Is GEP really necessary?
-
2ppaamm:
Of course perspectives are fine but when facts are wrong to begin with, it will only mislead.ksi:
It is ok to share views and exchange is key, but information about GEP must be validated and be accurate. I have noted a number of discrepancies and some are repeated and I believe the GEP parents are tired to educate and correct the wrong notion anymore. I believe you will drive them to stop sharing....so what is so sharing about this entire topic at the end of the day?
It would be mainly a lop-sided view and a wrong one. No one will benefit from this. 
Reminds me of this...
GEP is the elephant! Everyone will think they are RIGHT! Just different perspectives.
Nobody is entirely right or entirely wrong. 
-
:goodpost: :thankyou:
I do recognize that there are pupils whose speciality maybe in one domain so that we don't miss out Lim Teck type of pupil. BTW, how come they didn't consider the T-score for each subject to select pupils whose speciality maybe in one domain? One can always argue that there are pupils whose specialty maybe in conversation/oral but may not be good in writing within a subject. :faint: Another pupil may then argue about they are good in calculus but poor in number patterns...
Sun_2010:
There are main streamers who have received CO but have scored less than the cut off point too.
PSLE gives equal weight age to all subjects while DSA is domain specific. So a low A in one subject is enough to pull the T-score down. While the child's speciality maybe in one domain- among the top in maths/ science/ language. DSA also takes in other factors like leadeship, CCA role etc. After all these are important traits too along side academics. The school has the autonomy to decide its criteria. And I think most schools are doing a good job of choosing the niche. If all Sec1 selection is done based on pure PSLE score leads to same kind of students mostly the ones good in all subjects and sidelines those that are exceptional in certain areas
DSA is thus necessary and a step in the right direction. While it does lead to another set of problems, which need to be tackled, scraping this in the name of leveling the playing field is just not right.
Let me also add that I do not have any kids in Gep. And Dd is one of those kids who is very good in all subjects and has done very well in Psle. So this is not a case of my view based on my kid. -
ksi, which piece of information about GEP is inaccurate? What the discrepancies? What are the wrong facts to begin with. Please help to clarify..
TIA!ksi:
Of course perspectives are fine but when facts are wrong to begin with, it will only mislead.
Reminds me of this...2ppaamm:
[quote=\"ksi\"]It is ok to share views and exchange is key, but information about GEP must be validated and be accurate. I have noted a number of discrepancies and some are repeated and I believe the GEP parents are tired to educate and correct the wrong notion anymore. I believe you will drive them to stop sharing....so what is so sharing about this entire topic at the end of the day?
It would be mainly a lop-sided view and a wrong one. No one will benefit from this.
GEP is the elephant! Everyone will think they are RIGHT! Just different perspectives. Nobody is entirely right or entirely wrong. [/quote]
-
Melodies:
Melodies, some of these have already been clarified but ignored so I will not dwell on this further because it is a never ending story as some has put it.ksi, which piece of information about GEP is inaccurate? What the discrepancies? What are the wrong facts to begin with. Please help to clarify..
TIA!
Suffice to say, my observation is, the GEP parents are no longer discussing in this thread, it only means that the views or info will only be one-sided.
When a discussion degenerates to this stage, whatever claims about GEP that comes along, be mindful of its source. If anyone is going to believe everything being posted here onwards about the programme, then please write to MOE for clarification before spreading the untruths. -
Your figures do support the point of GEPpers are higher in demand and TOP IP schools recognize this. :yikes:
Below are just a very rough calculation:
Presumably, average Tscore for GEPpers is 255 and this is top 6% for the whole cohort. There are abt 50k in a cohort so there are abt 3K pupils who have 255 t-score and above. Say all GEPper are evenly distributed to all IS school together with the comparable mainstreamers who has scored 255 and above, hence each school will have= 500/3000 = 16.7% GEPper. The fact is we are seeing higher % of GEPper population than 16.7% in TOP IP schools. There are abt 300 GEPper scored 255tscore n this shd give about 10% of GEPpers population for each IS school if we assume all comparable (based on PSLE score) GEPpers are evenly distributed to all IS schools with their comparable mainstream peers.
The conclusion is GEPpers are higher in demand and TOP IP schools do recognize this and prefer GEPpers to mainstreamers.
