# data[].attributes.headline
Tracking of impact of programmes on HAL 

# data[].attributes.subject
Tracking of impact of programmes on HAL 

# data[].attributes.body
Would like to seek some inputs for this as my school as been wondering if there is a system that we could possibly use in school to track the impact of the programmes that we have for HAL? For now what we have is the percentage of students who are successful for DSA / AL scores in PSLE.

# data[].attributes.body
Just asking an open question - has DSA resulted in higher perceived stakes in the enrichment opportunities? The primary schools do not really have much say or control over what secondary schools are looking out for.

# data[].attributes.body
a) Problems:
Teachers: Increased workload, little support,
Parents: Not fair for those not selected, undue stress for selected, need to create better narrative to communicate to parent and get their buy-in
Students: Drop in participation, prefer to attend those which will increase their DSA chances.

b) Assumptions:
- Those selected will appreciate the school's effort - outcomes does not equate to efforts/ expectations
- Selection criteria is most ideal; however, students in the various group may have different interests and talents.
- Teachers have the competencies, aptitude and interests to conduct the programmes

# data[].attributes.body
(a) Problems
- BTs engaged only
- No off-loading, lack support
- Top 25 students for EMS
- Communication with parents unclear

(b) Assumptions
- Only focus is on academic subjects (selection criteria)
- Assume students have the interest

(c) Areas for Improvement
- Clarity of goals, desired outcomes, intentionality
- Use more than one selection criteria
- Communication with parents can be clearer
- Identification of teachers with the pedagogical knowledge and aptitude
- Training and mentoring for BTs may be put in place to guide them

# data[].attributes.body
Problems
1) Parents' response
2) Teachers' increased workload
3) Students' waning interest as they are selected not based on interest. More interested in preparing themselves for DSA.

Assumptions
1) Beginning teachers' enthusiasm wrongly interpreted as a high coping mechanism.
2) Assumed that students strong in 1 subject may be strong in multiple subject areas.
3) Students who are strong in the subject may want to join in the enrichment. Did not check on their other commitments.
4) Assumed that all parents would be open to the idea.
5) Students in top 25 are all strong in Maths

Solutions
1) Communication to parents should be improved
2) Students to be given a choice
3) Teachers to be given a say/choice before being given PD.
4) Teachers to be given sufficient training to ease them into their role
5) Selection criteria/ identification of students is not clear for all three programs. Why the top 25 be channeled to Maths enrichment?

# data[].attributes.body
(a) Problem: Unable to retain students due to mismatch of aptitude and interest.
Teachers experiencing burnout.

(b) Assumptions: They assumed that it is sufficient to assign pupils based on their ranking of test scores and not based on their areas of strengths in that specific subject area.

(c) AFI: To include more areas of checkpoints such as HAL checklists or teachers' recommendations. Refer to subject specific results. To offload teachers involved in the various programs after school

# data[].attributes.body
(a) Problems
- BTs engaged only
- No off-loading, lack support
- Top 25 students for EMS
- Communication with parents unclear

(b) Assumptions
- Only focus is on academic subjects (selection criteria)
- Assume students have the interest

(c) Areas for Improvement
- Clarity of goals, desired outcomes, intentionality
- Use more than one selection criteria
- Communication with parents can be clearer
- Identification of teachers with the pedagogical knowledge and aptitude
- Training and mentoring for BTs may be put in place to guide them

# data[].attributes.body
- Students may not be assigned to the HAL programmes that they are keen to participate in - consider engaging stakeholders on intent of programmes, would be good to consider students' preference too

- Staff deployment & duties - consider offloading in some areas as well as experience and interest of trs when planning. Also take into consideration the type of mentoring/support required

# data[].attributes.body
(a) Parents feedback on the program from selection criteria, placing undue stress, widening the gap
(b) Assuming that the top 25 have the interest and aptitude for the subject (seems based solely on results), young teachers selected based on interest and enthusiasm - are they equipped with skills? experience? managing parents
(c)
- Use of other forms of criteria to select students e.g. checklists, teachers anecdotal feedback etc...
- Teachers can be off-loaded in other ways so as to better cope with the program
- -Have a buddy to collaborate on planning
Communicate the objectives of the program
- Assure parents that criteria for selection is holistic but at the same time need not reveal too much
- Parents/Students to acknowledge the expectations including attendance

