Aristocare
-
phtthp:
[/quote]Went into Dr Pehs website, he has a BSc, MSc and MBA but not clear how these degrees are related to teaching young kids. Looks like primarily a one man's team, but track record very impressive.Quote:
He knows there are parents who'll do anything to get their kids into GEP so he figures he can make a lot of money off them. If the parents weren't that desperate, he would have no biz. Makes me wonder if Dr Peh is at fault for calling his tuition centre Dr Peh when he is just a Mr Peh. Hhmmm....
Straits Times Reporters,
pls help parents verify into Dr Peh background too. (just in case) Thank you.Otah:
agree ![quote=\"ForumWriter\"] CASE doesn't care, does it?
With so much news reported recently, it is time they put it a stop to service priveders of GEP related training if thy still want to have this programme in place, else it become insulting to the education system here.
government should intervene and put a stop, take action on ALL GEP Training centres including Dr. Peh, MindStretcher, other existing ones + new potential ones (scam con men ) entering the market. ENFORCE the LAW ! -
ForumWriter:
The fact that CASE came out and stated its stand in our national papers and inviting people to take legal recourse in this case is already quite unusual. We have to give them credit for this.
Nope, relevant authorities won't check. As I've mentioned earlier in this thread, why would the government get its hands dirty? It'll just sit back, relax, and let the disgruntled parents hire private investigators and lawyers.Zeng:
Thats why the relevant authorities (or anyone here can confirm) should check if this so called center is registered bec in its original website info before it was taken down and in this thread, it was mentioned that there is a $200 registration fee ( payable annually) and a deposit. So if it is not a tution center, is the Consumer Act that Case mentioned in ST applicable? If these are free lance private transactions, what kind of rules/law are applicable?
If you recall, in their website, Aristocare has 3 names as \"directors\" and \"principal\". Where are there? How come ST did not mention or interview all these directors?
The forum letter from CASE already proves it, right? Instead of starting its own investigation to find out who was affected and take action against KO, it chooses to write a letter, inviting people to officially complain and seek legal action. Easy way out.
Of course, it's obvious that not everyone reads the papers/forums every day and could have missed CASE's message, but CASE doesn't care, does it?
I still stand by what I say: Parents should not get refunds since they were told by the government that GEP can't be trained (implication: GEP training sessions are useless/fake). But the government should still take action against KO just like any other scammer, instead of waiting for people to take their own legal action.
Under what law will the relevant authorities be able to take action against aristocare? -
Zeng:
Good Day,
Dea NickleBee
Thank you for your enlightening post on National Day. Have some queries for you
1.I am always very curious to know exactly what all these so called GEP trainers provide that can persuade many parents to part $1000 or more per mth for training or is it bec of the glittering track record such as \"50% of my our students top their schs or 80% of our students get into GEP\"?
2.Do you think the term GEP is a misnomer and perhaps a better term can be used? GEP refers to the top1% of performers based on the selection test but in reality in every batch only a few are really profoundly gifted beyond their years. By doing away with the term \"gifted\" perhaps there will be lesser bragging rights and GEP training will bec less popular.
3. A lot of us have kids who are struggling in sch and thats why we land up in KSP forum looking to learn from others and for some desperate looking for solutions. In years gone by, parents send their struggling kids to tuition centers but nowadays parents send their already very bright kids to tuition centers to make them even brighter. Do you think it is bec the curriculum is getting tougher and if tuition makes any diff to the latter group?
With regards to Query 1, I am sorry but as I and NickleBee Tutors do not agree with and will never provide preparatory courses for the Gifted Education Programme, I have no stake in such an industry and I will hence refrain from going into the mechanics of how GEP Prep Course Trainers attract and retain their students.
