.
#3. Even if everything is available and many learn for the sake of learning, I don’t think what’s causing the stress has changed (limited vacancy).
My niece, with her O level result, could not make it to JC back then. She went to poly. My daughter just gotten her A level results last week and is in the process of admitting to SMU and not withstanding any change of mind, my daughter should start her undergraduate studies at SMU this August. My niece too will start her studies at SMU same time, after doing well enough in poly. I think nowadays no longer our children will be put in a situation where their entire future hinges on one exam or enrollment. My niece and daughter taken very diff path and both end up in the same place.
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