floppy\" post_id=\"2021998\" time=\"1619799883\" user_id=\"97579:

6thisnthat9\" post_id=\"2021989\" time=\"1619793139\" user_id=\"145858:

I also know there are parents, with kids who are exceptional, both in GEP, top in cohorts etc, affected by new AL system. But somehow, they keep using AL 20, AL 22 to mark as examples of the pitfalls of new AL system, stating the wider range etc.

Strangely so far, I have not heard such complaints from parents with kids in these ranges.

Isn’t that usually the case?
The more “better” you are, the more concerned you have of lesser folks diluting your soup.

The other group that you haven’t heard complaints from… the school.

Just feel like the better they are, the more stake they have in not gaining more, to be honest.
I have one child in the wider 65 to 74 range, I only look at how to help my child get 1 or 2 more points here and there or support him in how I can, read up more, find out about dsa on his potential, and be prepared to accept whatever outcome. I am not complaining about the wider range and the disadvantage etc.
Just wondering if the parent stating the pitfalls of wider score range of AL20, AL22, would like to share if her child is actually scoring that range, perhaps to share more. If not, the rest of us are just making guessing.

How about a child scoring 45, being group with those scoring 64, like parent charsiu pointed out?

manorway\" post_id=\"2021996\" time=\"1619797771\" user_id=\"9303:

But it is totally possible to score 20% for a subject or two. If a child is really weak and parents have limited resources, they might just give up 2 subjects and work on 2.

Yes, it is possible for a child to score as low as 20-30% for 1 or 2 or more subjects. But to be able to score 80% for Eng and Maths, means this child is above average of the cohort, so with such good brain, good in Eng (right) and logic (left brain) , it is not realistic that such child will not score above 45 for Sci. For Chinese, even foundation Chinese grade would not be definitely a lowest grade, with such good brain.

With all the historical databases that moe has, not difficult for them to know more than public, the many correlation about these subjects and different groups of children.

When one state such extreme example, 80, 80, 0, 0
It may just be one scenarios in figures, but we also have to put them in real context.

lee_yl\" post_id=\"2021991\" time=\"1619794061\" user_id=\"17023:

Examples of

Eng 80% (AL 3)
Maths 80% (AL 3)
Sc 0% (AL
Chinese 0% (AL
Total AL22 - Express stream.

Very likely, no one in his right mind will purposely do it this way under the current system because the student will get a ridiculously low Tscore. So I believe that in MOE’s simulation, based on psle cohort 2020’s raw scores, there is a correlation between Tscore and AL.

However, if one chooses to game the new system then it’s entirely possible to score AL 3, 3, 8 and 8 to still have AL 22 to get in. Another interesting example is raw score of 45, 45, 45 and 75. The likely Tscore will likely be low and not likely to happen under the current system.

This could be a cognitive blind spot in MOE as their simulated data will not have such examples but in reality, these could offer creative ways to game the new system.

Not familiar with the affiliation issue with AL COP but
There is more likely correlation with Eng, maths and Sci scores.
I find it hard to believe that a child scoring 80 for both Eng and maths, will score 0 for Sci. Even to score 0 for Chinese is not easy too. So such examples may not exist in their database in the whole psle history.

zac's mum\" post_id=\"2021986\" time=\"1619792502\" user_id=\"53606:[quote=\"zac's mum\" post_id=2021986 time=1619792502 user_id=53606]

Veyron\" post_id=\"2021984\" time=\"1619791228\" user_id=\"30663:

Nope. The announced 22 is a simulated COP generated by MOE by using the raw marks of all the students (NOT their T score). Based on their actual choices, MOE used computer to fill up the vacancies using the simulated total AL score, from best to worst, until all the vacancies are filled. No T score anywhere. The generated cut off 22 is therefore the score of the (fictitious) last student.

They did NOT go dig up the actual last student’s raw score and add up & it turned out to be 22. Not that way.

Yes, zm is correct. In other words, the last person in 2020 posting using tscore of school A, is not the same last person in recent simulated posting using AL of the same school A.

I also know there are parents, with kids who are exceptional, both in GEP, top in cohorts etc, affected by new AL system. But somehow, they keep using AL 20, AL 22 to mark as examples of the pitfalls of new AL system, stating the wider range etc.


Strangely so far, I have not heard such complaints from parents with kids in these ranges.

