GEP 2012 - Screening & Selection

[Nebbermind]

PiggyLalala:

Hence if my child fails to get any IP schools next time, I may blame myself for making the wrong decision to allow him to join GEP. But this is life. We do not know exactly which is a better path for our child to take.

Again, just my view.

Then perhaps try dsa those school that select purely by hast/gat. I tend to believe that geppers will outperform others when it come to doing a test that could not be prep.

[teddy]

I shared the same view. After the rigorous gep programs which pitched at higher level, they should have advantages for all 4 subjects. They are better off in english especially the cloze passage n compre which I know majority mainstreamers r struggling with, in Chinese which is more difficult than mainstreamers', maths which r also tougher than mainstreamers' n sciences which cover more than mainstreamers'.


In fact, they start to prepare psle almost the same time as mainstreamers in term 3 as mainstreamers have to cover psle syllabus for 1st/2nd terms.
So, I think they should at least score >265 to be consistent with top 1%. Don't forget that they have higher capacity intellectually :boogie:

It makes no sense to me that they are worst off than p3 after the gep program. If this is the case, not sure if the selection is flaw to choose the wrong kid or the gep program is lousy n make them worst off than p3 where the kid was :yikes:

PiggyLalala:

BluryMom:

[quote=\"PiggyLalala\"]Personally I will expect a ge pupil to score above 260.

If a GE child scores in the range of 250 to 255, it makes me wonder would it be better if the child stays in the mainstream instead of the gep. I strongly believe if these students stay in the mainstream and with the systematic guidance provided by some good primary schools, these students can benefit from the traditional drills and practice and improve on their weaker subjects. With no weak subjects, they shld be able to score above 257 and get into the ip schools. Personally I think ip schools provide a more holistic education.
Hence I can understand the dilemma tt some parents are facing now especially if the child is doing very well in the mainstream and the primary schools that they are in, really prepare the child well for psle.

We have to think beyond these 3 gep years. I am more concerned of my child 6 years of secondary education. Just my views.

Can I comment that you have a high exceptions from the GE kids to score 260+ above? Note that not all GE kids are the top few in their cohort or schools when they are chosen for the programme.

I do not think so. Gep kids are so called the top 1-2 percent of the P3 cohort. If we assume that the selection test is acurate and that the kids put in the necessary preparation for psle, they should score above 260 which is ard top 3 percent of the cohort. With enough time to prepare and overcome their weaker subjects, I still think they should at least get ard 257, of course, would be better if say above 260.

Again, just my view. :)[/quote]

[Nebbermind]

teddy:

I shared the same view. After the rigorous gep programs which pitched at higher level, they should have advantages for all 4 subjects. They are better off in english especially the cloze passage n compre which I know majority mainstreamers r struggling with, in Chinese which is more difficult than mainstreamers', maths which r also tougher than mainstreamers' n sciences which cover more than mainstreamers'.


In fact, they start to prepare psle almost the same time as mainstreamers in term 3 as mainstreamers have to cover psle syllabus for 1st/2nd terms.
So, I think they should at least score >265 to be consistent with top 1%. Don't forget that they have higher capacity intellectually :boogie:

It makes no sense to me that they are worst off than p3 after the gep program. If this is the case, not sure if the selection is flaw to choose the wrong kid or the gep program is bad make them worst off. :yikes:

Have u try doing the psle qns yourself?
Most parents here have qualifications a few level higher than psle and yet many struggle to solve even lower pri math. Are we intellectually below those p3 kids?

[teddy]

simple2005:

If it is about how high is the PSLE score that we are concerned when it comes to GEP, then perhaps we are missing the whole point of education.


This is perhaps where DSA comes in, because these children are not expected to score the highest all the time in all areas, but are expected to do relatively ok, getting into a higher education centre (sec schools) of choice will not be solely based on points. It's not that the points totally don't matter, but it is always known that it's not only the points that matter.

GEP students generally do not respond well to drilling, and repeated practice just so they can answer questions quicker, better, and score. But given a chance to absorb new material, stretch their minds, and broaden their scope that they spring into live. We should not be studying only on the scope that will be tested, and narrow the minds to strict borders of what is maths/science/arts/language etc, but should give the chance for a student to expand. True, some of the things that is taught, or learnt through the years may never be tested, but taking exams is not the point here now, is it?

We have often come to the conclusion (and rightfully so), what we study in school are hardly applied in work/life etc, but how did it become this way? We have been so caught up with the paper chase, we lose the idea of getting an education. So engrossed in being the fastest, most efficient, we missed out on the advantage we get if we step back sit back and think and see through another view, that we can apply what we have learnt, not what we did in the tests. There's a physical limit to how productive we can be, and an age limit to how long we can sustain the pace, and once we reach that limit, as an individual, as a team, as an organisation, as a population, then what? How do we move forward besides being faster, more efficient in doing the same thing, to be more 'productive'?

All the ideas about revising PSLE, cannot be still about the examinations, otherwise, no matter how the examinations are changed, it will still boil down to scores, drilling and in bad situation, streaming to those who qualify to take more advanced papers, or easier papers.

If it is still about the examinations and scores, the teachers cannot stop giving so much revisions papers and homework, schools cannot stop trying to churn out the highest scorers, parents would not venture out by giving the child the chance to explore out of scope. And all the talk of revising PSLE will still boil down to the same things, and maybe even end up in a worse situation.

--

The fact is MOE insisted all gep kids to take psle, this explain all! If there is no intention for gep kids to score well in psle, then why bother to ask gep kids to take psle exams?