As for Query 2, I would think that the term \"Programme for the Intellectually Gifted\" would be more suited given that the GE Branch of MOE appears to restrict the definition of the term \"Gifted\" to what is more commonly known as being \"Intellectually Gifted\". I would hesitate to agree with your comment \"GEP refers to the top 1% of performers based on the selection test but in reality in every batch only a few are really profoundly gifted beyond their years.\". Due to the simple fact that there is no way we can define exactly what it means to be 'profoundly gifted' without injecting our personal bias into such a definition. Would we be talking about those who are academically inclined, or maybe the ones who are musically talented, mathematical savants, science geniuses or computer programming wizards? Not forgetting the few with more eclectic talents and abilities. I personally prefer to idolize those who have the capability to shape the course of world history and enrich human knowledge through innovations and ideas far beyond their time. In that sense, from my point of view, individuals as disparate as Mahatma Gandhi, Bill Gates, Stephen Hawkings, Albert Einstein and Gautama Buddha are 'Gifted'. Of course, if we made any of them sit for a Primary 3 MOE Standardized GEP Selection test whey they were 9 years old, I won't place my money on all of them passing such a test.
As for doing away with the label \"Gifted\", I would think that doing so would hardly matter. Labels are just that - labels. It is the perception by the parents of the GEP that makes it so desirable and not the bunch of letters that make up the word \"gifted\". As long as parents view the GEP with much fervour due to perhaps, the smaller class sizes, the bragging rights of being in an elite programme or due to the increased probability of a GEP kid of attaining entry into a choice Integrated Programme, no matter how we name such a programme, there will always be an aura of eliteness and desirability surrounding it.
Now, allow me to go onto Query 3. I personally never did have tuition (apart from Chinese tuition which I thoroughly hated). The reason why my mother didn't see the need for any other tuition was because she felt that her canes were effective enough to ensure continued compliance with her demands for excellent results. Quite funny, on hindsight, now that I look back at my childhood but I assure you that it wasn't as funny then. Of course, most of my GEP classmates must also have had some sort of tuition or parental guidance given that we always seemed to know more than what the syllabus prescribed , but we never did admit so to each other. So I would believe that the phenomena of bright kids still depending on tuition is not a recent one.
So why would the better students still depend on tuition? If I may borrow a concept from evolutionary biology known as the \"Red Queen Hypothesis\". The exact definition is as follows \"In reference to an evolutionary system, continuing adaptation (improvement of survival advantage) is needed in order for a species to maintain its relative fitness (survivability) amongst the systems being co-evolved with\".
Now if we paraphrase it to apply such a concept to the Singapore Education, \"In reference to an education system, continuing adaptation (improvement of academic advantage) is needed in order for a student to maintain its relative fitness (academic marks) amongst the students being co-educated with\".
To put it simply, no matter how good a students already is academically, he or she will always seek out an advantage (perceived or otherwise) over his or her peers (who are also seeking out their own advantage over the rest). Not forgetting the teachers who have to raise the exam standards time and time again as they have to differentiate the students into various levels of ability and definitely can't have all scoring A1 or A* all the time. I guess that's what makes the tuition industry in Singapore a billion dollar one.
If I may generalize a little, most outsiders view the best and brightest of the Integrated Programme or those in the GEP as being ones with huge egos and who view themselves as being the cream of the cream of the crop. The reality is that, on the inside, most are rather insecure about their intellectual capacity due to the simple fact that they are surrounded by their peers who regularly display feats of academic brilliance. Naturally, they would then seek an external advantage (such as 'Star' tutors) to help them achieve their aims of outshining the rest and when the rest notice the upstart, they would then hire their own tutors or seek out model answers from the seniors for their own external advantage and the 'Arms Race' carries on. Of course my 'unfair advantage' was my mother's rather arcane concept of caning and that was incentive enough to ensure a reasonable standard of grades I achieved, not forgetting also, that I was an information junkie and I quite literally inhaled textbooks on disparate concepts whether they were going to come out for the exams or not.
Most parents think that the curriculum is getting harder, especially for Primary School Maths. I am sorry to disappoint but it is not so. What is happening is that MOE demands that their students master skillsets such as critical thinking, problem solving and heuristics which are skills much needed in the brave new world that is the 21th century our children will grow up in. Such skills are indeed tough for parents who were brought up to absorb knowledge unquestioningly and regurgitate the information during exams to get the appropriate marks. I personally approve of the way MOE is teaching maths nowdays but I believe that MOE could get better returns by perhaps having smaller class sizes when teaching problem solving skills and heuristics. -
NickleBee Tutors:
:rahrah: :goodpost: :goodpost:
Good Day,Zeng:
Dea NickleBee
Thank you for your enlightening post on National Day. Have some queries for you
1.I am always very curious to know exactly what all these so called GEP trainers provide that can persuade many parents to part $1000 or more per mth for training or is it bec of the glittering track record such as \"50% of my our students top their schs or 80% of our students get into GEP\"?
