Some students fail to thrive on Integrated Programme scheme

jjrchome

Some students fail to thrive on Integrated Programme scheme  
Some transfer to polys or other JCs, others do poorly in A levels

Published on Dec 22, 2011
By  Sandra Davie, Senior Writer                                                               


Eleven of the 54 Rulang Primary pupils who made it to the IP celebrating yesterday, PSLE certificates in hand. They are (from left, back row) Jiang Zixing, Shaun Tan, Cheng Ging Wei, Han Mingzhou, Oh Sheng Han, (front row) Gillian Yeong, Rachel Liu, Yasmin Ziqin Mohamed Yousoof, Felicia Tai, Sneha Sanil and Deng Boya. -- ST PHOTO: NURIA LING


As about 3,000 students on Wednesday celebrated winning a coveted place on the Integrated Programme (IP), others already on the scheme are about to make a quiet exit to the polytechnics and lesser-ranked junior colleges.

Around 5 per cent of IP students exit before graduation, said the Education Ministry. Some transfer to polytechnics or junior colleges not offering the scheme. Of those who complete it, about 5 per cent fail to get into the local universities, the ministry added. Altogether, between 200 and 250 youngsters a year fail to thrive on the programme.

Students on the IP skip the O levels and shoot straight for the A levels or International Baccalaureate. They are expected to learn in an independent way, without being stifled by having to prepare for two major exams in six years.

But this is not necessarily the most desirable route for everyone, said the ministry. Nor is it the only path to success. 'Ultimately, the IP should only be taken up by those who would benefit from the self-directed learning environment it aims to promote,' said a spokesman.

Surprisingly, those who fail to thrive on the IP are not just less academic youngsters who were taken on because of their sporting or co-curricular achievements. Several entered IP schools with Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) scores well above 250, and a handful were from the Gifted Education Programme.

The Straits Times interviewed 40 students who had either left brand-name schools offering the programme - such as Raffles and Hwa Chong Institution - or stayed on but fared poorly.

Some of those who left opted to go to the polytechnics, using their school examination or O-level results. Others transferred to lesser-ranked junior colleges.

Many of those who did badly were unable to get into the local universities, heading instead to private schools such as the Singapore Institute of Management (SIM) or overseas to take up degree studies.

Recognising that not all students thrive on the scheme, two IP schools - Dunman High and Hwa Chong - also run O-level classes to prepare students for the examination. They said those lagging behind are identified at the end of Secondary 2 and advised to go into the O-level class. But some students also make the switch to the O-level track in Sec 4 or even JC1.

A few who do well enough in the O levels are admitted back into the JC level in the same school. If not, they are advised to leave for the polytechnics or other JCs.

Raffles Institution said it was looking into starting an O-level class. Principal Lim Lai Cheng said that if this happens, it will be 'to open up options' for those wanting to go to polytechnics or abroad.

The IP started in 2004 at eight schools. It was aimed at the top 10 per cent of students, who were clearly bound for university. The idea was to provide a seamless secondary and junior college education, giving them the space to develop intellectual curiosity and other talents.

The scheme became so popular that pupils and parents clamoured to get on board. More schools responded by offering the IP. In two years' time, 18 of them will be included in the programme, although the latest to join will also be offering the O-level track.

Parents are anxious that there will be even fewer places in top junior colleges for students who are not on the IP but hope to get in after the O levels. Some have turned to tuition centres that promise to help students excel in the PSLE.

Parents who have attended open houses at IP schools say they paint a rosy picture by publicising the stellar results of their IP students. There is no mention of their O-level class, or of those who fail.

Madam Clarissa Lim, who is considering the IP track for her son, said: 'It is only after talking to some parents of the older kids did I realise that a fair number of IP kids actually fall through the cracks.' The 38-year-old added: 'The schools should be more open so that parents will have to think hard about whether the IP suits their children.'

IP students who failed to thrive are divided about the merits of the scheme. One 22-year-old from Raffles Institution, who now studies at SIM, said: 'I didn't do so well in the A levels, but I still won't dismiss the IP as I felt that I gained in other ways. In my degree course at SIM, I am ahead of my classmates when it comes to research or when it comes to analysis.'

The student, who asked not to be named, added: 'In a sense it prepared me for the university well. Ironically it didn't prepare me well for the A levels.'

