7 New IP schools
-
dunnoleh:
haha, if you want beida and tsinghua, you should aim for HCI and top the cohort there and you will be on the way to beida / tsinghua / fudan....all expenses paid and no entrance test needed....aka DSA !
oh yes, 20%! heard this magic number recently, i'm sure. :lol:verykiasu2010:
... 18 schools x 450 per intake = 8100....so may be 20%
that's what our local unis are given, compared to places like beida/tsinghua, who get the top 0.??%, right?
just a passing thought... :lol: -
eh… what i mean is this 20% here already bery good liao! me not kidding hor, can see so much resources being pumped into this group. it’ll really do them a lot of good.
-
somehow, i see the introduction of more IP sch as a move to create more oppty for students weak in MT to enter good sec schools, following the failed attempt to reduce PSLE MT weightage
-
verykiasu2010:
I think your analysis is wrong.
there is only a limited supply of those 250 and above, viz MOE cut it at 10% of each cohort. unless MOE inflat the t-score by setting 250 as the 15% cut off line, or even higher % (high % = lower t-score)jtoh:
I'm not sure I agree with you. I understand what you're saying about demand and supply etc, as a whole. But looking at individual schools, these schools should enjoy a higher COP with their IP status as compared to their before IP status. Why? Because there is a higher demand for the school and if number of vacances is unchanged, the COP should increase.
Schools with no IP status will see a fall in their COP because the better students will now all have opted for the IP schools.
Say for eg. MGS gets IP status and SCGS doesn't. If I score 255 and I qualify for both schools, I would choose MGS over SCGS (assuming I do not have loyalty to either.) Even if I am an ex-SCGS girl, I'd seriously consider MGS because there's the IP advantage.
each year only about 40+ thousand sitting for PSLE, going forward some years could be below 40k as some years have only 30+k babies...even plus foreign students...so 10% as it is now will yield only around 4000 students with t-score 250 and above, based on present MOE bell curve for PSLE t-score
18 schools x 450 per intake = 8100....so may be 20%
Not all schools will have all their 450 intakes with scores over 250. Even ACSI does not have all their intakes above 250. They still have affiliated primary schools where they are obliged to take in weaker students. You can check MGS, SCGS, SNG etc...many have cutoff point of 22+ or 23+ for their affiliated primary schools. The point for these schools going IP is not to raise their cutoff points. The fact is that these schools have a fair number of students with score above 250, 260 or even 270 each year. These students are qualified for IP but the schools they have chosen are not IP like SNG, SCGS etc...Like I have said, these are very small number in these schools and like I have said, it is a resource issue to offer IP in these schools with too little qualifies students. -
joconde:
somehow, i see the introduction of more IP sch as a move to create more oppty for students weak in MT to enter good sec schools, following the failed attempt to reduce PSLE MT weightage
that is what I thought
well at least this quarter is taken care of -
WeiHan:
I think your analysis is wrong.
there is only a limited supply of those 250 and above, viz MOE cut it at 10% of each cohort. unless MOE inflat the t-score by setting 250 as the 15% cut off line, or even higher % (high % = lower t-score)verykiasu2010:
[quote=\"jtoh\"]
I'm not sure I agree with you. I understand what you're saying about demand and supply etc, as a whole. But looking at individual schools, these schools should enjoy a higher COP with their IP status as compared to their before IP status. Why? Because there is a higher demand for the school and if number of vacances is unchanged, the COP should increase.
Schools with no IP status will see a fall in their COP because the better students will now all have opted for the IP schools.
Say for eg. MGS gets IP status and SCGS doesn't. If I score 255 and I qualify for both schools, I would choose MGS over SCGS (assuming I do not have loyalty to either.) Even if I am an ex-SCGS girl, I'd seriously consider MGS because there's the IP advantage.
each year only about 40+ thousand sitting for PSLE, going forward some years could be below 40k as some years have only 30+k babies...even plus foreign students...so 10% as it is now will yield only around 4000 students with t-score 250 and above, based on present MOE bell curve for PSLE t-score
18 schools x 450 per intake = 8100....so may be 20%
Not all schools will have all their 450 intakes with scores over 250. Even ACSI does not have all their intakes above 250. They still have affiliated primary schools where they are obliged to take in weaker students. You can check MGS, SCGS, SNG etc...many have cutoff point of 22+ or 23+ for their affiliated primary schools. The point for these schools going IP is not to raise their cutoff points. The fact is that these schools have a fair number of students with score above 250, 260 or even 270 each year. These students are qualified for IP but the schools they have chosen are not IP like SNG, SCGS etc...Like I have said, these are very small number in these schools and like I have said, it is a resource issue to offer IP in these schools with too little qualifies students.[/quote]you said it
it won't raise the cut off points of the new IP schools, notwithstanding the demand for the places in these new IP schools. that is my pov
on the other hand, MOE can make all things look beautiful by lowering the cut off line of the magic t-score of 250. instead of 10%, it can start to look at 20%....and certainly then many entrants to IP schools will have t-scores higher than 250 -
verykiasu2010:
you said it
I think your analysis is wrong.WeiHan:
[quote=\"verykiasu2010\"]
there is only a limited supply of those 250 and above, viz MOE cut it at 10% of each cohort. unless MOE inflat the t-score by setting 250 as the 15% cut off line, or even higher % (high % = lower t-score)
each year only about 40+ thousand sitting for PSLE, going forward some years could be below 40k as some years have only 30+k babies...even plus foreign students...so 10% as it is now will yield only around 4000 students with t-score 250 and above, based on present MOE bell curve for PSLE t-score
18 schools x 450 per intake = 8100....so may be 20%
Not all schools will have all their 450 intakes with scores over 250. Even ACSI does not have all their intakes above 250. They still have affiliated primary schools where they are obliged to take in weaker students. You can check MGS, SCGS, SNG etc...many have cutoff point of 22+ or 23+ for their affiliated primary schools. The point for these schools going IP is not to raise their cutoff points. The fact is that these schools have a fair number of students with score above 250, 260 or even 270 each year. These students are qualified for IP but the schools they have chosen are not IP like SNG, SCGS etc...Like I have said, these are very small number in these schools and like I have said, it is a resource issue to offer IP in these schools with too little qualifies students.
