Is GEP really necessary?

[jtoh]

Chenonceau:

Is the GEP necessary?
In my opinion, yes. From DS' experience (and I dun think he is gifted) as someone who functions well in English and Science, he was craving for stimulation. We do have kids among us who need the GEP to enjoy school and stay engaged.

Fair or Unfair?
We should NOT take away the GEP's privileges just because of a fairness issue. They are kids after all. Different or not, we need to love them. The thing though, is that GEP's small classes facilitated the teaching through inquiry and self-directed learning. These are learning styles characteristic of gifted learners. However, since the inquiry-based learning has hopped over from GEP to mainstream (and I think it is a good thing) then why are classes in mainstream still at 40?

I am beyond questioning issues of fairness. Let the GEP keep whatever privileges it has... BUT... allow mainstream teachers to teach smaller classes so that they can best effectuate inquiry-based learning too.

I agree with the above.

[atutor2001]

There are 2 camps here. One believes that GEPers are smart but may not do well in exam and the other is GEPers are smart and should do well in exam.


I am from the 2nd camp. Go to RI (not that HCI don’t have but no personal knowledge) and it is easy to find many notorious GEPers who don’t do normal school works but will ultimately do well at A-level. My own kid who is not a GEPer has an estimated T-score of only 250 at school prelim, woke up after that and was only behind 3 GEPers in her school at PSLE with just 1 month of hardwork. Such anecdotes made me believe that a true GEPer should be able to do well in exam.

Many GEPers fade away by JC. Mostly these are those that are weak in languages. Those that continues to excel are usually the humanity students. I can only infer that the GEP selection process is good in identifying GEPers in language but not so for math and science. Probably it is easier to pump math and science through accelerated learning and thus many were mistaken to be GEPers during the selection.

[jtoh]

I think people tend to generalize and group all GEPpers as being the same. They aren’t. They run the spectrum of excelling in all 4 subjects, to those who excel in Math/Sci/Eng but fail Mandarin miserably, to those who excel only in English and Science. Some are hardworking, some sail by without studying and some don’t study and don’t do well.


By and large they will do alright in PSLE, scoring >250. To score >260, given their differentiated programme and lack of time to prepare for PSLE, many will, provided they are not particularly weak in any one subject. There are many GEPpers who are weak in MT which invariably pulls down their T-score. Or there are those who are weak in Math. If they had stayed in mainstream and had all of P4/5/6 to prepare for PSLE I dare say they would have better PSLE scores.

[jtoh]

Chenonceau:

There is also the possibility that the GEP test made a mistake and wrongly identified someone as gifted. No psychometric test is 100% reliable. GEP kids who don't score above a certain threshold should just be dropped (for their own good) in the same way that those who score 27+ at PSLE WERE often invited INTO the GEP in Sec 1... and therefore these DON'T get EESIS.

Beyond Fair or Unfair
We should NOT take away the GEP's privileges just because of a fairness issue. They are kids after all. Different or not, we need to love them because different kids are still the nation's legacy. The thing though, is that GEP's small classes facilitated the teaching through inquiry and self-directed learning. These are learning styles characteristic of gifted learners. However, since the inquiry-based learning has hopped over from GEP to mainstream (and I think it is a good thing) then why are classes in mainstream still at 40?

I am beyond questioning issues of fairness. Let the GEP keep whatever privileges it has... BUT... allow mainstream teachers to teach smaller classes so that they can best effectuate inquiry-based learning too.

Hi Chen,

I'm thinking that in the past when there was still GEP in secondary school and students who did very well in PSLE were invited to join the programme then, there was no EESIS? Or am I mistaken?

I agree with you that the teaching methods adopted in GEP should be extended to the population at large. But it's something MOE is unable to do for lack of resources. (and a whole other debate). But for MOE to do away with GEP because it's viewed as unfair by some would be to throw the baby out with the bath water.

[jtoh]

ksi, I like your posts.

[corneyAmber]

jtoh:

ksi, I like your posts.

:hi5:

[vlim]

Jtoh, time to get an avatar for yourself.. Dr Ksi can help ..

[Pen88n]

vlim:

Jtoh, time to get an avatar for yourself.. Dr Ksi can help ..

Vlim advertising for Dr Ksi in other threads

[Melodies]

vlim:

Generally most geppers can stil score well in PSLE. In ds p6 class, I think quite many get 260 and above ... Of course there are a few that under perform. For mainstream students, I believe they already start preparing and drilling for psle since p5.


I don't believe that drilling can help you to perform and score well in PSLE. No way! Nowadays, all the pri levels have high-thinking questions. They are much tougher than our times previously and all required you to think and solve. Take a look at the current Pri level Science, Maths and English papers. The English MCQ/OE comprehension are challenging and high thinking questions. You need to have good problem solving skills to be able to answer and score Maths. Drilling can only help you to build your foundation (you may reach 75-80% by just drilling which can be translated to be 220-235) Now, we are talking about scoring for A* for 91% no amount of drilling can help you reach there!

But for geppers, p5 is their most 'busy' yr having to do different gep projects, assignments and/or take part in various Maths / Sci competitions. Their Ge prog though ended in mid p6 after their mid yr sa1, but in July /aug, they still have to submit one or two social studies proj/assignment .. Plus they have to take a social studies prelim exam somewhere in aug which mainstreamers don't have to... And they have to pass it inorder to promote to the next level of gep... So I would say, generally most of the geppers can only start revising for psle in june/July of their psle yr... In view of tt, if most of them still can achieve 250 and above.... Don't they show their ability?.., I would say taking this gep is not only about nurturing and stretching our higher ability kids, in the mean while also need them to cultivate good working/study attitude and responsibility ...

Aren't these projects/assessments providing you a lot of training for nurturing the GEP pupils to develop intellectual; depth and higher-level thinking? I'm speechless here. Do you know that I have to send my dd to TLL to get this type of training? I have to sources all types of materials for dd in the hope of developing her intellectual; depth and higher-level thinking so that she is well equipped to be able to answer those high-thinking questions! I know that there are many GEPpers attending TLL as well. There is one mum said that she is grateful that there is guided in GEP classess and the GEPeprs teachers also marked and feedback for a few rounds after the GEPpers have done a few drafts for their English composition. I'm so envied with this as you can only dreamed on in the mainstreams! Think about that, mainstreams have to take a few miles than GEPpers (attending tuition and also researching themself) in order to score well in PSLE. After all these aids, advantages and training, why you still think that they are not trained to do well in PLSE for GEPper?

[jtoh]

vlim:

Jtoh, time to get an avatar for yourself.. Dr Ksi can help ..