All About GEP
-
colingoh86\" post_id=\"2114991\" time=\"1690732348\" user_id=\"202308:
At least - get an ex gepper to reflect 20 years later.
Floating of a \"trial balloon\" by MOE and Straits Times to observe the reaction of Singaporean parents? After all, rumour has it that the Gifted Education Programme System will be scrapped in the coming years?
Might be more convincing. -
skii\" post_id=\"2114998\" time=\"1690759996\" user_id=\"82603:
40 years btw. Agree with u. GEB should do a full review and report, from all involved parties’ pov. Has the GEP fulfilled its purpose?
At least - get an ex gepper to reflect 20 years later.
Might be more convincing.
And I want to raise an important qn: since prep is not encouraged (and not needed), why not just spring it as a surprise test? No need to announce the dates nor the year/age for the test mah. -
This post is deleted! -
skii\" post_id=\"2114998\" time=\"1690759996\" user_id=\"82603:
Dead giveaway was The Straits Times getting a Marketing Consultant and Business Strategist to write the article.
At least - get an ex gepper to reflect 20 years later.
Might be more convincing.
Sounds like the start of a \"grassroots\" Social Campaign. -
Sunnyfaith\" post_id=\"2115003\" time=\"1690762033\" user_id=\"116015:
True. We really shouldn't be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
In all honesty, maybe they should just ban gep training centers rather than throw away the gep programme which is a lifeline to many disengaged children -
The challenge is that there is formal training and informal training, the latter being parents teaching kids subjects on their own or just having additional resources floating around the home (like a plethora of books or an older child’s materials). The second group is generally held in a higher regard, and no one will really ever complain about a parent finding something interesting for a kid to do. Yet, all of these are forms of "training," and if not training, at least early exposure to content pitched at an advanced level. IMO, there is no test that is entirely free of prep and only testing ability (which is fine).
If we want to ban things, the same could be said about tuition in general. The reality is that this would just shift the advantage to kids whose parents have the ability and time to teach them on their own (or it would push things underground).
Whether the programme should stay or go, I don’t really know (there are pros and cons in both academic and non-academic aspects). As noted in the article, the IP programmes have changed the secondary landscape, but this just put another line between IP and non-IP (and people fight to be on this side or that side of the boundary). Is there a difference if GEP was eliminated but the "top" kids via observation, regular exam scores, etc get offered enrichment? That’s basically another selection exercise and people can end up in or out (and this already happens at various levels of schooling). -
Two years ago, I have 2 friends whose kids crossed round 1. The girl looked more like a HA kid to me while the boy looked more like a gepper to me. True enough, the boy got into the program while the girl did not. So I am still quite amazed that the selection process has not gone haywire despite so many gep training centers out there.
Unfortunately, while the boy is excellent in his English, he has problems coping with the Maths. So overall, his results aren’t fantastic. Quite a loner, while other kids are playing catching during recess, he was alone examining insects in the sch garden. Therefore, the key advantages of having this program is really to cater for one group of kids whose brains are indeed wired differently.
As to whether 20 yrs later these gep kids will be doing well in life, I guess it also depends on a lot of other factors, like motivation, discipline, the network effects and luck. I have come across a handful who are bright and fast learners but are stubborn and have attitude problems. So they are not able to excel in our system.
And as for whether kids got into the program via external training, this is arguable. If a kid got in because the mum sees the potential in him and sent him for such trainings, he got in but in the first place, the boy could already be intellectually gifted. Who can say for sure? A friend’s son told us openly that she sent her son for prep class. The boy is in NUS Medicine now. How to tell if such kids are already very smart to begin with or have motivated tiger mums or got in via prep classes or just a mixture of all these factors?
I won’t simply call for a review when I can’t even think of a way to differentiate these kids (already brilliant with prep or not gep but prep).
The author proposed that instead of gep, maybe can bring the program to all schools so that more students can benefit. In today’s kiasu world, I foresee this will add stress to more kids as parents will definitely try to push them in. It’s like most hope to get into top 2 classes which parents perceive to have the best teachers and most resources allocated. -
I don’t think MOE will ban GEP.
Because
I believe that still, there are a group of students, who do benefit from this GEP programme, for past several years (batches).
Doesn’t make sense to ride off GEP, just because another group of students failed to make it to GEP, hence demand to shut down GEP. -
phtthp\" post_id=\"2115026\" time=\"1690766381\" user_id=\"35251:
GEP is really in the minority. 1% of students go to GEP over the years (and I think this is really too many). So if there is enough in the OTHER group of students who fail to make it to GEP complain for whatever reasons, GEP will be shut down. The question is, why do so? Out of spite? There are many other things in this world \"worth\" coveting. If GEP is to be shut down, there should be proper reason, eg. the program does not achieve its aims, etc. We should not kill a program just because someone else failed to make the program.
... Doesn't make sense to ride off GEP, just because another group of students failed to make it to GEP, hence demand to shut down GEP. -
I ageee we should keep the program. Like some minister said, we should uplift the less academically ones but we shouldn’t cap the top. There should be room for the brilliant ones to grow and feel challenged. About the admission criteria, it’s debatable bc one could be a math genius but fare miserably in English so if GEP is using this two tests as the yardsticks, some brilliant ones will fall through the cracks.
Also noted many of these geppers (after completing the program at sec 2), went on to Science maths talent programme or humanities special programme and I don’t think these can be hot-housed. There must be something in these kids in the first place.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login