The ‘open house’ for ACS(I) is normally in the middle of the year because it’s designed to attract prospective DSA parents. ACS(I) isn’t very good at handling publicity — in fact, they hardly attempt to compete with RI for the students from their own feeder schools.

toddles:

Hmm... actually on this point, I think when MOE appoints principals, it sees them as CEOs of the school, and expect them to run the school like a CEO rather than to teach/be an educator.

Actually, no. The reason OTC was CEO of ACS(I) is that the principals of independent schools (only) were given the power to hire and fire within the constraints of resources and policies. MOE continues to treat their principals primarily as administrators but also teacher mentors and, in a broader sense, educators beyond what is expected of classroom teachers.

You can find all that on the http://www.moe.gov.sg.

In non-independent schools, normally officers like a specially designated Admin VP would carry out the jobs of HR, operations and so on.

3Boys:

reflecting over a nice glass of cabernet at dinner , speaking with the missus, thought I'd just add this. Actually, if OTC had been the principal of St Andrews instead, and the price of shooting up the academic league tables was a few harsh words and bruised egos, I would have taken it anytime.


jencrs, the irony is that he DID deliver, perhaps not for you, but for the generations of ACSians after you.

This is too funny, an SA boy defending a Rafflesian from criticisms of a ACSian.... :lol:

Yes it's pretty funny. But I think you may be defending an illusion. If you look at the results from 1991 (ranking starts) to 2002 (ranking ends for IP schools), you'll see this trend:

20, 14, 8, 11, 11, 14, 14, 8, 9, 10, 9, 9

That is, after the first ranking exercise, Prof Chia got the school in order so that by 1993, ACS(I) were ranked 8th. At that time, OTC was VP for Pastoral Care and Mrs Lenie Cho was VP/Acad.

OTC took over in 1994. As you can see, he never did better than 8th, despite having a better intake each year (smaller affiliated intake, higher average PSLE score, more scholars).

Obviously, a school is a lot more complex than this, and there are many other factors to consider. But I'm just following your CEO-producing-results argument and deciding that a lot of those results can be put down to factors other than the CEO.

I'm obviously one of those 'kaypoh' people who likes examining things more closely before I buy into media hype about anybody or anything. Up and on!

hildangirl:

Are there any girls admitted to ACS(I)? The MOE Secondary school webpage shows ACS(I) as a mixed school. The ACS(I) website has no mention of girls being admitted to this school

Girls are admitted to ACS(I) at Year 5 (equivalent to JC1). It's just like it was up to 1976 — ACS(I) is now a pre-university institution. But, yes, it's all boys from Year 1 to Year 4.

tiger262:

The ACS(I) website gives the monthly school fee but some people say that there are a lot of hidden costs, charges and fees at ACS(I), incurred throughout the year for various reasons. All these supposedly add up to a hefty yearly total.

The quarterly GIRO deduction for stationery, photocopying etc ranges from about $110 to $160. If students have to go for the end-of-year study camp, that's $240 + $25 per subject to be re-examined.

For overseas trips, the cost is variable; but all students from Sec 2 onwards go for at least one such trip a year. For Sec 2, this is normally to Malaysia. Malaysian trips cost $500-$600; trips elsewhere are $1100-$1600.

The lab fees start with an annual payment of $175 or so for lower sec classes, with additional charges to cover breakages etc. They seem to take their science programme quite seriously.

NTUC accident insurance annual premium per student is $11.65 at the moment, with other riders optional for sports injuries ($4.20 for Sec 1-4 and $9.80 for Year 5-6).

This is a rough summary of the info in this year's circulars to parents. I might have missed some things. And I am not sure what the current fees for IB examinations are.

WeiHan:

I read that the former head of CID has been appointed to lead the investigation board.


But don't expect much info will be released after the investigation. I speculate that there will be much coverup to save the name of the school.

Don't read too much into that. The 'former head of CID' happens to be on the http://www.blueskiescom.com/alumni/aug_sep_10/acs_boards.html, so it seems a rational choice. After all, he's had a lot of experience in investigating, no?

