Is GEP really necessary?
-
2ppaamm:
I did get your point that you did NOT think GEP should be scrapped. You advocated just changing it... so that...
Then, I am back to my point, it is a matter of policy, which again, does not make sense. Hahaha.... on and on and on. Endless... As long as we are just looking out for our own kids, and speaking up for them, it will be endless. I will always say make it fair for all in terms of entrance and scholarship. That's just so much easier to get buy in from everyone, but everyone is entitled to their views. BTW, my older kids were successful in DSA, but that does not make it fair, unless they also meet the COP.
(1) where required GEPpers can have the luxury of working on their weak subjects at normal pace (with the necessary amount of practice/drilling). Many GEPpers weak in this or the other are highly stressed by the need to follow an enhanced syllabus in EVERY area. They are children too... and we can and should protect them from excessive stress.
(2) where appropriate HIGHLY gifted GEPpers in any one subject can get the kind of individual attention a Lim Jeck needs, instead of having to slow down to the level of the other GEPpers. This would properly maximize each child's potential.
(3) GEPpers should have daily interactions within a community of normal children so that the US vs THEM mentality does not perpetuate itself. GEPpers are DIFFERENT. It doesn't help them socially to accentuate these differences. Apart from their obvious intellectual NEED for stimulation, these children need normality in other areas of their lives. Some families make it a point to do that but the schools (in the way they're set up at present) don't make it easy.
If it makes you feel better... I do agree with you on these points. -
Wah seh…this topic is still ‘ON and ON and ON’ parallel with the ABBA song.
this song not familiar. -
friendship:
You trying to omit yourself from that age group huh??!!Wah seh.....this topic is still 'ON and ON and ON' parallel with the ABBA song.
this song not familiar. -
Chenonceau:
I did get your point that you did NOT think GEP should be scrapped. You advocated just changing it... so that...2ppaamm:
Then, I am back to my point, it is a matter of policy, which again, does not make sense. Hahaha.... on and on and on. Endless... As long as we are just looking out for our own kids, and speaking up for them, it will be endless. I will always say make it fair for all in terms of entrance and scholarship. That's just so much easier to get buy in from everyone, but everyone is entitled to their views. BTW, my older kids were successful in DSA, but that does not make it fair, unless they also meet the COP.
(1) where required GEPpers can have the luxury of working on their weak subjects at normal pace (with the necessary amount of practice/drilling). Many GEPpers weak in this or the other are highly stressed by the need to follow an enhanced syllabus in EVERY area. They are children too... and we can and should protect them from excessive stress.
(2) where appropriate HIGHLY gifted GEPpers in any one subject can get the kind of individual attention a Lim Jeck needs, instead of having to slow down to the level of the other GEPpers. This would properly maximize each child's potential.
(3) GEPpers should have daily interactions within a community of normal children so that the US vs THEM mentality does not perpetuate itself. GEPpers are DIFFERENT. It doesn't help them socially to accentuate these differences. Apart from their obvious intellectual NEED for stimulation, these children need normality in other areas of their lives. Some families make it a point to do that but the schools (in the way they're set up at present) don't make it easy.
If it makes you feel better... I do agree with you on these points.
Yes, yes, it makes me feel better! :please:
1. I agree gifted children AND high ability children should be enriched, but I don't think they should be labeled and separated. I also don't think it is fixed for so long (3 years) and then they get privileges into the Sec school. I think every child should have a chance of getting enriched when they 'wake up'. Some kids are late developers.
2. I think all kids should have the same class size in general, and taught the same things, but for those who are special and can go further, there should be extra resources put in to give them enrichment.
3. I believe all classes should be taught the same syllabus, no such thing as GEP and non-GEP. All teachers, GEP or not, should prepare the kids for the PSLE first, and when they can handle move them to the next level. There should not be an excuse (from teachers or parents) that the kid cannot do PSLE because they covered more sophisticated topics. I have a difficulty with that. Their priority should be to prepare for PSLE first. If they cannot do PSLE properly, then they should dabble other topics. There should be no enrichment until the PSLE topics are mustered, so that every kid can say they are well prepared for the PSLE. If we want to place more importance on other things instead of PSLE, then scrap the PSLE, we are making a mockery out of it.
4. I don't think I mean daily interactions, I mean the segregation should not be for only top 1%, but a bigger group, e.g. top 25%, so that the children are exposed to a bigger variety of people. This is good for the gifted and non-gifted. They will have to face the world one day.
