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)

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?

Real world applications (e.g. sports commentary, use of present tense)

More progressive in the identification

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

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)

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

real life applications

interesting range of topics introduced

good scope and sequence of topics and skills covered

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

Would it be challenging to track the pupils if the pupils are progressing at different levels/pacing?

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

Possible to include financial literacy/topics on economics?

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

For identification, how much weighting should be attributed to the MST, teacher nomination, WA scores?

Hands-on approach that makes learning Science applicable and relevant.

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

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

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

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)

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

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

IDL between Science + History/Culture

Marry Science + Engineering (tinkering)

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?