[PSLE MT] PSLE less weightage in Chinese / Mother Tongue

[corneyAmber]

Based on their arguments, I believe they are more children who are disadvantaged in English because they came from non-English speaking families. And why are they not complaining? Partly because their parents could not write English letters to ST forums. :lol:

[corneyAmber]

tamarind:

Coming from an English speaking family is not an excuse for not doing well in Chinese.

:goodpost: tamarind! :celebrate:

[3Boys]

gnoikj:

There are conflicting views on the issue of reduction in weightage mainly because people percieve the reduction in weightage to be equivalent to a reduction in importance. This is the case because of our emphasis on academic mastery in not just languages, but in all examinable subjects as a whole. It may be that a reduction in weightage may spur some to enjoy the language (MT) more because it is no longer so stressful. The cynic in me believes otherwise. Unless a overhaul of the entire educational system takes place, piecemeal measures targeting a specific subject would just push students to focus on the more \"ïmportant\" subjects.

A fair question to you would be: What would you do, if MOE decides to reduce the weightage of MT in PSLE? Would you still encourage your kids to study it as conscientously and excel in it as with other subjects? Having read somewhere that you are not a kiasu parent of course.

You take a fairly utilitarian view of the issue, which is largely aligned with mine. I put my kids through the drill because I am aware of what the local scene is like and do not wish for them to be too severely disadvantaged (so yeah, maybe I'm am just a little bit kiasu). It is an utilitarian approach, and if in the future they wish to pursue the culture at a deeper level, it is their choice, I neither encourage nor discourage it. I see it this way, I am a Singaporean first, lingua franca is English. English necessarily needs to be of a higher importance than MT. For those who wish to pursue MT at a higher level, there are MANY options open. However, my view is that it is unreasonable to set the general bar at a level that a small (but significant) number of otherwise smart students struggle constantly with it through school and are disadvantaged when it comes to certain opportunities on the account of it. This has some resonance with me. Not everbody has the same affinity for the language or culture, and we are a plural society, so no one should be hounded on account of feeling that way.

Therefore, I feel there should be a diversity of approaches and standards. As many here have already stated, they don't set their internal standard for Chinese proficiency by what MOE does, they set it higher. I.e. they imply they don't really care what other people do. Yet, there is an internal contradiction in their position when they then insist that all must be held to the same standard, so that their precious baby's advantage will not be eroded away.

What does this tell me. Protectionism? Self interest? You can draw your own conclusions. I have little time for such attitudes, they are divisive and contributory to the high pitch of the debate.

Being in this mix has been extremely motivating for me, but in a negative way. At least you have the maturity to engage directly on the issue as opposed to casting innuendo or sneering behind my back.

What will I do? One basically needs to adapt to the environment. My kids will get the kind of support they need to manage CL2 well in the school environment. That includes enrichment, and at an early stage. But it will not be immersive. This is my base level, to be titrated up and down as the situation dictates. It does not matter if they be in the top tier of CL. In my years of hiring people, I know there is not necessarily a lot of correlation between PSLE (or even 'O' level) scores and work performance. Not to downplay the importance of academic performance, but exam-smart only gets you so far.

[Way2GO]

3Boys:

.....What does this tell me. Protectionism? Self interest? .......

Don't you see that by supporting reduction in MT weightage, you take a position no different from those you imputed on quote 'there is an internal contradiction in their position when they then insist that all must be held to the same standard, so that their precious baby's advantage will not be eroded away. ', except that you are at opposite ends of it.

Why must one group benefit at the expense of another group?
gnoikj is right. One cannot improve the system by piece measure such as just reducing the MT weightage.

[nan.014182nan]

Now I want to address the lowering of the bar…


>However, my view is that it is unreasonable to set the general bar at a
>level that a small (but significant) number of otherwise smart students
>struggle constantly with it through school and are disadvantaged when it
>comes to certain opportunities on the account of it

Say there are 10 students: 4 of them A* for MT, 3 of them B for MT, 2 of the C for MT, and 1 of them D for MT. Suppose one of the B students is 3Boys’ child.

Now the bar is at 25%.