5. I am for a change in the PSLE. The format today only creates loads of tuition and hothousing. I believe teachers should teach and parents should parent, not teachers administer and tuition teachers teach and parents co-ordinate. We either scrap this altogether, or make it such that it is impossible to prepare for a PSLE. Teachers just teach to the best, children just study their best. Tests will ultimately find your level, and everyone gets into their choice of school according to what they achieve. Of course there are already such tests. Many countries are using them, and psychologists use these tests in Singapore as well. There is a common way to test ALL levels even up to college or university level. There can be a syllabus, but the test need not test just the syllabus, a same topic can be absorbed by different kids at different levels, tests can be done using Bloom's taxonomy or the like, where you don't need to be grilled to know how to solve or answer a question, it depends on how you have internalized materials taught.
Conclusion: I am for a differentiated program, but not a segregation of children, I am for assistance to students, but not an inconsistent standard for different category of children. I am for test, but not for chasing up the bell-curve. I am for parents to respect good teachers to, but not for the lack of empowerment and passing the baton to parents. I am for a public education system to work, and not for parents to take over the responsibility which separates the haves and have nots. Education is the only equalizer in any society, and thank God for that. If I were born today to the illiterate, therefore parents who struggled to make ends meet and without time for me, I would have been in the streets. I hope to see more children such as me given equal opportunities in life. -
friendship:
Okok, I shuddup now... :censored:Wah seh.....this topic is still 'ON and ON and ON' parallel with the ABBA song.
this song not familiar. -
2ppaamm:
I did get your point that you did NOT think GEP should be scrapped. You advocated just changing it... so that...Chenonceau:
[quote=\"2ppaamm\"]
Then, I am back to my point, it is a matter of policy, which again, does not make sense. Hahaha.... on and on and on. Endless... As long as we are just looking out for our own kids, and speaking up for them, it will be endless. I will always say make it fair for all in terms of entrance and scholarship. That's just so much easier to get buy in from everyone, but everyone is entitled to their views. BTW, my older kids were successful in DSA, but that does not make it fair, unless they also meet the COP.
(1) where required GEPpers can have the luxury of working on their weak subjects at normal pace (with the necessary amount of practice/drilling). Many GEPpers weak in this or the other are highly stressed by the need to follow an enhanced syllabus in EVERY area. They are children too... and we can and should protect them from excessive stress.
(2) where appropriate HIGHLY gifted GEPpers in any one subject can get the kind of individual attention a Lim Jeck needs, instead of having to slow down to the level of the other GEPpers. This would properly maximize each child's potential.
(3) GEPpers should have daily interactions within a community of normal children so that the US vs THEM mentality does not perpetuate itself. GEPpers are DIFFERENT. It doesn't help them socially to accentuate these differences. Apart from their obvious intellectual NEED for stimulation, these children need normality in other areas of their lives. Some families make it a point to do that but the schools (in the way they're set up at present) don't make it easy.
If it makes you feel better... I do agree with you on these points. Yes, yes, it makes me feel better! :please:
1. I agree gifted children AND high ability children should be enriched, but I don't think they should be labeled and separated. I also don't think it is fixed for so long (3 years) and then they get privileges into the Sec school. I think every child should have a chance of getting enriched when they 'wake up'. Some kids are late developers.
2. I think all kids should have the same class size in general, and taught the same things, but for those who are special and can go further, there should be extra resources put in to give them enrichment.
3. I believe all classes should be taught the same syllabus, no such thing as GEP and non-GEP. All teachers, GEP or not, should prepare the kids for the PSLE first, and when they can handle move them to the next level. There should not be an excuse (from teachers or parents) that the kid cannot do PSLE because they covered more sophisticated topics. I have a difficulty with that. Their priority should be to prepare for PSLE first. If they cannot do PSLE properly, then they should dabble other topics. There should be no enrichment until the PSLE topics are mustered, so that every kid can say they are well prepared for the PSLE. If we want to place more importance on other things instead of PSLE, then scrap the PSLE, we are making a mockery out of it.
4. I don't think I mean daily interactions, I mean the segregation should not be for only top 1%, but a bigger group, e.g. top 25%, so that the children are exposed to a bigger variety of people. This is good for the gifted and non-gifted. They will have to face the world one day.
