Is GEP really necessary?
-
ksi:
Ksi ....I raising all my hands and legs ... I 100% agree ...Melodies, no amount of talking here will convince you unless you have interaction with true GE kids. They are different even from baby stages and can be picked out.
Suffice to say, in a competition, some of the topics may be above level, GE kids are good at above level stuff compared to mainstream kids even if they have not been exposed. However, when it comes to simpler things like a formatted exam, GE kids may trip over and fail miserably. Their ability to learn new and complex things are much stronger but they may not have practised enough on simpler repetitive work to produce zero-error work. Given time, they can bridge the repetitive part eventually(some maybe never) but their innate ability to learn new and complex things fast cannot be replicated in a child without the innate ability. So please be kind to true GE kids, they have their own struggles as well and they did not ask to be born this way.
My take is, they only make up 1% of each cohort, leave them alone as they don't take up that much budget as well, considering they are integrated into local schools with limited facilities and not having a standalone academy with the state-of-the-art facilities to warrant any kind of envy. This is probably the kind of low-cost operations that 2ppaamm is canvassing against. Currently the nurturing efforts look half-hearted to her but already many are unhappy with the so-called privileges. 2ppaamm, can you imagine if it goes into a large scale academy approach? You will have more to write here.....tell your DH..
:snuggles:
-
vlim:
:hi5: :hugs:
Ksi ....I raising all my hands and legs ... I 100% agree ...ksi:
Melodies, no amount of talking here will convince you unless you have interaction with true GE kids. They are different even from baby stages and can be picked out.
Suffice to say, in a competition, some of the topics may be above level, GE kids are good at above level stuff compared to mainstream kids even if they have not been exposed. However, when it comes to simpler things like a formatted exam, GE kids may trip over and fail miserably. Their ability to learn new and complex things are much stronger but they may not have practised enough on simpler repetitive work to produce zero-error work. Given time, they can bridge the repetitive part eventually(some maybe never) but their innate ability to learn new and complex things fast cannot be replicated in a child without the innate ability. So please be kind to true GE kids, they have their own struggles as well and they did not ask to be born this way.
My take is, they only make up 1% of each cohort, leave them alone as they don't take up that much budget as well, considering they are integrated into local schools with limited facilities and not having a standalone academy with the state-of-the-art facilities to warrant any kind of envy. This is probably the kind of low-cost operations that 2ppaamm is canvassing against. Currently the nurturing efforts look half-hearted to her but already many are unhappy with the so-called privileges. 2ppaamm, can you imagine if it goes into a large scale academy approach? You will have more to write here.....tell your DH.. :snuggles: -
ksi:
After reading the posts, I just realised the true GE kids are so sadly mistaken by people. GE kids are not typically known to be strong academic performers nor exam-smart but they have a good brain nevertheless. Their potential is not reached. In a school I know, the cohort's top few students in P3 were not selected for GE (but continue to top in P4,P5) and when they go for inter school competition for Math or Science they would not win, some cannot even pass the selection test. However, the GE children would stand out in the competition but they may not emerge the top students in the cohort when they join the PSLE. This is not strange if one understands how GE kids work.
:goodpost:
My close friend cum neighbor's DD is in GEP.
Since young, have seen how she behaves.....just like other kids but yet different.
In areas that they are good in, it's amazing how much they know, how well they can absorb vs other kids (my kids are HA, but yet seem soooo much 'slower/weaker' as compared). But in areas they are weak in.....they are just like any other ordinary kid.
IF we are to test GEP PSLE syllabus, no doubt they know MUCH more and should score better, but just like any other child, they can be careless. A written test score will not be able to show the actual knowledge/skills these GEP kids have.
And of course, GEP will have a range......some of the weaker ones may even score lower than the hardworking super High-ability kids. Some GEP kids are good in all subjects, some are strong in only some....and the weaker subject can pull the t-score down. The one I know....she's very good in English and Science, but her Maths is average.
PS : Just saw another posting from KSI......super agree.ksi:
Melodies, no amount of talking here will convince you unless you have interaction with true GE kids. They are different even from baby stages and can be picked out.
Suffice to say, in a competition, some of the topics may be above level, GE kids are good at above level stuff compared to mainstream kids even if they have not been exposed. However, when it comes to simpler things like a formatted exam, GE kids may trip over and fail miserably. Their ability to learn new and complex things are much stronger but they may not have practised enough on simpler repetitive work to produce zero-error work. Given time, they can bridge the repetitive part eventually(some maybe never) but their innate ability to learn new and complex things fast cannot be replicated in a child without the innate ability. So please be kind to true GE kids, they have their own struggles as well and they did not ask to be born this way.
