7 New IP schools

[verykiasu2010]

Brenda10:

verykiasu2010:

don't think so


because with the 7 more IPO schools, thousands more places in the IP program are created to cater for the demand. it simply means thousands more IP places available. relax !

I think the above situation would benefit the students who take PSLE on Year 2012. For PSLE on year 2011 only Cedar and VS are ready. Therefore still tough competition.

that is being status quo. no increased competition from existing condition

[tanbh]

zacharykieran:

tanbh:

[quote=\"INNOVATE\"]tanbh


Your analysis of which partnerships are more superior is just wild speculation without strong validity of arguments. How do you know the combis of scgs-st nick-chs will not work? Hve you considered the amount of time and financial support to be provided for this marriage? You are only assuming your conceptual skills more superior than the combine boards of these three top 0-level schools.

arent we people here simply writing our \"speculation\" and opinions here ? (wild or not wild is up to the reader ) ... i am just giving my personal opinion...and definitely SUBJECTIVE OPINION .. parents or students looking here are NOT stupid, they can make up their own mind.

I based my opinion on the fact that parents do not like uncertainty and JC that is not established (despite having \"IP status\" should counter abit of that effect) and the fact that those 3 CHS, SNGS and SCGS while all being top schools with good name, their SCHOOL NAME, BRAND RECOGNITION & culture cannot be transferred to the new public JC unlike SJI, ACS(i) or Dunman High........this could lead to students either not wishing to enter them after Pri6 or could leave after Sec4.... (note: those IP schools new ones are DUAL Track....can switch back to O lvl ... even if they are on IP still, i am sure if any IP student is truly talented, other established name JC WOULD NOT MIND them switching over at J1 or J2 if they are CHS or SNGS's IP students)

i already said quite abit...any one who is keen can go back to read my previous SUBJECTIVE COMMENTS :salute:

if Sir or Madam INNOVATE have any positive 100 percent SOlidly TRUE info to share on the the new PUBLIC JC OR any subjective / biased opinion to share on why the new IP jc will DEFINITELY WORK... please share with every one , subjective views also can, Discussion and conjecture here only, WE R NOT GOD, so we can't crystalball the future... :celebrate:

This argument is making me absolutely bemused.. You are really silly if you can't see why these 3 brand name schools are partnering. The MOE has already given the rationale for them to create a new school instead of joining an existing school: TO CREATE SOME COMPETITION FOR THOSE TOP JCS. The govt could have just chucked them into some random JC and called it an 'IP JC', but why not? BECAUSE IT DEFEATS THE ABOVEMENTIONED PURPOSE.

And if you think the new school is not going to have any link to these existing 3 schools, you are so terribly wrong. Obviously the IP board of these schools will design a seamless curriculum and a school that has a shared heritage and culture (CHS and SNGS have already a shared heritage) In fact, there is much discussion on who from those 3 schools will head the combined school. Do note that 20% of the places will be reserved for O level students.

CHS and SNGS are the 2 BIGGEST FEEDER SCHOOLS FOR O LEVEL into schools like RJC. By removing them to start a new school, other O level schools will be able to send their students there, hence levelling the playing field.

In fact, tell me what is so different about this new school compared to SJI's Year 5/6 program that makes it, I quote, 'superior'?[/quote]Dear Zacharykieran / Innovate [& other “kiasu frens”]

I hope followers of this topic can benefit from our exchanges since we bring in 2 sides of the story. I assume we just “see” or analyse (if I may say) it from different perspectives.

Firstly, I did NOT say SJI is “superior” over those “3schools into 1 JC” schools of CHS, SNGS and SCGS or the yet to be named JC… I meant that the SCHOOL CULTURE, BRAND NAME and unique character building aspects of these 3 good schools unfortunately cannot be continued in their Sec5/6 years like SJI and DH and they are entering a “mixed & new culture” JC with no track record (albeit created for IP with backing & “careful planning” of the brains of the 3 principals etc…), it is NOT difficult to integrate or create a seamless CURRICULUM for these 3 schools, but what about the continuation and follow through of the brand, culture & school spirit of these 3 schools?

This mixing of various schools with different culture and background is what that upsets me which probably caused me to write those points earlier, maybe I am wrong but I do concern that parents and student do indeed value these qualities & it can affect the intake, status and ranking of these schools in future, especially relative to other IP schools – all being very established schools.