Do take the above calculation with a pinch of salts since the data is from KSP forumers and have not been verified with MOE.verykiasu2010:
yes that is the origin of the students ex-Pri 6. once in RI, they are all the same doing the same thing \"from the same starting line\" (quoting the school)
I just wanna confirm... In RI,Chenonceau:
[quote=\"verykiasu2010\"]I think in RI, the GEPpers number around 190 (7 classes x 30 less a few mainstreamers in these 7 classes), and out of a cohort size of 450, it forms 42%. In HCI, it numbers around 90, so out of cohort size of 450, it forms 20%. Not sure about RGS / NYGH numbers though
42% of students are GEP
58% of students are Mainstream
Is it also true that GEP is 1% of the entire school population?
yes roughly 1% of the cohort, so roughly 450 to 500, is GEP at pri school
so your next conclusion is RI has the largest share of GEP kids.
and the chief difference between RI and HCI is that everyone of the 450 in RI gets the same enriched curriculum of SBGE, whereas in HCI, only the iSpark consortium (about 90 kids) has the differentiated curriculum. Understand HCI is also beginning to roll out certain program similar to RI's Euler etc[/quote] -
With HCI already down to 20%, it can only get lower down the list. Why shd it be such a big concern? :scratchhead:
-
I think you have brought up a good point of writing to MOE for clarification. Wonder if any TOP IP schools have also disclosed the statistic and data of the admitted GEPper and mainstreams and also their Tscore.
ksi:
Melodies, some of these have already been clarified but ignored so I will not dwell on this further because it is a never ending story as some has put it.Melodies:
ksi, which piece of information about GEP is inaccurate? What the discrepancies? What are the wrong facts to begin with. Please help to clarify..
TIA!
Suffice to say, my observation is, the GEP parents are no longer discussing in this thread, it only means that the views or info will only be one-sided.
When a discussion degenerates to this stage, whatever claims about GEP that comes along, be mindful of its source. If anyone is going to believe everything being posted here onwards about the programme, then please write to MOE for clarification before spreading the untruths. -
Wah, another 2 days to test... Best to everyone who will be sitting for the GEP selection test. My son is not sitting as we see no purpose for him. For those who wish be successful, may your wishes come true!
For those who will not get in, may better things come your way!
Just realized today is test day! Don't forget ok, those of you who have P3 children. -
ksi:
It is ok to share views and exchange is key, but information about GEP must be validated and be accurate. I have noted a number of discrepancies and some are repeated and I believe the GEP parents are tired to educate and correct the wrong notion anymore. I believe you will drive them to stop sharing....so what is so sharing about this entire topic at the end of the day?
It would be mainly a lop-sided view and a wrong one. No one will benefit from this.
Agree! I am a parent of GEP kid and I think it is very tiresome to help non-gepper parents appreciate the need and importance of the programme for these kids.
If it helps, see the Geppers as a group of special need children, just like the autistic children have special needs and need special education, these gifted kids need special education too. If you have a naturally gifted child, you
will be so thankful that MOE is helping you to help them. Some of these kids are really so amazing even the MOE GEP is not enough to fuel their intellectual need. Their parents still have to DIY by providing other resources (advance text on subjects of kid's interest) or music and arts, etc to keep them occupied. -
osim:
I think most parents (whatever their views) are supportive of GEP for the naturally gifted kids like your case.
Agree! I am a parent of GEP kid and I think it is very tiresome to help non-gepper parents appreciate the need and importance of the programme for these kids.
If it helps, see the Geppers as a group of special need children, just like the autistic children have special needs and need special education, these gifted kids need special education too. If you have a naturally gifted child, you
will be so thankful that MOE is helping you to help them. Some of these kids are really so amazing even the MOE GEP is not enough to fuel their intellectual need. Their parents still have to DIY by providing other resources (advance text on subjects of kid's interest) or music and arts, etc to keep them occupied.
However, many are upset not with GEP but rather with the selection process, which can be and has been, abused by those who prepare their kids for the test so that they can DSA through GEP to their choice school. Whether it is an easier route or not is not a concern for them as they see no harm in having an added alternative route for their kids to their choice school and glamour. They are also prepared to do the projects for their kids and pay for tuition.
These so-called gifted kids comprise quite a high percentage in the GEP cohort and they are the ones who tarnished the image of otherwise a very good programme for the truly gifted. To make matter worse, the selection process has failed to identify Lim Jeck - making many questioning its accuracy and reliability.
As long as we did not prepare our kids for the GEP selection and did not do their works for them, we can be proud to have a kid in GEP.
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