MOE to scrap Banding for Secondary Schools

[Chenonceau]

slmkhoo:

This is the main reason I applaud scrapping the banding. When schools are more concerned about the no. of As than educating kids in a more all-rounded way, then our education system is not doing its job. At least when there is no official ranking, teachers' and principals' performance and promotions will not be tied to the ranking, and kids will not be pressured to only take subjects they can score As in or take CCAs they win awards in.

If some people think it's important enough to privately rank schools, that's their prerogative. Actually, knowing something about the school's performance when selecting schools is a good thing (think of the Times Higher Education Supplement and similar publications), but teachers' should not be pressured to make raising the school's ranking their main goal. I also take issue with the banding as it was practised - why only rank by exam results? That's really too one-dimensional.

Finally, parents should consider whether the school is a good fit for the child rather than assuming that getting the child into a 'good' school necessarily means that the child will get those 'good' results. That child might end up as the trailing tail if the school is too competitive for him even if the teachers are supportive.

I begin to sound like some sort of sycophant but... :goodpost:

[mummy so kiasu]

SAHM_TAN:

jtoh:

With so many of the top schools going IP and not taking O level, there would be a big change in the Band 1 schools. One of the reasons for doing away with banding.

I feel the banding will still be useful for students who do not select IP schools to know which one are the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc after the IP schools

I agree with you. Such info will help parents to choose the right schools for their P6 kids. Everyone knows that the elite schools are RI, RGS, HCI, NYGH, but we do not know much about the neighbourhood schools. Banding tells the parents how well the schools prepared the kids for the O level exam. It also help parents to differentiate the better neighbourhood schools from the so so ones. If every school is good, then not every school is equally good. If every school is good, then why do the kids need to study so hard for PSLE to get higher T score.

[verykiasu2010]

mummy so kiasu:

SAHM_TAN:

[quote=\"jtoh\"]With so many of the top schools going IP and not taking O level, there would be a big change in the Band 1 schools. One of the reasons for doing away with banding.

I feel the banding will still be useful for students who do not select IP schools to know which one are the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc after the IP schools

I agree with you. Such info will help parents to choose the right schools for their P6 kids. Everyone knows that the elite schools are RI, RGS, HCI, NYGH, but we do not know much about the neighbourhood schools. Banding tells the parents how well the schools prepared the kids for the O level exam. It also help parents to differentiate the better neighbourhood schools from the so so ones. If every school is good, then not every school is equally good. If every school is good, then why do the kids need to study so hard for PSLE to get higher T score.[/quote]websites like ksp becomes useful

CKS : you should go advertise in every primary school, where to look for info on sec school

[Lilac66]

tutormum:

pinky:

I support the scrapping too. Heard from friends of schools asking their students to drop subjects that they did not do well in case it affect the school overall ranking. (I suppose referring to S4 students). Wonder if it is a common practice :yikes:

No need to wonder. It is so common that every school is doing it. Thank God that DS3 is able to take Literature as O level as he loves it. His school has not offered it for seven years. I know the main reason that students are not encouraged to take Literature cos of the low chance of scoring A. Schools don't want it to pull down the overall ranking while students don't want to get anything less than A. :sad:

I'm really out of touch. I did not know schools will resort to that to preserve their rankings. :rant:
Aren't schools supposed to nurture the children's talent and interest.You mean we'll see only a flood scientists and mathematicians in the future but none more inclined towards the arts??

Good thing the banding is going to be scrapped.

[edtan]

I think the MOE is too reactive over by one or two people comments.

First, it was the P1 screening and later Secondary school banding.

Why don’t take out the entry requirement for the universities, that will solve every parent woe and have unlimited vacancies for all courses. We can choose we want to do; not constraints by the entry points.

Because there is an entry requirement into the university, we have "A" level. It is because of "A" level, we need to make sure our kids do well in their exam and get to a decent course of choice. Because of all these, we need to have a competitive environment to put them into test.

An iron sharpens another iron. I can’t imagine a wood sharpens an iron but I don’t mind a diamond sharpens an iron.

[Mychildren]

edtan:

I think the MOE is too reactive over by one or two people comments.First, it was the P1 screening and later Secondary school banding.


Why don't take out the entry requirement for the universities, that will solve every parent woe and have unlimited vacancies for all courses. We can choose we want to do; not constraints by the entry points.

Because there is an entry requirement into the university, we have \"A\" level. It is because of \"A\" level, we need to make sure our kids do well in their exam and get to a decent course of choice. Because of all these, we need to have a competitive environment to put them into test.

An iron sharpens another iron. I can't imagine a wood sharpens an iron but I don't mind a diamond sharpens an iron.

