Is GEP really necessary?
-
2ppaamm:
Wanting to spread talent sounds good in theory. But not always so in practice. When the govt decided many years ago that they cannot just admit the top brains to NUS Med school, as other disciplines need the bright one too, they decided to implement an interview system. These interviewers are of course the med sch lecturers and practicing doctors. In reality most who get into med sch since are coincidentally predominantly from families with doctors background. A lot of bright aspiring teens slog at their school work and I know of a current case who scored 7 As for his A levels and still don't get into med school. The boy is devastated. I know of many past cases as well. Theory is always good. The devil is in the implementation and details.http://www.todayonline.com/Singapore/EDC120830-0000067/Spread-young-talent-among-schools
We should spread talents, including the gifted. But you know, what he says is so incredibly hard to achieve given the current education streaming system, where kids are already taught from young to want to be grouped only with their 'kind'.
An objective way of deciding which child goes where is required. It is always dangerous to leave it to subjectivity. Then someone is playing God which is not ideal. On what basis should a child who perform academically good not be allowed his first choice. To this child it will never be fair even if it means for the greater good of spreading talent. -
Dnls_mum:
I have to agree with you that this is only good in theory, especially at the tertiary level, where kids have already decided where they want to go to.
Wanting to spread talent sounds good in theory. But not always so in practice. When the govt decided many years ago that they cannot just admit the top brains to NUS Med school, as other disciplines need the bright one too, they decided to implement an interview system. These interviewers are of course the med sch lecturers and practicing doctors. In reality most who get into med sch since are coincidentally predominantly from families with doctors background. A lot of bright aspiring teens slog at their school work and I know of a current case who scored 7 As for his A levels and still don't get into med school. The boy is devastated. I know of many past cases as well. Theory is always good. The devil is in the implementation and details.
An objective way of deciding which child goes where is required. It is always dangerous to leave it to subjectivity. Then someone is playing God which is not ideal. On what basis should a child who perform academically good not be allowed his first choice. To this child it will never be fair even if it means for the greater good of spreading talent.
Speaking of med school. What is the criteria for an interview, is that ever made known to the applicants? I have seen and counseled a few broken hearted cases as well. I guess like-poles attract. Lecturers look for people they want to teach, not necessarily those who have better results. Not sure if children of doctors have already been exposed to the trade and that's why they can perform better at the interviews? -
Dnls_mum:
interview for med school entry is not unique to SG. it is also widely practiced in UK, and the A level schools even have prep course to tackle med school interview and invite med school prof to give talks to potential applicants...and yes the interview will decide the candidate. Reason for SG students going to UK to do A level then med school is because of the interview prep in addition to grades, more vacancies etc. An A level student from SG applying to UK med school stand a lower chance because of the interview setback
Wanting to spread talent sounds good in theory. But not always so in practice. When the govt decided many years ago that they cannot just admit the top brains to NUS Med school, as other disciplines need the bright one too, they decided to implement an interview system. These interviewers are of course the med sch lecturers and practicing doctors. In reality most who get into med sch since are coincidentally predominantly from families with doctors background. A lot of bright aspiring teens slog at their school work and I know of a current case who scored 7 As for his A levels and still don't get into med school. The boy is devastated. I know of many past cases as well. Theory is always good. The devil is in the implementation and details.2ppaamm:
http://www.todayonline.com/Singapore/EDC120830-0000067/Spread-young-talent-among-schools
We should spread talents, including the gifted. But you know, what he says is so incredibly hard to achieve given the current education streaming system, where kids are already taught from young to want to be grouped only with their 'kind'.
An objective way of deciding which child goes where is required. It is always dangerous to leave it to subjectivity. Then someone is playing God which is not ideal. On what basis should a child who perform academically good not be allowed his first choice. To this child it will never be fair even if it means for the greater good of spreading talent. -
Not sure about medical school, but when we interview for students in other faculties, it is not the results that matter, just like in a job interview, we don't go for results either. The administration determines what is 'good enough', which is not told to us, and then everybody else is put on equal standing while we interview them. So, a child with an extra 'A' does not have an edge over another with less. (Another reason why I said in Singapore, maximizing the number of A's is 'chasing after the wind...'
There are so many qualities that can be picked up in an interview, his social skills, his thinking (I certainly don't like conceited or selfish candidates) skills, his interpersonal skills, his ability to convey his thoughts. Such are observed. Certainly, when we pick, we look for students who can be successful in the course. As for the UK selection, I am sure someone who is already in the country for some time will have an advantage over someone who is totally fresh and 'green'. There are social norms not familiar to the latter, and sometimes, lingo.
I do support the interview process, but it is an expensive one for the university as well, because it involves personnel, time and administrative work. So, picking just results is easy, and probably makes things easier for everyone, but it is such an expensive process to train doctors, lawyers, accountants and psychologists, etc, the universities want to be doubly sure. There will be some unfairness, as in everything, but I guess this is what most universities deem fit. In some medical entrance exams, they even set situation questions. I have a friend's son who did not get through not because of results, interview or knowledge in medical field, but because he is not a good communicator, and they picked that up from his medical entrance paper. Such is life... So, for those who think that EQ and communication skills are not important, then good luck to you!