# data[].attributes.body
Problems:
Parents:
-Equitable opportunities for all as they feel that their students should be given the same accommodations
-misaligned perceptions of giftedness
-not all parents feel a need for their children to attend enrichment modules

Assumptions (Parents):
-parents have the same attitude towards HAL programme

Teachers:
-although enthusiastic, they are inexperienced
may not possess subject mastery
-no other subject teacher to bounce ideas with
-not sure if TD Coordinator has subject mastery of all these areas
-lack of mentors
-no offloading

Assumptions (Students):
-passion will override all challenges (workload)

HAL Programme:
-Team seems to have disregard student interests as the students are allocated to 3 areas - E2K Math, E2K Sc, Creative Writing

Assumptions (HAL Programme):
-team probably think that this arrangement will be optimal

Areas for Improvement:
-get students to rank their choices of subject
- team should comprise IP heads as well to provide more support and inputs
- more transparency in communicating criteria for HAL programme

# data[].attributes.body
a)/b)
--> Students do not have a choice or voice. Allocation to the different programmes is based on the school's decision.
--> The school assumed that allocation to the different programmes can be based on the ranked results.

c)
--> Formal training or mentoring may be given to the beginning teachers to support them in implementing the programme
--> Lack of different datapoints to determine the programme allocation
--> Parents may find it ambiguous in term of the school's processes and decisions.
--> Before deploying the teachers for the programme, the school may discuss with the teachers and find out their concerns.

# data[].attributes.body
a) Students not given a choice to choose based on the interest. So they may lose interest along the way.

b) T may not be very suitable as they need to manage their classroom skills and pedagogy. May not be trained.

c) Offloading could be given for these HAL teachers. Tap on the more experienced teachers eg: GEO 5.

Place a structure to allocate the school's resources , teacher's deployment to student activities.

Get teachers to express their interest to teach so that it will be more sustainable.

For parents, to communicate to parents clearly that these enrichment is not for DSA.

# data[].attributes.body
Problem 1:
Increased workload in preparing for lessons + having to do other duties

Suggestions: Offloading? This piece to be taken into account in the total deployment hours.

Look into scheduling - could have the programme every fortnight instead of weekly.

Maybe those who are doing the stretch programmes don't do remedials.

Problem 2:
Deploying BTs - perhaps with the assumption that their enthusiasm will carry them through while forgetting that they may have other priorities like focusing on classroom management and content development

Suggestions: Expand pool beyond just the BTs who are willing

Problem 3:
Potential mismatch of students in the programme (allocation is by numbers, those assigned to the programme may not have the aptitude / interest for it). Students not given any choice as to which area they would like to be developed in.

Suggestions: Give students the option to choose which they have interest for. Develop a policy for selection + transparency in criteria
Deconflict schedules so that students who are strong in more than 1 area can  participate in more than 1 if they wish.

Problem 4:
Managing parents' expectations and requests - maybe the selection criteria is not clear or not communicated properly.

Suggestions:
Could have a clear criteria policy so parents are aware of how students are selected. Could also show parents the plan for the year so that they are able to select which programmes their students will go for if there is a clash.

# data[].attributes.body
A) Problems faced by the TDP team
Workload and Managing Expectations
1) Increased workload - no offloading in other areas
2) Managing parents' expectations
3) Providing equal opportunities for the students
4) Teachers' competencies in leading HAL programmes
5) 4 in the team to manage 3 different curriculum with about 80 students
6) Identification of the pupils to attend the programme - should fall back to one of the 5 models

Students
1) Participation rate dropped
2) Stressed out during the programme

B) Assumptions
1) Teachers' competencies
2) Beginning Teachers' enthusiasm will carry through the programme
3) Identification of the pupils - I know what you need VS allowing you to choose
4) Assuming that BTs are digitally more inclined and hence, they will do better in HAL programme
5) Aptitude of pupils/ Interest of pupils/ Motivation of pupils
6) Parents will be fine with such a programme without hearing some of their concerns.
7) Limiting the choices of the pupils/ parents

C) Areas for Improvement
1) To consider the aptitude of the students
2) To provide choice for the learners
3) To conduct FGD/ feedback at the end of the programme
4) Improving the competencies of the teachers

# data[].attributes.body
Problems Faced
1. Ranking of students - students interest, ability and strength were not considered. Very systematic cut off method used.