2.Do you think the term GEP is a misnomer and perhaps a better term can be used? GEP refers to the top1% of performers based on the selection test but in reality in every batch only a few are really profoundly gifted beyond their years. By doing away with the term \"gifted\" perhaps there will be lesser bragging rights and GEP training will bec less popular.
3. A lot of us have kids who are struggling in sch and thats why we land up in KSP forum looking to learn from others and for some desperate looking for solutions. In years gone by, parents send their struggling kids to tuition centers but nowadays parents send their already very bright kids to tuition centers to make them even brighter. Do you think it is bec the curriculum is getting tougher and if tuition makes any diff to the latter group?
With regards to Query 1, I am sorry but as I and NickleBee Tutors do not agree with and will never provide preparatory courses for the Gifted Education Programme, I have no stake in such an industry and I will hence refrain from going into the mechanics of how GEP Prep Course Trainers attract and retain their students.
As for Query 2, I would think that the term \"Programme for the Intellectually Gifted\" would be more suited given that the GE Branch of MOE appears to restrict the definition of the term \"Gifted\" to what is more commonly known as being \"Intellectually Gifted\". I would hesitate to agree with your comment \"GEP refers to the top 1% of performers based on the selection test but in reality in every batch only a few are really profoundly gifted beyond their years.\". Due to the simple fact that there is no way we can define exactly what it means to be 'profoundly gifted' without injecting our personal bias into such a definition. Would we be talking about those who are academically inclined, or maybe the ones who are musically talented, mathematical savants, science geniuses or computer programming wizards? Not forgetting the few with more eclectic talents and abilities. I personally prefer to idolize those who have the capability to shape the course of world history and enrich human knowledge through innovations and ideas far beyond their time. In that sense, from my point of view, individuals as disparate as Mahatma Gandhi, Bill Gates, Stephen Hawkings, Albert Einstein and Gautama Buddha are 'Gifted'. Of course, if we made any of them sit for a Primary 3 MOE Standardized GEP Selection test whey they were 9 years old, I won't place my money on all of them passing such a test.
As for doing away with the label \"Gifted\", I would think that doing so would hardly matter. Labels are just that - labels. It is the perception by the parents of the GEP that makes it so desirable and not the bunch of letters that make up the word \"gifted\". As long as parents view the GEP with much fervour due to perhaps, the smaller class sizes, the bragging rights of being in an elite programme or due to the increased probability of a GEP kid of attaining entry into a choice Integrated Programme, no matter how we name such a programme, there will always be an aura of eliteness and desirability surrounding it.
Now, allow me to go onto Query 3. I personally never did have tuition (apart from Chinese tuition which I thoroughly hated). The reason why my mother didn't see the need for any other tuition was because she felt that her canes were effective enough to ensure continued compliance with her demands for excellent results. Quite funny, on hindsight, now that I look back at my childhood but I assure you that it wasn't as funny then. Of course, most of my GEP classmates must also have had some sort of tuition or parental guidance given that we always seemed to know more than what the syllabus prescribed , but we never did admit so to each other. So I would believe that the phenomena of bright kids still depending on tuition is not a recent one.
So why would the better students still depend on tuition? If I may borrow a concept from evolutionary biology known as the \"Red Queen Hypothesis\". The exact definition is as follows \"In reference to an evolutionary system, continuing adaptation (improvement of survival advantage) is needed in order for a species to maintain its relative fitness (survivability) amongst the systems being co-evolved with\".
Now if we paraphrase it to apply such a concept to the Singapore Education, \"In reference to an education system, continuing adaptation (improvement of academic advantage) is needed in order for a student to maintain its relative fitness (academic marks) amongst the students being co-educated with\".
