Is GEP really necessary?
-
I am curious. When a child enters Uni at 16 and graduate at 19 or 20, then what happens after that? Does the child join the work force? Or pursue a academic/research route? Do employers employ 19 or 20 year olds for decent jobs? I ask myself if I’ll take in 19 or 20 yo to work for me in the bank. Even if these are brilliant, I’m not sure …hmmmmm
-
- deleted -
- double posting - -
I have noticed that the pool of parents who vocally defend the educational system with "I think the system largely works, but of course, can be improved because nothing is perfect" is comprised of a statistical OVER-representation of
(1) parents with GEP kids… with a few vocal parents of HAT kids who are taught GEP (some, if not all) stuff anyway.
(2) parents of kids in lower primary doing well in schools (in years where schools haven’t yet upped the stakes)
It is hard to tell from the postings whether the "system" these parents defend is the GEP-HAT system and its attendant privileges OR whether these parents generalize their own positive experience with education to all of mainstream (and to upper primary). If the system that you defend is the GEP-HAT system, then I have nothing to say. Parents are happy with that system. Kids seem to be taught well regardless of family background. So, it MUST work rather well. For that we have to give MOE credit.
They’re doing a good job with 1.5% of the student population. That is good. Let’s keep that. At least there is something good.
If, however, GEP-HAT parents speak of "system" as encompassing the entire system including mainstreamers and normal stream, THEN let me respectfully ask that the 2 systems be separated and analyzed differently.
Whilst we speak up in defense of this group or that group of children, let us not forget that as adults of this nation, we are custodians of every other child in every other group. Our precious 1% or even 10% cannot survive if confronted with the ill will of 90% of the population… ESPECIALLY when you go out into real life. The feelings, thoughts and well-being of the other 90% matters to the survival and thrival of 10% of top people.
Necessarily, people have had different life experiences. If your child goes to a school where Science is taught through hands-on experimentation every week, then the reality of the child who is being taught Science from the Science textbook ONLY, is far removed from your experience. You will find it hard to relate to that reality because you have not experienced it.
Our first car was a Suzuki Swift. We drove the car for so long that my 2 kids experienced the back seat as a daily sauna treatment. My husband had never sat anywhere but the driver’s seat. As a wife, I am inclined to believe that there is no kinder nor more compassionate man than the one I married. Yet, for perfectly GOOD reason (i.e., to be frugal), my husband REFUSED to get a bigger car for a now larger family (including in-laws). One day, I engineered a situation where HE had to sit in the back seat. He got out of the car 45 minutes later, his shirt sopping wet.
The next weekend, we bought a new car. We could afford it… and a much larger one at that BUT that is not the way of this family. We value "frugality" and "being contented with what is enough". However, until my husband realized that what he thought was ENOUGH was actually far below ENOUGH because every single trip in that small car with the half-strength air-conditioner was like being locked up in a tupperware for his kids, his value of FRUGALITY took precedence.
The one in the driver seat (i.e., my husband), who had never experienced the cooped-up-the-tupperware feeling can say "Money doesn’t grow on trees (i.e., insufficient resources). We cannot afford a newer and better car"… and he would get up on his moral high horse to preach contentment and fiscal prudence. We upheld these values to the extent where a hotel attendant absolutely refused to allow our tiny car to get into the VIP lot allotted to us because he couldn’t believe any VIP would be driving such a small and old car.
My husband could go on for 10 minutes on how important it was to teach the children contentment and frugality. No one could say he was wrong. So… I tricked him into the back seat of our 8 year old Suzuki Swift with Grandpa and 2 children… took the long circuitous route from Woodlands to Katong… purposely got lost twice. Arrived at destination after about 45 minutes. Then The Husband shut his mouth about "not enough resources (i.e., money) and learning to be content.
You see, he too loved our children and the moment he experienced their reality, he could not bear to NOT do anything. This is where I am on the topic of education. I cannot bear not to say anything.
DS PSLE Prelim results were eventually
- 1st in class for English (a boy who score 9/20 in compo in P3)
- 2nd in class for Science
- Amongst top 7 for Math (a boy who was amongst the last in class in Math in P3)
- Dunno yet about Chinese but should be slightly above average in the 2nd best class
He got these results because I begged, borrowed and created learning materials for him to learn from. I KNOW there are schools that teach well. But I cannot accept that just because SOME schools teach well, that parents say the system works barring some refinements. HOW MANY schools teach well? Even if ONE school does not teach well, do we not have the right to ask for better teaching… or for an inquiry?
