Is GEP really necessary?
-
Mychildren:
If what you said in blue is true, I wonder why he is not selected then??? :?
Basic traits of a truly gifted :
a) Speed reading
b) Great ability in understanding and analysis at high speed.
c) Elephant memory with unlimited storage capacity for all subjects
d) Ability to see links and patterns that others don't
Can a truly gifted, who is endowed with such natural talents not do well in exam because they are skewed? Their elephant memory will pull them through easily even if they don't like it.
HA kids usually have (a) and (b) and some also have (d). However, they don't have (c). It is \"elephant memory\" that allows the gifted to process new issues with cross reference to a much bigger data base at high speed and coming up with a solution. A HA kid needs to wake up and start storing all the info to do well. Those that failed to wake up will be lost in the crowd.
Hot-housed kids has only (a). At young age, their (b) appears good as they went through accelerated learning. As years go by, without the other factors, their results will suffer.
[/quote]
Maybe he/she is late-bloomer. -
ksi:
1. Yes, I don't expect 100% accuracy in the selection test.
You must be kidding to expect a 100% accuracy.Mychildren:
Hi, my DS's friend got in too because was prepared before hand. So I do somewhat agreed on the above in blue. I don't want to say so much cause his mum might be reading this.
:siam:
1. MOE can only try their best to be prudent in their processes to minimise but cannot eliminate. There is definitely a % of HA in there because between 1% and 1.1% any difference?
2. If that child is trained, the child already has the pre-requisite of innate ability. My personal experience is all those that I know who trained, DID NOT get in...and trained a few years...but academically doing above average in mainstream.
2. My personal experience too, told by the mother herself to me. (He was prepared for GEP selection test. How was it done, she never said.) By the way, he is HA too. -
ruohoo97:
Ladies, who is the 'he'? :?
Maybe he/she is late-bloomer.Mychildren:
If what you said in blue is true, I wonder why he is not selected then??? :?
-
ksi:
Good conclusion ksi.
Then again we are talking about 2 different things. My robustness points to keeping the HA kids who can be trained out of the selection. So my call is to parents, don't even bother about training. Your bastardization points to reducing 2E intake and getting in more giftedness in all-rounding, which in your definition is not possible to be omni-gifted, at best HA only. To you, there is only one definition for giftedness, 2E. Please talk to atutor2011 or Leonardo and see if they agree. In the discussion in this thread, it has gone off balance to dump down other gifted kids who are not in 2E. The range of giftedness is not limited to 2E.2ppaamm:
Er... but the original selection process was devised by experts invited by MOE along with training the original set of teachers. Along the way, they couldn't cope with the teaching so they changed the whole selection system. I don't think this is called 'robustized', I'd rather call this 'accustomized', with compromise.
To use vlim's terminology, they used to choose kids with surface area bigger, but any shape. However, since they find it hard to even find the surface area of these children, they decided the biggest they can find, with the criteria of being round, and does not matter if their surface area is smaller than those who are odd shaped and not round. 
In short, GEP has its own definition of giftedness. And it is ok. As long as they don't lead parents of gifted children in all directions and only to find out through their own admission months later.
But this discussion is a good read for parents with 2E kids if they feel that GEP cannot meet their needs after learning about 2ppaamm's experience. The real problem is Singapore is too small, we do not have enough 2E kids to start a genius academy and likely not enough experts for 2E kids, the large countries can. Some 2E kids like Sheldon can fit GEP(maybe he is 3E, skewed and all-rounder), some like LJ cannot so all is not lost for 2E kids, it just have to be managed by exception. And we do not advocate management of exception by demolishing a system which works for another group of kids with the special learning needs.
:salute: for preserving to show the hollowness of some posts.
The fact is that Da vinci was not groomed by any educational system so why compare with him?
If at all a comparison needs to be made ( i dont see it as necessary but would be good to see) then it should be done with some other nation that has a gifted program in place and has produced such world renowned talents consistently.
LJ has good support of his sec school, so how come it becomes MOE's failure I dont see. Yes he was not talent spotted early on but once his calibre was known , he has been provided with good support. -
Mychildren:
1. Yes, I don't expect 100% accuracy in the selection test.
You must be kidding to expect a 100% accuracy.ksi:
[quote=\"Mychildren\"]
Hi, my DS's friend got in too because was prepared before hand. So I do somewhat agreed on the above in blue. I don't want to say so much cause his mum might be reading this.
:siam:
1. MOE can only try their best to be prudent in their processes to minimise but cannot eliminate. There is definitely a % of HA in there because between 1% and 1.1% any difference?
