Is GEP really necessary?
-
jtoh:
I dun understand why you address this to me. I never said that we should do away with GEP. Not sure about EESIS in the past. Dunno enough to comment. Sorry if this sounds curt. I dun know how type emoticons on smart phone. Took @#$!& long to type these few lines!
Hi Chen,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.
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. -
vlim:
:goodpost: 100% agree with you. You put it across so aptly.
Ksi ....I raising all my hands and legs ... I 100% agree ...ksi:
Melodies, no amount of talking here will convince you unless you have interaction with true GE kids. They are different even from baby stages and can be picked out.
Suffice to say, in a competition, some of the topics may be above level, GE kids are good at above level stuff compared to mainstream kids even if they have not been exposed. However, when it comes to simpler things like a formatted exam, GE kids may trip over and fail miserably. Their ability to learn new and complex things are much stronger but they may not have practised enough on simpler repetitive work to produce zero-error work. Given time, they can bridge the repetitive part eventually(some maybe never) but their innate ability to learn new and complex things fast cannot be replicated in a child without the innate ability. So please be kind to true GE kids, they have their own struggles as well and they did not ask to be born this way.
My take is, they only make up 1% of each cohort, leave them alone as they don't take up that much budget as well, considering they are integrated into local schools with limited facilities and not having a standalone academy with the state-of-the-art facilities to warrant any kind of envy. This is probably the kind of low-cost operations that 2ppaamm is canvassing against. Currently the nurturing efforts look half-hearted to her but already many are unhappy with the so-called privileges. 2ppaamm, can you imagine if it goes into a large scale academy approach? You will have more to write here.....tell your DH..
:snuggles: -
atutor2001:
how about angmos who score well in Chinese too without doing the primary school chinese syllabus ? :evil: :evil:jtoh:
....... 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.
This is where I find puzzling. Being gifted, they tend to have special ability, even for tackling subjects that they are weak in. An old friend who is a baba migrated to UK because her daughters were struggling with Chinese in primary school. Years later, she returned together with her kids because of her job . By then her children are in secondary level and she managed to get them into RGS. I taught they would suffer as there is Chinese. Surprisingly, they aced everything. This friend was much older then me and I regretted not seeking her advice on how she managed to make her kids pick up Chinese again, which was the cause of their migration. Is it because of a change in attitude as they had been exposed to a different learning environment in UK?
I also know many students who were good in mainly math and science. Miraculously, they were able to score A for Chinese. However, after a few years, they practically forgot everything. Such cases only make me feel that a gifted person has no problem with exams, no matter what the subject is. Perhaps those that can't is more of \"attitude problem.\" -
verykiasu2010:
Not broken record leh... interesting information for me.
just for perspective from a broken record:Chenonceau:
I too am confused now. People in MOE have said that schools like NYPS turns in stellar results (where 40% score above 250) at the PSLE, not because NYPS teaches very much better than other schools (since all MOE believes all schools are good)... BUT because it has a large GEP population who MOE believes will naturally do well in whatever the school had they stay put in their original schools. Clearly, some MOE data suggests that GEPpers do better at the PSLE than the rest of the cohort?
NYPS cohort size is around 480, of which 100 is GEPpers (21%)
last few years scoring above 250 is 43%, roughly around 200~206 kids.
if we assume 100% of GEPper scoring above 250, then there is still at least 22% who are non-GEP who score above 250.
but obviously not 100% of GEPper score above 250, hence the number of non-GEP scoring above 250 is even higher than 22%
-
keroppi:
:goodpost: 100% agree with you. You put it across so aptly.[/quote]Cannot agree. Hippo does not have hands, only 4 legs, or more ?? :evil: :evil:
Ksi ....I raising all my hands and legs ... I 100% agree ...vlim:
[quote=\"ksi\"]Melodies, no amount of talking here will convince you unless you have interaction with true GE kids. They are different even from baby stages and can be picked out.