Of course, there are those who say "it doesn’t matter". Those with poor grades can also make it in life. Really? Based on the outliers highlighted in MSM you conclude so? Take a random sample of ITE grads and a random sample of Uni grads. Calculate the mean income. You think you will find parity? Education does not matter?
I am willing to accept my child no matter the intellect. If after all that I have done, my Little Boy stayed resolutely at the bottom of the class, I know he is intellectually challenged. But that was not the case. My Little Boy climbed from zero to hero (without tuition) after I decided to top him up on learning materials and taught him how to do self-directed independent learning.
This is not a problem that can wait for MOE to SLOWLY resolve. Every day, hundreds(?)… thousands (?) of mainstream children get the intellectual sardines-in-tupperware feeling in classes of 40-45… and constrained access to the wealth of learning material they need to maximize their potential in view of the new syllabus.
Yeah… yeah… change takes time. It’s easy to say that when you are not the sardine in the tupperware. When I write this, I am not trying to pass judgment on the fellow forummers whom I have grown to esteem and respect. I am just hoping that more people will understand where Pam is coming from. -
Dnls_mum:
I am curious. When a child enters Uni at 16 and graduate at 19 or 20, then what happens after that? Does the child join the work force? Or pursue a academic/research route? Do employers employ 19 or 20 year olds for decent jobs? I ask myself if I'll take in 19 or 20 yo to work for me in the bank. Even if these are brilliant, I'm not sure ..........hmmmmm
Hi,
4 of my children went through this route, half by choice, half by no choice. So here's what I can share:
1. After the boys are done with undergrad, about 17 or 18, they go to NS lor... after that, it is normally postgrad, and normally with a scholarship. RHD normally comes with scholarship. This takes them to 24 years old, just like any other fresh grad, just a lot more qualified. Or, some choose to become researchers. At 19, they are well qualified and normally matured enough to be TAs and RAs, which means they learn how to teach and work with professors. Often, academics take this step at 22, they are about 4 years earlier. By now, there's no different in size or shape... hahaha, so no one can really tell their age, but the professors will always give them this opportunity. The girls do everything 2 years earlier, or they do not have the constraint of doing their undergrad before 15 to meet the NS guidelines.
2. Post grad professional degree with almost a guaranteed entry.
3. Become an academic.
4. Probably have a family younger... hahaha.
Most often, research has shown that early entrants will pursue post grad studies, are more confident, and achieve more success than their peers who are not radically accelerated. You can google out some of the research.
-
I have a questoin : Is Gep still necessary if most of the geppers are PR?
-
2ppaamm:
Dnls_mum:
I am curious. When a child enters Uni at 16 and graduate at 19 or 20, then what happens after that? Does the child join the work force? Or pursue a academic/research route? Do employers employ 19 or 20 year olds for decent jobs? I ask myself if I'll take in 19 or 20 yo to work for me in the bank. Even if these are brilliant, I'm not sure ..........hmmmmm
Hi,
4 of my children went through this route, half by choice, half by no choice. So here's what I can share:
1. After the boys are done with undergrad, about 17 or 18, they go to NS lor... after that, it is normally postgrad, and normally with a scholarship. RHD normally comes with scholarship. This takes them to 24 years old, just like any other fresh grad, just a lot more qualified. Or, some choose to become researchers. At 19, they are well qualified and normally matured enough to be TAs and RAs, which means they learn how to teach and work with professors. Often, academics take this step at 22, they are about 4 years earlier. By now, there's no different in size or shape... hahaha, so no one can really tell their age, but the professors will always give them this opportunity. The girls do everything 2 years earlier, or they do not have the constraint of doing their undergrad before 15 to meet the NS guidelines.
2. Post grad professional degree with almost a guaranteed entry.
3. Become an academic.
4. Probably have a family younger... hahaha.
Most often, research has shown that early entrants will pursue post grad studies, are more confident, and achieve more success than their peers who are not radically accelerated. You can google out some of the research.
I suppose as a banker, I am looking at the business world, my world. And it does seem to me that those under such accelerated path may not suitable in the business world. Their career path seems more geared towards academic and research. So I suppose this is not for everyone. I know for sure I have never wanted to be an academic or researcher myself. Somehow I have never dreamed of or encouraged my children to be academics or researchers too :? Maybe because i am an evil banker :rotflmao:
I presume such accelerated path normally takes a home schooling path and is specifically targeted at moving faster along the academic path without need of being held back by classmates and school curriculum. I just cannot imagine eg a practicing lawyer, banker succeeding under this path as life experiences, stress etc needs to be part their education as these will have a bearing in determining how successful they will be in their chosen career. A formal school environment is necessary for some jobs. .
