# data[].attributes.body
Please indicate your group number. Capture key points from the group's sharing and discussion.

# data[].attributes.body
the inclusion of writing in the ID process, recognising the different competencies in English that students may be talented at

authentic learning experience and real-world application, e.g. sports commentary

GEP resources are still relevant and used for Tier 2 (conceptual teaching)

# data[].attributes.body
how the writing component will be marked. Will only selected students (selected through the MCQs in MST) need to do the writing component? We recognise different competencies in EL, will those talented in writing correctly identified? already streamlined from the MCQ

if GEP SS materials can be integrated into EL (or vice versa) for the modules in RC. How about texts in Reading Circles, can the themes fit into SS themes?

# data[].attributes.body
Any culminating products at the end of the RC experience?

Answer: No culminating task at the end of each year but for each module or component, there is a culminating or performance task.

EL to consider the value proposition of their enriched programmes. What do all these lead to? What would the desired outcomes be for a graduand of the EL RC?

# data[].attributes.body
1. Real world applications (e.g. sports commentary, use of present tense)

2. More progressive in the identification

# data[].attributes.body
Question: Issue in identification of pupils for Tier 3 as each of the module/component may have different requirements, focus on different competencies.

Answer: However, the teacher can make the recommendations based on their assessment (such as their engagement with the lesson, how they respond to questions etc).

Question: Any queries from parents currently to find out why their child is not selected for the Reading Circle?

Answer: No parent has asked why the child is not selected for RC.

Question: How to select the students if there is a cap to the number?

[no time to further discuss this]

# data[].attributes.body
Would like to clarify the intention of including Sport Commentary? Would there be other topics that are more relatable?

Will there be a consistent unit plan across all the 15 RC center or will there be differentiation across the 15 RCs?

# data[].attributes.body
The concept units (e.g. sports commentary) are broad enough to encourage inquiry and independent learning based on students' personal interest.

# data[].attributes.body
Clear tiering progression from Tiers 1 - 3 could be seen thru the examples.

Helpful to show the plan by year and semester of what the programme looks like.

It was good that there are other programmes available besides what is in the RC (e.g. Wits & Words, CWP)

# data[].attributes.body
It is good that the Tier 1 E&I is also made available to all schools.

# data[].attributes.body
Wondering if it is possible to do provision that is not tie to the mainstream curriculum. While we understand that there is value in aligning with National Syllabus. this might help to widen their exposure. Currently the packaging of the activity seems to be an extension of STELLAR curriculum.

# data[].attributes.body
Identification is blunt + competencies are not homogeneous (e.g. strong readers may not be strong writers, or the most confident speakers) - as such, the suite of programmes on offer captures a range of verbal talents to ensure that there are other options for pupils who are either not picked up through formal identification or do not wish to commit to participation in the full RC programme.

It would be challenging to accurately identify strong writers through a centralised testing process

Strong writers may not be quick writers or may face difficulties translating ideas into words within a short time limit

The test-taking duration may not provide a realistic opportunity for writers to flesh out their ideas - the test may be more useful for assessing basic writing skill (e.g. fluency, syntactic control, vocabulary range)

Practical challenges of evaluating a copious number of scripts

# data[].attributes.body
Wonder if the RC Tier 2 E&I move further from the STELLAR focus (sports commentary) to promote greater student interest and independent inquiry?

E.g. pets race / animal beauty pageantry / food commentary?

# data[].attributes.body
1. real life applications

2. interesting range of topics introduced

3. good scope and sequence of topics and skills covered

4. strong value proposition (e.g. chanelling pupils to do STEM in future and the RC will be one such platform)

# data[].attributes.body
1. Would it be challenging to track the pupils if the pupils are progressing at different levels/pacing?

2. How to find mixed-level classes if there is a specific day for specific level?

3. Possible to include financial literacy/topics on economics?

4. To consider including topics that have a STEM focus? e.g. engineering; structural stability

# data[].attributes.body
1. For identification, how much weighting should be attributed to the MST, teacher nomination, WA scores?

2. Olympiad Math Gold medalist, do they get automatic placement in the RCs?

3. If there is excess demand, how do we determine the number of students that we take from each school to attend the RCs?

# data[].attributes.body
1. Hands-on approach that makes learning Science applicable and relevant.

2. Effort to reflect the values and dispositions in the learning outcomes for the Science RC.

# data[].attributes.body
Focus on developing dispositions (mathematical ways of thinking), pupils' ability to apply mathematical concepts to real-world situations and contexts and appreciate mathematics in the world

The use of recreational math sparks curiosity to wonder and discover

Creates a math talent pipeline which encourages students to develop in STEM subjects at secondary and beyond

Having P4 and P5 pupils in the same classroom is one good way to conserve manpower

# data[].attributes.body
I am wondering why recreational mathematics is introduced in Tier 2 and not in Tier 1?

# data[].attributes.body
Perhaps the team might need to consider repackaging the idea of recreation Maths (we need to bring out mathematics thinking and reasoning in this aspect)

Apart from STEM, we need to build up the disciplinary focus of mathematic skill within the students. In addition, we need to have a clear progression of mathematical skills and thinking development across the 3 different levels.

We need to be careful in terms of the messaging for the P5 who entered the Tier 3 program at a later stage as compared to P4 pupils who can entered P5 Tier 3 as well.

# data[].attributes.body
How to select for Math masterclass?

Share with schools a performance task that can be administered during E2K Math as a way to identify suitable pupils

Would there be an issue of aggressive parents who insist that their kids be in the programmes?