2. If that child is trained, the child already has the pre-requisite of innate ability. My personal experience is all those that I know who trained, DID NOT get in...and trained a few years...but academically doing above average in mainstream.
2. My personal experience too, told by the mother herself to me. (He was prepared for GEP selection test. How was it done, she never said.) By the way, he is HA too.[/quote]Sorry I lost you, you said he prepared and got into GEP and now you say he is HA too... so what is he? -
ksi:
Ladies, who is the 'he'? :?[/quote]Kee kee, my elder DS. :evil:
Maybe he/she is late-bloomer.ruohoo97:
[quote=\"Mychildren\"]
If what you said in blue is true, I wonder why he is not selected then??? :?
-
Don't worry, I don't have any flame here. I just here to chit chat and see see look look as usual. If I do distract you all, just ignore me.
-
Sun_2010:
Precisely Sun! LJ is a good example of not having to go thru the pain of doing English the GEP way and yet getting a good support in other ways to pursue his passion. I thought he was a positive example of our education support system but somehow he has been construed and made to look as a negative example for GEP screening failure. *thud* :faint:
LJ has good support of his sec school, so how come it becomes MOE's failure I dont see. Yes he was not talent spotted early on but once his calibre was known , he has been provided with good support. -
Mychildren:
Of course we don't expect 100% accuracy lah. Must be God to be able to do that. But apparently, folks in MOE think they are gods and they say at the GEP briefing that NO ONE is incorrectly selected.
1. Yes, I don't expect 100% accuracy in the selection test.ksi:
You must be kidding to expect a 100% accuracy.
1. MOE can only try their best to be prudent in their processes to minimise but cannot eliminate. There is definitely a % of HA in there because between 1% and 1.1% any difference?
2. If that child is trained, the child already has the pre-requisite of innate ability. My personal experience is all those that I know who trained, DID NOT get in...and trained a few years...but academically doing above average in mainstream.
2. My personal experience too, told by the mother herself to me. (He was prepared for GEP selection test. How was it done, she never said.) By the way, he is HA too.
But again, I remember they have their own measurement, so they are 100% correct BY THEIR MEASUREMENT. Remember this discussion?
When dealing with gods, we must remember we are just mortals, until the idols are abolished. :imanangel: -
Sun_2010:
Good conclusion ksi.
Then again we are talking about 2 different things. My robustness points to keeping the HA kids who can be trained out of the selection. So my call is to parents, don't even bother about training. Your bastardization points to reducing 2E intake and getting in more giftedness in all-rounding, which in your definition is not possible to be omni-gifted, at best HA only. To you, there is only one definition for giftedness, 2E. Please talk to atutor2011 or Leonardo and see if they agree. In the discussion in this thread, it has gone off balance to dump down other gifted kids who are not in 2E. The range of giftedness is not limited to 2E.ksi:
[quote=\"2ppaamm\"]
Er... but the original selection process was devised by experts invited by MOE along with training the original set of teachers. Along the way, they couldn't cope with the teaching so they changed the whole selection system. I don't think this is called 'robustized', I'd rather call this 'accustomized', with compromise. To use vlim's terminology, they used to choose kids with surface area bigger, but any shape. However, since they find it hard to even find the surface area of these children, they decided the biggest they can find, with the criteria of being round, and does not matter if their surface area is smaller than those who are odd shaped and not round.
In short, GEP has its own definition of giftedness. And it is ok. As long as they don't lead parents of gifted children in all directions and only to find out through their own admission months later.
But this discussion is a good read for parents with 2E kids if they feel that GEP cannot meet their needs after learning about 2ppaamm's experience. The real problem is Singapore is too small, we do not have enough 2E kids to start a genius academy and likely not enough experts for 2E kids, the large countries can. Some 2E kids like Sheldon can fit GEP(maybe he is 3E, skewed and all-rounder), some like LJ cannot so all is not lost for 2E kids, it just have to be managed by exception. And we do not advocate management of exception by demolishing a system which works for another group of kids with the special learning needs.
:salute: for preserving to show the hollowness of some posts.
The fact is that Da vinci was not groomed by any educational system so why compare with him?
If at all a comparison needs to be made ( i dont see it as necessary but would be good to see) then it should be done with some other nation that has a gifted program in place and has produced such world renowned talents consistently.
LJ has good support of his sec school, so how come it becomes MOE's failure I dont see. Yes he was not talent spotted early on but once his calibre was known , he has been provided with good support.[/quote]Sadly, we don't have too many Da vinci today. I think our human being is de-evolution, instead evolution. :slapshead:
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