Bear.w.me:

I noticed that the Western countries (suppose to be developed countries) like the USA and Western European countries, going to university is a matter of choice for their citizens. As long as one can study and meet the minimum entry requirements. :rahrah:


Just my humble opinion.

Daddy

http://www.straitstimes.com:80/premium/singapore/story/every-school-have-niche-2017-20120920

[quote]Every school to have a niche by 2017
MOE to fund teacher training and facilities, to help build expertise...

Bear.w.me:

I noticed that the Western countries (suppose to be developed countries) like the USA and Western European countries, going to university is a matter of choice for their citizens. As long as one can study and meet the minimum entry requirements. :rahrah:

slmkhoo:

Similarly in the US, it's not just a case of meeting minimum standards to be accepted. There are also many universities of varying standards, and employers will take that into consideration too. I think one of the main differences between the west (I have many US and UK friends) and Asians is that there is less of the strong desire for the same top few courses like law and medicine. Individuals consider their abilities and interests more than simply pay and prestige.

Countries like China should also serve as a warning to Singapore - many graduates cannot find jobs as the quality of many degrees is low, but graduates are unwilling to take 'lesser' jobs. For some of these graduates, it is a tragic situation as sometimes entire extended families have helped to pay his fees and are relying on him to get a 'good' job and help the clan in finances and guanxi. When they can't find a 'graduate' job, they experience a lot of pressure and disappointment, and there are debts to pay back. In these cases, the students would probably have done better to have gone to the poly-equivalent rather than struggle to make into a low-ranked university and course - at least they would have a job.

Bear.w.me:

Hi All,


I am a parent whose children are also in school right now. :grphug:

In my opinion, for as much as Singapore would like to be a developed nation, then its people will be making choices more independently (i say more independently because there is still a system and requirement in place).

I noticed that the Western countries (suppose to be developed countries) like the USA and Western European countries, going to university is a matter of choice for their citizens. As long as one can study and meet the minimum entry requirements. :rahrah:

So i think step-by-step Singapore is moving in the right direction. In the end citizens will find more levelled playing field.

We need to move away with the myth that higher education is only meant for the brightest but it is meant for the one who wants to work hard to achieve it. This is what education in a developed countries is about.

Just my humble opinion.

Bear.w.me:

Hi All,


I am a parent whose children are also in school right now. :grphug:

In my opinion, for as much as Singapore would like to be a developed nation, then its people will be making choices more independently (i say more independently because there is still a system and requirement in place).

I noticed that the Western countries (suppose to be developed countries) like the USA and Western European countries, going to university is a matter of choice for their citizens. As long as one can study and meet the minimum entry requirements. :rahrah:

So i think step-by-step Singapore is moving in the right direction. In the end citizens will find more levelled playing field.

We need to move away with the myth that higher education is only meant for the brightest but it is meant for the one who wants to work hard to achieve it. This is what education in a developed countries is about.

Just my humble opinion.

edtan:

I think the MOE is too reactive over by one or two people comments.

First, it was the P1 screening and later Secondary school banding.

Why don't take out the entry requirement for the universities, that will solve every parent woe and have unlimited vacancies for all courses. We can choose we want to do; not constraints by the entry points.

nms1:

verykiasu2010:

no time to catch up reading from page 1


here is my view. when MOE stops the banding, there will be enterprising people who will start to compile the data and do their own research and ranking and analysis, and parents will buy those info in a book, or subscribe to a website

I know there were people who wanted to do just that - research, compile & analyse data, interview the school, and rank them, and sell the info

Probably ksp website could one day evolve into that database, subscription based

Not giving any idea to CKS to start charging. It is just an example

The bottom line is, MOE does not do it, others will do it. Last time it was done by SPH/ST

Which just goes to prove that the parents are part of the problem! However much MOE tries to change unless parents change their expectations, the problems will still remain.

Parents need to accept that not all children can be top students, not all children will benefit from being in a \"top\" school and really find out where their child's strengths lie and what the best options are for them.

verykiasu2010:

no time to catch up reading from page 1


here is my view. when MOE stops the banding, there will be enterprising people who will start to compile the data and do their own research and ranking and analysis, and parents will buy those info in a book, or subscribe to a website

I know there were people who wanted to do just that - research, compile & analyse data, interview the school, and rank them, and sell the info

Probably ksp website could one day evolve into that database, subscription based

Not giving any idea to CKS to start charging. It is just an example

The bottom line is, MOE does not do it, others will do it. Last time it was done by SPH/ST

firefly38:

tutormum:

[quote=\"pinky\"]I support the scrapping too. Heard from friends of schools asking their students to drop subjects that they did not do well in case it affect the school overall ranking. (I suppose referring to S4 students). Wonder if it is a common practice :yikes:

No need to wonder. It is so common that every school is doing it. Thank God that DS3 is able to take Literature as O level as he loves it. His school has not offered it for seven years. I know the main reason that students are not encouraged to take Literature cos of the low chance of scoring A. Schools don't want it to pull down the overall ranking while students don't want to get anything less than A. :sad:

tutormum:

He has had prayed fervently for it cos he knew that the chance was very slim. :nailbite: :nailbite: Imagine 20+ out of a cohort of more than 350 students taking Literature. :slapshead: :slapshead:
He's enjoying it very much and one of the reasons is that the class is half of the usual number and there's so much more the teacher can do than with a normal class. Class size does play an important role. :rant: He has learnt so much (much more than what I did for my O levels) that it's one of his favourite subjects and confident that he'll get A with his eyes closed.
Interest in a subject does play a very important role. No point forcing your children to take up triple sciences, for example, just cos everybody is doing it and hope that he'll be a doctor when he loves arts, right? I rather go against the norm and have happy children then spend tons of money in trying to make them big lawyers and doctors unless it's their wish in the first place. :roll: When schools and parents are churning out A students, they overuse the cutters and yet wonder why all students are of one size and shape. :mad: :mad:

firefly38:

tutormum:

[quote=\"pinky\"]I support the scrapping too. Heard from friends of schools asking their students to drop subjects that they did not do well in case it affect the school overall ranking. (I suppose referring to S4 students). Wonder if it is a common practice :yikes:

No need to wonder. It is so common that every school is doing it. Thank God that DS3 is able to take Literature as O level as he loves it. His school has not offered it for seven years. I know the main reason that students are not encouraged to take Literature cos of the low chance of scoring A. Schools don't want it to pull down the overall ranking while students don't want to get anything less than A. :sad:

pinky:

tutormum:

[quote=\"pinky\"]I support the scrapping too. Heard from friends of schools asking their students to drop subjects that they did not do well in case it affect the school overall ranking. (I suppose referring to S4 students). Wonder if it is a common practice :yikes:

No need to wonder. It is so common that every school is doing it. Thank God that DS3 is able to take Literature as O level as he loves it. His school has not offered it for seven years. I know the main reason that students are not encouraged to take Literature cos of the low chance of scoring A. Schools don't want it to pull down the overall ranking while students don't want to get anything less than A. :sad:

edtan:

Because there is an entry requirement into the university, we have \"A\" level. It is because of \"A\" level, we need to make sure our kids do well in their exam and get to a decent course of choice. Because of all these, we need to have a competitive environment to put them into test.


An iron sharpens another iron. I can't imagine a wood sharpens an iron but I don't mind a diamond sharpens an iron.

tutormum:

pinky:

I support the scrapping too. Heard from friends of schools asking their students to drop subjects that they did not do well in case it affect the school overall ranking. (I suppose referring to S4 students). Wonder if it is a common practice :yikes:

No need to wonder. It is so common that every school is doing it. Thank God that DS3 is able to take Literature as O level as he loves it. His school has not offered it for seven years. I know the main reason that students are not encouraged to take Literature cos of the low chance of scoring A. Schools don't want it to pull down the overall ranking while students don't want to get anything less than A. :sad:

edtan:

I think the MOE is too reactive over by one or two people comments.First, it was the P1 screening and later Secondary school banding.


Why don't take out the entry requirement for the universities, that will solve every parent woe and have unlimited vacancies for all courses. We can choose we want to do; not constraints by the entry points.

Because there is an entry requirement into the university, we have \"A\" level. It is because of \"A\" level, we need to make sure our kids do well in their exam and get to a decent course of choice. Because of all these, we need to have a competitive environment to put them into test.

An iron sharpens another iron. I can't imagine a wood sharpens an iron but I don't mind a diamond sharpens an iron.

tutormum:

pinky:

I support the scrapping too. Heard from friends of schools asking their students to drop subjects that they did not do well in case it affect the school overall ranking. (I suppose referring to S4 students). Wonder if it is a common practice :yikes:

No need to wonder. It is so common that every school is doing it. Thank God that DS3 is able to take Literature as O level as he loves it. His school has not offered it for seven years. I know the main reason that students are not encouraged to take Literature cos of the low chance of scoring A. Schools don't want it to pull down the overall ranking while students don't want to get anything less than A. :sad:

mummy so kiasu:

SAHM_TAN:

[quote=\"jtoh\"]With so many of the top schools going IP and not taking O level, there would be a big change in the Band 1 schools. One of the reasons for doing away with banding.

I feel the banding will still be useful for students who do not select IP schools to know which one are the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc after the IP schools