Schools would manage this (would schools be ready to do so and would they end up referring parents to GEB in the end?)

Possible to consider an integrative sort of culminating task to bring together the various skills they have picked up (e.g. weave mathematical concepts into a mystery story)

How would interdisciplinary teaching happen? Given that pupils are selected for only one of the EMS RC programmes

There may be avenues within the EMS programmes to naturally integrate interdisciplinary elements

# data[].attributes.body
We like the idea of Recreational Mathematical as a selling point.

# data[].attributes.body
Given that the modules seem fairly standalone, can a student who is identified only at P5 opt to do a P4 Tier 2 module? These students may then culminate in P5 Tier 2, given they probably don't have the calibre or time to do the P6 mentorship programme?

# data[].attributes.body
Is it possible for a multi-talented child to choose to experience English in one year, Math in a second year, etc?

Logistically possible for child to attend RC programmes in two subjects at the same time, but the child may not have the time to spare.

There would be a need for the school to plan such that pupils attending RC can arrive and depart safely (need to work with OM)

# data[].attributes.body
Appreciate that the structure proposed allow for mixed-level groupings; the modules are also quite fun and promote the joy of learning.

We also like that the seniors or the more advanced students get the opportunity to apply their learning for the juniors (treasure-hunt)

# data[].attributes.body
Blended approach is interesting. Allows the affordance of having common lessons across different RCs.

# data[].attributes.body
Not overly packing to 30 weeks. But provide

Packaging into different aspects such as real-world applications, puzzles, etc.

# data[].attributes.body
Is there a reason why research projects are in P6?

If topics like logic puzzles could also be covered at the Tier 1?

# data[].attributes.body
+++ The clarity of the branding that RC Math is NOT about olympic preparations but further pique curiosity in the subject,

+++ the dispositions/attitude towards Math are taken into consideration,

+++ the modules are very interesting and fun,

+++ the design also considers students progressing at their own pace, e.g. P4 students taking P5 tier 2 modules

# data[].attributes.body
Are pupils expected to have covered the topics in their mainstream classes first before they can embark on the enriched modules ar RC Tier 2 and 3? what happens if the pupils come without the necessary knowledge/skills?

Question: How do you identify Science talents?

Answer: school results and from E2K science lessons

Question: Possible to consider to start Science RC in term 2 to allow more time for selection in Term 1, e.g., through E2K?

Answer: May not be a good idea and it may become stressful for the schools.

Interviewing as an identification tool may also be difficult as pupils at such a young age may also not be able to express themselves well.

Possible to include earth science?

# data[].attributes.body
Question: Would it be too early to start the RC modules at Term 1 when schools may need more time to identify and select the science talents?

In lesson packages rolled out to schools, differentiated tasks could be shared with teachers to help them assess if the pupils possess the relevant skills?

# data[].attributes.body
? The cryptography topic seems to lend itself well to be integrated with CEP. Any chance for integration with CEP? i.e. app making,

? The P6 Research Project can also feed into IRS (math research projects)

? Partnership with SBGE schools, or Math undergraduates, to support the mentoring for the Research Project.

# data[].attributes.body
It highlighted the skills clearly for each tier that needed to be developed.

The topics are interesting and relatable. Some of these are issues that we are facing currently at the Gobal level.

There was a clear development of skills from one level to another particularly in terms of inquiry in terms of level of open-ness.

We are preparing the pupils for the inquiry at the Secondary Level too.

# data[].attributes.body
The many interesting themes connected to real world. Some of the LJs are not places that parents can bring their kids to.

Opportunities to meet with field experts. Makes learning more authentic.

# data[].attributes.body
The curriculum is anchored on disciplinary ethics and values, dispositions (e.g. tolerance for ambiguity, persistence, etc.) - this is something we may not have been able to explore as deeply in the current GEP curriculum and is an opportunity

# data[].attributes.body
How important is GAT in the identification process? (Spatial, Visualization and modelling skills necessary for construction of machines). Will it be more applicable for identifying tier 3 students?

Might there be masterclass modules that do not require GAT type of skills?

# data[].attributes.body
Is the current spread of themes too broad? Would it be more advantageous for the RC curriculum to narrow down to fewer topics and go deeper?

The concept is something like that of a buffet - students get to explore a wider diversity of topics which may cater to diverse interests

Wider range of topics also makes it easier for students to enter the programme at various junctures in a more porous model

A wide range also helps pupils assimilate knowledge from different topics better as they continue to cross-apply concepts across topics

# data[].attributes.body
(General comment, not specific to just Science) Would we be competing against private enrichment centres who may be able to provide alternative programmes which are just as attractive, if not more so, than our programme? Given the practical constraints of our new model whereas they can operate on weekends?

To what extent would GAT help identify pupils who are suited for the Science programme?

# data[].attributes.body
We wonder if the Tier 2 modules may be too intellectual for the students? Would a more experiential approach that taps on scientific concepts, e.g. a CSI investigation?

# data[].attributes.body
IDL between Science + History/Culture

Marry Science + Engineering (tinkering)

# data[].attributes.body
Appreciate how the SC curriculum has many natural fit with the IRS and IVP + many real-life applications!

# data[].attributes.body
Partnership with Science Center (in addition to NUS High) for Tier 3 programmes

ID for Science seems tricky indeed. Some ideas: no Science RC in P4 but provide Science mass-programmes for the HALs and have a "Science Fair" or "Science Camp" to ID students for P5 RC?