slmkhoo:

Sieg:

[quote=\"zbear\"]Just thinking aloud - it's an irony that MOE build a new JC (Euonia) to cater to the demand for more IP JCs n shrinking the no of lower JCs (non IP). isn't this creating more stress amongst the Primary kids (PSLE) and parents who don't want to go to Poly but JC and for those who are determined to try n not give up just becos you are lesser capable than the high ability ones?


Is this another way of creating elitism when MOE die die says All Schools Are Good??? Is this motto still good????

I share your sentiment. Creating more stress and maybe more IMH cases in our society.

But they have said that existing JCs will increase their intake, so the number of students in JCs shouldn't reduce?[/quote]I agree that on the whole, everyone who is eligible and wish to go JC will be granted a place 'at the moment'. However, the way MOE handled those lower tier JCs while creating prestigious one such as EJC shows its favourism towards elitism.
To further explain, all parents want the best for their kids and some (if not most) will stretch their young kids to the limit so as survive this rat race.

zbear:

Just thinking aloud - it's an irony that MOE build a new JC (Euonia) to cater to the demand for more IP JCs n shrinking the no of lower JCs (non IP). isn't this creating more stress amongst the Primary kids (PSLE) and parents who don't want to go to Poly but JC and for those who are determined to try n not give up just becos you are lesser capable than the high ability ones?


Is this another way of creating elitism when MOE die die says All Schools Are Good??? Is this motto still good????

I share your sentiment. Creating more stress and maybe more IMH cases in our society.
Morever, not all who excel in O levels or in IP will excel in A levels and vice-versa.

Hey Jetsetter, please delete my username from that particular post of yours as it wasn’t me who wrote this:

"Because someone, somewhere screws up.
If you cannot convince them, confuse them - and the best way of confusing people is to lump together a few comprehensible, but totally meaning phrases."
It was Floppy!

slmkhoo:

As long as the total no. of JC places remains at the same proportion of the cohort size, does it really make much difference? I can see MOE's rationale (being ex-public sector) that economies of scale make larger JCs better in some ways - more subject comb choices, more CCA choices, larger and more varied facilities etc. It's sad for those which are closing, but at least no teachers will lose their jobs, and those who want to take A levels will have the same opportunities as before. The cut-off points are determined by the applicants, not the JC. So if each existing JC expands the no. of students it can take in, and there is no further \"improvement\" in A level grades scored by each cohort, the COPs will fall.

Today's paper states that some JC teachers will be transferred to secondary schools. Some teachers were upset that they were kept in the dark for so long.
Yeah, let's see if the COP for JC eligibilty will still be capped at 20 raw in the years to come.

zbear:

My interpretation of MOE's move is a signal to O level students who score more than 10 pointers to choose Poly route instead of JC as I see that the partnership of the merged JCs - low tier JC stops intake n gets absorbed into mid tier JC.


Eventually those who score more than 10 points will have a lesser choice of JCs and more Polys to choose.

Are all O level 11-20 pointers not good enough for JC?
DS' home tutor was from TPJC and a graduand of NUS biomedical course. She is currently doing her PhD in UK. Morever for one to choose the poly route, the pupil has to know his future career path. Not everyone is ready at the age of 16.

floppy:

Sieg:

\"As to why new JCs such as Eunoia were still being opened if enrolment was dwindling, MOE said that Eunoia JC was opened not to increase capacity but to give students more options, and for a more varied educational landscape\".


This is vague. Can someone please elaborate on the \"give more options and varied educational landscape\".

Because someone, somewhere screws up.
If you cannot convince them, confuse them - and the best way of confusing people is to lump together a few comprehensible, but totally meaning phrases.

this is one good interpretation.

My initial thought was EJC, being an IP-JC housing legit brighter students, is one that our 'garmen' would love to promote while those poorer-performing jcs are to be eliminated. In short, it is promoting elitism that will result in further kiasuism among anxious parents here. Not afraid birth rate will be afffected? Things will work well here only if one is blessed with academically smart kid(s).

