Bell Curve - To remove or not to remove?

[atutor2001]

oldies:

atutor2001:

Generally most people exhibit academic ability in either language or math. The lucky ones have both. To me both language and math are of equal importance. However, currently, those good in math (high mean) are enjoying greater advantage in the aggregate T-score ranking system.

Hi atutor2001,
Any idea which group of kids will perform better in secondary? The ones who are strong in maths or language ?

Thanks!

Based on my personal kay pohing, I find that the one stronger in language tends to be more successful. Subjects such as philosophy, public administration, law, economic... needs good ability in language. It is more difficult to understand, analyse and apply such knowledge as compared to science and math. Philosophy, economics... provides the main framework for success - vision e.g. the Apple guy. Although he is also good technically, without the \"vision\", technical know-how can only help to improve or refine an existing knowledge. There will be no grand new invention or break through like what he had done in Apple. Many great scientists in the past were also great philosophers.

Those good in math and sciences usually become top employees. Those good in language usually become their own boss.

PS
Sorry mis-read your question.

In secondary school, for the first 2 years, the math/science guys are definitely more successful because they have common subjects. By year 3 and 4, after streaming, the language guys can outshine the math/science guys (usually in the top schools because the language guys in other schools are not really that \"powderful\" in their language and it is harder to \"learn\" those subjects. Nevertheless, with the science subjects removed, many of the language guys will starts to get better grades than his contemporaries who remain in math/science) In JC, we will find the percentage of language guys (in top schools) taking up top positions to be greater than math/science (note that the number of classes of language guys are much smaller so relatively speaking their success rate is higher although the absolute number is smaller. Usually top scholars come from language guys)

[oldies]

Thanks atutor2001.

[jtoh]

oldies:

Any idea which group of kids will perform better in secondary? The ones who are strong in maths or language ?

Thanks!

In my personal observation, students who are good in languages/arts subjects do better in Sec 1/2. That's bec in Sec 1/2, aside from English and MT, there's 3 humanities subjects (Lit, History and Geog), Social studies, Math & Science. So there are in total about 5 subjects (languages, lit, history, geog, social studies) which a student strong in languages and humanities can excel in. Whereas the Science/Math student has just 2 subjects to excel in. But in Sec 3/4, it's equal opportunity for all students bec you choose your subject combination to your strengths. Students strong in Math/Science can choose a Trip Sci combination with double math. Students strong in Humanities can choose trip humanz. So it doesn't really matter.

[oldies]

Thank you jtoh and atutor2001 for providing the different views.

[bupashu]

Will_lim:

I've come across a great blog and want to share it here:


http://hedgehogcomms.blogspot.sg/2012/10/piecing-together-psle-puzzle.html

The article has really made me to ponder over my views about PSLE results. As they are calculated based on the bell curve or t-score (your relative score), I'm more convinced that this is a fairer type of assessment since it takes into account other variables (e.g. difficulty of the papers). But witnessing so many children nowadays have been stressed, pressured and even gone hysterical, I wonder if it can help to de-stress the kids if the bell curve system is removed.

The blogger has pointed out:

\"Ranking fosters competition and discourages collaboration because it becomes a race where it's about outrunning your rivals rather than performing to the best of your ability. I'd rather score an A and have my schoolmates score Bs than score an A* along with everyone else.\"

I quite agree with him on this idea that this system is actually promoting an unhealthy competition.

For myself personally, I have been discouraged and depressed very much during my school years as despite how hard I kept trying, I seldom got the grades I wanted. I guess maybe a sense of achievement or a little of satisfaction could have made my school life better and more enjoyable!

whether the bell curve is removed or not, it does not matter - it still exist. The normal distribution of people of diff degree of cleverness or dumbness exist in the population, even if every one denies it.

if you are depressed or discouraged, then work on understanding the truth and the truth will set you free. changing the presentation of talent distribution of removing the curve does not solve the problem. your problem is understanding yourself, your ability, and your definition of achievement. you are so far following other people's definition of achievement to be your own target and hence find yourself discouraged

[enoawng]

Will_lim:

http://hedgehogcomms.blogspot.sg/2012/10/piecing-together-psle-puzzle.html

I don't want to debate on the pros and cons of the bell curve but the author is right in that moe should be more transparent to provide the raw scores of each subject, the average and the standard deviation.

The 12 year olds can work out the t-scores themselves.....

