Can through-train school work in kiasu Singapore?
-
sushi88\" post_id=\"2103494\" time=\"1680222106\" user_id=\"100857:
Personally, I prefer to allow every student in Singapore to have a choice to opt out of PSLE at end of P5 instead of having parents to opt in for TT program at P1, while still want to keep the option of taking PSLE to get into better schools. This to me is as good as affiliation school as almost 100% of students from affiliation will get promoted to same secondary school, while they still can move out if they do well in PSLE.
In the pseudo TT, how would anyone know who has chosen the TT way if everyone still continues to prep for PSLE? The difference is it would be less tense in general for the kids.
Also, if adults do not know how to respect choice, how would kids know how to?
As someone has pointed out that those who chose jc route are gong kias, suggesting there are academically strong kids who CHOSE to go the poly route to get to the uni too. We can respect kids who take the poly route as choices not because they cannot make it to the JCs but prefer a different learning environment, yet still get to the U, can't we? Or do we conclude that all poly kids are weak in their studies due to our labelling minds? I really do not think so.
A student who wishes to opt out of PSLE will be required to take prelim and the result will be used by the secondary school to determine their FSBB in Sec1, where they will join the other PSLE students. The only caveat here is that students who skips PSLE may not get into their preferred secondary schools.
So there is really no need for any fancy red carpet arrangement for \"TT\" because the demand for such a pathway is likely to be muted and MOE will not turn the education system upside down just to make it popular. -
The policymakers (presumably the top 10% academically of their cohort) are there to make policy that governs the 100%, not just their own 10%.
If they speak up on issues for self-serving reasons, or change policy only to benefit their own 10%, then the whole country will be in deep sh1t sooner or later. -
MP denise phua already called for the re-evaluating of high stakes exams and tuition culture since 2018.
More than 5 years and nothing has been done.
[youtubeId]y7zxDYR-Ph0[/youtubeId] -
In 2012, MP yee jenn jong also called on MOE to allow parents to opt out of the PSLE.
11 years and not a peep from MOE.
https://yeejj.wordpress.com/2012/09/18/scrapping-the-psle/
[quote]Today’s issue of TODAY screamed the headline, “MP echoes calls for PSLE to be scrapped“. MP Hri Kumar had blogged to support slaying the PSLE sacred cow, as long as alternative can be agreed on. During the Committee of Supply (COS) debate on MOE in parliament in March this year, I had made a call to allow parents to opt out of the PSLE when I presented a proposal for primary to secondary through-train schools . The Workers’ Party manifesto had also called for a primary-secondary integrated prorgramme as well.
Education is something close to the heart of Singaporean parents. PSLE is something so entrenched in our system that many wonder what the alternative would be.
I would have preferred outright primary to secondary through-train schools for everyone. No need for an alternative to decide how to sieve and stream students. No need for some secondary schools to be more special than others. Have 10 years to prepare them for the first major examinations at secondary 4. This concept sounds alien to us because we have been so used to an ever increasing competitive system that continously sieve out students to place them onto pathways planned for them to ‘maximise’ their learning, and to determine how resources should be appropriately allocated according to students’ abilities. Through-train from primary school is not a new concept though, as other countries have tried such a model, most notable of which is Finland. Finland had reversed an earlier policy that had streaming and elite grammar schools into one more egalitarian, and had achieved acclaimed international success with this transformation.
However, being practical, I agree that it would be too difficult to implement such a drastic change within a short time. I had conducted focus group discussion with many parents before I presented my proposal at the COS on MOE this year. Many I had interviewed could not imagine what it would be like without PSLE. A common response that came back was, “How do we determine who should go to Raffles?”
I was encouraged though, to hear a significant number of parents supportive of the idea. I was even more encouraged when a former senior MOE official told me such a proposal was submitted several years ago by a school that already has primary and secondary sections. There had always been a vast majority of its students moving from the primary section into the secondary, so the school was interested to have programmes that could prepare students for a more holistic education without the distraction of PSLE. Not surprisingly, this internal proposal was not heard by many as it was dismissed by MOE. PSLE is too sacred a cow to be sacrified. I was encouraged because it shows that there are parents, educators and established educational institutions that will support the idea. Today, I am even more encouraged that fellow MPs from across the party divide are believing in this too.