2. Teacher deployment - Beg trs were deployed for this programme. Could have a KP or experienced tr overseeing - to provide directions/handholding.

Assumptions Made & AFI
1. All students are of the same ability & standards, hence they used a cut-off system to place them into the Math/Sci programmes.
2. Assumed that parents would support - for those students selected. Could have considered parents whose children were not selected & how to manage their expectations. Clearer objectives to be shared with all stakeholders.
3. Assumed that any teacher could take on the programme - could have better profiling of teacher's interest and capacity.

# data[].attributes.body
1) Problems faced by the Devt Team
a) BTs are deployed to conduct the enrichment classes
b) pupils dropped out presumably due to a poor match of strengths and interests
c) Teachers feel burnt out

2) Assumptions made
a) The allocation of pupils to the various enrichments is based on pupils' ranking in summative examinations. There does not seem to be matching of pupils' talents to the enrichment allocated.

3) Areas for improvement
a) deploy teachers who are strong in their subject mastery and have the necessary training. Teachers should not be deployed just based on their enthusiasm.
b) select pupils based on their aptitude
c) relook the logistics needed so that the enrichment sessions are more spaced out and to make the workload of teachers more manageable

# data[].attributes.body
a) Problem faced by the talent development team in VPS
- distribution of students and matching their true area of strength to the right programme
- not being clear about the selection criteria - being clear would help teachers respond to parents' queries
- deployment of teachers - BTs may not be a suitable fit as they might not have the appropriate training/ lack of experience, overload in terms of teaching periods/after sch activities

b) the assumptions made by the decision-makers
- assumption that top 25 goes into math - based on what was this decision made?
- deployment of teachers - how did they make the selection? enthusiasm of teachers?
- assumption that teachers were able to cope (they had increased workload)
- assumption that students would commit to the programme (it was optional)

c) areas for improvement
- avoid clash in timing of activities, KPs have to deconflict
- EL enrichment limited to creative writing. Could there be a more varied choice so they can build on their area of strength
- look into doing TD during curriculum and not just after curriculum

# data[].attributes.body
In your group, identify

(a)the problems faced by the talent development team in Vision Primary School,

(b)the assumptions made by the decision-makers, and

(c)areas for improvement.

# data[].attributes.body
In your group, identify

(a)the problems faced by the talent development team in Vision Primary School,

(b)the assumptions made by the decision-makers, and

(c)areas for improvement.

# data[].attributes.body
In your group, identify

(a)the problems faced by the talent development team in Vision Primary School,

(b)the assumptions made by the decision-makers, and

(c)areas for improvement.

# data[].attributes.body
In your group, identify

(a)the problems faced by the talent development team in Vision Primary School,

(b)the assumptions made by the decision-makers, and

(c)areas for improvement.

# data[].attributes.headline
Session 3: Evaluating Programmes for High-Ability Learners

# data[].attributes.subject
Session 3: Evaluating Programmes for High-Ability Learners

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Evaluating Programmes for High-Ability Learners_KP Seminar 2023

# data[].attributes.headline
Session 3: Evaluating Programmes for High-Ability Learners

# data[].attributes.subject
Session 3: Evaluating Programmes for High-Ability Learners

# data[].attributes.headline
Session 3: Evaluating Programmes for High-Ability Learners

# data[].attributes.subject
Session 3: Evaluating Programmes for High-Ability Learners

# data[].attributes.headline
Exploration & Inquiry (E & I) Extensions 

# data[].attributes.subject
Exploration & Inquiry (E & I) Extensions 

# data[].attributes.body
I understand there is such a programme: synopsis here:
Exploration and Inquiry (E&I) Extensions

E&I is based on an inquiry approach to language teaching. It serves to provide differentiated instruction for the more verbally inclined in the regular classroom and is designed to extend on the STELLAR 2.0 curriculum.  The extensions will centre around language concepts and skills, interesting quirks about the English language as well as visual and media literacies which involve the interpreting of texts through different lens.

