IP, IB vs A Levels
-
Nowaday, even a degree don’t guarantee you anything. Don’t have to mention about A level cert. Is even more true with O level cert.
-
jtoh:
Then just repeat your A levels.
I dont think so easy to repeat esp if you are a boy and your results are neither here or there.....NS is pending..... -
slmkhoo:
But surely RI hasn't shrunk in % terms, meaning that in the past, did it take more than the top 2% of students? I think it's aspirations that have grown, not that the chances of getting into the handful of top schools has decreased.[/quote]Cohort size used to be around 360 some 20-30 years ago. % wise I understand to be around 1%.Nebbermind:
[quote=\"ruohoo97\"]though this is an old post, but it makes me understand where does psle stress come from
Of course stressed lah. Assuming the cohort size is 45,000, of which 50% are boys, and with RI intake at 450, u need to be the TOP 2% in SG to get in, or wait for kids in this 2% to give up their seats coz they rather be somewhere else.
Top 2% leh!! How not to be stressed?
But then RJC were not all filled with RI/RGS students; at least 30% of the cohort did not go to RJC even with a 2 points affiliation. Some crossed over to HCJC/NJC and a lot did not make it. And HCJC were an even more mixed lot.
Now 40-50% of the places in RI and RGS were \"booked\" from a test conducted in P3 which screens for the top 1% at the age of 9 years old. The entire cohort in RI/RGS/HCI/NYGH remains intact from Year1 to Year6 with a minuscule number of places available for O level entrants. -
AWSP:
Your numbers above may not be correct.
Cohort size used to be around 360 some 20-30 years ago. % wise I understand to be around 1%.
But then RJC are not all filled with RI/RGS students; at least 30% of the cohort did not go to RJC even with a 2 points affiliation. Some cross over to HCJC/NJC and a lot did not make it. And HCJC were an even more mixed lot.
Now 40-50% of the places in RI and RGS were \"booked\" from a test conducted in P3 which screens for the top 1% at the age of 9 years old. The entire cohort in RI/RGS/HCI/NYGH remains intact from Year1 to Year6 with a minuscule number of places available.
Now 40-50% of the places in RI and RGS were \"booked\"
This is assuming all the GEP students end up in these 2 schools. Since there are GEP students in other IP and non-IP schools, the % \"booked\" can't be so high.
The entire cohort in RI/RGS/HCI/NYGH remains intact from Year1 to Year6 with a minuscule number of places available
The intake at Year 5 for RI and HCI is not really \"minuscule\", because they take in more than 20% O Level students at Year 5.
Bottom line, as long as the total intake of these \"top schools\" are not reduced and assuming their popularity stays about the same, the level of competition to get a place in these schools should be about the same, with or without GEP, IP. -
AWSP:
What would you define as miniscule?
Cohort size used to be around 360 some 20-30 years ago. % wise I understand to be around 1%.
But then RJC were not all filled with RI/RGS students; at least 30% of the cohort did not go to RJC even with a 2 points affiliation. Some crossed over to HCJC/NJC and a lot did not make it. And HCJC were an even more mixed lot.
Now 40-50% of the places in RI and RGS were \"booked\" from a test conducted in P3 which screens for the top 1% at the age of 9 years old. The entire cohort in RI/RGS/HCI/NYGH remains intact from Year1 to Year6 with a minuscule number of places available for O level entrants. -
AWSP:
:stompfeet: Kids have less chance to interact with others who are from different social-economic and academic background. By the nature of meritocracy, those who are in top schools have higher chance to rise up to be society leaders,....but by then perhaps they might have exclusived themselves too much to know the social reality.
Cohort size used to be around 360 some 20-30 years ago. % wise I understand to be around 1%.
But then RJC were not all filled with RI/RGS students; at least 30% of the cohort did not go to RJC even with a 2 points affiliation. Some crossed over to HCJC/NJC and a lot did not make it. And HCJC were an even more mixed lot.