So the question parents should ask themselves is do they want to decide for their child at their young age, the career path that is open to them, or do they want to let their children discover what is available in this world and let them choose themselves what they want to do. -
huh? What did I do to get involved? Aiyoh, we just joined the system barely a month. Let me breathe a little lah... Really can't comment too as my children are still in lower primary.
Chenonceau:
Exactly our own experience with mainstream education.chamonix:
That is why my son has been begging me and trying his luck every week to take him out of school. He said he can learn much more and faster at home, and still has lots of time to laze around.
I have noticed that the pool of parents who vocally defend the educational system with \"I think the system largely works, but of course, can be improved because nothing is perfect\" is comprised of a statistical OVER-representation of
(1) parents with GEP kids... with a few vocal parents of HAT kids who are taught GEP (some, if not all) stuff anyway.
(2) parents of kids in lower primary doing well in schools (in years where schools haven't yet upped the stakes)
It is hard to tell from the postings whether the \"system\" these parents defend is the GEP-HAT system and its attendant privileges OR whether these parents generalize their own positive experience with education to all of mainstream (and to upper primary). If the system that you defend is the GEP-HAT system, then I have nothing to say. Parents are happy with that system. Kids seem to be taught well regardless of family background. So, it MUST work rather well. For that we have to give MOE credit.
They're doing a good job with 1.5% of the student population. That is good. Let's keep that. At least there is something good.
If, however, GEP-HAT parents speak of \"system\" as encompassing the entire system including mainstreamers and normal stream, THEN let me respectfully ask that the 2 systems be separated and analyzed differently.
Whilst we speak up in defense of this group or that group of children, let us not forget that as adults of this nation, we are custodians of every other child in every other group. Our precious 1% or even 10% cannot survive if confronted with the ill will of 90% of the population... ESPECIALLY when you go out into real life. The feelings, thoughts and well-being of the other 90% matters to the survival and thrival of 10% of top people.
Necessarily, people have had different life experiences. If your child goes to a school where Science is taught through hands-on experimentation every week, then the reality of the child who is being taught Science from the Science textbook ONLY, is far removed from your experience. You will find it hard to relate to that reality because you have not experienced it.
Our first car was a Suzuki Swift. We drove the car for so long that my 2 kids experienced the back seat as a daily sauna treatment. My husband had never sat anywhere but the driver's seat. As a wife, I am inclined to believe that there is no kinder nor more compassionate man than the one I married. Yet, for perfectly GOOD reason (i.e., to be frugal), my husband REFUSED to get a bigger car for a now larger family (including in-laws). One day, I engineered a situation where HE had to sit in the back seat. He got out of the car 45 minutes later, his shirt sopping wet.
The next weekend, we bought a new car. We could afford it... and a much larger one at that BUT that is not the way of this family. We value \"frugality\" and \"being contented with what is enough\". However, until my husband realized that what he thought was ENOUGH was actually far below ENOUGH because every single trip in that small car with the half-strength air-conditioner was like being locked up in a tupperware for his kids, his value of FRUGALITY took precedence.
The one in the driver seat (i.e., my husband), who had never experienced the cooped-up-the-tupperware feeling can say \"Money doesn't grow on trees (i.e., insufficient resources). We cannot afford a newer and better car\"... and he would get up on his moral high horse to preach contentment and fiscal prudence. We upheld these values to the extent where a hotel attendant absolutely refused to allow our tiny car to get into the VIP lot allotted to us because he couldn't believe any VIP would be driving such a small and old car.
My husband could go on for 10 minutes on how important it was to teach the children contentment and frugality. No one could say he was wrong. So... I tricked him into the back seat of our 8 year old Suzuki Swift with Grandpa and 2 children... took the long circuitous route from Woodlands to Katong.... purposely got lost twice. Arrived at destination after about 45 minutes. Then The Husband shut his mouth about \"not enough resources (i.e., money) and learning to be content.
You see, he too loved our children and the moment he experienced their reality, he could not bear to NOT do anything. This is where I am on the topic of education. I cannot bear not to say anything.
DS PSLE Prelim results were eventually
- 1st in class for English (a boy who score 9/20 in compo in P3)
- 2nd in class for Science
- Amongst top 7 for Math (a boy who was amongst the last in class in Math in P3)
- Dunno yet about Chinese but should be slightly above average in the 2nd best class
He got these results because I begged, borrowed and created learning materials for him to learn from. I KNOW there are schools that teach well. But I cannot accept that just because SOME schools teach well, that parents say the system works barring some refinements. HOW MANY schools teach well? Even if ONE school does not teach well, do we not have the right to ask for better teaching... or for an inquiry?