Others felt the IP had affected their academic progress. 'As far as I am concerned, I wasted one whole year,' said 18-year-old S. Lim, now in Ngee Ann Polytechnic. She had applied to the polytechnic after JC1. On her decision, she said: 'I am really one of those people who need a major exam to hunker down to study.'

The ministry said that for most students, O levels will continue to be the most suitable preparation for post-secondary education. It said this is why all the seven new IP schools will offer this route alongside the elite programme, to allow students to transfer across tracks.

-----转载自海峡时报

vivocity2010

所以没有什么事是肯定的！进入IP的学生都要加油！:victory:

教育版淘气包

A handful 是Gep的，我们连GEP都不是，更加要觉醒一点。嘻嘻。

meidance

学习是要努力的，持之以恒的事。
不能躺在过去的成绩上睡觉。
努力、努力、再努力！学习、学习、再学习。
IP的淘汰率是很高的。要时刻警醒。

frekiwang

教过IP学生的飘过, 的确制度还有些需要改进的地方, 因为我感觉这些PSLE的生源来说, 最后达到的高度很多并不尽如人意.

有时候那句话说得的确在理: 没有鸭梨就没有冻梨

jjrchome

一则旧闻：

谨慎开动“直通车”

潘星华 林诗慧 (2011-06-18)


　　2005年9月9日立化中学获教育部批准成为第11所开办直通车课程的学校，当时的教育部长尚达曼在那一天到立化中学视察，同时宣布教育部在短期内会暂停开办直通车课程，为的是要让教育环境先稳定下来。他说，教育部的宗旨是为学生提供多元化的教育模式，而不要所有的学校一窝蜂开设直通车课程。

　　去年9月1日，时任教育部长的黄永宏医生宣布经教育部撮合，另外七所中学将从2012年起陆续加入开办直通车课程行列。

　　前日，已擢升为副总理的尚达曼在出席印度人发展协会举办的青年领袖研讨会上，就学生对直通车课程的关注，表达他认为明年起七校开设直通车课程后，有必要谨慎处理扩展直通车课程的看法。他说：“学生需要有不同的选择，因为他们兴趣各异、能力不同。我们必须给他们铺设最好的道路，而不是塑造一个大家都随波逐流的制度。”

　　早在2008年4月1日，他卸下教育部长任职前接受本报独家专访时，谈到教育部原本要让10%学生参加直通车综合课程，却在只有6%学生参加就暂停让其他学校加入的原因。

　　他当时说：“直通车综合课程现在虽然只有6%学生，到了2010年稳定状态，学生人数将占到10%。开办直通车综合课程，我们要确保上车的学生，都能跳过O水准会考，单凭A水准会考就能开进大学。

　　“但是，这几年我们发现很多最优秀10%的学生因为种种原因，没有去直通车学校，结果使在直通车学校里的学生，并没有完全代表这最优秀的10%。在发展直通车综合课程的过程中，教育部和学校都很谨慎思考。我们重视多样化的教育景观，社会需要各种各样的人为国家作贡献，我们不赞同学校一窝蜂开动直通车。”


受访家长： 不是每个学生都能乘搭

　　星桥国际新加坡私人有限公司高级副总裁郑清寿对直通车综合课程感受良深，因为他两个儿子都是华侨中学学生，长子宇翔（24岁）就读时，华中还没有开直通车，次子宇杰（20岁）则是华中直通车综合课程第二届学生。两个儿子的表现，让他深深体会直通车综合课程和O水准课程的差异。

　　郑清寿说，长子宇翔读到中三就开始为O水准会考备战，压力很大。为了要以好成绩进入华中初级学院，他非常拼，拒绝出国度假，结果全家人只好不出国，陪“太子”读书。宇翔的O水准成绩考到7科A1，进华初，后来再去英国深造，目前在英国工作。

　　他的次子宇杰2005年入学，是华中第二届直通车综合课程学生。他在中一中二参加很多活动，做义工，跟学校出国，学习状况和哥哥不同。

　　郑清寿说：“我这个儿子小时很内向，很敏感，很情绪化，是个很容易受伤的男孩，我们必须要特别照顾他。没想到在华中直通车课程的培养下，他的人变得出落大方，很自信，很善于自我表达，做起晚会司仪，让我惊喜。他还带领同学去中国福建的土楼做义工，是全权策划人，中三用了九个月时间，做筹款、策划、开会、召集和联系的工作。这个福建土楼义工队后来还成了华中的常年义工项目，每年都有学生去那里服务。”