As for cover-up, there are only three reasonable outcomes (exonerated, exonerated with caveats, and guilty), and no board has to report findings to non-stakeholders. Unlike an institution that has the word 'National' in its name, or one that has a powerful patron, this one (having neither) is not really of such great interest.

atutor2001:

jtoh:

[quote=\"Piggy Lim\"]Hi

Just like to know if IB students are not well accepted (entry) into local Uni. Heard those who take IB will most likely have to go oversea Uni. Is this true? My son is now in ACS(J) just want to find out more from experience mom. Thanks!

Yes, it's true, for the first batch. Not sure if the situation's improved.

Maybe we are not familiar with IB scores and its equivalent A level scores. I understand that most students in IB get at least 40 points. Those less than 40 points are in trouble.

In A level, there are so many students with perfect score (all As), which rightfully should be the equivalent of 45 points under IB??.

Competition is so keen that getting 4As 1B effectively rules a student out of favourite courses such as med and law, the chance is as good as zero. Only a handful through other reasons (great interview, fantastic CCAs??) got in. Many perfect scores in A level were rejected by Med and Law. Maybe 4As 1B could be the equivalent of 40 points in IB and not being familiar with the new scoring system creates the impression that IB is not well accepted when students with 40 plus points were rejected.

However, I do get the feedback that it is easier to get into good American Uni through IB which could explain why many are going overseas.[/quote]I think that the best way to think about it is to do a comparison of three systems: the standard A-levels, the SG-Cambridge A-levels, and the IBDP.

In 2006, reports such as http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-394399/A-level-blow-Baccalaureate-given-rating-5-A-grades.html showed that 38 IB points out of 45 was equivalent to 5 standard A-level 'A' grades. 30 was worth 3.5 'A's, 35 was worth 4.5 'A's. In other words, 30 points was enough to get into most UK universities.

However, by 2009, the picture was changing as the UK revamped most A-level examinations. Thus, in reports such as http://www.tes.co.uk/article.aspx?storycode=6010100, some adjustment had been made. So it appeared that, especially at the upper end, the A-levels had caught up a tiny bit.

In SG, however, the A-level examination standard and syllabus are actually controlled by MOE although the papers are set by Cambridge. This is acknowledged by many top universities. Our A-levels may actually be up to 1.5 times harder than the standard A-levels.

That is why a good IB score may not translate to successful admission to a local university course but can get you into Columbia or Harvard.

http://nk11r10-homepage.mac.com/WebObjects/FileSharing.woa/wa/2007TSLNIBDPFInal.pdf.pdf-zip.zip?a=downloadFile&user=brythain&path=/Public/2007TSLNIBDPFInal.pdf is an interesting (but slightly outdated) article (380k PDF) about how the IB Diploma seems to fit into the SG education system.

Daddy

Good one.... how come the reporter(s) went to interview the sch kids? Very irritating...

My personal opinion is that the way the current admin cope with these nine issues (maybe more? anyone wants to add to this?) will tell us a lot about what to expect in the difficult months ahead.

The school’s priorities right now should be simple enough.


1. Establish a stable situation.
2. Provide crisis counselling and management.
3. Support the students and buffer them against stressors like the Press etc.
4. Provide timely updates about the school to the parents, but only if necessary.
5. Do not get distracted by the ex-principal because he is no longer staff.
6. Ensure the management of examinations etc is orderly and competent.
7. Assess and review current plans and see if still workable.
8. Prepare for the next academic year.
9. Work out the talent-sharing that is necessary for their link-up with MGS.

I don’t think much is gained by speculation right now. But I’m sure we’d all like to see these priorities dealt with.

The Year 5 students already in the IP normally help out in orientation and pre-orientation tasks. When the ‘new’ Year 5 students come in, they will go through a brief orientation programme.


Over the next year or so, they will catch up. Available data shows that as far as A-level results are concerned, those who entered at Y5 tend to be as good as or even better than those from earlier stages of the IP.

However, that’s probably because they’ve been through the pressure of competitive exams, so it’s a reflection of exam-skills mindset.

There’s actually no research so far that says IPs are better in any way.