More details here, hope it helpsOriginally Posted by rattydrama
http://www.moe.gov.sg/education/admi...on/allocation/
Good Luck!
More details here, hope it helpsOriginally Posted by rattydrama
http://www.moe.gov.sg/education/admi...on/allocation/
Good Luck!
Thanks! Now, popular neighbourhood school will have to do PV else chance is really slim. What say about 3-4 years later? Cannot imagine.....Originally Posted by howgozit
And I think those apartments near popular schools, even it is within neighbourhood will continue to be popular and much sort after.
No wonder cannot find a a reasonable good ones based on my initial investment strategy.
Hope market can crash & bounced back!!! haha
It's true. It also depends on the character and capacity of the children.Originally Posted by SpinCity
of course it's a self-fulfilling prophecy and it will continue to be. why xyz is the top university ? because top students go there.Originally Posted by howgozit
for me to choose a home (not investment pty) near a school is more for convenience of the studying kid. so kind of buying the pty after ur kid is enrolled. although I know not every one has the luxury of knowing he sure can get a place in xyz school ...
proud_owner, u r exaggerating. I also know of ppl whose daughters did very very well and all went to Cambridge/Oxford. Another one went Columibia just came back. Oh another one going to Stanford this year. See off hand I can count so many already. spoiled kids are everywhere. not just restricted to "good schools".
I used to think that way. Until I ended up buying a new place and top of the consideration was because it was near to the school I wanted my kids to go to.
When it comes to kids, often, your heart will overcome your mind. Because as a parent, you want the best for your kids. So, even if there may not be that kind of benefit, a "good" name school will always be preferable to a no name school. And so, as a parent, if you have the power to enable your kids to go to a good school, then you will try your very best to make it happen.
I know what you mean and we share the same thoughts regarding parenting.Originally Posted by Eldenfirefly
Can stand it any more, mouth itchy must
[1] What you said is not true lah. You know why MOE forbid schools to release the results of schools in terms of students getting at least and A for each subjects? You will find that most of the so-called popular schools, there are >95% of students getting at least an A for each subject. that means, >95% of the students get at at least 4A, putting them in the top 10% of all cohort. That means, they also get into the top 20 Secondary schools! That means: any kid that get into that "popular" school has >95% of getting into the top 20 secondary schools! You go compare that with the average neigbourhood school, it was like only about <=40% students getting at least an A for each subject!
[2] Home environment is important, but given that nowsadays both parents are working and get to interact and spend less time with kids, but kids stay in school half day for lessons and half day for CCAs, isn't school environment and their companions (school mates) even more important? So, all the more important to get kids into "popular" schools where all their classmates are the kids of "so-and-so rich and/or famous and/or influential" or at least the highly educated professionals! They will benefit immersely from the high-class and powerful earth-moving contacts in future! There may be some spoilt kids, but it is still better to be in their companion than the hooligans in the neighbourhood schools!
Originally Posted by howgozit
Very funny you know. For each 1 example you quote here produced from the good schools, the neighbourhood schools produced several more of such vain girls whose parents have no means to support them but they still party away anyway and find all means to get free drinks etc in exchange for free sex....
Similar stories for the boys.
Originally Posted by proud owner
the good results of these popular schools are not the product of better teaching. rather, it is the result of better input, smarter kids and richer parents that can afford to send their kids to cram schools called euphemistically enrichment centers. yuck!!!Originally Posted by teddybear
the question is not whether they can go to harvard, MIT or stanford. the question is what they can do with these degrees. Many singaporeans have expensive degrees, but they cannot think creatively and are destined for office jobs. the education system here cannot create anyone remotely close to mark Zuckerberg. the system creates non thinking robots that think taking exams is the purpose of life.Originally Posted by amk
I have many singaporean friends who have ivy league diplomas. but for me they are worse than high school graduates. their brains have been fried by the rote learing they were put through in the school system here. they can only answer narrowly defined questions, but ask them to do independent research, they would rather jump off the cliff.
the system in this country is perfect for countries that depend on MNE, not home grown enterprises. and singapore is a MNE country.
Last edited by stalingrad; 19-07-11 at 16:38.
Originally Posted by amk
i am not exaggerating ...
i am trying to state a fact that good school does not equate to good student or that they will not go astray ..
in fact that particular case ..her gang friends are all from rich background and same class ..
so good school doesnt necessarily mean good influence
i dont deny good schools produce some top students ..
but we mustnt deny that some average schools also have top students
Originally Posted by teddybear
i dont deny that either ...
so if a neighbourhood school produces a Top student ... do we give credit to the school ? or the student ?
produce top students for sitting on their butts in the office all day, not creating world class enterprises like facebook.Originally Posted by proud owner
The average and mean better PSLE/O level score of students from good school will always be much better as compared to others.
I do not deny that neighbourhood school does produce some good students, but chances are much higher in better schools.
I am sure we also would love to have a facebook creator or google creator come out of our education system. But being an entrepreneur doesn't mean automatic success. For every facebook creator, there are probably thousands of failed ventures left along the wayside.
Are you prepared for that kind of statistic? So, for every mega billionaire you might create, you may also see thousands of dropouts who will just get by. The private sector is a harsh one. 80% of the profits and revenue is earned by the top 20%, maybe even the top 10%. The rest of the people in the game are just fighting or living from the remaining scraps.
I think sometimes, its easy to say our education system caters too much to producing good workers only. But honestly, there is a reson why there are only so few billianiaires around.
I prefer to see this in another way. Our system has produced a country with the most number of millionaires on a percentage basis. So, which is better? To have everyone at an average lower level, with a few people who are the Li Ka Shings of Singapore, or to have a much higher number of people who are quite well off, but fewer Li Ka Shings?