I had nominated two teachers last year and have not heard of any news or emails on this. Is there such a programme still? How can we go about this? Please advise. Thank you. (Nithiyah, WGPS)

# data[].attributes.body
Students participate in this 3-year programme, conducted by external vendor mostly.

Different areas to focus on for each level - public speaking and publication (magazine)

# data[].attributes.body
Punggol Green Primary School, Princess Elizabeth, Pasir Ris Primary Pei Tong Primary School, PLMGS, Pei Hwa Presbyterian Primary
Programme: E2K, math olympiad, school-based talent development programme for languages, interest elective programme, debate, Aesthetics talent programme, reading circle (opinions on selected texts), ALP (coding), Science innovation programme
Reason: tiered approach - broad-based to cater to interests, selected group to cater to the higher abilities learners, small group for students who can be stretched further and take part in competitions
selection basis: teacher observation, results, GEB list
Models: Tomilson's DI, LOS, Renzulli's

# data[].attributes.body
Comms to students, such programmes are for enrichment, not for DSA.

Parents are given choices to choose only one out of a few HAL programmes.

These students are not in remedial.

# data[].attributes.body
E2K for Math & Science
Uses design thinking to stretch the thinking - Capstone Project
Target Group: E2K math students

Topic: Reducing Carbon Footprint
Went to the nearby hawker centre to think of a solution to reduce food waste.
Students to facilitate the discussion - children need to go back to the objectives

# data[].attributes.body
2. One of our schools sees the school's alignment more to Tomlinson's model.

# data[].attributes.body
Work around the dates for the different Hp programmes. Different days for different programmes. One HP student could be taking up to 2 HP programmes.

# data[].attributes.body
GEB Selection
SCH based results
Checklist by GEB together with Interview

Stretch Programme for each subject (E2k, LJ, etc)

# data[].attributes.body
1. Donald Treffinger
2. Carol Ann Tomlinson - DI

*All models can be applied in the future workplans.

# data[].attributes.body
Reading circles
Debates
Open up selection for T from all classes to provide names. Most are from HP classes

# data[].attributes.body
1. Most of us use the LoS Model to guide our planning and implementation of our programmes. SKPS - LoS and June Makers
2. E2K science & math, Math Olympiad
3. Debate - Wits & Words, ACJS Debate Masterclass
4. Reading Circles
5. Literature prog
6. FPS Scenario Writing
7. CWP
8. Robotics - ALP & AEP, CCA, coding for selected students

Challenge
- HAL students often demonstrate strengths across multiple subjects, making it a challenge to encourage participation in all programmes they have been identified for

# data[].attributes.headline
Question 2: What models were used to guide...?

# data[].attributes.subject
Question 2: What models were used to guide...?

# data[].attributes.body
YZPS
Based on GEP list, academic results

XMPS
Academic results, checklists Math and Sci

# data[].attributes.body
E2k (math, science),
Math and Science Olympiad
Wits and Words

# data[].attributes.body
Selection of HALs:
- GEB selection
- Sch based results
- checklists by GEB

Tier2:
- revised customised sch curriculum for EL,MA,SC during curriculum time (From P3 onwards - for a class of top 40) - similar to June Maker; Enrichment after sch - Olympiad training, project work; IvP; selected LJs; Mentoring programme in the future plan
- Enrichment programmes (E2K MA and SC; Olympiad Training)

Co-currriculum Talent Development in CCAs:
- Using Donald Treffinger
- Tier 1: PAM curriculum at P1 and P2 for all. All P3s go thr CCA experience (to visit 3 CCAs to experience what it is like before selection of their own CCA.
- Tier 2: Selection of CCAs to explore their own interest.
- Tier 3/4: Selection of talented students to go for competitions.

# data[].attributes.body
Scheduling: fighting over the same pool of kids (CCA, olympiad training). Students are too stretched to go for training. Various programmes are difficult to coordinate due to clashes.

# data[].attributes.headline
Session 3: Evaluating Programmes for High-Ability Learners

# data[].attributes.subject
Session 3: Evaluating Programmes for High-Ability Learners

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Programme Evaluation_Logic Model Template (1)

# data[].attributes.body
Maths & Science E2K programmes, Maths & Science Olympiad, Real World Science Programme, A Problem A Day (to stretch the HAL in problem solving)

EL Wits and Words, EL Reading Circles, EL Writing programme, EL Journalism

Logistics: To work around the scheduling, the HAL programmes are planned during the remedial slots

Challenges: Schools face challenges in stretching the HAL in a socially-mixed class. Some of the HAL programmes thus have to be done after school as it is a heterogeneous class

# data[].attributes.body
Current model (various schools) - Programmes-based: E2K for MA & Science, Math & Science Olympiad training, Wits & Words (Debate training), Creative writing, Scrabble training.

