Is GEP really necessary?

[2ppaamm]

vlim:

Ok ok ok ... About the qn about how can a std gep suit 500 gifted kids right ....... So I think huh back in abt 28 yrs ago when gep not started yet huh ... Maybe huh Someone in the gov said..,' I want to set up a gep to nurture our top 1% gifted kids and they must be alllllll rounder'....

Then B said ,' then how abt those half round?'.....
A said, ' then we set up a secondary school which specialize in Maths and Sci to take them in la... Those super pro one can take accelerated modules of the subject .......'........
B asked again, ' then how abt those find the gep still not challenging?'
A said, ' then bo bian lo, they got to out source lo .....'....
:siam:

:rotflmao: vlim, I like your language!

No lah, GEP selection criteria was not always like this. This current selection method has already been adulterated. It used to be just good in Math or English. Now they changed it because it is easier to teach. I tend to agree the old system made sense, since not everyone expects to be omni gifted. But you know, like all things good, they became bastardized. So what we have here is a watered down version of the initial intention. Time for a revamp... people at the top changed the original intention. Now, there seems to be a completely different objective, and not to nurture the talented.

[2ppaamm]

ksi:

Melodies:

Hi, tks for your patience to reiterate again, not that I didn't read that, I read that but no want can explain exactly why need to do this type of re-iteration to nth degree by having a standardized program for every GEPper. I'm saying of having a few drafts but I'm saying why there is a standardized program with everything are the same. Are they trying to make every GEPper to be Leonardo da Vinci by using the precision way? :yikes:

I see vlim has offered another approach to explain this, (n+1)th time. Check it out.

But that explanation is not correct leh...

A child in my extended family (b. 1989) was chosen for Math alone and the parents were told specifically that he was chosen for Math.

My friend's daughter (b. 1988) was chosen for English alone, for she was an avid reader from 4 years old.

My student1 (b. 1986) was chosen for English and he told me he suffered because it is Math heavy, and classmate to our PM's son.

My student2 (b. 1989) was chosen for Math and he enjoyed the system.

My friend, who was the RGS Math HOD, told me it was impossible to teach those GEPpers who went through in English. These children pulled their class average down, and his KPI down. This current system makes sense, because it makes teaching much easier for teachers. I asked him how about those left out. He said, bo bian lor... teachers' interest must also be taken into consideration...

Not say, say only. Got proof one.

So the current selection DOES leave out all these children, so yes, I have to repeat myself again... hahaha. That the GEP does LEAVE OUT MANY, MANY gifted, and therefore, many, many HIGH ABILITY get in instead. NOTHING WRONG. Just different, MOE has chosen to nurture the High Ability and not the gifted. So be it. Too bad for the country.

[atutor2001]

ksi:

Sorry what class of 20 is this? Intermingling class? Tuition class or secondary class?

They are J2 classes. Those are the latest CT results. Actual class size is 23. You will know where they are from with the tell-tail sign of GEPers failing 2 subjects out of 5 and with just only 4 months to A level. Seasoned parents will not panic and know that everything will be fine in the end. First time parent with A-level kid will be hurting for the bestest tutor for their kid.

At A level, there is no T-score to pull down their grade and they can pick the subject of our choice. So the trend is more accurate. Those are only figures of 2 classes. However, if you hear the same kind of pattern for 3 different cohorts, you can roughly gauge - no statistic needed.

[iFirefly]

Nebbermind:

Wah! So many pgs of exchange....so what's still the issue now? Gep die die must get > 260 for psle?

After 6 months and 80 pages, you are still running on the same spot mah... :siam:

[2ppaamm]

firefly38:

Nebbermind:

Wah! So many pgs of exchange....so what's still the issue now? Gep die die must get > 260 for psle?

After 6 months and 80 pages, you are still running on the same spot mah... :siam:

Hehehe... how to have conclusion... in the kingdom of the blind, the one-eye jack thinks he is the king! Hahaha... problem is, everyone of us is a one-eye jack... also, people all have different perspectives.

[iFirefly]

ksi:

This is what people cannot understand and it has been explained... it seems that people are so caught up in being top that everything is only measured by TOP. If TOP-less, then no GEP calibre.

btw, congrats osim, 90%+ is great all-rounder for GEP, even for mainstream is great.

Yes, Yes, Dr ksi.. We know your ''TOP-less'' talent.. And we LOVE it... :salute:

[friendship]

only 5 yrs in GEP. At 15 years old, these bunch will be back to normal routine meaning blended with mainstreamers. Can’t really see the difference in their career.

The oldest alumni should be 38 years old this year.

Some of them also holding the same job as Diploma holders such as engineers, senior managers, etc.

[verykiasu2010]

2ppaamm:

:rotflmao: vlim, I like your language!

there is no GEP hippo :evil: :evil: :evil:

[verykiasu2010]

ksi:

Melodies:

Hi, tks for your patience to reiterate again, not that I didn't read that, I read that but no want can explain exactly why need to do this type of re-iteration to nth degree by having a standardized program for every GEPper. I'm saying of having a few drafts but I'm saying why there is a standardized program with everything are the same. Are they trying to make every GEPper to be Leonardo da Vinci by using the precision way? :yikes:

I see vlim has offered another approach to explain this, (n+1)th time. Check it out.

dead horse might resurrect

[corneyAmber]

firefly38:

Nebbermind:

Wah! So many pgs of exchange....so what's still the issue now? Gep die die must get > 260 for psle?

After 6 months and 80 pages, you are still running on the same spot mah... :siam:

Both of you are so spot on.

The recent posts show speculations of what is GEP and contradiction in their speculations yet same expectations, RESULTS. One laments GEP takes in HA only who are not \"gifted\" in anything but supposed to be all-rounders, so should produce results. In this world, it seems only 2E geniuses are gifted. Then in a population of 4M+, do we seriously expect to have so many 2E category?

Another expected GEP to be Leonardo da Vinci all-rounders gifted genius because gifted means should be able to learn everything ma and failing in any subject is unacceptable and must produce results.

Btw, these children are humans like all of us, heterogeneous and UNIQUE in case we forget. They do come in many shapes and sizes, the only common thing is MOE-defined giftedness and yet that is also different because their giftedness do vary. Some are definitely skewed and some all rounders. In fact, all-rounders is what some are blessed with like Leonardo but not all are Leonardos la or to Leonardo's level because he is already an adult by the time he exhibited his all-roundness..... but hor be careful all-rounders are only known as HA, not gifted... Don't say I say one har.... I never say Leonardo was not gifted, I never say Leonardo topped in any of his classes either.

As for bastardization of the selection process, I can only comment that it is probably more robust now as MOE has more than one point of assessing the suitability of the children and no preparation is possible.