Luxedream\" post_id=\"2021969\" time=\"1619785345\" user_id=\"98340:

Veyron\" post_id=\"2021950\" time=\"1619778512\" user_id=\"30663:

Affiliation schools offering AL17 COP is indeed shocking because the T-score equivalent for AL17 band is extremely wide.

e,g The upper end T-scores for AL17 can be 225 while the lower end is as low as 190. Which is to say, students who score 225 hoping to get a spot in secondary school will have to ballot with peers scoring as low as 190.

May I know how do you calculate that AL17 ranges from t score 190-225? Is there a conversion table or chart available?

I’m curious to know the range for AL18-20, I believe the range will be even wider than AL17 coz AL5 is a 10 mark difference. AL20 being the cut off for express, is also the COP for many affiliated schools.

In the list recently released by MOE, schools with AL17 as the lower AL in the range has a range of cop in tscore 220-225. Whereas schools with AL22 as the lower AL in the range has a range of cop in tscore 188-190.

So how does the 190-225 range come about?

Anyone also noticed?

Now no more default ESIS for GEP P6 kids.
So maybe AL6 as cop for ESIS to make up is possible

putien\" post_id=\"2021795\" time=\"1619685180\" user_id=\"29927:

ESIS COP
2021 - 4 or 5 ?
2020 - 261
2019 - 261
2018 - 260
2017 - 262
2016 - 262
2015 - 262
2014 - 258
2013 - 258
2012 - 262
2011 - 260
2010 - 260
2009 - 261
2008 - 263
2007 - 264
2006 - 262

ESIS is awarded to top 3% of each cohort, i.e. ~1200 students.

We will only know if it is 4 or 5 when 2021 PSLE results are out in Nov.

Do you think it is going to be 4?

I know a child has 3A* and 1A, score 264 in 2019, so was awarded ESIS. So I think AL5 and some AL6 is the cut-off, just a guess.
MOE may change the criteria to above AL6, ~top 5% or something, to simplify the process.

Thank you for reminding us the original intention about AL system. To strike off the Std Dev. Almost lose sight of this for some of us, including myself.


For some kids, comparing own performance against their peers in tscore system gives them better results because the other kids are under performing,
while for others, seem like a losing race forever, never can catch up.

Now with AL, every child's performance is measured by his own.

m3i_m3i\" post_id=\"2021777\" time=\"1619674027\" user_id=\"18745:

Luxedream\" post_id=\"2021773\" time=\"1619671620\" user_id=\"98340:

[quote=SG_KP1 post_id=2021728 time=1619660231 user_id=188234]
The AL system is similar to the O-Level system in that you get no credit above the threshold for the highest band and you have the step function where one point moves you up or down a level.

While both AL and O level systems are based on banding, O level's A1 is >75. For PSLE, >75 used to be an A grade, now it can range from AL1to AL4. Instead of reducing the stress on students, I personally find the AL system extremely competitive especially for the top 20% of the cohort.

From MOE FAQ
It's not 20%, more than 50% of students get 75 in PSLE.
I'd rather like AL than t-score (my older girl is the last t-score cohort)
I was so stress since I know my girl's weakness in languages and T-score seems to favor kids that good in languages.
When I broke down how T-score calculated, I understood that standard deviation played that favor. Every subject must have different std dev, and different in 1 point can make such different.
With AL kids are no more compared with cohort, scrapped the std dev, each kid can excel in their own strength.
I heard a sad story previous years, kid with A* 2A and C on CL only got 214, when I calculated into AL he supposed got max AL15 and MOE indicated around 225-229
I read other parent's comment about how not fair 89 & 90 become different AL; if 75-89 is group into the same AL, it will be even unfairer[/quote]

floppy\" post_id=\"2021642\" time=\"1619605067\" user_id=\"97579:

6thisnthat9\" post_id=\"2021639\" time=\"1619602946\" user_id=\"145858:

[quote=floppy post_id=2021534 time=1619536787 user_id=97579]

Nope.

If school A COP is AL9, affiliated COP is AL13, the school is most likely going to be comfortable with some DSA students having a score of AL14 or for some exceptional talent, AL15.

How do we know? Is there real examples to share?
Every child only has 3 choices for dsa, have to weigh to go for which choices with better chances.

Err…
AL score hasn’t really been implemented yet, where got examples to share :rotflmao:
We can only guestimate from past t-score behavior. AL13 / 14 is around 230 ish, which is what IP schools are minimally comfortable with. I doubt that will change in AL score environment.[/quote]Yes, I meant real past examples, doesn't matter they are under old or AL system. I heard schools still choose those with good or closer to cop in academic results for cca dsa. Just wondering child w cca talent but results not as comparable, will stand a chance still?