pirate\" post_id=\"2103763\" time=\"1680406344\" user_id=\"66252:

We are back to meritocracy, are we?

https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-O8bSOWTzHlU/VxF8E4PgLYI/AAAAAAAAHdc/L4XiECDgTmcN2SeTos-Gd7_Yvnm5PNKSgCLcB/s1600/assessment.jpg
">

If we randomly pick 100 students from the same schools and send them to the same enrichment program, can we expect that every student will perform equally well? And the answer is NO.

Using the same picture, do you think the outcome will be different if these animals are offered TT to skip the test till 4 years later? The answer is NO.

If secondary school postings are done purely by random balloting, the outcome may be similar to the picture, where students are sent to schools that are not suited to their abilities. And the same may also apply to TT school as well because at P1, how do parents know for sure how their child will turn out to be when they are teenagers?

Sometimes parents must learn to accept that some students are just smarter than others in their studies and there are many factors influencing that, not just purely enrichment centers or money.

sushi88\" post_id=\"2103983\" time=\"1680439298\" user_id=\"100857:

Wrong channel, we are not talking about IP track.
Popular schools with long history are either IP schools or affiliation schools with the exception of of 2 schools. Gan Eng Seng used to be more popular as a boys' school and even with a primary school of the same name, it has no affiliation. That could have affected its popularity as a sec school. Btw, it's original name was Anglo-Chinese Free School. Outram Sec School. which specialises in educating students with hearing problem. So it is a niche school.

Many of these popular schools has already established their reputation long before IP started. NJC, HCI, NYGH Raffles College, RGS, etc and that is also the reason why they are selected by MOE to run IP program. Even if there is no IP, I am sure they will still be the most sort after secondary schools in Singapore.

As I said, MOE doesn't sort the students, it's the students and parents who choose where they wish to continue their studies.

sushi88\" post_id=\"2103795\" time=\"1680414091\" user_id=\"100857:

How about \"better input, better output\" like what Minister CCS said? So which one comes first? Better schools or better students? :? Not forgetting tuition is also in the formula to boost the output. As long as we keep sorting the kids into schools using a COP, the better COP schools will always outshine the not-so-good COP schools.

It's really up to us, I am not advocating anything at this point. Only wondering what everyone is chasing so hard until stress becomes so unsurmountable when everyone is promised a place in a secondary school as long as they pass and all schools are provided the same as good schools by MOE.

This is not sorting, just natural order when it comes to school selection. Ultimately it is the students who decide on school choices, not MOE sorting. If students want more choices, they have to do well in PSLE or any other major exams henceforth.

Some of the popular sec/JCs in Singapore are more than 100 years old, so its certainly the schools come first before students. If we randomly pick 100 students from the same school and send them to the same enrichment program, do you think the output will be the same? Not possible right? some will be AL4 some AL10, some AL18.
And there are also AL4 students who don't go to have tuition.

sushi88\" post_id=\"2103741\" time=\"1680396039\" user_id=\"100857:

Meritocracy is right but why is there a need for the majority to get into secondary schools(excluding the 10% IP track) via a merit system if ALL schools are good schools and overall vacancies are sufficient to promote all students who pass? Also, with FSBB, it is more and more evident that there is no necessity to sort the kids so granularly so that they can enjoy a diverse learning environment which is a true emulation of the real world. Within the school, meritocracy can and will still be practised in situations where the rewards are limited.

All schools are good schools, but some schools are better at delivering better O-Level results.

One classic example is ACS affiliation.
ACS - COP (AL22 for express)
ACS (I) - COP (AL13 for express)

Of the 2, only ACS(I) publish their O-level performance.

Why better O-level result?

Better schools attract students with better PSLE scores, and students who do well in PSLE will generally also do well in O-Level.

usaik881\" post_id=\"2103704\" time=\"1680348669\" user_id=\"199461:

Stress exists only when expectation becomes unrealistic, when expectation exceeds capability. In other words, when it comes to academics, although the parents can be so-and-so, it never means their children by default are so-and-so too.

One can also say that PSLE has deprived many kiasu parents, so-and-sos and the well-to-dos of the chance to game our education system while allowing children of lower income and average joe the opportunities to get into top secondary schools and JC through academic achievement.

And this is the reason why we have more luxury cars queuing at popular primary schools as compared to IP schools. For those with fame and money, if their kids doesn't do well there will also be the option of sending their kids to international school or overseas boarding schools.

instead of thinking about TT to skip PSLE, how about TT for IP students to expose to overseas education?

sushi88\" post_id=\"2103509\" time=\"1680230412\" user_id=\"100857:

1. Think we have somewhat agree that PSLE is one important checkpoint of understanding how the kids are doing for both parents and MOE. We need some indicators at a national level to know if we need to tweak anything to change behaviour.

2. So in view of (1), we can adjust our thoughts around TT.
No parents need to decide TT at P1. If all pri schools' affiliation to sec are well-designed, people are happy to choose a primary school knowing which are the potential secondary schools to promote into, think everyone has a peace of mind, especially working parents.