I do know the CHS and SNGS’s ties and similarities… some of my best friends are from these 2 schools, I would NOT have stated my views on this IF the new JC is taking IP students just from these two schools of CHS and SNGS of similar cultural background (leaving SCGS to partner with someone else or do it alone), because these 2 schools are NOT simply mission schools, but both sharing culture as being strong in CL (both are good SAPs ) …. (also different from other mission schools as most are relatively more ang-mo-pai / English speaking).

MOE’s “marriage of simplified convenience” of these 3 schools will cause a mix or clash of cultures since SCGS is a “English-Paranakan School”, 3 schools’ students will have a Through train in terms of curriculum (academic wise) but in terms of Culture and school spirit, I don’t consider that as through train.

You guys also mentioned on competition which is a good point but I see it from other perspectives besides the providing more openings for O level students into TOP JCs …
With more schools doing IP, it is natural that student will have more choices, but it can also make CHS/SNGS/SCGS lose potential students who would prefer other schools having ALREADY ESTABLISHED brand name in Sec5-6 section (or having prestigious boys schools as partner) and enjoying more continuous & similar school culture / spirit between sec 1-4 and sec5-6 years.

Another aspect of competition is that IF (hypothetically) 2 GROUPs of Boy-Girl school family were formed say 1.CHS-SNGS-new JC and 2. SCGS-SJI (assume similar to ACS-MSG marriage format), the problems I raised would not arise (or be mitigated) – so BOTH groups would be more ‘integrated’ and similar in culture and definitely more established in the minds of parents at large; AND these schools or groupings would provide MUCH BETTER and REAL competition to the top brand groupings of Anglo Chinese, Hwa Chong, Raffles and Victoria families, especially the current top 2, wouldn’t that be even better for Singapore?

My view is that MOE and all the 7 IP schools are moving this through soonest possible, as they fear that the Ghost of “why not go IP yet” would haunt them very soon in that the quality of their students would fall further and further behind those earlier IP schools and also competition from other good schools (especially “neighbourhood kings” or “B kings” like BPGHS, Anderson etc have possibility of overtaking them - if not already on par), the laws of economics and budget also stood in the way of a better solution, MOE probably didn’t have the money to set up two JCs and SCGS cannot find a suitable Boy friend.

This is my point of view, for all old boys and gals of CHS, St Nics and SCGS, please pray hard that my opinions turn out to be wrong and what I mentioned don’t happen . I am serious and not saying it in a patronizing manner

[kiaaik]

actually, i was only expecting VS and mebbe SJI to go IP this round…

[Daddy D]

:celebrate: :celebrate:

Now I remember why I used to get confused on how to pronounce the \"IP MAN\" movie...
:lol: :lol: :lol:

[verykiasu2010]

Daddy

:celebrate: :celebrate:

Now I remember why I used to get confused on how to pronounce the \"IP MAN\" movie...
:lol: :lol: :lol:

\"aye pee\" man ...... man who wants to pee

[zacharykieran]

tanbh:

I do know the CHS and SNGS’s ties and similarities… some of my best friends are from these 2 schools, I would NOT have stated my views on this IF the new JC is taking IP students just from these two schools of CHS and SNGS of similar cultural background (leaving SCGS to partner with someone else or do it alone), because these 2 schools are NOT simply mission schools, but both sharing culture as being strong in CL (both are good SAPs ) …. (also different from other mission schools as most are relatively more ang-mo-pai / English speaking).

While you are right in stating that CHS/SNGS are 2 good SAPS, you have forgotten one key point: Both institutions pride themselves in making their students effectively bilingual. And they have succeeded. Just take a look at their O level English and Literature results, which are among the best in Singapore. While you have 'best friends' from these schools, I am surprised that you do not see the fact that it is not very strange, or contrived, to pair these 2 schools which excel in English as well with an English-medium school. In fact, adding a bilingual element to this combination, which already excel in English is a brilliant idea, in my opinion.

Please note that I am not even a student of these 3 schools. But I do recognize the traits of these schools which make them an effective combination.

tanbh:

My view is that MOE and all the 7 IP schools are moving this through soonest possible, as they fear that the Ghost of “why not go IP yet” would haunt them very soon in that the quality of their students would fall further and further behind those earlier IP schools and also competition from other good schools (especially “neighbourhood kings” or “B kings” like BPGHS, Anderson etc have possibility of overtaking them - if not already on par)

All these 7 schools have been applying for IP since 2005/2006. It is definitely not some rushed idea approved by the MOE, since all institutions have been in deep discussion with the Govt, and multiple proposals have been put forward.