I know at least this is what most lecturers will look for. -
I was told that there are many project works in gep program n the geppers have ample trainings for their presentation skills for their project works to the extent of 1-2 presentation per week basis per gepper. Someone commented that the geppers have advantages when come to oral test as they have been trained rigorously. Can anyone confirm this?
-
Though interpersonal skills is different from presentation skills, If u r involved in a lot of project works, I supposed u need EQ n interpersonal skills to work with peers to do a good project. Unless u think u r brilliant n can do everything all by yourself, then...
-
Melodies:
I was told that there are many project works in gep program n the geppers have ample trainings for their presentation skills for their project works to the extent of 1-2 presentation per week basis per gepper. Someone commented that the geppers have advantages when come to oral test as they have been trained rigorously. Can anyone confirm this?
some are naturally talkative, geppers or not .... -
Agree that at tertiary education level, interviews have become common to try to identify non academic qualities required by the profession.
But at primary and secondary level, if someone who does well is not given his qualified choice of school just for the greater good of spreading talent, how can it ever be fair in the eyes of that child. At that age, they are also still developing and growing. Parents are already complaining about the fairness of DSA when these schools conduct interviews. What now if you say doing well and achieving cut off marks will not necessary get the 12 yo to his choice school. Spreading of talent is for the greater good of all schools and students. But to the student who is being spread, do you think he will say it is for his gd too? He will only wonder why me and not another person. Human nature. If it doesn't affecting me, good la, but when I am affected, sure not happy and complain. Then a new set of problems and kiasuism sets in
-
Dnls_mum:
Isn't this already happening with the current DSA programs? A child having a higher COP may not necessarily getting into a school compared to a child with a lower. At least during our times, it was taken for granted whoever did better at PSLE would have a better chance of getting into their schools of choice. Yet, in those days, I remember we were spread more evenly then these days. I didn't even know the difference between RGS and Cedar Girls... We were assured of getting the schools of our CHOICE, not the TOP school. It is no longer the case now, people work hard to get into a particular top school. Yet, while we expect the competition to be constrained to academic levels only, there are now so many anomalies which are at best,ambiguous.
But at primary and secondary level, if someone who does well is not given his qualified choice of school just for the greater good of spreading talent, how can it ever be fair in the eyes of that child. At that age, they are also still developing and growing. Parents are already complaining about the fairness of DSA when these schools conduct interviews. What now if you say doing well and achieving cut off marks will not necessary get the 12 yo to his choice school. Spreading of talent is for the greater good of all schools and students. But to the student who is being spread, do you think he will say it is for his gd too? He will only wonder why me and not another person. Human nature. If it doesn't affecting me, good la, but when I am affected, sure not happy and complain. Then a new set of problems and kiasuism sets in
Those who get into a top school may or may not be top scorers in the PSLE, but may be: top x medalists from x, y, and z sport, top x GEPpers who get at least 80+x% in their P4, 5, 6 exams, top x% of PSLE T-score, top x performers in Olympiad, top this, top that from everywhere, the criteria has changed for them.
When there is a sport competition, those top medalist please go and get honours for the school, ditto for all the different competitions, because the school has to be 'balanced' (but not necessarily the children), and then if they don't do well academically and hence might affect the school's 'A' levels results, they are asked to take 'O' levels as a private candidates and then, please leave the school? Hm... so much for spreading, so much for building balanced schools that excel in everything. At the expense of the child? Of course, though I have a problem of agreeing, I do see merits in doing so, we are teaching the child that when he is no more of an utility, then the consequence is dire - cruel but reality of life. Treasure every lesson, I guess. :roll:
So yes, our children have already learned that doing well and pursuing what they were told is not necessarily a ticket to their dreams, that the tale that they were told to work hard to get where they want is a fairy one, even from as young as 9 years old. There are so many other factors to be successful that were never whispered to them. But at 18, it affects their career choices, and it impacts their lives directly and then they see it. At that point, it just becomes clearer and more painful. Just if some adults who experienced it: parents and teachers, would have told them earlier. -
At the age of 12, IMHO, is not too young to learn about the realities of life.
My DD has just gone through the DSA process. Though rejected by one of the schools, she was thankfully given an offer for the other. Faced with the fact that some of her classmates whose academic results are poorer than her were accepted by the school which rejected her, she said in a "matter-of-fact" manner to her younger sis, "Such is life, you do not always get what you want. Sometimes things are not within your control even if you had worked hard at it."
I realised she had learnt an important life lesson here, even though it may be cruel.
I looked back at myself learning a similar lesson when I was 18, which I found so much harder to come to terms with. With my good "Á" levels result, I went on for an interview for a university course, the course that had always been the dream of my (then young) life. That was my only chance, as my parents had made known to me that doing that course overseas is financially out-of-reach for us. Then I looked around at my JC classmates who did not do as well as me, but heading overseas for THAT course, I just could not help to feel… and know… that life is not fair.
I think it is that much harder to learn at 18 years old…
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