　　郑清寿认为次子的改变跟学校教学课程改变有关，直通车综合课程跨过O水准考试，给了他很多时间和空间去发挥自己的潜能，也给了他胆量，搞社区活动、照顾不幸的人群。现在，这儿子看到哪里需要帮忙，就会自发自动去筹款，去联系同学，卷起衣袖去行动。他认为次子的爱心，是学校通过直通车综合课程培养起来的。

　　他认为华中还有一个高招是设立了Q班，这是让跟不上车的学生，下车考O水准会考的班，虽然人数很少，但足以给学生勤奋努力的压力。
　　郑清寿说：“只要中二年底成绩不好，中三就会被安排进Q班，孩子很怕进Q班，认为这是很没有面子的事。我只要看他稍微懈怠，就提醒他不要忘记Q班。我能从他每星期、每个月所累积的学分，看出他的转向，表现稍有退步，立刻要纠正他。”

　　郑清寿同意不是每个学生都能搭乘直通车，这关乎学生的能力和性格。基础扎实又能自动自发学习的学生，搭直通车很舒畅，需要受考试规范学习的学生，则接受O水准课程比较合适。

　　他认为有些学生是要特别照顾，因此Q班是需要的，否则，考不到A水准会考，只有小六会考成绩是无法就业和升学的。

华侨中学校长：直通车培育精英

　　华侨中学校长潘兆荣承认直通车综合课程是培育精英的课程，但认为这并没有什么不对。他说：“国家需要优秀人才领导，而领导人有爱心才最重要，直通车综合课程把社区活动列为优先，培养学生不自私，愿意为人服务，这才重要。”

　　华中从前高一收生800人，现在收生1200，人数比从前增加50%。1200名学生中有250人是外校生，跟从前相比，他不认为竞争更激烈。

　　潘兆荣说：“从前我们的高一生有来自莱佛士书院、莱佛士女中、德明政府中学、立化中学的，现在这些学校都有了高中，学生很少会到华中来，因此O水准学生要进华中的竞争并没有比从前更激烈，反而比从前轻松，不能说我们的名额被‘垄断’。其他年级我们虽然没有对外大招生，但只要对自己有信心，愿意来敲华中的门的学生，能通过测试，任何年级我们都愿意接纳。”

　　他曾经接受一个外校中四生，去过两所直通车综合课程学校，但都感觉自己不能适应，来到华中，被录取后，表现非常优异。

　　针对华中设立Q班（让跟不上车的学生，下车考O水准会考的班），潘兆荣说：“有些学生因为突然家变，意志消沉，终日迷恋电脑，以致成绩大退步，平均分在4分以上，我们必须特别照顾，让他们‘下车’或‘转车’。如果继续留在直通车，A水准会考不及格，只剩下小六会考成绩，造成升学和就业的困难，就不好了。我们把最好的教师放在Q班，下午给他们开补习班，这个班人数很少，通常只有十多人，他们一般都能在老师特别照顾下，成功考得O水准会考，顺利转去其他初院或理工学院，前途依然美好。有些学生的成绩和学习态度转好，中四我们让他们转回直通车，所以设立Q班不只在于阻吓作用，还有它的积极意义。”

早报图表。

公教中学校长赞同 应谨慎扩充计划

　　公教中学校长李学文对副总理兼财政部长及人力部长尚达曼认为有必要谨慎扩充直通车计划表示赞同。

　　他受访时说，如果以在小六会考考取250分以上作为加入直通车计划的标准，而每年考到250分以上的学生占总体的10%，每年加入直通车计划的学生估计稍微少过一成（包括去年宣布加入计划的学校），毕竟不是所有考到250分以上的学生都选择加入直通车计划。

　　李学文说：“我个人认为10%已经达到饱和点。如果计划进一步扩充到其他学生，例如从顶尖的10%到30%，计划便无法发挥它该有的作用，因为学生们的基础没那么好，可能无法应付课程。”