Of course, there are those who say \"it doesn't matter\". Those with poor grades can also make it in life. Really? Based on the outliers highlighted in MSM you conclude so? Take a random sample of ITE grads and a random sample of Uni grads. Calculate the mean income. You think you will find parity? Education does not matter?
I am willing to accept my child no matter the intellect. If after all that I have done, my Little Boy stayed resolutely at the bottom of the class, I know he is intellectually challenged. But that was not the case. My Little Boy climbed from zero to hero (without tuition) after I decided to top him up on learning materials and taught him how to do self-directed independent learning.
This is not a problem that can wait for MOE to SLOWLY resolve. Every day, hundreds(?)... thousands (?) of mainstream children get the intellectual sardines-in-tupperware feeling in classes of 40-45.... and constrained access to the wealth of learning material they need to maximize their potential in view of the new syllabus.
Yeah... yeah... change takes time. It's easy to say that when you are not the sardine in the tupperware. When I write this, I am not trying to pass judgment on the fellow forummers whom I have grown to esteem and respect. I am just hoping that more people will understand where Pam is coming from. -
cherryc:
:goodpost:In a wide-ranging interview with former GIC chief economist Yeoh Lam Keong, Yahoo! Singapore’s JEANETTE TAN finds out what he thinks are the key challenges Singapore faces in its quest for continued economic development. This is the second of a three-part series entitled “Behind Singapore Inc.” that takes a look at the country’s key policies and governance. In Part II interview :
-
Chamonix… I agreed with the statement I quoted from you. The rest is my thoughts. My son too thinks learning in school is effortful and learning at home is more effective, efficient and he has time to play.
Where am I getting you involved in what?
If you really don’t think you and I should agree on the point I agreed with you on (or if you dislike that I quote you), I can delete my agreement and your quote and keep the rest. I am quite capable of arguing my thoughts without involving others. -
Dnls_mum:
2ppaamm:
[quote=\"Dnls_mum\"]I am curious. When a child enters Uni at 16 and graduate at 19 or 20, then what happens after that? Does the child join the work force? Or pursue a academic/research route? Do employers employ 19 or 20 year olds for decent jobs? I ask myself if I'll take in 19 or 20 yo to work for me in the bank. Even if these are brilliant, I'm not sure ..........hmmmmm
Hi,
4 of my children went through this route, half by choice, half by no choice. So here's what I can share:
1. After the boys are done with undergrad, about 17 or 18, they go to NS lor... after that, it is normally postgrad, and normally with a scholarship. RHD normally comes with scholarship. This takes them to 24 years old, just like any other fresh grad, just a lot more qualified. Or, some choose to become researchers. At 19, they are well qualified and normally matured enough to be TAs and RAs, which means they learn how to teach and work with professors. Often, academics take this step at 22, they are about 4 years earlier. By now, there's no different in size or shape... hahaha, so no one can really tell their age, but the professors will always give them this opportunity. The girls do everything 2 years earlier, or they do not have the constraint of doing their undergrad before 15 to meet the NS guidelines.
2. Post grad professional degree with almost a guaranteed entry.
3. Become an academic.
4. Probably have a family younger... hahaha.
Most often, research has shown that early entrants will pursue post grad studies, are more confident, and achieve more success than their peers who are not radically accelerated. You can google out some of the research.
I suppose as a banker, I am looking at the business world, my world. And it does seem to me that those under such accelerated path may not suitable in the business world. Their career path seems more geared towards academic and research. So I suppose this is not for everyone. I know for sure I have never wanted to be an academic or researcher myself. Somehow I have never dreamed of or encouraged my children to be academics or researchers too :? Maybe because i am an evil banker :rotflmao:
I presume such accelerated path normally takes a home schooling path and is specifically targeted at moving faster along the academic path without need of being held back by classmates and school curriculum. I just cannot imagine eg a practicing lawyer, banker succeeding under this path as life experiences, stress etc needs to be part their education as these will have a bearing in determining how successful they will be in their chosen career. A formal school environment is necessary for some jobs. .
So the question parents should ask themselves is do they want to decide for their child at their young age, the career path that is open to them, or do they want to let their children discover what is available in this world and let them choose themselves what they want to do.[/quote]Depends lah... hahaha, I was a banker for 20 years too! I guess I am evil too! :rotflmao:
Refer to Option (2), go do a professional course and finish at 21 with an MBA (or other professional degree) But to each his own, there is absolutely nothing wrong with a normal path, and no, this is not a homeschooled option only. Kids go to school and there's such a thing called dual enrollment, where kids go to school the same hours as their age peers all through high school.
Many roads to Rome, none the best.
The system we are in allows this, where students are pulled out for acceleration in specific subjects or all subjects.
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