Not based on framework. However, ALP / LLP targeting different tiered students might end up focusing on HAL. (i.e student ambassadors given a chance to take charge of an initiative - environment)

(Bedok Green) - 3E structure : Expose (i.e Science Day), Enrich (i.e P4 - Shadow play), Excel (i.e E2K, Olympiad)

# data[].attributes.body
1. - E2K Sci, Elementz project work and Sci competitions
- EL Wits & Words
- E2K Maths, Maths Olympiad & Competitions
- MTL Oratorical and story design competitions

2. Treffinger's (School-wide)and Renzulli's & GEB Checklist (Dept-based) models to organise the various efforts
Tomlinson's within the class

# data[].attributes.body
In schools we have E2K (Math, Science), Math Olympiad.
Scaled down 7 weeks makers (IVP) program, In-house developed innovation programs.
Selected pupils based on GEP admissions, teachers recommendations.

Some constraints:
-Many Schools have many constraints (teachers, time, feasibility)
-Same group of pupils tapped on for all 2-3 enrichments, on top of their own enrichments, so they are pretty stretched
-Considerations for Training for Science Olympiad
-Not all teachers are trained

# data[].attributes.body
1. Current HA Programs
E2K Science and MA, MA Olympiad
Science Research (via Science&Env Club)
EL Creative Writing
Innovation Program
Within class differentiation

2. Checklists for HAL Learners
Teachers' Inputs
Tomlinson Differentiation Model

3. Levels of Service Model
Maker's Curriculum Differentiation Model

# data[].attributes.body
Most school do not follow any particular model. But seems similar to Treffinger

Most schools have E2K for Math and Science and in-house programme for EL to cater to HAL. These students also will be identified to compete in competitions such as Olympiad.

Most of us faces challenges where these pool of students are also selected for other programmes such as swimsafer.
One way to minimize this is to block the programmes for different timing.

# data[].attributes.body
Our current HA programmes:

English - creative writing, debate.
Math - E2k Math, participation in Math Olympiad and GEB P4P5 Poster and Game design
Science - E2K Science

# data[].attributes.headline
Q1. What talent dev progs are avail in our schools?

# data[].attributes.subject
Q1. What talent dev progs are avail in our schools?

# data[].attributes.body
RGPS:
Raffles experience prog. Adapted from Renzoulli's Model. Take into account the 3 areas.
Regular curr: take into account the various DI for various subjs. Includes compacting the curr and move learning fwd for certain gps of pupils.
Outside curr time: Enrichment clusters. 4 Types:
Type 1- Raffles explore for gen cohort.
Type 2- Raffles Grow and Stretch for grps of students to stretch students after sch. E.g E2K and Fundametics for Ma and Sc, Aspiring Writers Prog for P4/5, Oracy Prog for MT
Challenge:
The same girls are being tapped but the time is limited. Choice given to the girls. Identification rubrics used. Girls choose a max of 2 progs.

QPS Challenges:
Fighting over the same grps of students and limited time.
Parents whose child are not identified as HAL but would like their child to be selected for niche progs. Info spread via their network.

RGPS Challenges:
Stick to set criteria that is not transparent to parents. Criteria not solely based on scores. Some % are also on teachers' in-class observation of skills that are subject-specific for a full year. Reassure parents/girls that many opportunities are provided during curr to stretch the general cohort of students.

# data[].attributes.body
1. None yet. But we are intending to start E2K for Math and Science in the next 2 years.

2. N.A.

3. ID of students will depend on purpose of selection. Programmes to align to Renzulli's SEM or Treffinger's LoS. A tiered approach would be preferable.

# data[].attributes.body
1. E2K SCI & MATH, participation in various competitions (Olympiads, Language Speaking Competitions, etc.), EL Enrichment Programme (in-house)

2. Renzulli's 3-ring is used to select for E2K SCI. Revolving door to select P5 students for E2K SCI

3. Treffinger's LoS to organise various TD efforts across various subjects into a more coherent plan

# data[].attributes.body
1. P5 Creative Writing Programme - Partner with GEB
Kept the group small and they have to create a writing portfolio
Feedback and mentoring given by the Tr IC. Online sessions (self-directed, completion within a timeframe)
They go for a 2-day workshop with established writers. If their piece is selected, it would be published in the book - Momento
Materials are given by GEB - teacher will still curate them

2. Reading Circle Programme
P4 & P5 Group (Frindle) - 23 students
The P5 students were matured enough to understand the theme of the book - Holocausts. Conducted during after-school enrichment activity. Just starting out on this programme. Need to go through the process of book discussion. All sessions are F-2-F (more practical)

EL Enrichment are not as structured as the E2K programme.