　　教育部去年9月宣布让更多学校开办直通车课程。从2013年开始，每年进入直通车课程的学生将增至12%。

　　公教中学是在去年获准加入直通车计划。经教育部“撮合”，公教中学、圣尼各拉女校和新加坡女子中学将来的高中生，将一起上新设立的政府初级学院。这所全新的初院预料将在2017年开课。

　　针对有家长反映直通车制度可能导致较迟发育者无法“上车”，而应付不了直通车课程的学生无法“下车”，李学文指出，这也是为什么教育部推出“双轨制”，即一所学校同时开办直通车和O水准课程，让学生可以在中三的时候“上下车”，为制度带来伸缩性。

　　不过他也指出，需要“上下车”的学生其实并不多。以公教来看，到了中三希望转换到直通车学校就读的学生一年不超过五名。

　　有鉴于此，李学文不认为有必要推出更多措施解决“上下车”问题，例如每年都让学生有机会“上下车”，因为这不但会带来行政上的不便，对学生也无益，因为“水准参差不齐”，学生需要不断调适学习环境。

　　谈到加入直通车计划的好处，李学文说，公教中学有附小，又有天才班。每年估计有20%的小六毕业生转去报读直通车学校，而他们当中有不少其实是想要留在公教的。

　　除了避免精英流失，直通车计划也让学校在编排课程时有更多的伸缩性，无需删减节目来应付考试。

　　公教中学将采取的是“双轨制”，并非所有学生都“上车”。问及是否对这样的安排感到失望，李学文说：“我们打从一开始就希望是双轨，因为我们有附小。我们希望无法考进直通车计划的学生也能够继续留在学校。教育是有教无类的，不应该只是为了好的学生。”

　　以目前考获250分以上的学生比例作为标准，他预估学校未来会有60%的学生加入直通车计划，其余40%考O水准。

　　李学文不认为“双轨制”会为学校带来行政或教员安排上的困难，目前也未向其他直通车学校参考他们的运作模式，因为他对学校自己的思维有信心。此外，三所学校校长的合作目前为止也很顺利，因为大家都“朝着一样的方向”。

　　李学文说，直通车不应该是一个终点，而是一个不断发展的过程。如果能够灵活、有改变的动力，它就会不断进步。

世界变大了

　　华侨中学高二生谢颖聪（18岁）认为直通车综合课程让他有了时间和空间同社会联系，让他从很多非传统的路闯出自己天地的中小企业总裁身上，看到条条大路通罗马，让他感觉成功的标准很广阔，不再像从前那么狭隘。

　　例如这两年他参加了经济发展局举办的商业计划比赛，从中认识了很多白手兴家的成功人士。

　　他说：“他们给我第一个感觉就是世界真的很大，从前我只和考试成绩优秀的同学在一起，我的压力是要紧跟他们，不能掉队，掉队了就不知自己身在何方。到了碰上这些企业家，我看到了不走寻常路，也可以杀出一条路来，可以活下去，而且可以活得更好的时候，我的思想就解放了。看到他们，我只感觉还有更多需要学习。这些非一般的成功人士，思维方式很不同，完全没有一个套路。他们很开放，什么观点都接受，都珍惜，都聆听。”

　　谢颖聪目前正为A水准会考备战。他笑着对记者说：“没有O水准会考是直通车课程最大的好处，也是最大的坏处。这六年我们什么都学了，就是没有学到怎样考试。”

《联合早报》
（编辑：陈俐妃）

jjrchome

《海峡时报》最近登载很多“反思"直通车课程的文章，比如12月2号的《Tuition boom as kids prep for Integrated Programme》，12月14号的《The runaway IP train》和12月17号的《Stick to tried and tested O levels》。 教育部坐不住了，今天开始反击。

O levels still the best way for most: MOE                                                                        
http://www.straitstimes.com/STForum/Story/STIStory_747939.html


WE WOULD like to correct the perception that the introduction of the Integrated Programme (IP) has reduced opportunities for those not selected for the programme after the PSLE.

Popular schools and junior colleges have always seen more applicants than places, resulting in higher cut-off points. For example, before the IP started in 2004, the cut-off point for Raffles Institution (RI) was around 260, similar to what it is currently.

