Is GEP really necessary?
-
Chenonceau:
Not true what....he is attending The Chenonceau Lab!
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.
My girl came back one day in p2 asking to be put in TLL. That's peer pressure....even at p2...coz when the teacher asked, think more than half her class put up their hands.
My point is, I donch believe these branded schools teach that much better. I would give more credit to the resources that these parents put in. They have their own personal trainers!
Better school material....yes....they need to perform and justify their ranking more than those other schools.
Give them the material....personal trainers will help....u get success stories on both sides...the schools and the enrichment centres simply love each other..... -
Haha… I never said branded schools teach better. The point is that smaller classes and better materials will help teachers in mainstream teach better. And thanks for the back-handed compliment on Chenonceau Lab…
But really, my Little Boy has been great. I am illiterate in Chinese… innumerate in Math… and know very little about his Science. I provided the materials and he homsechooled himself.
And yeahhh… the schools and enrichment centers love each other!! Ngiahahahahaha! -
Chenonceau:
Too modest lah, BTW, do you run Positive Parenting Talks ? Saw somewhere in other threads.Haha... I never said branded schools teach better. The point is that smaller classes and better materials will help teachers in mainstream teach better. And thanks for the back-handed compliment on Chenonceau Lab...
But really, my Little Boy has been great. I am illiterate in Chinese... innumerate in Math... and know very little about his Science. I provided the materials and he homsechooled himself.
And yeahhh... the schools and enrichment centers love each other!! Ngiahahahahaha! -
Dnls_mum:
O... I didn't know the affiliation gives so little advantage
True true, got affiliation. But his affiliation not like others. Public cut off 241. Affiliation cut off 238 in his year. But still better then nothing :please: So we Heng lor.
What has got GEP or no GEP to do with right or wrong peers? I don't want my kid to mix with wrong crowd, but don't need him to mix with GEP or HA kids only. And he doesn't lor.
Are you saying if change to your system, then all will score 260? Then base on bell curve, need 300 to top lor.
I am sure in your adopted country also got those that last in class. Cannot be all first right? That is why in countries like USA, not all grads are the same. Grad also cannot be assured of good jobs. Then become degree inflation only 
If want everything equal, then need communism
:rotflmao: But we have seem that communism has also failed. 
Nothing is fair in this world. It never is and it never will be. I try to make the best of what I have and hope for the same for my kids. My worry is with FTs squeezing out our native Singaporeans. No other country in the world is as liberal as ours with immigration. If this trend does not reverse, change what education system, do what accellerated path also no use. We have bigger problems in this country. our affiliation gives more than 20 points, so I thought they are all about the same. But advantage is advantage lah, for those who can't even get into a feeder school, their struggle is so different. A boy who scores 23x will have to go to like top end of neighbourhood school, cannot even smell SJI.
O, sorry about that part about GEP and wrong peers. I think I didn't make it clear. There are GEPpers who are very far from the COP but they get in through GEP DSA. I know of this boy who went to RI at 24x. Because of his GEP status, he gets this advantage of close to 20 points. A child who has no GEP and no affiliation will not have this advantage, and the chance of him going to a school with the wrong cohort is higher. Again, I am assuming schools with higher COP has a better cohort than a school with lower COP.
Don't know what that 260 thing came about leh... when did I say I have a system that will help EVERYBODY to score 260? >260 only applies to 2.5% to 3% of the population ma...
The degree inflation thingy is happening everywhere in the world. But nothing like the grade inflation that is happening in Singapore!
I've always told folks that they either do really well in their degree, go for the highest, or forget about it, just excel in work or business or something. Having a degree is not necessarily the best investment whether of $$$ or of time. But that's just my opinion.
-
Dnls_mum:
I agree to a large extent, but also disagree lah.
I'll not pick the PhD. Those good at studies not necessary good at work. Conversely, too highly educated cannot bring themselves down to communicate with normal people. Just like our ministers lor :rotflmao:
I am in front line sales and I speak from personal experience. Those who are too smart think they know everything and do not listen to what their clients really want. They think they know what their client wants.