5. I am for a change in the PSLE. The format today only creates loads of tuition and hothousing. I believe teachers should teach and parents should parent, not teachers administer and tuition teachers teach and parents co-ordinate. We either scrap this altogether, or make it such that it is impossible to prepare for a PSLE. Teachers just teach to the best, children just study their best. Tests will ultimately find your level, and everyone gets into their choice of school according to what they achieve. Of course there are already such tests. Many countries are using them, and psychologists use these tests in Singapore as well. There is a common way to test ALL levels even up to college or university level. There can be a syllabus, but the test need not test just the syllabus, a same topic can be absorbed by different kids at different levels, tests can be done using Bloom's taxonomy or the like, where you don't need to be grilled to know how to solve or answer a question, it depends on how you have internalized materials taught.
Conclusion: I am for a differentiated program, but not a segregation of children, I am for assistance to students, but not an inconsistent standard for different category of children. I am for test, but not for chasing up the bell-curve. I am for parents to respect good teachers to, but not for the lack of empowerment and passing the baton to parents. I am for a public education system to work, and not for parents to take over the responsibility which separates the haves and have nots. Education is the only equalizer in any society, and thank God for that. If I were born today to the illiterate, therefore parents who struggled to make ends meet and without time for me, I would have been in the streets. I hope to see more children such as me given equal opportunities in life.[/quote]
:goodpost: -
:goodpost:
2ppaamm:
I did get your point that you did NOT think GEP should be scrapped. You advocated just changing it... so that...Chenonceau:
[quote=\"2ppaamm\"]
Then, I am back to my point, it is a matter of policy, which again, does not make sense. Hahaha.... on and on and on. Endless... As long as we are just looking out for our own kids, and speaking up for them, it will be endless. I will always say make it fair for all in terms of entrance and scholarship. That's just so much easier to get buy in from everyone, but everyone is entitled to their views. BTW, my older kids were successful in DSA, but that does not make it fair, unless they also meet the COP.
(1) where required GEPpers can have the luxury of working on their weak subjects at normal pace (with the necessary amount of practice/drilling). Many GEPpers weak in this or the other are highly stressed by the need to follow an enhanced syllabus in EVERY area. They are children too... and we can and should protect them from excessive stress.
(2) where appropriate HIGHLY gifted GEPpers in any one subject can get the kind of individual attention a Lim Jeck needs, instead of having to slow down to the level of the other GEPpers. This would properly maximize each child's potential.
(3) GEPpers should have daily interactions within a community of normal children so that the US vs THEM mentality does not perpetuate itself. GEPpers are DIFFERENT. It doesn't help them socially to accentuate these differences. Apart from their obvious intellectual NEED for stimulation, these children need normality in other areas of their lives. Some families make it a point to do that but the schools (in the way they're set up at present) don't make it easy.
If it makes you feel better... I do agree with you on these points. Yes, yes, it makes me feel better! :please:
1. I agree gifted children AND high ability children should be enriched, but I don't think they should be labeled and separated. I also don't think it is fixed for so long (3 years) and then they get privileges into the Sec school. I think every child should have a chance of getting enriched when they 'wake up'. Some kids are late developers.
2. I think all kids should have the same class size in general, and taught the same things, but for those who are special and can go further, there should be extra resources put in to give them enrichment.
3. I believe all classes should be taught the same syllabus, no such thing as GEP and non-GEP. All teachers, GEP or not, should prepare the kids for the PSLE first, and when they can handle move them to the next level. There should not be an excuse (from teachers or parents) that the kid cannot do PSLE because they covered more sophisticated topics. I have a difficulty with that. Their priority should be to prepare for PSLE first. If they cannot do PSLE properly, then they should dabble other topics. There should be no enrichment until the PSLE topics are mustered, so that every kid can say they are well prepared for the PSLE. If we want to place more importance on other things instead of PSLE, then scrap the PSLE, we are making a mockery out of it.
4. I don't think I mean daily interactions, I mean the segregation should not be for only top 1%, but a bigger group, e.g. top 25%, so that the children are exposed to a bigger variety of people. This is good for the gifted and non-gifted. They will have to face the world one day.
5. I am for a change in the PSLE. The format today only creates loads of tuition and hothousing. I believe teachers should teach and parents should parent, not teachers administer and tuition teachers teach and parents co-ordinate. We either scrap this altogether, or make it such that it is impossible to prepare for a PSLE. Teachers just teach to the best, children just study their best. Tests will ultimately find your level, and everyone gets into their choice of school according to what they achieve. Of course there are already such tests. Many countries are using them, and psychologists use these tests in Singapore as well. There is a common way to test ALL levels even up to college or university level. There can be a syllabus, but the test need not test just the syllabus, a same topic can be absorbed by different kids at different levels, tests can be done using Bloom's taxonomy or the like, where you don't need to be grilled to know how to solve or answer a question, it depends on how you have internalized materials taught.