Please do not think that psle exams is all about the drilling. The fact is many gep kids can't answer those psle questions are those high order thinking questions which mainstreamers obviously find difficult to answer.
So, don't say gep kids are not expected to do well. They have all it takes to do well in psle than mainstreamers :please:

[teddy]

Nebbermind:

teddy:

I shared the same view. After the rigorous gep programs which pitched at higher level, they should have advantages for all 4 subjects. They are better off in english especially the cloze passage n compre which I know majority mainstreamers r struggling with, in Chinese which is more difficult than mainstreamers', maths which r also tougher than mainstreamers' n sciences which cover more than mainstreamers'.


In fact, they start to prepare psle almost the same time as mainstreamers in term 3 as mainstreamers have to cover psle syllabus for 1st/2nd terms.
So, I think they should at least score >265 to be consistent with top 1%. Don't forget that they have higher capacity intellectually :boogie:

It makes no sense to me that they are worst off than p3 after the gep program. If this is the case, not sure if the selection is flaw to choose the wrong kid or the gep program is bad make them worst off. :yikes:

Have u try doing the psle qns yourself?
Most parents here have qualifications a few level higher than psle and yet many struggle to solve even lower pri math. Are we intellectually below those p3 kids?

I think I have answers for your questions in my posting before this! I am fully aware of this.

[Nebbermind]

teddy:

The fact is MOE insisted all gep kids to take psle, this explain all! If there is no intention for gep kids to score well in pale, then why bother to ask gep kids to take psle.

Please do not think that psle exams is about the drilling. The fact is many gep kids can't answer those psle questions are those high order thinking questions same as mainstreamers.

Donch quite understand your logic...perhaps I'm tired now.

Anyway, if one is not interested in gep, then just opt out, or donch even bother about the screening n selection.

[PiggyLalala]

teddy:

I shared the same view. After the rigorous gep programs which pitched at higher level, they should have advantages for all 4 subjects. They are better off in english especially the cloze passage n compre which I know majority mainstreamers r struggling with, in Chinese which is more difficult than mainstreamers', maths which r also tougher than mainstreamers' n sciences which cover more than mainstreamers'.


In fact, they start to prepare psle almost the same time as mainstreamers in term 3 as mainstreamers have to cover psle syllabus for 1st/2nd terms.
So, I think they should at least score >265 to be consistent with top 1%. Don't forget that they have higher capacity intellectually :boogie:

It makes no sense to me that they are worst off than p3 after the gep program. If this is the case, not sure if the selection is flaw to choose the wrong kid or the gep program is bad make them worst off. :yikes:

Hi Teddy, I am sorry but I do not think that we share the same view. Maybe it is my fault. I may not have expressed myself well enough in my earlier post.

From your post, can I assume that your kids are still young and have not gone through PSLE? To get above 260 in PSLE is really not easy. Hard work and a certain level of drilling may be necessary, in my view.

I do not think that the rigorous gep programs which pitched at higher level will necessarily lead to the child performing better in PSLE because the GEP is never about preparing for PSLE.

[PiggyLalala]

Nebbermind:

PiggyLalala:

Hence if my child fails to get any IP schools next time, I may blame myself for making the wrong decision to allow him to join GEP. But this is life. We do not know exactly which is a better path for our child to take.

Again, just my view.

Then perhaps try dsa those school that select purely by hast/gat. I tend to believe that geppers will outperform others when it come to doing a test that could not be prep.

Thanks. Will rem yr advice in 2014.:) Hopefully he will be successful in his DSA application.

[chlobe]

nansk:

chlobe:

Hi all,


My dd has also been selected for GEP... So far, at least a couple of friends have told me to consider not going for it. Surprisingly some of them are current MOE teachers.... Seems like they don't really like the program and how the kids are churned out. Any views?

That's interesting. What reasons did they give for asking you to careful consider this option? When they say \"how the kids are churned out\", are what aspect are they referring to? (The intense project load? The acceleration? What else?)

Thank you for sharing this alternate viewpoint.

Guess they have seen how some kids couldn't cope with the program and how some kids have personality issues.

[teddy]

PiggyLalala:

teddy:

I shared the same view. After the rigorous gep programs which pitched at higher level, they should have advantages for all 4 subjects. They are better off in english especially the cloze passage n compre which I know majority mainstreamers r struggling with, in Chinese which is more difficult than mainstreamers', maths which r also tougher than mainstreamers' n sciences which cover more than mainstreamers'.


In fact, they start to prepare psle almost the same time as mainstreamers in term 3 as mainstreamers have to cover psle syllabus for 1st/2nd terms.
So, I think they should at least score >265 to be consistent with top 1%. Don't forget that they have higher capacity intellectually :boogie:

It makes no sense to me that they are worst off than p3 after the gep program. If this is the case, not sure if the selection is flaw to choose the wrong kid or the gep program is bad make them worst off. :yikes:

Hi Teddy, I am sorry but I do not think that we share the same view. Maybe it is my fault. I may not have expressed myself well enough in my earlier post.

From your post, can I assume that your kids are still young and have not gone through PSLE? To get above 260 in PSLE is really not easy. Hard work and a certain level of drilling may be necessary, in my view.

I do not think that the rigorous gep programs which pitched at higher level will necessarily lead to the child performing better in PSLE because the GEP is never about preparing for PSLE.

Gep program allows kids to explore the depth n breadth of subjects, in term of knowledge, technique n skills, they r better off. They just need to do some practices which they are lacking now. As psle is focusing more on high thinking questions now and drilling will help with getting lower A but will not help you a lot with getting A* in psle nowadays. Like I say, gep kids have all it takes to score A* in psle now.