ndmmxiaomayi SG That's the point. Although criteria has been relaxed a little, English, Maths and Science still have to pass. Fail any of these forget about continuing education. The only place that accept you is ITE. Although I don't like to say that ITE is second-class, they still accept students who did not meet entry requirements. I wonder what are the revamps for.
ndmmxiaomayi SG Not Robert say so, neither did the government. I say it gives the impression. Every time Straits Times print the Scholar copy, government agencies always say the same thing to students applying for scholarship: Good A Level results or Good Diploma. CCA is a plus. It will be better if you hold some posts like the vice-president of your club. The word "a plus" gives me the impression that results first, CCA second.
ndmmxiaomayi SG We don't have many leaders who have gone through the same thing as LKY, but I believe they have the baptism of fire in them --> money.
redstone SG I wonder why MOE didn't see this issue. This had been overlooked, while govt "recognised, promoted, developed" young talent somewhere else. Oh, the contradiction!!! It's damn rigid. Nothing, absolutely nothing is recognised besides official exam results. Even if you win some international Science competition, and you failed math, you'll still be rejected.
ndmmxiaomayi SG So some people cannot go NUS High. Because it is for people who do very well in both Maths and Science, not just Science or Maths. This is called recognizing talent. Build a school that caters to both but not one.
redstone SG Here, there's a Sec 3 RI student who got into Music course in NUS because he's 'talented'. From PSLE qualification jump directly to degree. If that can be done, why can't O level holders be admitted to poly/jc based to talent also? Talent should compliment results.
the Bear SG the gabrament "scholar system" is already obsolete.. actually, it was more than a decade ago.. it's typical of most managements... they WILL throw good money after bad, instead of scrapping the whole system.. they are all too myopic and cowardly to rock the boat.. that's the long and short of it..
ndmmxiaomayi SG Poly got. For example, students talented in IT will study IT and will continue this at poly. But hor, this is limited to certain schools and neighbourhood schools no chance of trying this out. I don't understand how Singapore can stress that humans are our only resource and come up with such an obsolete system.
ndmmxiaomayi SG I would say the guts to try new things. There is still not enough changes in the education scene. And with this education system, I don't think we are prepared enough to step into this knowledge-based economy.
redstone SG You won't want to know what happened to me... Even if you have all the passion, strong interest, high grades, other awards/certs.... BUT you miss an entry requirement, everything is equal to zero.
ndmmxiaomayi SG Read about it before. You failed missed by one grade only and cannot enter the course you want.............
Salman SG Its an objective criteria and you need to draw the line somewhere. Everyone is given the same syllablus and same test. If somebody fails, it simply means he did not get himself ready for the exam given the opportunity. If you want everybody to take whatever course he and she wants, where do you draw the line? If grades don't matter, who will study?
ndmmxiaomayi SG You may be right about that he did not get himself ready for the exam. But what if he is very ready and due to some other factors which cause him to fail? Like anxiety? He can't concentrate well if he is anxious and will make a lot of mistakes. I never say I want everybody to do whatever course they want. It will be chaotic. If 70% of the population wants to be doctors, 20% wants to be lawyers, 9% wants to be in the service sector and the 1% wants to hawkers, we will starve to death. Too little hawkers and too many people need to eat.
redstone SG What I'm trying to say is nothing can compensate for the 1 grade miss in requirement for one subject. Even if all your other subjects are distinctions, even if those subjects have other excellence awards/certificates, not even if you appeal 3 times. Not even if you demostrate very strong talent, interest, passion and aptitude.
robertteh SG You have a good point. Our education policy is too narrow as it relies too much on overall scores to determine abilities or success. It seems to focus only on creaming off people with high IQ rather than to train students to be useful to contribute to specific area of excellence. The past education system is too deeply entrenched in assessing overall grade, the higher is the overall scores the better will be the result. Why should this be the case? Is examination about comparing IQ or is it about knowledge in any particular field. Common sense will tell us that when someone scores one subject extremely well, even though he might fail in most subject that does not automatically mean that he is poor in abilities. He may well turn out to be the talent in the only one subject he passes well even if he does not do well in overall scores of all other subjects as a whole. It is time to reexamine our overall grading policy to see if it has been over-killed. What a person in real life is to do well in one area or subject and focus in that one area he is good at rather than proving all his other areas of intelligence. How many people can be all rounder and even if there are, can all rounder apply or have opportunity to apply knowledge in all areas. For example, if a student failed in most subject but scores extremely well in Art, he might well turn out to be a good artist. So why deny such a peson early in life and mark him down because educationists are too obsessed with overall score ? In the final analysis, education is about applying knowledge and applying knowledge well in one area may be better than passing all subjects with distinctions and unable to focus in any particular area.
