王瑞杰:小六会考制度将作出调整

男人如树 · 发表于 21-8-2013 14:26:47|来自：新加坡

鹏飞狮城发表于 21-8-2013 14:18
2012年第一类中学的最低录取分数线是235（新明中学），而RI的录取分数线是261。对新明中学来说，通过等级分 ...

对新明中学来说，通过等级分制可以录取到以前抢不到的好学生

对以前抢不到的好学生来说, 凭什么就要把我分去新明中学呢?

鹏飞狮城 · 发表于 21-8-2013 16:47:21|来自：新加坡

公布答案:因为每一所学校都是好学校!(赶紧戴头盔穿防弹衣先...)

其实psle是用t-score还是等级分并没有太大的区别。关键是看中学如何录取学生。如果第一类中学的录取是随机进行的话，应该是减少了学生和家长的压力，当然，一心想进RI的除外。

刀如水 · 发表于 21-8-2013 17:54:32|来自：新加坡

媒体的风向似乎有点转移的迹象。

以下是今天海峡时报上的一篇文章。我粗略地翻译了一下，翻译不当之处希望能够予以指正。

No way to assess character objectively
品格无法度量
Lim Shu Ning (Ms)

The Straits Times
Wednesday, Aug 21, 2013

SINGAPORE - During his National Day Rally speech, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong mentioned that qualities such as character and drive may soon be considered under the Direct School Admissions scheme ("Flexibility in secondary schools"; Monday).
李显龙总理的国庆群众大会上说，在不久的将来，学生的某些品质例如品格和冲劲也会被作为直接招生计划的衡量条件之一。

How does one measure character objectively?
请问你要如何客观地衡量一个人的的品格？

Are we to depend on testimonials?
靠推荐信吗？

Then we would be determining the students' ability to convince others that they have good character, regardless of their actual character.
这样一来，我们所考量的其实是一个学生说服他人相信自己有良好品格的能力，而不是他是否真的具有良好品格。

Are we to interview the students?
靠面试学生吗？

Then we would be testing their interview skills.
这样一来我们似乎是在考量他们的面试技巧。

Or are we to look for anecdotal evidence?
或许我们应该找些孩子的逸事趣闻。

Then we would be crediting serendipity.
这样一来，我们似乎是在相信机缘巧遇。

Despite our apparent need for everything to be measurable, humans are too complicated to gauge.
人们力图度量所有事物，但人本身却复杂得难以度量。

More importantly, do we really want to turn character into a commodity?
更重要的是，我们真的要把品格变成一种商品吗？

How do we define good character?
“良好品格”该如何定义？

Is making a list of desirable character traits not equivalent to coming up with an authoritative criterion for what makes a "good" person?
列出一连串理想的品格特质，还不如直接告诉我 “如何当好人”呢。

By giving a person special privileges for demonstrating a certain trait, are we not saying that he is a better person than his peers for it? Who are we to do that?
当我们给予一个人某些特权去展示某种特质，我们也在告诉其他人："你们不配享有这种特权“。问题是，凭什么我们可以这么做？

Regardless of which way one leans in the nature-versus-nurture debate, this is not an appealing proposition.
无论你相信“血统论”还是相信“后天环境论”，对你来说这都不会是一个有趣的命题。

We are either crediting children for being fortunate enough to have been born with certain characteristics, or crediting them for successfully adopting a certain prescribed moral code.
也许，我们正在把孩子的成功归功于他天生就拥有了某种品质的运气，或者是归功于孩子成功地采纳了某种指定的道德准则。