-duplicate-

"As to why new JCs such as Eunoia were still being opened if enrolment was dwindling, MOE said that Eunoia JC was opened not to increase capacity but to give students more options, and for a more varied educational landscape".


This is vague. Can someone please elaborate on the "give more options and varied educational landscape".

KTKS:

mindays:

I have my reasons for bringing in NJC this year, okay, allow me to explain, no offense intended.

I took note of NJ's results as follows:
H2 Subjects with at least 50% Distinctions
• Art
• Chinese Language & Literature
• Economics
• French
• German
• History
• Knowledge & Inquiry
• Mathematics
• Physics
• Tamil Language & Literature

Note that these H2 subjects are mostly taken by the minorities of NJ: Art, Chinese Language & Literature, French, German, Knowledge & Inquiry, Tamil Language & Literature. 6 out of 10 of the subjects that were posted on its website are subjects that are taken by the minority of the students (assuming the popular science courses in NJC is just as regular as the other JCs: PCME and BCME) Note that common humanities like Geography and Literature are not above the 50% rate.

NJC had 46% of its students scoring at least 3H2 distinctions LAST YEAR (2015 A level results).NJC has also been relatively silent about its A level results for 2016 as compared to 2015. This may mean that the 2016's results may not be as good as 2015's. This means that there may be fewer than 46% of its students achieving 3H2 distinctions. In contrast to NYJC, taking that the cohort size is 700 and 260 of them got 3H2 distinctions, the percentage (rounded down to be more prudent) is 37%. That's why I said that NYJC is probably comparable to NJC.

Given that NJC is well known for its science related programmes and its excellence in that, I would have expected its results for H2 Chemistry and H2 Biology to be one of the subjects that exceeds 50% distinction rates. As a top 5 JC (or supposedly so), it is a given that H2 Math and H2 Sciences subjects (majority take PCME too) should surpass the 50% barrier. In this case, H2 Math did and H2 Physics too. This brings me to the point that NJC may not have done as well as the other IPJCs like VJ or DHS, not to even compare with RI or HCI.

Out of all the IP JCs (there are 7 which take the A levels (2016 batch)), I took the last 3 of the tier (TJC, RVHS and NJC) and said that it is probably comparable to a top non-IP JC (in this case NYJC, but to be more correct, ACJC as its 6/7 for that year) based on COP. Rationale: logically speaking, these non-IPJCs should comprise of top o level students that didn't go IPJCs, hence COP is used.

I have no ill intentions to downgrade any JCs but rather to show that non-IP JCs can be as capable as IPJCs.

NJC has achieved so many subjects with at least 50% distinctions (including 3 subjects from the most popular PCME) and here you are trying very hard to downplay its performance and squeeze in NYJC, while dragging ACJC along, to equate itself with NJC's performance!!
Sadly, the closest that NYJC can get is to be at par with NJC COP this year due to its popularity. :razz:
There's no evidence to prove that NYJC is probably comparable to TJC and RVHS too.

Of course you can exaggerate all that you want as you know NYJC principal will never reveal any statistics to give your past false declarations away. :evil:

Your declared that NYJC had obtained above 60% distinctions in H2 Math and Chemistry. Show us the evidence. Are these the only 2? How about the rest of the subjects? NJC has gotten 10 subjects above 50% distinctions, mind you.

P/S: How to leave the 2 circus friends here alone to direct and indulge in their own drama. :slapshead:

Don't mean to intrude but I must say that IP JCs encourage students, who qualify, to take 4H2 instead of 3H2 and 1H1 combination. How about NY? Is the majority of students taking 4H2? However, as you are aware, the computation of UAP is to treat the 4th H2 as if it's a H1 subject. Therefore, it is not accurate to simply look at a JC's UAP or % of 3H2 distinctions because a student who took 4H2 and another who took 3H2 and 1H1 might appear to have the same score of eg AAA/B but the former is deemed to have done better, imho.

:congrats: to the girls and all the top 10 winners of 2017 NEmation competition!



https://s7.postimg.org/wut5bvli3/image.png\">


https://s2.postimg.org/6wv24fgbd/nemation.png\">