In my experience PHD, especially mathematician only good in dealing room. And then even some cannot succeed because no EQ. Too smart, no one else understand them or can communicate with them. These people too academic and not in touch with real world.
In my world, degree only get you started. After that it is on the job performance that count. Whether you can make money for the bank.
Firstly, I don't know why, the PhDs in Singapore GENERALLY (not all har) have bad EQ. But there are some who are really good! Really! I think you have not met them yet. In fact, they are better than many, many bankers (those screaming vulgar language watching computers all day ones... you know which department I mean) that I know.
You see, for a professor to be truly successful, he/she must work with other professors, so there is no way a person can be successful unless they have people skills. So, I'd say you met the 'ahem' ones. :rotflmao:
I agree with that said about 'the smart ones'. But I think it also depends on the upbringing and how much they have worked with people with different kinds of people. That's why I think the way you have let your GEP kid mix is really good. Not all parents are so enlightened. Unfortunately, it is very hard to teach EQ to very bright people, especially those who are strong on the right side of the brain. God is fair, not all of us are gifted in both ways. However, I tend to agree with you that, not only in banking, in most industries, it is the EQ that carry us much further. Now... my question is then, why are the GEPpers then the ones who are groomed from P4-P6, when we already know that we don't need a big IQ to lead organizations. Attention should be given to a larger group, because in fact, I believe the top 25% has much chance to succeed in the commercial world.
Too smart, not true cannot communicate with the world, if they are taught to do so. There is a way to break the information down. The difference between a lot of professors in Singapore and the Western is their ability to bring themselves down to other people's levels. In GEP, they tell you that you are smart, but they have never taught how to express and communicate with people of different levels of intelligence. A skill I feel is even more important than training them to be human calculators.
I agree completely that in the banking and many industries, a degree only gets you started. However, I remember getting a banking job simply because I had a postgrad, and it was a front line job. That is because, there were other candidates, and we all had the same work experience, and we were all more or less at par in industry knowledge and EQ department. Finally, the boss gave me the job and specifically told me because I had a higher degree. For me, it became the tie breaker, and that was my door opener.
-
Nebbermind:
the schools and the enrichment centres simply love each other.....
:rotflmao: :evil:
-
Dnls_mum:
Wah... running the danger of nepotism :scratchhead: But I will choose the poorer one, or the one who needs the job more, only if he/she is at least 3rd generation Singaporean.
I will choose the Singaporean! :evil: -
Actually the 24ish aren't that bad lah...
Zhuge:
Sorry this was my last update in Dec 21 last year:
NUSH - 262
NYGH - 262
RGS - 261
RI - 261
HCI - 258
NJC - 258
Cedar - 258/250
DHS - 256
ACSI - 255/247
VS - 255/247
RVH - 254
MGS - 250
CHS - 248
SCGS - 248
SNG - 246
BPGH - 244
Anglican High - 243
Crescent - 243
Nan Hua - 243
SJI - 242
St Margaret's - 240
Chung Cheng High Main - 237
Nan Chiau High - 236
Zhonghua - 236
Swiss Cottage - 235
TKGS - 235
Ngee Ann - 233
Tanjong Katong - 233
Chung Cheng High Yishun - 232
Maris Stella - 232
Yishun Town - 232
Kranji - 230
Temasek - 230 -
comfy:
Of course not lah. I off-topic even more...
Thanks for replying. I understand from your point of views. I will try my best to put my point across. (I am better in talking than writing when comes to express my thought.) The reason why I post this question is that somewhere in this thread, someone mentioned that too much resources have already been poured into GEP programme and sort of expect some kind of output/result from them in the long term. In my dd's class, there are quite a few of PR kids and I have nothing against them. Well, it just that during one of the coversation when one of the mummy shared that her dd would go oversea where she can get free education if she does not want to continue sec school in Singapore. (US citizen) I sort of huh.... what if after all the gep education, these kids just left Singapore and the question I asked myself is : Is it justify to 'invest' in them in GEP from Singaporean point of view? Or is it better to have more Singaporean benefiting from this programme? If this is off topic here, please ignore.