3. Students all make their choices at P5 to decide if they want to compete or continue on the TT to secondary.
The IP schools are only 10%, Likely only 30-40% of the kids want to compete for that. The other 50-60% likely happy to use the PSLE to determine the subject bandings for S1 as their TT journey.

This is all contingent upon demand for TT to make PSLE a less high-stake exam instead of making PSLE optionally skippable which would be a much longer debate.

What you are suggesting is like affiliation actually, so there is no need to rebrand and confuse using TT.
This is more like having a transit station at mid way P5, to choose to take the PSLE or to skip.

sushi88\" post_id=\"2103504\" time=\"1680228345\" user_id=\"100857:

@Veyron, exactly what I wanted to say the same as zac's mum. Since you mentioned it many times, it's probably time for me to say that MPs background is irrelevant here because they cannot assume every kid to perform at the same level as them, can they? There have to be choices to cater for the varying learning needs of the children. It would be draconian to insist that every child to be exactly like them. :yikes: Though we generally always call the popular schools good, have we ever paused to think of those kids who were ill-fitted to the schools parents want for them actually have to suffer for years in those schools? Some may even have their esteem taking a toll.

I get your point, but as someone mentioned earlier, those cases you highlighted are statistically irrelevant because the number is too small and MOE will not uproot the entire forest just for a few trees.

The same applies to parents who support skipping PSLE, to reduce stress, while at the same time, also hoping their child to get into a good secondary school that will likely to lead them to a more competitive environment because popular schools will have more hardworking students who chionging for exams. e.g. ACS(I) vs ACS.

sushi88\" post_id=\"2103494\" time=\"1680222106\" user_id=\"100857:

In the pseudo TT, how would anyone know who has chosen the TT way if everyone still continues to prep for PSLE? The difference is it would be less tense in general for the kids.

Also, if adults do not know how to respect choice, how would kids know how to?

As someone has pointed out that those who chose jc route are gong kias, suggesting there are academically strong kids who CHOSE to go the poly route to get to the uni too. We can respect kids who take the poly route as choices not because they cannot make it to the JCs but prefer a different learning environment, yet still get to the U, can't we? Or do we conclude that all poly kids are weak in their studies due to our labelling minds? I really do not think so.

Personally, I prefer to allow every student in Singapore to have a choice to opt out of PSLE at end of P5 instead of having parents to opt in for TT program at P1, while still want to keep the option of taking PSLE to get into better schools. This to me is as good as affiliation school as almost 100% of students from affiliation will get promoted to same secondary school, while they still can move out if they do well in PSLE.

A student who wishes to opt out of PSLE will be required to take prelim and the result will be used by the secondary school to determine their FSBB in Sec1, where they will join the other PSLE students. The only caveat here is that students who skips PSLE may not get into their preferred secondary schools.

So there is really no need for any fancy red carpet arrangement for \"TT\" because the demand for such a pathway is likely to be muted and MOE will not turn the education system upside down just to make it popular.

usaik881\" post_id=\"2103475\" time=\"1680185840\" user_id=\"199461:

The discussion question, Can through-train school work in kiasu Singapore?, can mean different things to different people, unless the indicative verb \"work\" is defined.

Moreover, the MP who raised the issue of TT pilot schools, surprisingly, had asked for a TT of 10 years, and not a TT of 12 years. We can only say, based on the TT duration, her definition of the indicative verb \"work\" is different from ours.

The MP who raised the issue of TT pilot schools, used words such as \"our precious young\", \"high stakes exams and rankings\". In a nutshell, the MP was asking for education reform that removed streaming, the PSLE, the rankings, etc. But she asked for a TT of 10 years which to us was neither here nor there. Reading behind the lines, she was probably asking for no sieving by MOE at P3 and P6 for her child/children, for she said, \"\"myself included\".

The idea of 10 years TT was first brought up by Denise Phua around 10 years ago, and ever since, NCMP such as Hazel Poa and opposition MP, Jamus Lim have also raised this idea in parliament, but without many details to address the many concerns we are discussing here.

https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/run-pilot-schools-offer-10-years-through-train-education-denise-phua
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/watch/committee-supply-2023-debate-day-3-jamus-lim-flexible-through-train-programme-schools-3311926

Why 10 years instead of 12 years? The first reason that came to my mind is that some students may be more suited for the Poly path instead of JC and its certainly impossible to predict a child's learning ability or inclination when they are in pre-school

Interestingly, Denise, Hazel and Jamus are all from what we call the \"elite\" schools, RGS, St Nic and RI.

So if I may ask,
1) Why did they choose those schools? Why are these schools so popular?
2) Did they benefit from their secondary and JC education?
3) Would they have gotten into those schools if there were no PSLE?
4) Would their life be different if they have gotten into \"TT\"?


So what exactly is the intended purpose of TT?
Will TT work without a branded school? e.g ACS?
What can we expect from TT that our current system cannot deliver?
Is TT just another name for affiliation? A case of same same but different

In my opinion, TT or removing PSLE is not going to be some \"holy cow\" in solving our kiasu culture in education because when students move to secondary school, the same pressure or stress will come in S3 and S4 if students wish to do well and get into top JC or Poly. What happens if TT students/parents are stressed again after 10 years?
Kick the can down the road and make it into 12 or 13 years TT?