Now 40-50% of the places in RI and RGS were \"booked\" from a test conducted in P3 which screens for the top 1% at the age of 9 years old. The entire cohort in RI/RGS/HCI/NYGH remains intact from Year1 to Year6 with a minuscule number of places available for O level entrants. -
Skyed:
But IP is risky in that if you screw up your As you don't have an O level cert to fall back on.
think parents need to know their child best.
every child is different.
think IP curriculum is independent, like study university style.
A lot of exposure and much more research based independent projects to work upon. Like give you a topic - child go and research on their own, given supervision.
on the other hand -
some parents prefer the Traditional O level route. It is safer !
although some kids' PSLE score qualify them to enter IP track, but some parents feel safer to stick to the O level road - because got teachers to teach and guide them, follow the more structured systematic curriculum, step by step. They worry that if everything hinges on that A level cert and should something happen last minute (screw up A level) and child can't enter local uni (for whatever reasons), then child got to go overseas uni. But due to financial reasons, not every parent can afford or fork out a huge sum of $ to send their child go overseas uni. Not every parent willing to sell away the HDB house to downgrade to a smaller one, in order to raise funds for overseas education. Nowadays, the cost of minimal 3 or 4 yrs education overseas uni easily cost minimal half a million. Hence, there're still parents who prefer to stick to the Traditional O level route, because got teachers to guide and teach children step by step. Some parents feel that Sec 1 to Sec 4 - the children are still young. They still need guidance from Sec school teachers to teach & to guide them. They may not be ready for university independent style like IP program yet. Not all kids can study on their own independently. Different kids - different stroke ! Parents really need to know & understand their child best.
example:
for this pioneering batch of SCGS / CHS / SNGS (kids born 2000, yr of dragon) -
everything is so new!
Come what may - like it or not, at end of JC2 (ie. yr 2018), they'll be competing with all A level students from those well established IP JCs like RI, HCI, Victoria JC, etc - in ALL faculties ! Thus, simply can't afford the new JC to have any hiccup or glitch whatsoever in their pioneering first batch maiden A level curriculum.
in contrast, the O level curriculum for SCGS / SNGS / MGS is very, very strong, been proven many years ! There're bound to be parents who prefer & will stick to the traditional O level route. -
phtthp:
so is it understanding child character or parents preference? these 2 are not always the same. even if you take O level, you may still not do well in A, thus even with a O level cert you still cant go anywhere....Skyed:
But IP is risky in that if you screw up your As you don't have an O level cert to fall back on.
think parents need to know their child best.
every child is different.
think IP curriculum is independent, like study university style.
A lot of exposure and much more research based independent projects to work upon. Like give you a topic - child go and research on their own, given supervision.
on the other hand -
some parents prefer the Traditional O level route. It is safer !
although some kids' PSLE score qualify them to enter IP track, but some parents feel safer to stick to the O level road - because got teachers to teach and guide them, follow the more structured systematic curriculum, step by step. They worry that if everything hinges on that A level cert and should something happen last minute (screw up A level) and child can't enter local uni (for whatever reasons), then child got to go overseas uni. But due to financial reasons, not every parent can afford or fork out a huge sum of $ to send their child go overseas uni. Not every parent willing to sell away the HDB house to downgrade to a smaller one, in order to raise funds for overseas education. Nowadays, the cost of minimal 3 or 4 yrs education overseas uni easily cost minimal half a million. Hence, there're still parents who prefer to stick to the Traditional O level route, because got teachers to guide and teach children step by step. Some parents feel that Sec 1 to Sec 4 - the children are still young. They still need guidance from Sec school teachers to teach & to guide them. They may not be ready for university independent style like IP program yet. Not all kids can study on their own independently. Different kids - different stroke ! Parents really need to know & understand their child best.
example:
for this pioneering batch of SCGS / CHS / SNGS (kids born 2000, yr of dragon) -
everything is so new!