Actually, you have brought up an excellent point... we cannot be biased against a PR, but it is a reality that they have no loyalty. Your example reminds me of many others: the Singapore government gives out (taxpayer's money) of $25K per tertiary scholar, but they are 2nd grade ones, compared to those who prefer to go to the Western countries. And these folks then serve their bonds of 3-10(medicine) years and then they wave goodbye... Hello? Many of our Singaporeans have to pay school fees +tax.
First generation PRs come to Singapore and they don't have to do NS, after taking all the education, make the money, they then say goodbye and move elsewhere when their kids have to do NS. Hello, my son has to protect them? My son can't even get a deferment to further his studies.
So, yes. I can feel what you are saying, but there's nothing we can do to stop a PR. And, many PRs are not loyal, unlike PRs from other countries. Because, once you are no longer a 'newbie' in Singapore, you are no longer valued. This is the first time I come across a country that gives more privileges to outsiders than their own... but aiyah, who am I to complain? I've already left... I am already counting my blessings. -
2ppaamm:
I agree to a large extent, but also disagree lah.Dnls_mum:
I'll not pick the PhD. Those good at studies not necessary good at work. Conversely, too highly educated cannot bring themselves down to communicate with normal people. Just like our ministers lor :rotflmao:
I am in front line sales and I speak from personal experience. Those who are too smart think they know everything and do not listen to what their clients really want. They think they know what their client wants.
In my experience PHD, especially mathematician only good in dealing room. And then even some cannot succeed because no EQ. Too smart, no one else understand them or can communicate with them. These people too academic and not in touch with real world.
In my world, degree only get you started. After that it is on the job performance that count. Whether you can make money for the bank.
Firstly, I don't know why, the PhDs in Singapore GENERALLY (not all har) have bad EQ. But there are some who are really good! Really! I think you have not met them yet. In fact, they are better than many, many bankers (those screaming vulgar language watching computers all day ones... you know which department I mean) that I know. You see, for a professor to be truly successful, he/she must work with other professors, so there is no way a person can be successful unless they have people skills. So, I'd say you met the 'ahem' ones. :rotflmao:
I agree with that said about 'the smart ones'. But I think it also depends on the upbringing and how much they have worked with people with different kinds of people. That's why I think the way you have let your GEP kid mix is really good. Not all parents are so enlightened. Unfortunately, it is very hard to teach EQ to very bright people, especially those who are strong on the right side of the brain. God is fair, not all of us are gifted in both ways. However, I tend to agree with you that, not only in banking, in most industries, it is the EQ that carry us much further. Now... my question is then, why are the GEPpers then the ones who are groomed from P4-P6, when we already know that we don't need a big IQ to lead organizations. Attention should be given to a larger group, because in fact, I believe the top 25% has much chance to succeed in the commercial world.
Too smart, not true cannot communicate with the world, if they are taught to do so. There is a way to break the information down. The difference between a lot of professors in Singapore and the Western is their ability to bring themselves down to other people's levels. In GEP, they tell you that you are smart, but they Havel never taught how to express and communicate with people of different levels of intelligence. A skill I feel is even more important than training them to be human calculators.
I agree completely that in the banking and many industries, a degree only gets you started. However, I remember getting a banking job simply because I had a postgrad, and it was a front line job. That is because, there were other candidates, and we all had the same work experience, and we were all more or less at par in industry knowledge and EQ department. Finally, the boss gave me the job and specifically told me because I had a higher degree. For me, it became the tie breaker, and that was my door opener.
I suppose everyone's views and opinions are based on our personal experience. My views are what I will do, but not all recruiting managers are like me. My first experience with a post grad is at my first financial industry job. A credit and marketing job, requiring me to bring in new business. One of my colleague is an MBA. The boss is very clear that she was recruited becos of her MBA. Several of us fresh grads came in a while after her. I tell you, she had the worst sales performance among all of us for the 2 years I was there. Of cos then in subsequent years I had other experiences too.
Let's just agree to disagree, ok?
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
Recent Topics
Statistics