My take is, they only make up 1% of each cohort, leave them alone as they don't take up that much budget as well, considering they are integrated into local schools with limited facilities and not having a standalone academy with the state-of-the-art facilities to warrant any kind of envy. This is probably the kind of low-cost operations that 2ppaamm is canvassing against. Currently the nurturing efforts look half-hearted to her but already many are unhappy with the so-called privileges. 2ppaamm, can you imagine if it goes into a large scale academy approach? You will have more to write here.....tell your DH.. -
I too am confused now. People in MOE have said that schools like NYPS turns in stellar results (where 40% score above 250) at the PSLE, not because NYPS teaches very much better than other schools (since all MOE believes all schools are good)... BUT because it has a large GEP population who MOE believes will naturally do well in whatever the school had they stay put in their original schools. Clearly, some MOE data suggests that GEPpers do better at the PSLE than the rest of the cohort?
And now... people say that GEPpers don't do well at the PSLE? Some also say that the really gifted are not meant to do well at the PSLE because the PSLE requires drilling and GEPpers don't get drilled enough? Others say that PSLE requires rote learning and GEPpers are bored with that?
Hmmmm...
Does PSLE test rote-learning?
In my opinion, no longer. The new PSLE is constructed around inquiry and problem-solving skills. Teaching methods that were once characteristic of GEP, hopped over to mainstream in the form of Teach Less Learn More. The PSLE tests mental skills, NOT rote-learning. Not anymore.
Does PSLE require drilling?
What is drilling? Can I define it as \"practice upon practice upon practice\"?
In my opinion, for the less intellectually capable, yes, practice is required. If I am not talented in taekwondo, I need to practise/drill my muscles MORE than another who is gifted with all the strong muscles necessary where they should be. In areas such as deductive and inductive skills, my son seems to have all the brain \"muscles\" there where they should be. He needs very little drilling/practice. For reasons I cannot comprehend, he scores well in Science with a quarter of the practice he puts into Chinese (and he still scores only slightly above average in Chinese). I've tried making him practice more only to realize that quality of work dipped. More careless. Worse handwriting. He was bored and irritated with me. He has been known to lose marks in Science because he maintains that he had read somewhere that the research is unclear on this issue and therefore there is no clear answer to the question in his exam paper. After discussing with his teacher, his teacher agrees!! I don't even know where he gets all this but I dare not drill him too much in case performance dips.
In areas where he doesn't naturally have the brain \"muscles\" he needs where they should be in his brain, I need to give him practices ad nauseum, like this in Chinese - http://petunialee.blogspot.sg/2012/08/preparing-for-psle-oral.html. The practices are designed to be multi-skilled because
(1) the PSLE syllabus has changed to testing complex mental skills that need to be practiced ALL TOGETHER
(2) this is the way kids should be taught anyway in order not to bore the brain
If a child were intellectually high functioning, as the GEPpers are supposed to be, then they would need very little drilling/practice in order to do well as evidenced by my son in Science. They should possess the brain muscles where they should be. I signed my DS up for a USA high school literature module (where he read the Great Gatsby and Edgar Allan Poe) in early P6 of this year because he was bored with English as taught by his Teacher Who Can't Spell... overall he practiced even LESS English exams than Science, and he still got to 2nd in class in English at PSLE prelims. He didn't need drilling, he needed extra stimulation to stay engaged. If not, he would have gone and underperformed. When he started to give me really bad PSLE English compositions that were sloppy and way below his capability, I asked him to write a 3000 word short story. And all of a sudden, he began to sparkle again.
However, if a child were intellectually low functioning as evidenced by my son in Chinese, there is then a need to drill/practice to get those muscles working at acceptable levels (at least must be above average by PSLE... when he started out way below average in class).
I don't think it is reasonable to say that just because you are a GEPper, you're not expected to do well at PSLE. I don't think the statistics gathered by MOE bear this out. If MOE can attribute NYPS's stellar performance to the presence of a large GEP cohort, then I think statistically the data shows that GEPpers DO tend to do well at PSLE. GEPpers are by definition intellectually high functioning, no?
I think saying that GEPpers are not supposed to do well at PSLE is just an excuse for...
(1) poor performing GEPpers
(2) GEP testing inaccuracies (that identify the wrong kid as gifted) GEP testing (like any other psychometric testing instrument) CAN make mistakes. There is no such thing as a 100% reliable test.
Is the GEP necessary?
In my opinion, yes. From DS' experience (and I dun think he is gifted) as someone who functions well in English and Science, he was craving for stimulation. We do have kids among us who need the GEP to enjoy school and stay engaged.
Fair or Unfair?
We should NOT take away the GEP's privileges just because of a fairness issue. They are kids after all. Different or not, we need to love them. The thing though, is that GEP's small classes facilitated the teaching through inquiry and self-directed learning. These are learning styles characteristic of gifted learners. However, since the inquiry-based learning has hopped over from GEP to mainstream (and I think it is a good thing) then why are classes in mainstream still at 40?
I am beyond questioning issues of fairness. Let the GEP keep whatever privileges it has... BUT... allow mainstream teachers to teach smaller classes so that they can best effectuate inquiry-based learning too. -
Chenonceau:
\"Well\", it's all relative!!I too am confused now. People in MOE have said that schools like NYPS turns in stellar results (where 40% score above 250) at the PSLE, not because NYPS teaches very much better than other schools (since all MOE believes all schools are good)... BUT because it has a large GEP population who MOE believes will naturally do well in whatever the school had they stay put in their original schools. Clearly, some MOE data suggests that GEPpers do better at the PSLE than the rest of the cohort?