Come what may - like it or not, at end of JC2 (ie. yr 2018), they'll be competing with all A level students from those well established IP JCs like RI, HCI, Victoria JC, etc - in ALL faculties ! Thus, simply can't afford the new JC to have any hiccup or glitch whatsoever in their pioneering first batch maiden A level curriculum.
in contrast, the O level curriculum for SCGS / SNGS / MGS is very, very strong, been proven many years ! There're bound to be parents who prefer & will stick to the traditional O level route.
On another note, my feel is that the new jc will do just fine. All three schools are government schools and moe will pull resources in from the other established JCs to make sure it work...... -
jtoh:
Out of around the 1200 places available in RJC, about 900 are reserved for the RGS/RI students from what I've heard.
What would you define as miniscule?AWSP:
Cohort size used to be around 360 some 20-30 years ago. % wise I understand to be around 1%.
But then RJC were not all filled with RI/RGS students; at least 30% of the cohort did not go to RJC even with a 2 points affiliation. Some crossed over to HCJC/NJC and a lot did not make it. And HCJC were an even more mixed lot.
Now 40-50% of the places in RI and RGS were \"booked\" from a test conducted in P3 which screens for the top 1% at the age of 9 years old. The entire cohort in RI/RGS/HCI/NYGH remains intact from Year1 to Year6 with a minuscule number of places available for O level entrants. -
Skyed:
Out of around the 1200 places available in RJC, about 900 are reserved for the RGS/RI students from what I've heard.[/quote]The information is in
What would you define as miniscule?jtoh:
[quote=\"AWSP\"]
Cohort size used to be around 360 some 20-30 years ago. % wise I understand to be around 1%.
But then RJC were not all filled with RI/RGS students; at least 30% of the cohort did not go to RJC even with a 2 points affiliation. Some crossed over to HCJC/NJC and a lot did not make it. And HCJC were an even more mixed lot.
Now 40-50% of the places in RI and RGS were \"booked\" from a test conducted in P3 which screens for the top 1% at the age of 9 years old. The entire cohort in RI/RGS/HCI/NYGH remains intact from Year1 to Year6 with a minuscule number of places available for O level entrants.
http://www.moe.gov.sg/media/forum/2011/12/more-opportunities-in-diverse-education-landscape.php
The following is the article:
The commentary, ‘The runaway IP train’ (14 Dec), noted that only some 500 places were set aside for O-level students entering Hwa Chong Institution (HCI) and RI at JC1. We would like to point out that prior to IP, only 400 of HCI and RI’s students (at JC1) hailed from schools not offering the IP today.
There are 900 places reserved for RI/RGS cohort and probably 250 additional for \"O\" levels. I suppose the same applies to HCI.
I was an HCJC alumni. I could attest to the fact that during my time 20+ year ago, it was a diverse lot. I have schoolmates from catholic high, acs, saint andrews, mgs, SJI, TKGS, VS and what have you. it was possibly 100 from Chinese High and 1000 from everywhere.
Somehow, the statement from MOE appears to contradict with my own experience. Possibly the education system has stratified a lot. But reading between the statement (in RED) it could be a \"play of words\" from MOE. We can possibly assume that before hwa chong became IP, may be another 400 could have come from the other IP schools like dunman high, river valley high, victoria, cedar, acs (maybe also SJI, catholic high, st nicholas which have just turned ip).
The affiliation effect between chinese high, nygh and HCJC could have bumpeed up the number of chinese high and nygh students to 50%. That is after my time.
So is affiliation an unfair practice? I dont know.
Is 500 good enough for the likes of TKGS, Anderson and others? I dont know.
I dont think those in the other IP schools mind not going to the premier RI and HCI. Well, we used to have the option of crossing over from raffles to hwa chong last time as hwa chong is more premier than rjc.
Some sour grapes may also say that there is around 30% in HCI an RI who shouldnt be there in year 5 and 6 - it is not fair. I dont know if this is right or wrong and I dont want to participate in any arguments over all these.
I am a peaceful person
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 💗
Register Login
Online Users
Statistics
Popular Topics