Still, you can't deny the fact that once your kid get in, based on the school results, you can be >95% confident that he/she will be in the top 10% cohort and get into top 10 best secondary schools?
Isn't that what parents look forward to?
We have not even talked about other benefits yet.
Originally Posted by stalingrad
I hope MOE would look at Teddy and say "this is a sign that the system has failed and need to be fixed."Originally Posted by teddybear
Teddy, you have a tendency to mistake effect for cause, suggesting poor school training, probaby the result of too many hours spent in cram school and not enough time to explore on your own. If the good performance of popular schools is due to bright students, not better teaching methods, then you kids will not do well if they are not bright even if you send them to the best school. by the same token, if your kids are bright, then they will be good students wherever they go, even if they study at woodlands primary. in other words, if your kids are not bright, the 95% figure will never include your kids, even if they are in the best school, and pass motion with the best students. high IQ does not rub off, if you get my drift.
PV will be difficult for SCGS!
Originally Posted by gfoo
What failed? MOE failed mainly because they did not give enough priority to singapore citizens! They should change the system such that PRs are only eligible for phase 3 & foreigners phase 4! They should just scrap priority for Grassroots & PVs! Why should anybody affiliated to a political party have priority? Why should parents be treated like free labors for schools & MOE through PVs?
You like it or not, 99.999% of all kids have same mental capability, it is through nurturing that they become better. So people know where to hedge their bet if their kids are just average, & take advantage of the connections that come from the schools to make themselves successful in life when they grow up. I am just being frank here. Don't think many people want to reveal such inner secrets!
Originally Posted by stalingrad
i think its all in the genes....
if parents are smart or cunning, the kids will follow...
the Chinese like to say that graduate parents produces graduate kids...
true?
Sure or not??? Graduate parents produce graduate kids????Originally Posted by cl0ver
So what about non-graduates or even illiterate parents? Can u tell me What kind of kids do they produce?
Btw, clover, what u said reminded me about a politician who once commented that graduates should marry each other...... If I remember correctly, there was a huge uproar after that comment went out.
You want to risk that here?????
it's just a saying la.... i know some aunties like to say that.....
in some countries, there is what they call a poverty gap.
farmers will not be able to send kids to school, so kids will become farmers....
hence, upbringing is important. if you can make the effort to give your kids a chance at something better, they at least get the opportunity which many do not have the luxury for, albeit even basic opportunities like education.
Ha ha..... I think it is both funny and sad the way you think.Originally Posted by teddybear
First of all, I was referring to transition to IP schools. There are IP schools and then there are "the rest". If you are not in an IP school, you are in "the rest" no matter how top that school is. I mean no disrespect to these schools, but it is near impossible to get into HCI, RJC...etc after your 'O' levels. Even crossovers btw IP schools are very competitive and GPA scores must be very high.
If your child is not in that category why stress him/her to study so hard and place so much emphasis on academics?
If you think >95% of the so-called popular primary schools (less GEP) make it to IP schools, than you are sorely mistaken. I take it you either don't have kids or your kids have not reached that stage yet.
With the exception of ACS(I) which has fraternal links, all the IPS accept the students based on either merit or DSA (with a pre-requisite GAT-General Abilty Test). I assure you the spread of students in the IP schools are fairly in line with the demographic. They are quite a motley crew of students.
Sure there are minister's or top businessman's kids there, that's because they inherited the smart genes not because of which primary school they went.
Anyway, we are talking about primary schools here. So what if a child has parents that are rich, famous or influential? I wouldn't ask my kids to fraternise with them just because of that. Kids must have the freedom to choose their own friends and not be in awe of these so-called "rich/famous/influential" kids.
Just imagine, you worm your kid into one of these "popular" primary schools but your kid fails to make it to the IP schools like the minister's kids. What do you think that does for your kid's self-esteem?
This is so very untrue, its laughable that you think this way.Originally Posted by teddybear
You cannot improve your IQ. You can only nurture to optimise what you are born with. This is precisely why "education" in Singapore has gone bonkers. Everyone believes their child can become a scholar through "nurturing". And by "nurturing" in Singapore it means heaps and heaps of tuition.
Connections from primary school??!! You sure??!!Originally Posted by teddybear
Before I get misunderstood, let me state that I am not belittling parents who mean well for their child and want the best for them. I can empathise with that.
Other than moving within 1km, doing PV and donating, I have also heard of people changing religion or even Cantonese claiming to be Hokkien just to get their child into a choice school. All these actions show the love parents have for their child.
But if all your best efforts fail to get your child in a choice primary school, all is not lost. All schools and teachers are more or less the same, if your child has what it takes, he will still shine at PSLE and go on to a good secondary school (IP or otherwise). It's there where strong bonds begin to forge and set him for life. Cheers!
No misunderstanding. You are only against teddy! I won't send my kid to the elite schools and subject him/her to those harsh environment. It gets too pressurized in these places. Just a good enough school will do....Originally Posted by howgozit
You are spot on. I used to tell others all schools are the same until my turn to register came. So many considerations popped up but ultimately our parental instincts to try our best for our kid kicked in.
A good school is a gift for your kids and their future generations.
Originally Posted by Eldenfirefly
the debate nature vs nurture still goes on?
nurture - criminals will blame their parents' lack of loving for turning them into criminals.
nature - criminals will blame their parents' gene set for turning them into criminals.
well, it depends on expectations.
Scientists did an experiment. They compile a group of average students. They randomly selected students A to F to be classified as good students.
Then they inform the teachers students A to F are good students.
They observed that teachers paid more attention to students A to F.
As a consequence, students A to F performed better in tests.
Similarly to good schools and bad schools.
In bad schools, teachers (consciously or subconsciously) think that students are stupid, so they dont have much expectation from them, so ......
The reverse in good schools......