# data[].attributes.body
Models:
- Based on Treffinger's Talen Development model
- Levels of Service model
- Renzulli

Programmes:
- E2K, Olympiads, Wits and words, NUS High Oratorical challenge, Problem solving projects, Future Problem solving RGS, IP enrichment (moo-O), Reading circles
-

# data[].attributes.body
1. Talent Development Programmes
- E2K Science
-RSO
-SPSO
-E2K Maths
-Reading Circle[English]
-IVP
- Bukit View Accomplished Communicators of English (BV ACEs)

2. Models
- E2K Science and Maths (P3 year end results and GEP results) : Using Level of service model (type 2)
- RSO, SPSO (LOS model, results)
- Reading Circle: Based on EL results. Meet up with teachers teaching level, and based on feedback and results.
- IVP: Same group of pupils who are selected for E2K, and they can choose to take part in either E2K or IVP. Also selection by results

3. Which model can be applied?
Levels of Service Model seems to be common amongst the different programmes.

# data[].attributes.body
1 (a) Computational Thinking (non-acad), Reading Circles (EL), E2K, Math / Science Olympiads, Individualised Study Option (ISO) to P5, IvP, Inter-mingling (GE and HAL during MT)
1(b) Selection of students - Mixture of choice & targetted approach; after school and during school

# data[].attributes.headline
Question 1: What Talent Development Programmes are currently available in your school? Why are these chosen? How are they organised?

# data[].attributes.subject
Question 1: What Talent Development Programmes are currently available in your school? Why are these chosen? How are they organised?

# data[].attributes.body
1. E2K Math
2. E2K Science
3. EL Enrich
Literature Appreciation (Charlie and the Chocolate Factory) - Reading Circles
Oracy programme (external vendor)
P456 - Thematic (eg. P6s Myths and Legend; Cultural Immersion)
Debate (Vendor + Competition)
4. Future Problem Solvers (in 2024)
5. ACE Math and Science (curriculum time)
Theme: Water conservation
Sci - Testing the purity of the water
Math - Volume
Flipped learning through SLS
Deliverables: Ideation on how they can conserve water

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Session 2_Sharing of school-initiated HAL provisions

# data[].attributes.headline
Session 1 slides: Characteristics of HAL and Planning Talent Development Programmes

# data[].attributes.subject
Session 1 slides: Characteristics of HAL and Planning Talent Development Programmes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
KP seminar (Session 1) Characteristics and TD

# data[].attributes.body
Issues - Same pool of students constantly being tapped on and provided opportunities. Providing choices to parents also gave rise to another issue. Different perspectives of parents meant that the allocation of students to programme will need to be flexible (some want more, some more strategic).

Manpower constraints is an issue, as effort are usually channelled towards students of lower ability.

Suggestion: Perhaps having an overview of all the enrichment programmes possible would help parents be strategic and make more informed decisions. Being clearer with expectations and deliverables of the programmes will allow for that as well.

Apart from basing on aptitude, perhaps consider attitudes of students (i.e strong passion / interest) in the selection process. Also consider if the students are able to cope well.

# data[].attributes.body
1. What Talent Development Programmes are currently available in your school? Why are these chosen? How are they organized?

2. What models (if any) were used to guide the planning and implementation of those programmes?  If no model was used, what guiding principles were considered instead?

3. Which model(s) discussed here can be applied in your school’s future plans for Talent Development? How do you see it/them being used?

# data[].attributes.body
Not enough resources deployed to support the talent development team. The selected teachers are BT. Probably a trained teacher could be paired with a more inexperienced teacher. Teachers should be trained to teach the HAL. The teachers are also burdened with lesson preparation, and baseline lesson resources should have been prepared for them (maybe by more experienced teachers). There should also be PD given for HAL.

Students are also not given a choice, therefore it may not be the subject they are interested in. They may then choose to go for DSA, which will benefit them better.

Assumption
It may be assumed that BTs are more enthusiastic/ better able to explore, thus the decision makers deployed them to be in charge of the programmes. However, they may still be grasping with learning different pedagogies to engage learners.