Conclusion: I am for a differentiated program, but not a segregation of children, I am for assistance to students, but not an inconsistent standard for different category of children. I am for test, but not for chasing up the bell-curve. I am for parents to respect good teachers to, but not for the lack of empowerment and passing the baton to parents. I am for a public education system to work, and not for parents to take over the responsibility which separates the haves and have nots. Education is the only equalizer in any society, and thank God for that. If I were born today to the illiterate, therefore parents who struggled to make ends meet and without time for me, I would have been in the streets. I hope to see more children such as me given equal opportunities in life.[/quote] -
:goodpost:
2ppaamm:
I did get your point that you did NOT think GEP should be scrapped. You advocated just changing it... so that...Chenonceau:
[quote=\"2ppaamm\"]
Then, I am back to my point, it is a matter of policy, which again, does not make sense. Hahaha.... on and on and on. Endless... As long as we are just looking out for our own kids, and speaking up for them, it will be endless. I will always say make it fair for all in terms of entrance and scholarship. That's just so much easier to get buy in from everyone, but everyone is entitled to their views. BTW, my older kids were successful in DSA, but that does not make it fair, unless they also meet the COP.
(1) where required GEPpers can have the luxury of working on their weak subjects at normal pace (with the necessary amount of practice/drilling). Many GEPpers weak in this or the other are highly stressed by the need to follow an enhanced syllabus in EVERY area. They are children too... and we can and should protect them from excessive stress.
(2) where appropriate HIGHLY gifted GEPpers in any one subject can get the kind of individual attention a Lim Jeck needs, instead of having to slow down to the level of the other GEPpers. This would properly maximize each child's potential.
(3) GEPpers should have daily interactions within a community of normal children so that the US vs THEM mentality does not perpetuate itself. GEPpers are DIFFERENT. It doesn't help them socially to accentuate these differences. Apart from their obvious intellectual NEED for stimulation, these children need normality in other areas of their lives. Some families make it a point to do that but the schools (in the way they're set up at present) don't make it easy.
If it makes you feel better... I do agree with you on these points. Yes, yes, it makes me feel better! :please:
1. I agree gifted children AND high ability children should be enriched, but I don't think they should be labeled and separated. I also don't think it is fixed for so long (3 years) and then they get privileges into the Sec school. I think every child should have a chance of getting enriched when they 'wake up'. Some kids are late developers.
2. I think all kids should have the same class size in general, and taught the same things, but for those who are special and can go further, there should be extra resources put in to give them enrichment.
3. I believe all classes should be taught the same syllabus, no such thing as GEP and non-GEP. All teachers, GEP or not, should prepare the kids for the PSLE first, and when they can handle move them to the next level. There should not be an excuse (from teachers or parents) that the kid cannot do PSLE because they covered more sophisticated topics. I have a difficulty with that. Their priority should be to prepare for PSLE first. If they cannot do PSLE properly, then they should dabble other topics. There should be no enrichment until the PSLE topics are mustered, so that every kid can say they are well prepared for the PSLE. If we want to place more importance on other things instead of PSLE, then scrap the PSLE, we are making a mockery out of it.
4. I don't think I mean daily interactions, I mean the segregation should not be for only top 1%, but a bigger group, e.g. top 25%, so that the children are exposed to a bigger variety of people. This is good for the gifted and non-gifted. They will have to face the world one day.
5. I am for a change in the PSLE. The format today only creates loads of tuition and hothousing. I believe teachers should teach and parents should parent, not teachers administer and tuition teachers teach and parents co-ordinate. We either scrap this altogether, or make it such that it is impossible to prepare for a PSLE. Teachers just teach to the best, children just study their best. Tests will ultimately find your level, and everyone gets into their choice of school according to what they achieve. Of course there are already such tests. Many countries are using them, and psychologists use these tests in Singapore as well. There is a common way to test ALL levels even up to college or university level. There can be a syllabus, but the test need not test just the syllabus, a same topic can be absorbed by different kids at different levels, tests can be done using Bloom's taxonomy or the like, where you don't need to be grilled to know how to solve or answer a question, it depends on how you have internalized materials taught.