Education Minister Heng Swee Kiat had responded during COS debate that having such a scheme would transfer pressure to the preschool level and at selection for primary schools. I think we can have ways to execute this scheme without creating such a situation.
One way to thread the ground carefully is to offer the choice to parents. Those who really do not wish to have PSLE can do so. This new through-train track shall not be a short cut into existing top secondary schools. We can exclude all existing Integrated Programme (IP) schools, which currently take in the top 10% of students at PSLE. The parents who opt for this choice must now really believe in the value of the 10-year holistic development plan of such schools. They must know it is highly unlikely their child will enter the Raffles schools and other top schools without the PSLE.
Since every school is a good school, MOE should have confidence in picking a few schools to start the programme with. A quick scan will reveal that there are still a good number of schools with primary and secondary sections run by various groups that are not one of the current IP schools. We can also be bold to pick up outstanding principals of existing autonomous secondary schools that have demonstrated holistic development and allow them to offer a new primary school section. I noted several of my principal friends who had left MOE are helming international schools overseas that cover preschool to high school education, and are doing an excellent job out of it. The programme can let some existing principals rise to the challenge to helm the new 10-year schools.
We do not need to start with so many schools initially. I believe there should be enough demand to start eight such schools, two each in each of the North, South, East and West zones. We can expand the programme as we go along.
MOE currently rotates principals out of schools regularly. A principal now typically stays with a school 4-6 years. A senior MOE official once remarked to me that if you leave principals in a school too long, strange things happen sometimes. So principals are rotated regularly and a new broom sweeps clean with each change.
I believe to make this programme work, we need to identify visionary principals who believe wholeheartedly in holistic development. Have them helm these schools, and let them do so for for a longer period, say 10 years or longer. This will allow them to really build up the character of the school and anchor the programme. With the current short cycle as principal in a school, the principal may find it hard to execute long term programmes. Give the principal the space to truly define how the school should run, given the luxury of 10 years to build up the child. Allow the principal to define the values and mission of the school and to have time to articulate that to students and parents.
MOE has also implemented holistic assessment, particularly in primary schools. Without PSLE, it is the best time for them to show off how to make holistic assessment and holistic development work.
I sincerely believe we can get the first batch of such schools to work, given that we have enough good educators and capable school administrators to do the pilot. With success, we can start to expand the programme. Over time, Singaporeans will start to seriously question why we are so anxious to have our children in a rat race to ace the PSLE. Singaporeans can truly reflect on what education and what good schools should be about. Perhaps by that time, we may truly be able to slaughter the PSLE sacred cow. Till then, a safer way to implement this is to tread carefully at the initial stage by offering a realistic choice for those who do not wish to have their children sucked into an academic rat race that distorts the true value of education.[/quote] -
@Veyron, exactly what I wanted to say the same as zac's mum. Since you mentioned it many times, it's probably time for me to say that MPs background is irrelevant here because they cannot assume every kid to perform at the same level as them, can they? There have to be choices to cater for the varying learning needs of the children. It would be draconian to insist that every child to be exactly like them. :yikes: Though we generally always call the popular schools good, have we ever paused to think of those kids who were ill-fitted to the schools parents want for them actually have to suffer for years in those schools? Some may even have their esteem taking a toll.
-
HSK was right. YJJ was wrong. It is just kicking the can up or down the road. If "we have ways to execute this scheme without creating such a situation" (ie. transferring the pressure), we might as well just apply these ways to the pressure at PLSE.
The primary focus should always be "the ways" to relieve pressure, not to kick the can up or up down the road.
This seems to me to be the approach MOE is adopting with their many pathways approach and full subject based banding.
Has anybody considered that with the 10 year TT, if the child does not pass the O levels or whatever at the end of 10 years, the child does not even have a primary school education certificate? How is that supposed to relieve pressure? -
Veyron\" post_id=\"2103497\" time=\"1680225663\" user_id=\"30663:
1. Think we have somewhat agree that PSLE is one important checkpoint of understanding how the kids are doing for both parents and MOE. We need some indicators at a national level to know if we need to tweak anything to change behaviour.
Personally, I prefer to allow every student in Singapore to have a choice to opt out of PSLE at end of P5 instead of having parents to opt in for TT program at P1, while still want to keep the option of taking PSLE to get into better schools. This to me is as good as affiliation school as almost 100% of students from affiliation will get promoted to same secondary school, while they still can move out if they do well in PSLE.