We have expanded the enrolment of the JCs offering IP. The number of students entering these JCs from secondary schools not offering IP has increased from some 2,100 previously to over 2,300 today.

These students make up about 50 per cent of the cohort in the JCs offering IP, comparable to the proportion before IP started.

The commentary ('The runaway IP train';Dec 14), noted that only some 500 places were set aside for O-level students entering Hwa Chong Institution (HCI) and RI at JC1. We would like to point out that prior to IP, only 400 of HCI and RI's students (at JC1) hailed from schools not offering the IP today.

There is now greater diversity in the JCs offering IP, as they are accepting O-level students from more secondary schools. Their students used to come from some 50 schools but now almost 70 schools are represented. This is partly because students from other IP schools no longer compete for admission at JC1.

Ultimately, we strive to maximise each child's potential, regardless of which school he or she attends.

The IP should not be seen as the only pathway to success. For the majority of our students, the O-level pathway will continue to be the most suitable preparation for post-secondary education.

Dr Cheong Wei Yang
Director, Planning Division
Ministry of Education

jjrchome

Stick to tried and tested O levels                                                                        
http://www.straitstimes.com/STForum/Story/STIStory_745802.html

Published on Dec 17, 2011

AS A student who sat the O levels and proceeded to a junior college with the Integrated Programme (IP), I can understand why parents are stressed about their children's education in primary school ('The runaway IP train'; Wednesday).
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             This stress is further compounded by the fact that there are an increasing number of schools that now offer the IP. It does not make sense for a child's fate to be determined when he is merely 12 years old.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           One may argue that even if the child does not make it to his dream secondary school after the PSLE, he can still sit the O levels for a chance to qualify for his preferred JC.

The fundamental problem is that there is no level playing field - the obstacles faced by a non-IP student are potentially tougher than those encountered by an IP student because of the O-level bar and the limited places a non-IP student must fight for.

An inadvertent distinction is also drawn between IP and non-IP students in school, which disadvantages the latter.  Some teachers in my junior college did that in class, which is unjustifiable.

While there is no easy answer to solving this conundrum of wanting to stimulate a student's learning process by removing exams and giving a fair chance to non-IP students, one way, as the commentary by senior writer Sandra Davie suggests, is to limit the IP scheme to a small minority.

The ultimate, but drastic, solution is to scrap the IP entirely. While this may create a furore, the traditional O-level route is a system that has been tried and tested.


Lim Ruo Lin (Miss)


Background story
O-level warrior says...

'It saddens me to see more JC places being snapped up by IP students.'

MR NICHOLAS LEE: 'Four years ago, I nervously sat the O levels and had the same feeling two years later when I battled the A levels ('The runaway IP train'; Wednesday). My PSLE score (236) was not fantastic but I managed to get into a decent Catholic school through affiliation. I managed to score five A1s in the Olevels and five As in my A levels. I am no genius and I represent an increasing number of late-blooming (and frustrated) students. It saddens me to see more junior college places being snapped up by Integrated Programme (IP) students. This doesn't create a meritocratic education system - it spawns elitism. The Education Ministry should not allow an increase in the number of IP places any more.''

            
                                                            

jjrchome

The runaway IP train
Source:The Straits Times, Author: Sandra Davie
14/12/2011

NINE-YEAR-OLD Ian Lim spends three evenings a week with a private tutor on mathematics, English and Chinese. Next year, when he enters Primary 4, he will spend four evenings a week, including his Saturdays, on tuition.

His manager father and housewife mum admit that their son is stressed out from all the studying. They know the $1,100 spent on providing tuition for him is a lot of money.

Not that Ian is at risk of failing. He is already top of his class. His parents just want him to score good enough grades at the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) to get into an Integrated Programme (IP), preferably at Raffles Institution, where the cut-off point for admission is above 260.

If he does not get into an IP school, where he is assured of a place in a junior college, they fear he would have scant chance of getting into a good junior college for his A levels.

The Lims are typical of an increasing number of parents piling the pressure on their young children early, in the hopes of getting them into the elite IP programme.

Their concern is that their children cannot get a place in a premier secondary school or junior college because many top institutions now reserve the bulk of their places for students in the IP.

