Any Updates As To When PSLE T-Scores Will Be Scrapped?
-
sleepy:
Never met helpful teachers during my time leh. My dh did extremely well for his psle but he didn't even know RI or HCI exist. That era no internet no ksp no information he picked the nearest secondary school
But did going to the nearest sec school change his fate drastically? He still did very well and went to college later, right?
A lot of under-privileged students picked the nearest sec school because they had to help out at their parents' stalls, take care of younger siblings and take up a part-time job; moreover, there was no MRT then.
Minister Chan Chun Sing was from a lower income, single parent family. I'm not sure the extent of help he'd received from his teachers wrt selecting RI at Grange Road which was then a 'no-brainer' choice for those high scorers living in Tiong Bahru, Outram, Bt Ho Swee, River Valley, Bt Merah, HV (amongst those older RI boys I know).
However, he once shared on Ch 8 TV that he didn't know what RI was, but because he watched TV debates regularly, he knew RI was a good school that had won many inter school debates, so he picked it after PSLE, despite that he lived in MacPherson. CCS also reads voraciously, so it's little wonder that he knew about these top schools at age 12.
I guess in those days, early 80s, one has to be ambitious, observant and motivated enough to make informed choices that suit your own abilities. Only you can help yourself! -
pirate:
Yes, pirate, that's coming up nextSun_2010:
I would go on to say this is a brave change, perhaps even a tad foolish ,considering it is going to be unpopular. Because the most vocal of us are not going to be happy that we can do nothing to manipulate it beyond the basic. And we will not keep quite either.
Can always manipulate the DSA thingy. :imanangel:
Sun: agree with you that it's a tad foolish. On first glance, it does look too ridiculously unclever, too raw, too simplistic, too blunt for comfort--by KSP standard and by MOE top scholars' standard! However, after mulling over it whilst patiently waiting for MOE's reply to http://www.todayonline.com/voices/new-psle-system-may-be-unfair-some-students) which never came, I suspect it's deliberately meant to be unclever, for reasons UBKmom, Chen ('petunia' in her blog) and I have mentioned, i.e. to spread the talents to more good schools to make them 'gooder'. -
sushi88:
That's great to learn that for some of the parents here, their teachers from primary schools guided them in making a tough choice. And that's how it should be. Teachers, not parents, should play the leading role in the children's educational journey.
The children should consult the teachers for advice, whether parents are involved or not, as one of the views. During my time, majority of us were underprivileged and our parents were clueless and guess who come to our help? The teachers. I remember filling up my choices on my own with help from teachers.Blurryburger:
I wonder what MOE will do to help the underprivileged children...
Research elsewhere has shown that in the early schooling years, parental involvement is relatively more important than say, who your peers are. So, if that's true in Singapore and the choice of school is more important with the change, and supposedly children from lower incomes and underprivileged households do not receive as much parental involvement as the higher income families, who is going to help these kids figure out their choices? Will children from a certain income stratum be left behind by the system?
My DC is in P1 this year, so the recent changes in PSLE affect me tremendously on a personal level. As a parent, I would describe myself pretty laid back, but now for some reason I find myself feeling more and more agitated and worried about what will be and will not, with regards to my DC's performance in PSLE 2021 and the whole of his future. Like many parents of this cohort, I am already worried about Sec 1 posting, tertiary education, right up to his career path and job prospects! :scared: :nailbite:
From what I observe, currently many parents tend to take the responsibility of their children's primary school education in their own hands. Because parents have the most at stake. But why does it have to be so? Surely the lion's share of the responsibility should be with the school and teachers. It is the teachers whose KPI should be tied to their overall class performance, or teachers who need to take ownership of their class' performance at year end exams at P1 to P5 level.
If a student is weak in a particular subject, then I feel it should be the teacher's call to advise the parents if a little extra help, in the form of tuition/ remedial lessons, will help; instead of parents deciding unilaterally to enroll their DC in tuition. -
Missty:
That's great to learn that for some of the parents here, their teachers from primary schools guided them in making a tough choice. And that's how it should be. Teachers, not parents, should play the leading role in the children's educational journey.
The children should consult the teachers for advice, whether parents are involved or not, as one of the views. During my time, majority of us were underprivileged and our parents were clueless and guess who come to our help? The teachers. I remember filling up my choices on my own with help from teachers.sushi88:
[quote=\"Blurryburger\"]I wonder what MOE will do to help the underprivileged children...
Research elsewhere has shown that in the early schooling years, parental involvement is relatively more important than say, who your peers are. So, if that's true in Singapore and the choice of school is more important with the change, and supposedly children from lower incomes and underprivileged households do not receive as much parental involvement as the higher income families, who is going to help these kids figure out their choices? Will children from a certain income stratum be left behind by the system?
My DC is in P1 this year, so the recent changes in PSLE affect me tremendously on a personal level. As a parent, I would describe myself pretty laid back, but now for some reason I find myself feeling more and more agitated and worried about what will be and will not, with regards to my DC's performance in PSLE 2021 and the whole of his future. Like many parents of this cohort, I am already worried about Sec 1 posting, tertiary education, right up to his career path and job prospects! :scared: :nailbite:
From what I observe, currently many parents tend to take the responsibility of their children's primary school education in their own hands. Because parents have the most at stake. But why does it have to be so? Surely the lion's share of the responsibility should be with the school and teachers. It is the teachers whose KPI should be tied to their overall class performance, or teachers who need to take ownership of their class' performance at year end exams at P1 to P5 level.