So, the B, C and D are struggling.

MOE lower the bar to 10%. The B’s are happy, now they don’t struggle so much.

But the bottom 3 are still struggling.

6 months later, they petition to MOE. MOE lower the bar again to 5%.

The C’s are now happy. But there is still a D there struggling.

So where should the bar be such that NO Smart students are struggling ?

The bar should be at Zero.

Although the bar is at Zero, the 6 students’ MT standard is still poor compare to the 4 ! Because no effort was made to improve their capability but lower the bar. They remain weak and happy, because in Singapore, they speak English as working language and in coffeeshop they order mee pok in Teochew. That works.

These 10 students now will not struggle with MT. So the next thing will be Maths. There will be Science Smart student but struggling with numbers. So, their parents will petition to MOE to lower the weightage of Maths for PSLE.

…on and on…until all weightages are zero. All Singaporeans are happy now.

Singaporeans are happy to continue to speak English as a working language, order mee pok in Teochew, the mee pok man give change, they cannot count, take out a calculator and press…

[corneyAmber]

Way2GO:

3Boys:

.....What does this tell me. Protectionism? Self interest? .......

Don't you see that by supporting reduction in MT weightage, you take a position no different from those you imputed on quote 'there is an internal contradiction in their position when they then insist that all must be held to the same standard, so that their precious baby's advantage will not be eroded away. ', except that you are at opposite ends of it.

Why must one group benefit at the expense of another group?
gnoikj is right. One cannot improve the system by piece measure such as just reducing the MT weightage.

Exactly, and 3Boys, your baby's advantage is English just like mine, but I think in fairer terms for those who focused on Chinese. I feel that I have a loser mindset if I cannot even accept that people have invested more time in getting something right which I have not done so for my child. I do not expect the playing field to be levelled but I DO expect my child to try hard for her own sake. I would be happy to inform in future that she has not taken the defeatist attitude towards her life.

[MMM]

Does anyone know when will the press conference happen today???

[HyperKiasu]

tamarind:

Coming from an English speaking family is not an excuse for not doing well in Chinese.

Even in neighbourhood schools, there are many students who do very well in O levels. It is not the end of the world.

My girl's Chinese teacher teaches many songs during the Chinese lesson. I believe that most Chinese teachers are already trying their best to make the lessons more interesting. The problem could be with the child, he is most likely influenced by the parents' negative attitude towards the language, then don't blame the teacher.

yalo, ATTITUDE should be changed, not to change the weightage.
think if some of those 10% divert some time and effort to MT, their EMS will not be as good as if they dun do so....
those who can excel in 4 subjects definitely are much better than who can only manage 3, 4>3, so simple....
they dun like neighbourhood, they like Raffles, thus like what you said in earlier post, give them Raffles, whatever they want, just give, but bottom line is : Never Cut Our Mother Tongue!!

[Way2GO]

ksi:

Exactly, and 3Boys, your baby's advantage is English just like mine, but I think in fairer terms for those who focused on Chinese. ... I do not expect the playing field to be levelled but I DO expect my child to try hard for her own sake. I would be happy to inform in future that she has not taken the defeatist attitude towards her life.

ksi
My anti-MT- weightage- reduction stance is definitely not motivated
by gaining some advantage for my kids.
For the record, my DS1's weakest subject was CL during PSLE.
My kids were raised in an English speaking home environment.
In school, all their schoolmates also interact in English, except during CL classes.

A survey was carried out in his secondary school recently
along this line with these options (may not be exact words in survey)
If MT weightage is reduced, would you
1. Put more effort into learning MT, or
2. Put same effort in learning MT, or
3. Put less effort in learning MT.

His selection?
3
Just as I predicted in an earlier post.
I believe many students will think the same way!

[HyperKiasu]

tamarind:

Give Mr Ng some face lah. We can't expect him to apologize and say that he is wrong to make the statement about lowering the weighting right ? If he keeps quiet tomorrow, that means he admits his mistake and nothing will be changed. Then let's pretend that nothing has happened before lor.

sure will give him some face. blame it on his surname: N.G. (cut)

but if cut is doomed, then too bad too bad.....