Suffice to say, in a competition, some of the topics may be above level, GE kids are good at above level stuff compared to mainstream kids even if they have not been exposed. However, when it comes to simpler things like a formatted exam, GE kids may trip over and fail miserably. Their ability to learn new and complex things are much stronger but they may not have practised enough on simpler repetitive work to produce zero-error work. Given time, they can bridge the repetitive part eventually(some maybe never) but their innate ability to learn new and complex things fast cannot be replicated in a child without the innate ability. So please be kind to true GE kids, they have their own struggles as well and they did not ask to be born this way.
My take is, they only make up 1% of each cohort, leave them alone as they don't take up that much budget as well, considering they are integrated into local schools with limited facilities and not having a standalone academy with the state-of-the-art facilities to warrant any kind of envy. This is probably the kind of low-cost operations that 2ppaamm is canvassing against. Currently the nurturing efforts look half-hearted to her but already many are unhappy with the so-called privileges. 2ppaamm, can you imagine if it goes into a large scale academy approach? You will have more to write here.....tell your DH.. :snuggles: -
verykiasu2010:
So NYPS is still better school then others? Sorry... dun get your point.
just for perspective from a broken record:Chenonceau:
I too am confused now. People in MOE have said that schools like NYPS turns in stellar results (where 40% score above 250) at the PSLE, not because NYPS teaches very much better than other schools (since all MOE believes all schools are good)... BUT because it has a large GEP population who MOE believes will naturally do well in whatever the school had they stay put in their original schools. Clearly, some MOE data suggests that GEPpers do better at the PSLE than the rest of the cohort?
NYPS cohort size is around 480, of which 100 is GEPpers (21%)
last few years scoring above 250 is 43%, roughly around 200~206 kids.
if we assume 100% of GEPper scoring above 250, then there is still at least 22% who are non-GEP who score above 250
but obviously not 100% of GEPper score above 250, hence the number of non-GEP scoring above 250 is even higher than 22% -
:goodpost:
Just to add that I don't think this should be called GEP program i nthe very first place. I think this is the prerequisite training for all students and yes it is necessary to nurture a pupil to develop every pupil to develop intellectual; depth and higher-level thinking.
As for the fair/unfair treatment, I'm OK with GEPpers got to enjoy those privileges but still think that the govt should also reward EESIS to those who really worked hard enough to score better than those average GEPpers. I think they deserved this. I don't wish to see pupils from poor families (parents can't afford/r not willing to pay for the IP/IS schools fees) who have scored well but missed by 1 pt in order to get EESIS. They have no choice but to admit into public sec school (I hope this is not happening)Chenonceau:
I too am confused now. People in MOE have said that schools like NYPS turns in stellar results (where 40% score above 250) at the PSLE, not because NYPS teaches very much better than other schools (since all MOE believes all schools are good)... BUT because it has a large GEP population who MOE believes will naturally do well in whatever the school had they stay put in their original schools. Clearly, some MOE data suggests that GEPpers do better at the PSLE than the rest of the cohort?
And now... people say that GEPpers don't do well at the PSLE? Some also say that the really gifted are not meant to do well at the PSLE because the PSLE requires drilling and GEPpers don't get drilled enough? Others say that PSLE requires rote learning and GEPpers are bored with that?
Hmmmm...
Does PSLE test rote-learning?
In my opinion, no longer. The new PSLE is constructed around inquiry and problem-solving skills. Teaching methods that were once characteristic of GEP, hopped over to mainstream in the form of Teach Less Learn More. The PSLE tests mental skills, NOT rote-learning. Not anymore.
Does PSLE require drilling?
What is drilling? Can I define it as \"practice upon practice upon practice\"?
