Abolishing streaming and replacing with subject-based banding: nothing but a cosmetic joke

[TerrexLee]

The thing with the just-announced ‘Subject-Based Banding’ for secondary schools in Singapore, does it remove streaming or does it make streaming even more defined?

Under the new system, G1 subjects correspond to the Normal (Technical) standard, Ong Ye Kung said. G2 subjects correspond to the Normal (Academic) standard and G3 subjects correspond to the Express standard.

Take the hypothetical situation that students take 3 subjects for their ‘O’ Levels at Secondary 4, with the different G-subject combinations and grades according to the following:

[1] G3 (A grade), G3 (A), G3 (A)

[2] G3 (A), G3 (A), G2 (A)

[3] G3 (A), G2 (A), G2 (A)

[4] G2 (A), G2 (A), G2 (A)

[5] G2 (A), G2 (A), G1 (A)

[6] G2 (A), G1 (A), G1 (A)

[7] G1 (A), G1 (A), G1 (A)


Instead of 3 streams, now do we have 7 streams?

An extended version with 4 subjects would look like this:

[1] G3 (A grade), G3 (A), G3 (A), G3 (A)

[2] G3 (A), G3 (A), G3 (A), G2 (A)

[3] G3 (A), G3 (A), G2 (A), G2 (A)

[4] G3 (A), G2 (A), G2 (A), G2 (A)

[5] G2 (A), G2 (A), G2 (A), G2 (A)

[6] G2 (A), G2 (A), G2 (A), G1 (A)

[7] G2 (A), G2 (A), G1 (A), G1 (A)

[8] G2 (A), G1 (A), G1 (A), G1 (A)

[9] G1 (A), G1 (A), G1 (A), G1 (A)


Does this now make 9 streams?

Now, take this and multiply by the number of subjects students have to actually take (6 to 8, at least), and then by the more refined grading (A1, A2, B3, B4, etc.).

I want to be happy about the change but at the same time, I know the PAP will not let go of their elitist ways – the PAP’s DNA is built on Lee Kuan Yew’s eugenics beliefs, as such that will always be at the core of their policymaking, in the foreseeable future.

As some commenters have said online, whether or not streaming is supposedly “removed” in secondary schools, it still exists to segregate students into the junior colleges, polytechnics and ITEs, this has not changed.

And as long as such segregation exists, students will still be streamed somehow.

More at https://www.domainofexperts.com/2019/03/abolishing-streaming-and-replacing-with.html

 

[ChanRasjid]

Although some new age educators may say exams is bad, there is no practical replacement - you just have to set exams to test someone's paper knowledge. If exams could be replaced, I think the Chinese imperial exam system would not have lasted for centuries.

What is just proposed by this Ong Yee Kung is just nonsense - I'll call it bullshit. By definition, no streaming means everyone takes the same examination. The ancient Chinese Imperial Exam has no streaming. The Chinese and Korean Gao Kao have no streaming as all takes the same paper for a subject. So these smart MP trying to cheat by using the term "no streaming".

True no streaming in O level means one subject each - in general, e.g. biology, chemistry, physics , mathematics, additional mathematics. Not :G1 biology - learn only how the reproductive organs and the eyes work; G2 biology - reproductive organs + eyes + lungs + stomachs; G3 biology - full human anatomy less reproductive organs, the naturally gifted students know some things by themselves.

There is no perfect education system - this is what this wiseguy MOE and Ong Ye Kung should know. There is not even the need to let smart students take more subjects - say a fixed 7 or eight. The grades the students get at the final examination is the natural streaming - depending how many A's you get. The smartest get 8 As - that's a good enough differentiation between the top with the bottom students.

With the same examination for all students, then the smarter students would have more free time to do whatever they want. Is that bad? Or maybe we should implement the one same Gao Kao system and none should complain - free for all students to take, as many times as you want.

Chan Rasjid.

 

[winnipegjets]

70 percent of sinkees will support this. They are incapable of dissecting the PAP's rationale; so they just follow.