Conclusion: I am for a differentiated program, but not a segregation of children, I am for assistance to students, but not an inconsistent standard for different category of children. I am for test, but not for chasing up the bell-curve. I am for parents to respect good teachers to, but not for the lack of empowerment and passing the baton to parents. I am for a public education system to work, and not for parents to take over the responsibility which separates the haves and have nots. Education is the only equalizer in any society, and thank God for that. If I were born today to the illiterate, therefore parents who struggled to make ends meet and without time for me, I would have been in the streets. I hope to see more children such as me given equal opportunities in life.[/quote] -
my uncle cassette collection lah, sayang.
Heard ABBA song before but not this song called ‘ON and ON and ON’. -
:goodpost:
2ppaamm:
I did get your point that you did NOT think GEP should be scrapped. You advocated just changing it... so that...Chenonceau:
[quote=\"2ppaamm\"]
Then, I am back to my point, it is a matter of policy, which again, does not make sense. Hahaha.... on and on and on. Endless... As long as we are just looking out for our own kids, and speaking up for them, it will be endless. I will always say make it fair for all in terms of entrance and scholarship. That's just so much easier to get buy in from everyone, but everyone is entitled to their views. BTW, my older kids were successful in DSA, but that does not make it fair, unless they also meet the COP.
(1) where required GEPpers can have the luxury of working on their weak subjects at normal pace (with the necessary amount of practice/drilling). Many GEPpers weak in this or the other are highly stressed by the need to follow an enhanced syllabus in EVERY area. They are children too... and we can and should protect them from excessive stress.
(2) where appropriate HIGHLY gifted GEPpers in any one subject can get the kind of individual attention a Lim Jeck needs, instead of having to slow down to the level of the other GEPpers. This would properly maximize each child's potential.
(3) GEPpers should have daily interactions within a community of normal children so that the US vs THEM mentality does not perpetuate itself. GEPpers are DIFFERENT. It doesn't help them socially to accentuate these differences. Apart from their obvious intellectual NEED for stimulation, these children need normality in other areas of their lives. Some families make it a point to do that but the schools (in the way they're set up at present) don't make it easy.
If it makes you feel better... I do agree with you on these points. Yes, yes, it makes me feel better! :please:
1. I agree gifted children AND high ability children should be enriched, but I don't think they should be labeled and separated. I also don't think it is fixed for so long (3 years) and then they get privileges into the Sec school. I think every child should have a chance of getting enriched when they 'wake up'. Some kids are late developers.
2. I think all kids should have the same class size in general, and taught the same things, but for those who are special and can go further, there should be extra resources put in to give them enrichment.
3. I believe all classes should be taught the same syllabus, no such thing as GEP and non-GEP. All teachers, GEP or not, should prepare the kids for the PSLE first, and when they can handle move them to the next level. There should not be an excuse (from teachers or parents) that the kid cannot do PSLE because they covered more sophisticated topics. I have a difficulty with that. Their priority should be to prepare for PSLE first. If they cannot do PSLE properly, then they should dabble other topics. There should be no enrichment until the PSLE topics are mustered, so that every kid can say they are well prepared for the PSLE. If we want to place more importance on other things instead of PSLE, then scrap the PSLE, we are making a mockery out of it.
4. I don't think I mean daily interactions, I mean the segregation should not be for only top 1%, but a bigger group, e.g. top 25%, so that the children are exposed to a bigger variety of people. This is good for the gifted and non-gifted. They will have to face the world one day.
5. I am for a change in the PSLE. The format today only creates loads of tuition and hothousing. I believe teachers should teach and parents should parent, not teachers administer and tuition teachers teach and parents co-ordinate. We either scrap this altogether, or make it such that it is impossible to prepare for a PSLE. Teachers just teach to the best, children just study their best. Tests will ultimately find your level, and everyone gets into their choice of school according to what they achieve. Of course there are already such tests. Many countries are using them, and psychologists use these tests in Singapore as well. There is a common way to test ALL levels even up to college or university level. There can be a syllabus, but the test need not test just the syllabus, a same topic can be absorbed by different kids at different levels, tests can be done using Bloom's taxonomy or the like, where you don't need to be grilled to know how to solve or answer a question, it depends on how you have internalized materials taught.
Conclusion: I am for a differentiated program, but not a segregation of children, I am for assistance to students, but not an inconsistent standard for different category of children. I am for test, but not for chasing up the bell-curve. I am for parents to respect good teachers to, but not for the lack of empowerment and passing the baton to parents. I am for a public education system to work, and not for parents to take over the responsibility which separates the haves and have nots. Education is the only equalizer in any society, and thank God for that. If I were born today to the illiterate, therefore parents who struggled to make ends meet and without time for me, I would have been in the streets. I hope to see more children such as me given equal opportunities in life.[/quote]
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