To put it simply, no matter how good a students already is academically, he or she will always seek out an advantage (perceived or otherwise) over his or her peers (who are also seeking out their own advantage over the rest). Not forgetting the teachers who have to raise the exam standards time and time again as they have to differentiate the students into various levels of ability and definitely can't have all scoring A1 or A* all the time. I guess that's what makes the tuition industry in Singapore a billion dollar one.
If I may generalize a little, most outsiders view the best and brightest of the Integrated Programme or those in the GEP as being ones with huge egos and who view themselves as being the cream of the cream of the crop. The reality is that, on the inside, most are rather insecure about their intellectual capacity due to the simple fact that they are surrounded by their peers who regularly display feats of academic brilliance. Naturally, they would then seek an external advantage (such as 'Star' tutors) to help them achieve their aims of outshining the rest and when the rest notice the upstart, they would then hire their own tutors or seek out model answers from the seniors for their own external advantage and the 'Arms Race' carries on. Of course my 'unfair advantage' was my mother's rather arcane concept of caning and that was incentive enough to ensure a reasonable standard of grades I achieved, not forgetting also, that I was an information junkie and I quite literally inhaled textbooks on disparate concepts whether they were going to come out for the exams or not.
Most parents think that the curriculum is getting harder, especially for Primary School Maths. I am sorry to disappoint but it is not so. What is happening is that MOE demands that their students master skillsets such as critical thinking, problem solving and heuristics which are skills much needed in the brave new world that is the 21th century our children will grow up in. Such skills are indeed tough for parents who were brought up to absorb knowledge unquestioningly and regurgitate the information during exams to get the appropriate marks. I personally approve of the way MOE is teaching maths nowdays but I believe that MOE could get better returns by perhaps having smaller class sizes when teaching problem solving skills and heuristics. -
I am back from my brief, self-imposed exile.
I must catch-up with Aristocare threads. Briefly, what is all that about???
Finally, in relation to GEP, I do notice that a lot of effort on Kiasu threads is about attainment in key subjects rather than building cognitive and reasoning ability. There should be a great emphasis on building these skills.
As I cannot find books in these areas from POPULAR, I buy from India and Australia (check my GEP thread on books). -
optimistforum:
is about this unscrupulous conman, founder of this company called Aristocare.
I must catch-up with Aristocare threads. Briefly, what is all that about????
whose objective: is to devise all ways & means, go all out to con gullible parents so eager to prepare their child sit for P3 GEP entrance tests. He charged expensive rates, lied about his academic background, boast about his fake university degree qualifications, etc. Everything about him is fake, nothing but one lie leading to another. -
Hi NickleBee,
I like your statement that caning works effectively for you.
As a matter of thought, I recollected my childhood when my Mum would demonstrate the cane to exert the importance of study. It has worked effectively for me. I did not have any tuition at all and yet, I made my way thru and graduated with 2nd Class Honors about 20 yrs back.
Now that my DD is in P4 and even though she is in GEP class, I would occasionally exert caning (not hard but a firm one ) if needed when she makes careless mistakes repeatedly. It also works well in her too. She would tell me that it is a waking call for her. -
"Most parents think that the curriculum is getting harder, especially for Primary School Maths. I am sorry to disappoint but it is not so. What is happening is that MOE demands that their students master skillsets such as critical thinking, problem solving and heuristics which are skills much needed in the brave new world that is the 21th century our children will grow up in. Such skills are indeed tough for parents who were brought up to absorb knowledge unquestioningly and regurgitate the information during exams to get the appropriate marks. I personally approve of the way MOE is teaching maths nowdays but I believe that MOE could get better returns by perhaps having smaller class sizes when teaching problem solving skills and heuristics."
Thank you Nickle Bee for your kind reply.
Agree that MOE’s approach is a good one, but the concern is the practical relevance of all those convoluted Maths questions for our young kids which have been highlighted in other KSP threads.
Its a brand new game when a kid gets into sec sch. -
Hehehe… next forum:
"How to cane your child to enter GEP"… tuition fees $100 / hr -
Lynn2010:
You are hilarious Lynn!! :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao:Hehehe..... next forum:
\"How to cane your child to enter GEP\"....... tuition fees $100 / hr
Canes have different types too...designer ones or mid-market ones or common ones? :boogie: Different rates apply....
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