In my opinion, for the less intellectually capable, yes, practice is required. If I am not talented in taekwondo, I need to practise/drill my muscles MORE than another who is gifted with all the strong muscles necessary where they should be. In areas such as deductive and inductive skills, my son seems to have all the brain \"muscles\" there where they should be. He needs very little drilling/practice. For reasons I cannot comprehend, he scores well in Science with a quarter of the practice he puts into Chinese (and he still scores only slightly above average in Chinese). I've tried making him practice more only to realize that quality of work dipped. More careless. Worse handwriting. He was bored and irritated with me. He has been known to lose marks in Science because he maintains that he had read somewhere that the research is unclear on this issue and therefore there is no clear answer to the question in his exam paper. After discussing with his teacher, his teacher agrees!! I don't even know where he gets all this but I dare not drill him too much in case performance dips.
In areas where he doesn't naturally have the brain \"muscles\" he needs where they should be in his brain, I need to give him practices ad nauseum, like this in Chinese - http://petunialee.blogspot.sg/2012/08/preparing-for-psle-oral.html. The practices are designed to be multi-skilled because
(1) the PSLE syllabus has changed to testing complex mental skills that need to be practiced ALL TOGETHER
(2) this is the way kids should be taught anyway in order not to bore the brain
If a child were intellectually high functioning, as the GEPpers are supposed to be, then they would need very little drilling/practice in order to do well as evidenced by my son in Science. They should possess the brain muscles where they should be. I signed my DS up for a USA high school literature module (where he read the Great Gatsby and Edgar Allan Poe) in early P6 of this year because he was bored with English as taught by his Teacher Who Can't Spell... overall he practiced even LESS English exams than Science, and he still got to 2nd in class in English at PSLE prelims. He didn't need drilling, he needed extra stimulation to stay engaged. If not, he would have gone and underperformed. When he started to give me really bad PSLE English compositions that were sloppy and way below his capability, I asked him to write a 3000 word short story. And all of a sudden, he began to sparkle again.
However, if a child were intellectually low functioning as evidenced by my son in Chinese, there is then a need to drill/practice to get those muscles working at acceptable levels (at least must be above average by PSLE... when he started out way below average in class).
I don't think it is reasonable to say that just because you are a GEPper, you're not expected to do well at PSLE. I don't think the statistics gathered by MOE bear this out. If MOE can attribute NYPS's stellar performance to the presence of a large GEP cohort, then I think statistically the data shows that GEPpers DO tend to do well at PSLE. GEPpers are by definition intellectually high functioning, no?
I think saying that GEPpers are not supposed to do well at PSLE is just an excuse for...
(1) poor performing GEPpers
(2) GEP testing inaccuracies (that identify the wrong kid as gifted) GEP testing (like any other psychometric testing instrument) CAN make mistakes. There is no such thing as a 100% reliable test.
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. -
Melodies:
yes the label \"Gifted\" is misleading. it should be reserved only for people like Lim Jeck or Sheldon, not any Jack or Nodlehs.:goodpost:
Just to add that I don't think this should be called GEP program i nthe very first place. I think this is the prerequisite training for all students and yes it is necessary to nurture a pupil to develop every pupil to develop intellectual; depth and higher-level thinking.
As for the fair/unfair treatment, I'm OK with GEPpers got to enjoy those privileges but still think that the govt should also reward EESIS to those who really worked hard enough to score better than those average GEPpers. I think they deserved this. I don't wish to see pupils from poor families (parents can't afford/r not willing to pay for the IP/IS schools fees) who have scored well but missed by 1 pt in order to get EESIS. They have no choice but to admit into public sec school (I hope this is not happening)
EESIS is available to those mainstream high scorers within the top 1/3 of the IS school cohort -
verykiasu2010:
Cannot agree. Hippo does not have hands, only 4 legs, or more ?? :evil: :evil:[/quote]Excuse me ... I am hippo not alien ok .... :nunchuk:
:goodpost: 100% agree with you. You put it across so aptly.keroppi:
[quote=\"vlim\"]
Ksi ....I raising all my hands and legs ... I 100% agree ... :snuggles:
-
I am glad to see some nice convergence in views developing. Good for us all for being reasonable. Pat pat us.
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 š
Register Login