it won't raise the cut off points of the new IP schools, notwithstanding the demand for the places in these new IP schools. that is my pov
on the other hand, MOE can make all things look beautiful by lowering the cut off line of the magic t-score of 250. instead of 10%, it can start to look at 20%....and certainly then many entrants to IP schools will have t-scores higher than 250[/quote]But it will help them retain some of their top scorers.
I do not think it is MOE intention to make things look beautiful. They already said these schools will offer dual track. Unless you are talking of a conspiracy to pull these schools up due to some pressure from some elites. -
verykiasu2010:
I think the total number of students in IP won't be as big even with 18 IP schools. Even today, for school like ACSI which runs dual track, their Sec 1 IB programme intake is only 180, not 450. For the 7 new IP schools, I doubt their Sec 1 IP programme intake will be 450, probably 150 or even less. Hence, you won't get such a big number. On the other hand, I agree that with more intake, the COP will be lower, but you are referring to \"'lower COP\" for IP programme, it is not the same as saying \"lower COP for a particular school\", right? For a specific school, if it gets to run IP, its COP may increase, even though could be slight increase.
there is only a limited supply of those 250 and above, viz MOE cut it at 10% of each cohort. unless MOE inflat the t-score by setting 250 as the 15% cut off line, or even higher % (high % = lower t-score)jtoh:
I'm not sure I agree with you. I understand what you're saying about demand and supply etc, as a whole. But looking at individual schools, these schools should enjoy a higher COP with their IP status as compared to their before IP status. Why? Because there is a higher demand for the school and if number of vacances is unchanged, the COP should increase.
Schools with no IP status will see a fall in their COP because the better students will now all have opted for the IP schools.
Say for eg. MGS gets IP status and SCGS doesn't. If I score 255 and I qualify for both schools, I would choose MGS over SCGS (assuming I do not have loyalty to either.) Even if I am an ex-SCGS girl, I'd seriously consider MGS because there's the IP advantage.
each year only about 40+ thousand sitting for PSLE, going forward some years could be below 40k as some years have only 30+k babies...even plus foreign students...so 10% as it is now will yield only around 4000 students with t-score 250 and above, based on present MOE bell curve for PSLE t-score
18 schools x 450 per intake = 8100....so may be 20% -
wonderm:
of course the 450 x 18 is an eventual possibility, though may not be immediate
I think the total number of students in IP won't be as big even with 18 IP schools. Even today, for school like ACSI which runs dual track, their Sec 1 IB programme intake is only 180, not 450. For the 7 new IP schools, I doubt their Sec 1 IP programme intake will be 450, probably 150 or even less. Hence, you won't get such a big number. On the other hand, I agree that with more intake, the COP will be lower, but you are referring to \"'lower COP\" for IP programme, it is not the same as saying \"lower COP for a particular school\", right? For a specific school, if it gets to run IP, its COP may increase, even though could be slight increase.
take for eg ACSI, running dual track IP and O level, do you expect the COP of the school to drop or go up ?
So far in all our discussion we are all talking about the cop of the school as a whole....and thus expanding the IP to more schools means more IP students as a whole (excl O level and also excl those who choose not to be in IP school nor IP program)...thus the COP for the IP track will still drop esp for newer IP schools due to larger IP intake as a whole ...... there are only so many students with 250 & above to go round. -
verykiasu2010:
I know what you are talking about...The PM already said that PSLE results should not represent a person last chance. Students who only get 24+ or even 23+ in their psle but have joined these new IP schools can still join the IP programme later in sec 2 or sec 3 if they prove themeselves. In that sense, the \"COP\" will be reduced and more students will take part in IP. But disagree in a sense that MOE necessarily lower the bar for IP at psle .
of course the 450 x 18 is an eventual possibility, though may not be immediatewonderm:
I think the total number of students in IP won't be as big even with 18 IP schools. Even today, for school like ACSI which runs dual track, their Sec 1 IB programme intake is only 180, not 450. For the 7 new IP schools, I doubt their Sec 1 IP programme intake will be 450, probably 150 or even less. Hence, you won't get such a big number. On the other hand, I agree that with more intake, the COP will be lower, but you are referring to \"'lower COP\" for IP programme, it is not the same as saying \"lower COP for a particular school\", right? For a specific school, if it gets to run IP, its COP may increase, even though could be slight increase.
take for eg ACSI, running dual track IP and O level, do you expect the COP of the school to drop or go up ?
So far in all our discussion we are all talking about the cop of the school as a whole....and thus expanding the IP to more schools means more IP students as a whole (excl O level and also excl those who choose not to be in IP school nor IP program)...thus the COP for the IP track will still drop esp for newer IP schools due to larger IP intake as a whole ...... there are only so many students with 250 & above to go round.
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