For instance, did you know that originally there was a proposal for a CHS-SJI IB merger, but the idea was rejected, because of the fact that the school would be 'too big'?


I appreciate your concerns, which are certainly very valid. It is good to debate them so that everyone may see the merits/demerits of such a unique merger, hence helping them to make a more informed choice in the future, if the need arises.

[kiaaik]

zacharykieran:

tanbh:

I do know the CHS and SNGS’s ties and similarities… some of my best friends are from these 2 schools, I would NOT have stated my views on this IF the new JC is taking IP students just from these two schools of CHS and SNGS of similar cultural background (leaving SCGS to partner with someone else or do it alone), because these 2 schools are NOT simply mission schools, but both sharing culture as being strong in CL (both are good SAPs ) …. (also different from other mission schools as most are relatively more ang-mo-pai / English speaking).

While you are right in stating that CHS/SNGS are 2 good SAPS, you have forgotten one key point: Both institutions pride themselves in making their students effectively bilingual. And they have succeeded. Just take a look at their O level English and Literature results, which are among the best in Singapore. While you have 'best friends' from these schools, I am surprised that you do not see the fact that it is not very strange, or contrived, to pair these 2 schools which excel in English as well with an English-medium school. In fact, adding a bilingual element to this combination, which already excel in English is a brilliant idea, in my opinion.

Please note that I am not even a student of these 3 schools. But I do recognize the traits of these schools which make them an effective combination.

tanbh:

My view is that MOE and all the 7 IP schools are moving this through soonest possible, as they fear that the Ghost of “why not go IP yet” would haunt them very soon in that the quality of their students would fall further and further behind those earlier IP schools and also competition from other good schools (especially “neighbourhood kings” or “B kings” like BPGHS, Anderson etc have possibility of overtaking them - if not already on par)

All these 7 schools have been applying for IP since 2005/2006. It is definitely not some rushed idea approved by the MOE, since all institutions have been in deep discussion with the Govt, and multiple proposals have been put forward.

For instance, did you know that originally there was a proposal for a CHS-SJI IB merger, but the idea was rejected, because of the fact that the school would be 'too big'?


I appreciate your concerns, which are certainly very valid. It is good to debate them so that everyone may see the merits/demerits of such a unique merger, hence helping them to make a more informed choice in the future, if the need arises.

i heard sji wanted ib, but chs prefer a levels which chs can excel in

[zacharykieran]

kiaaik:

i heard sji wanted ib, but chs prefer a levels which chs can excel in

Don't ask me why I know, but there was an even earlier CHS-SNGS IB merger in 2006 that was rejected.

MOE did consider the idea of only a CHS-SNGS merger. Somehow it did not go down nicely with them.

[phankao]

zacharykieran:

For instance, did you know that originally there was a proposal for a CHS-SJI IB merger, but the idea was rejected, because of the fact that the school would be 'too big'?.

Yes, in 2005/2006, this was the proposal. And yes, for IB.

Nay, it was not rejected then bc the MOE thought the school would be \"too big\". It did not approve those 3 to be IP schools as these 3 schools accepted students who fall below the \"special stream\" criteria, which means they would generally fall below the IP eligibility. And that's bc these 3 schools take in students from their affiliated feeder schools. MOE at that point in time, did not approve IP schools with dual track programme - so far, only ACSI could do that bc ACSI independent.

anyway, the proposal was not for a BIG school. It was for all 3 schools to run their IP programmes in their schools, and the girls to go to either year 5 or 6 in CHS or SJI, or to a separate new Catholic JC set up by the Catholic Schools' Board. Anyway, MOE happily closed the application for further IP schools at that point in time, so no need for further discussion then lor, or any discussion to modify the 3 catholic schools' proposals.

[dunnoleh]

verykiasu2010:

Daddy

:celebrate: :celebrate:

Now I remember why I used to get confused on how to pronounce the \"IP MAN\" movie...
:lol: :lol: :lol:

\"aye pee\" man ...... man who wants to pee

we got only Ip Boy and Ip Girl.