[PSLE MT] PSLE less weightage in Chinese / Mother Tongue
-
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… -
Way2GO:
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.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. -
Does anyone know when will the press conference happen today???
-
tamarind:
yalo, ATTITUDE should be changed, not to change the weightage.
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.
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!! -
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! -
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..... -
HyperKiasu:
:rotflmao:
sure will give him some face. blame it on his surname: N.G. (cut)
cute.
He is just the front man.
-
Way2GO:
Actually, I see very little impact on my children one way or the other. We will adapt , and I don't obsess over fractions of percentage points differences, they will even out in the long run. My philosophy on such matters is generally pragmatic, when in Rome, do as the Romans.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.
I take this position not because I have a vested interest, but because I think it is the right thing to do. -
Way2GO:
To be clear, I do believe that many parents are like yourself. You believe in the importance of cultural connectedness, and the neccessity of learning the language to gear for the future. It is a perfectly rational and justifiable position to take, for YOUR children. I have never had an issue with that, but to extend it beyond your family, insist that it be examinable across the board to some notional standard, then begins to look like an imposition, and we have to be careful on how we implement that.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!
I believe those who primarily take the cynical 'my child ahead of others' approach are in the minority, but they are there. -
3Boys:
I take this position not because I have a vested interest, but because I think it is the right thing to do.
Good for u
though I may add just reducing the MT weightage is not the right solution.
As many correctly pointed of, MOE should implement a system that encourages
the learning of MT, not discourage it.
I share with u something else....
When my DS1 was young and realizing his MT was not up to par.
we decided he should go for Chinese enrichment.
He absolutely refused and declared that
he is NOT Chinese :!:
He is OK with Mandarin now,
but at that time, his declaration raised an alarm bell!
Do kids know any better at their tender age?
Most will take the route of least resistance.
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 💗
Register Login