I'm not sure whether its 1 or 2 or more people comments (to those in blue). But I do hope that MOE used their wisdom to think before they act & know what's the reasons for doing so, not to be shortsighted for the sake of satisfying anyone temporary.

[iFirefly]

tutormum:

pinky:

I support the scrapping too. Heard from friends of schools asking their students to drop subjects that they did not do well in case it affect the school overall ranking. (I suppose referring to S4 students). Wonder if it is a common practice :yikes:

No need to wonder. It is so common that every school is doing it. Thank God that DS3 is able to take Literature as O level as he loves it. His school has not offered it for seven years. I know the main reason that students are not encouraged to take Literature cos of the low chance of scoring A. Schools don't want it to pull down the overall ranking while students don't want to get anything less than A. :sad:

Catholic High School (Sec) is an exception.. The students are allowed to take any subject combinations (in addition to choosing from fixed subject bundles), as the Principal believes that students are more likely to do well in subjects they have interest in, not in subjects they are being forced to take.. The school will make special arrangement even if there is only 1 student taking a particular subject combination.. Certainly more work for the school time-tabling team, but they feel that the extra effort is worth it..

I believe, besides CHS, there are many other schools which have been placing students' welfare as their first priority.. I do not agree when you say ''EVERY school is doing it''.. I do not think Pinky meant it that way either.. :roll:

[pirate]

edtan:

Because there is an entry requirement into the university, we have \"A\" level. It is because of \"A\" level, we need to make sure our kids do well in their exam and get to a decent course of choice. Because of all these, we need to have a competitive environment to put them into test.


An iron sharpens another iron. I can't imagine a wood sharpens an iron but I don't mind a diamond sharpens an iron.

I do not agree that the \"A\" levels is necessarily a good gauge of university applicants' capability and potential. A competitive environment is not necessarily a bad thing. But what is the competition about? Cramming ability or the ability of children's family to pay for \"enrichment\" tuition?

We can talk about iron sharpening another iron etc. But if we concentrate too much on tempering iron, we may forget how to steel and titanium etc, which are superior to iron in terms of strength.

[tutormum]

pinky:

tutormum:

[quote=\"pinky\"]I support the scrapping too. Heard from friends of schools asking their students to drop subjects that they did not do well in case it affect the school overall ranking. (I suppose referring to S4 students). Wonder if it is a common practice :yikes:

No need to wonder. It is so common that every school is doing it. Thank God that DS3 is able to take Literature as O level as he loves it. His school has not offered it for seven years. I know the main reason that students are not encouraged to take Literature cos of the low chance of scoring A. Schools don't want it to pull down the overall ranking while students don't want to get anything less than A. :sad:

so how was your son able to take it now? he must be very happy[/quote]He has had prayed fervently for it cos he knew that the chance was very slim. :nailbite: :nailbite: Imagine 20+ out of a cohort of more than 350 students taking Literature. :slapshead: :slapshead:
He's enjoying it very much and one of the reasons is that the class is half of the usual number and there's so much more the teacher can do than with a normal class. Class size does play an important role. :rant: He has learnt so much (much more than what I did for my O levels) that it's one of his favourite subjects and confident that he'll get A with his eyes closed.
Interest in a subject does play a very important role. No point forcing your children to take up triple sciences, for example, just cos everybody is doing it and hope that he'll be a doctor when he loves arts, right? I rather go against the norm and have happy children then spend tons of money in trying to make them big lawyers and doctors unless it's their wish in the first place. :roll: When schools and parents are churning out A students, they overuse the cutters and yet wonder why all students are of one size and shape. :mad: :mad:

[corneyAmber]

firefly38:

tutormum:

[quote=\"pinky\"]I support the scrapping too. Heard from friends of schools asking their students to drop subjects that they did not do well in case it affect the school overall ranking. (I suppose referring to S4 students). Wonder if it is a common practice :yikes:

No need to wonder. It is so common that every school is doing it. Thank God that DS3 is able to take Literature as O level as he loves it. His school has not offered it for seven years. I know the main reason that students are not encouraged to take Literature cos of the low chance of scoring A. Schools don't want it to pull down the overall ranking while students don't want to get anything less than A. :sad:

Catholic High School (Sec) is an exception.. The students are allowed to take any subject combinations (in addition to choosing from fixed subject bundles), as the Principal believes that students are more likely to do well in subjects they have interest in, not in subjects they are being forced to take.. The school will make special arrangement even if there is only 1 student taking a particular subject combination.. Certainly more work for the school time-tabling team, but they feel that the extra effort is worth it..

I believe, besides CHS, there are many other schools which have been placing students' welfare as their first priority.. I do not agree when you say ''EVERY school is doing it''.. I do not think Pinky meant it that way either.. :roll:[/quote]Kudos to CHS for not succumbing to school ranking competition pressure..