If a student is weak in a particular subject, then I feel it should be the teacher's call to advise the parents if a little extra help, in the form of tuition/ remedial lessons, will help; instead of parents deciding unilaterally to enroll their DC in tuition.[/quote]Aren't there a lot of schemes and programmes for under-privileged families? :scratchhead:
I heard from my teacher friends they are working very hard to help weaker students from disadvantaged families. Remedials, counselling, etc. That the schools/ministry don't publicise teachers' hard work and intervention doesn't mean the teachers/P didn't do anything. -
jetsetter:
How would I know how not going to RI or HCI affected his fate? Hmm... maybe it cost him a Minister salary :rotflmao:
But did going to the nearest sec school change his fate drastically?
Minister Chan Chun Sing was from a lower income
he once shared on Ch 8 TV that he didn't know what RI was, but because he watched TV debates regularly, he knew RI was a good school that had won many inter school debates, so he picked it after PSLE
By the way, his house no tv, couldn't watch RI debate -
Acaciahua:
The biggest problem with our education system is streaming students according to their academic abilities. What happens when you group students with the lowest marks together like in the normal stream? Students who do not get good results are those who do not like to study and prefer to waste their time playing.
I have taught such students before and their attitude is so bad and the class is so noisy that it is impossible for teachers to teach properly. Parents of course do not want their children to end up in a such a class. A class with students who are very strong academically will be very quiet and attentive. It is not only a joy to teach such a class, but every student in the class will be motivated to work hard because of the good influence from their classmates.
It is only natural for parents to wish for their children to study among the best students in the country. Many people like to say that it is not the end of the world if your child ends up in the normal stream. Only teachers like me who have taught students in the normal stream know the truth that it is very difficult for a student to do well in normal stream where teachers cannot even teach properly and everything has to be dumbed down to ensure passing rate.
Do not blame parents for wanting the best environment for their children. The problem is with the education system, not with the parents.
The only way to relieve stress is to scrap PSLE completely. Primary school to secondary school based on 100% balloting. However many parents who die die want to get their children into the so called top schools will not accept this.
So there will never be a system that will please everyone. We need education experts to work out what is the best system for the country and push through the system instead of trying to make everyone happy.
The old education system is responsible to a great extent. I don't know any one of you had ranking/streaming system back in pri-sch days, but I was in the same class for 6 years. LOL! There was no ranking, though after comparing amongst ourselves, we knew who were the top 3, but essentially, no one cared about their ranking/banding.
Frankly, I like it that way
The old saying, \"It is better to conquer yourself than to win a thousand battles. Then the victory is yours.\" helped me excel throughout my years as a student.
-
sleepy:
He could have watched it from the CC or the void deck TVs operated by some RCs.
By the way, his house no tv, couldn't watch RI debate
(Or he may just be BS-ing) -
sleepy:
I mean, he isn't shortchanged greatly, still a PME. Not everyone who went to RI and HCI 20-30 years ago are in public service or politics, let alone became a Minister! Some are just ordinary PMEs, due to their lack of proficiency in CL2 (EL1 or GP for HCI students) that cost them a top JC place or even uni place.
How would I know how not going to RI or HCI affected his fate? Hmm... maybe it cost him a Minister salary :rotflmao:jetsetter:
But did going to the nearest sec school change his fate drastically?
Minister Chan Chun Sing was from a lower income
he once shared on Ch 8 TV that he didn't know what RI was, but because he watched TV debates regularly, he knew RI was a good school that had won many inter school debates, so he picked it after PSLE
By the way, his house no tv, couldn't watch RI debate
:oops: I have some older cousins who were contented with their affiliated mission sec schools despite scoring well enough for SAP schools (in those days should be the IP equivalent). I don't see them in any disadvantaged position today. LOL!! Maybe the mission school is quite famous bah! :rotflmao: -
floppy:
Huh? Why need to BS over such thing? No tv very proud meh?
He could have watched it from the CC or the void deck TVs operated by some RCs.
(Or he may just be BS-ing)
His family only bought their first tv set when he was in his teens. Before that must thick skin go neighbor' house if really really want to watch tv but wouldn't get to choose channel hor -
Missty:
Parents have 1, 2 or maybe 3 (few have 4 or 5) kids. Compared to teacher who has 30-40 kids. Who would be able to detect if a child needs help? and who should be better placed?
From what I observe, currently many parents tend to take the responsibility of their children's primary school education in their own hands. Because parents have the most at stake. But why does it have to be so? Surely the lion's share of the responsibility should be with the school and teachers. It is the teachers whose KPI should be tied to their overall class performance, or teachers who need to take ownership of their class' performance at year end exams at P1 to P5 level.
If a student is weak in a particular subject, then I feel it should be the teacher's call to advise the parents if a little extra help, in the form of tuition/ remedial lessons, will help; instead of parents deciding unilaterally to enroll their DC in tuition.
I have heard of friends castigating teachers who ask parents to enroll kids for tuition after a couple of tingxie. On the other end, I have seen teachers repeatedly telling disbelieving parents their kids don't need tuition (but parents still send).
I think after primary school, I should also be more laidback - but it's probably because kids are more independent and want to exercise own will when they are in sec school.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better š
Register Login
Online Users
Statistics
Popular Topics