The IP started in 2004 at eight schools, including the Raffles and Hwa Chong family of schools. It was targeted at the top 10 per cent of the PSLE cohort, who were clearly university-bound.

The idea was to allow these students to skip the O levels and go straight to the A levels or International Baccalaureate (IB). This way, their learning would not be stifled by having to prepare for two major examinations in six years. Instead, the seamless secondary and junior college education would develop their intellectual curiosity and other talents.

The IP - called the 'through-train' programme for skipping the O levels - became so popular that pupils and parents clamoured to get on board. More schools responded by offering the IP.

By 2013, 18 - or just about all the premier secondary schools and junior colleges - will be offering the programme.

This has created a fear among parents that there will be even fewer places in top junior colleges for those not in the IP, who hope to get in after the O levels.

The Ministry of Education (MOE) has assured parents repeatedly that the IP junior colleges are offering just as many places as before to those coming in via the O-level route. But in the absence of hard numbers, parents have resorted to doing their own checks, and cite figures to explain why they worry.

Hwa Chong Institution and Raffles Institution, for example, each give out only 250 places a year to those from the non-IP track. The remainder of the 1,200 places at each of these two colleges go to the IP students from their own institutions.

The through-train that started out as a niche programme for a small elite group risks becoming a runaway train. Some fixes are needed to reduce undue pressure on students racing to be admitted to the IP at Secondary 1.

Right now, students can be admitted into the IP at Secondary 1, Secondary 3 and JC1 after the O levels. MOE can ensure that there are multiple entry points into IP schools, and that a good number of places are given out at each level.

Another simple fix is for schools and MOE to release admission figures.

Schools should make public their admission figures to the IP, giving the number of students who enter at Secondary 1, Secondary 3 and at JC1 after the O levels. This gives parents the assurance that their students can get another chance if they fail to do so at Secondary 1.

Schools should also publish data comparing the performance of their IP students to those who join them after the O levels. The two top junior colleges, Raffles Institution and Hwa Chong Institution, say the performance of students who joined them at JC1 is on a par with those who were on their IP track earlier.

On a more macro level, MOE should consider whether it is good for the education system as a whole if so many top secondary schools should convert to the IP. Some parents and alumni of IP schools have already questioned this.

One of them is an old girl of the popular Singapore Chinese Girls' School (SCGS). She remembers that the school principal then, Ms Rosalind Heng, steadfastly stood by the tried and tested O-level route. When other top schools were debating whether to offer the IP through-train, Ms Heng said that SCGS prepared its students well for the O levels, and it was going to continue that tradition.

But SCGS is among the latest list of schools to announce that it will offer the IP. Laments the SCGS alumna, a mother of two who went on to the elite Raffles JC: 'What is wrong with the O levels? Is there no value in it any more? It prepared me well for the A levels.'

Another issue to consider is whether more schools which offer the IP can do so in parallel with the O levels. After all, some students even at top schools benefit from the more structured O-level track. And there is a small number who fail to get an A-level certificate or IB diploma after six years in the IP.

Without O levels, their highest formal qualification is only their PSLE certificate. There may thus be benefits for schools to retain the O levels and allow students to switch tracks from the IP to the O levels.

Students who entered the IP schools with their O levels and aced the A levels do not regret having sat for the O levels. They say the examination was good practice for the A levels.

The Integrated Programme began as a niche programme for very bright children expected to make it to university, who thus do not have to sit for the O-level sorting examination. But with so many schools jumping on board, is it becoming a default programme, resulting in parents pushing their average kids to get in?

Seven years on, it is time to review the IP experiment and consider the effects it is having on students and parents' behaviour. It might be time to put the brakes on the IP and return it to its original purpose - a programme for a very small minority - and restore the place of the O levels for the rest.

[email protected]

shima

jjrchome 发表于 23-12-2011 10:53
The runaway IP train
Source:The Straits Times, Author: Sandra Davie
14/12/2011

最近2天，我老公把最近讨论IP学校的贴子都让孩子看了一遍，大人、孩子都有个心理准备。
大人的责任是要提供一个稳定、舒适的家庭环境，保持一个健康的心态。
在孩子遇到困难的时候，永远支持他们。
做好最坏的打算，即使孩子被IP制度淘汰，也要接受，并和孩子一起应对下一次的选择。