[bupashu]

enoawng:

Will_lim:

http://hedgehogcomms.blogspot.sg/2012/10/piecing-together-psle-puzzle.html

I don't want to debate on the pros and cons of the bell curve but the author is right in that moe should be more transparent to provide the raw scores of each subject, the average and the standard deviation.

The 12 year olds can work out the t-scores themselves.....

lots of parents already have problem & difficulties understanding the t-score formula....u think the students at P6 can handle statistics, mean, median & standard deviation and 45,000 x 4 raw scores ?

but if you don't trust the t-score given, you can always request to review the t-score from MOE, and if you are still not satisfied, go file a court order to order MOE to reveal all the stats and get an independent committee of inquiry to audit the t-score process and procedures, including the computer software codes for it

[AWSP]

The T-score formulation is interesting, its complication is probably unwarranted for. The point is not about trusting or not trusting it but to understand its effect first. That has sort of eluded us.

If you look at the formulation and try to understand the intuition. It looks weird. First, it tries to "recenter" the scores around the 50 mark by "differencing the score and the mean and adding to 50.
Secondly, it also tries to rescale the difference by a factor of 10/(standard deviation). I can only guess that 10 appears to be some form of "historical standard deviation".
It may appear that the guys formulating it assume that the standard deviation will be wide for an easy paper and narrow for a difficult paper. I think that is a disputable assumption.
However my guess is that the guys are merely trying to fit the scores into a channel by rescaling it using a standard deviation. And that channel happens to be 0-100.
The more I look at it, the more likely that my guess is correct.
It is possibly something that only Singaporeans can create. Uniquely Singapore!
And we boast that we are more advanced than everyone else who use the good old percentile to grade!
PS I dont think it is our intent to take them(MOE) to court. We are just discussing this out of interest and for the fun of it.

[VALyap]

AWSP:

The T-score formulation formulation is interesting, its complication is probably unwarranted for. The point is not about trusting or not trusting it but to understand the effect first. That has sort of eluded us.

If you look at the formulation and try to understand the intuition. It looks weird. First, it tries to \"recenter\" the scores around the 50 mark by \"differencing the score and the mean and adding to 50.
Secondly, it also tries to rescale the difference by a factor of 10/(standard deviation). I can only guess that 10 appears to be some form of \"historical standard deviation\".
It may appear that the guys formulating it assume that the standard deviation will be wide for an easy paper and narrow for a difficult paper. I think that is a disputable assumption.
However my guess is that the guys are merely trying to fit the scores into a channel by rescaling it using a standard deviation. And that channel happens to be 0-100.
The more I look at it, the more likely that my guess is correct.
It is possibly something that only Singaporeans can create. Uniquely Singapore!
PS I dont intend to take them to court. I am just discussing this out of interest.

my guess is, in MOE Not more than 5 persons involved in T-score , processes, formulation and final approval including the minister… just a wild guess! given the fact it's like state secret….just the chief statistician and Directors of examination branch & minister etc..

[AWSP]

VALyap:

AWSP:

The T-score formulation formulation is interesting, its complication is probably unwarranted for. The point is not about trusting or not trusting it but to understand the effect first. That has sort of eluded us.

If you look at the formulation and try to understand the intuition. It looks weird. First, it tries to \"recenter\" the scores around the 50 mark by \"differencing the score and the mean and adding to 50.
Secondly, it also tries to rescale the difference by a factor of 10/(standard deviation). I can only guess that 10 appears to be some form of \"historical standard deviation\".
It may appear that the guys formulating it assume that the standard deviation will be wide for an easy paper and narrow for a difficult paper. I think that is a disputable assumption.
However my guess is that the guys are merely trying to fit the scores into a channel by rescaling it using a standard deviation. And that channel happens to be 0-100.
The more I look at it, the more likely that my guess is correct.
It is possibly something that only Singaporeans can create. Uniquely Singapore!
PS I dont intend to take them to court. I am just discussing this out of interest.

my guess is, in MOE Not more than 5 persons involved in T-score , processes, formulation and final approval including the minister… just a wild guess! given the fact it's like state secret….just the chief statistician and Directors of examination branch & minister etc..

It is extremely weird that the only consideration in the T-score is data fitting into 0-100 range. Reflects the state of affairs in our civil service, perhaps. Ngiam Dong Tow is right in his recent comments on the civil service perhaps.