And now... people say that GEPpers don't do well at the PSLE? Some also say that the really gifted are not meant to do well at the PSLE because the PSLE requires drilling and GEPpers don't get drilled enough? Others say that PSLE requires rote learning and GEPpers are bored with that?
From the earlier posts, people are expecting GEPpers to get 260ish...so that they can justify their EESIS and their 'top 1%' status.
Anyway, they r not a homogeneous bunch of kids... -
Nebbermind:
:goodpost: Nebbermind...you said it all...
\"Well\", it's all relative!!Chenonceau:
I too am confused now. People in MOE have said that schools like NYPS turns in stellar results (where 40% score above 250) at the PSLE, not because NYPS teaches very much better than other schools (since all MOE believes all schools are good)... BUT because it has a large GEP population who MOE believes will naturally do well in whatever the school had they stay put in their original schools. Clearly, some MOE data suggests that GEPpers do better at the PSLE than the rest of the cohort?
And now... people say that GEPpers don't do well at the PSLE? Some also say that the really gifted are not meant to do well at the PSLE because the PSLE requires drilling and GEPpers don't get drilled enough? Others say that PSLE requires rote learning and GEPpers are bored with that?
From the earlier posts, people are expecting GEPpers to get 260ish...so that they can justify their EESIS and their 'top 1%' status.
-
Nebbermind:
There is also the possibility that the GEP test made a mistake and wrongly identified someone as gifted. No psychometric test is 100% reliable. GEP kids who don't score above a certain threshold should just be dropped (for their own good) in the same way that those who score 27+ at PSLE WERE often invited INTO the GEP in Sec 1... and therefore these DON'T get EESIS.
\"Well\", it's all relative!!
From the earlier posts, people are expecting GEPpers to get 260ish...so that they can justify their EESIS and their 'top 1%' status.
Anyway, they r not a homogeneous bunch of kids...
Beyond Fair or Unfair
We should NOT take away the GEP's privileges just because of a fairness issue. They are kids after all. Different or not, we need to love them because different kids are still the nation's legacy. The thing though, is that GEP's small classes facilitated the teaching through inquiry and self-directed learning. These are learning styles characteristic of gifted learners. However, since the inquiry-based learning has hopped over from GEP to mainstream (and I think it is a good thing) then why are classes in mainstream still at 40?
I am beyond questioning issues of fairness. Let the GEP keep whatever privileges it has... BUT... allow mainstream teachers to teach smaller classes so that they can best effectuate inquiry-based learning too. -
Chenonceau:
Of course possible...I personally believe there's very little separating them and the next 1% (for the GEP selection test) or even 5%!! I always believe that those selected are just 'privileged'.
There is also the possibility that the GEP test made a mistake and wrongly identified someone as gifted. No psychometric test is 100% reliable. GEP kids who don't score above a certain threshold should just be dropped (for their own good) in the same way that those who score 27+ at PSLE WERE often invited INTO the GEP in Sec 1. -
slmkhoo:
There is also the possibility that a kid is highly gifted in only 1 area and is pulled down by the other subjects. Not all 'gifted' kids can be equally gifted in all 4 subjects.
This for certain. The HIGHLY gifted are usually skewed. The earlier MOE interpretation of giftedness honored this. The present MOE interpretation does not seem to honor this. GEPpers are expected to perform in all areas. To stay coherent with MOE's current operative definition of giftedness (which is subject to debate), then the expectation is good performance throughout... to be consistent with this definition, then those who cannot perform across all subjects should be dropped from GEP.
That is why Lim Jeck (highly gifted ONLY in Math) is not a GEPper. -
Chenonceau:
There is also the possibility that the GEP test made a mistake and wrongly identified someone as gifted. No psychometric test is 100% reliable. GEP kids who don't score above a certain threshold should just be dropped (for their own good) in the same way that those who score 27+ at PSLE WERE often invited INTO the GEP in Sec 1... and therefore these DON'T get EESIS.Nebbermind:
\"Well\", it's all relative!!
From the earlier posts, people are expecting GEPpers to get 260ish...so that they can justify their EESIS and their 'top 1%' status.
Anyway, they r not a homogeneous bunch of kids...
Beyond Fair or Unfair
We should NOT take away the GEP's privileges just because of a fairness issue. They are kids after all. Different or not, we need to love them because different kids are still the nation's legacy. The thing though, is that GEP's small classes facilitated the teaching through inquiry and self-directed learning. These are learning styles characteristic of gifted learners. However, since the inquiry-based learning has hopped over from GEP to mainstream (and I think it is a good thing) then why are classes in mainstream still at 40?
I am beyond questioning issues of fairness. Let the GEP keep whatever privileges it has... BUT... allow mainstream teachers to teach smaller classes so that they can best effectuate inquiry-based learning too.
Yes I agree with tt too!
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 š
Register Login