A student who wishes to opt out of PSLE will be required to take prelim and the result will be used by the secondary school to determine their FSBB in Sec1, where they will join the other PSLE students. The only caveat here is that students who skips PSLE may not get into their preferred secondary schools.
So there is really no need for any fancy red carpet arrangement for \"TT\" because the demand for such a pathway is likely to be muted and MOE will not turn the education system upside down just to make it popular.
2. So in view of (1), we can adjust our thoughts around TT.
No parents need to decide TT at P1. If all pri schools' affiliation to sec are well-designed, people are happy to choose a primary school knowing which are the potential secondary schools to promote into, think everyone has a peace of mind, especially working parents.
3. Students all make their choices at P5 to decide if they want to compete or continue on the TT to secondary.
The IP schools are only 10%, Likely only 30-40% of the kids want to compete for that. The other 50-60% likely happy to use the PSLE to determine the subject bandings for S1 as their TT journey.
This is all contingent upon demand for TT to make PSLE a less high-stake exam instead of making PSLE optionally skippable which would be a much longer debate. -
sushi88\" post_id=\"2103504\" time=\"1680228345\" user_id=\"100857:
I get your point, but as someone mentioned earlier, those cases you highlighted are statistically irrelevant because the number is too small and MOE will not uproot the entire forest just for a few trees.
@Veyron, exactly what I wanted to say the same as zac's mum. Since you mentioned it many times, it's probably time for me to say that MPs background is irrelevant here because they cannot assume every kid to perform at the same level as them, can they? There have to be choices to cater for the varying learning needs of the children. It would be draconian to insist that every child to be exactly like them. :yikes: Though we generally always call the popular schools good, have we ever paused to think of those kids who were ill-fitted to the schools parents want for them actually have to suffer for years in those schools? Some may even have their esteem taking a toll.
The same applies to parents who support skipping PSLE, to reduce stress, while at the same time, also hoping their child to get into a good secondary school that will likely to lead them to a more competitive environment because popular schools will have more hardworking students who chionging for exams. e.g. ACS(I) vs ACS. -
sushi88\" post_id=\"2103509\" time=\"1680230412\" user_id=\"100857:
What you are suggesting is like affiliation actually, so there is no need to rebrand and confuse using TT.
1. Think we have somewhat agree that PSLE is one important checkpoint of understanding how the kids are doing for both parents and MOE. We need some indicators at a national level to know if we need to tweak anything to change behaviour.
2. So in view of (1), we can adjust our thoughts around TT.
No parents need to decide TT at P1. If all pri schools' affiliation to sec are well-designed, people are happy to choose a primary school knowing which are the potential secondary schools to promote into, think everyone has a peace of mind, especially working parents.
3. Students all make their choices at P5 to decide if they want to compete or continue on the TT to secondary.
The IP schools are only 10%, Likely only 30-40% of the kids want to compete for that. The other 50-60% likely happy to use the PSLE to determine the subject bandings for S1 as their TT journey.
This is all contingent upon demand for TT to make PSLE a less high-stake exam instead of making PSLE optionally skippable which would be a much longer debate.
This is more like having a transit station at mid way P5, to choose to take the PSLE or to skip. -
Veyron\" post_id=\"2103510\" time=\"1680230468\" user_id=\"30663:
Frankly, at this point, we do not know the real statistics as you have said before that KSP is not representative when I said I could not feel the demand. I think it is MOE who has to do their due diligence to sus out if there are indeed a large percentage feeling that PSLE is a high stake exam and causing undue stress(how is our mental health indicators looking for our kids and teachers now?) to their kids when they are not wanting to compete at 12 yo. If most kids are not willing to be dragged into this competitive PSLE just for the top 30% or so kids, then we need the \"cool down\" measures for the general well-being of the majority of kids.
I get your point, but as someone mentioned earlier, those cases you highlighted are statistically irrelevant because the number is too small and MOE will not uproot the entire forest just for a few trees.
The same applies to parents who support skipping PSLE, to reduce stress, while at the same time, also hoping their child to get into a good secondary school that will likely to lead them to a more competitive environment because popular schools will have more hardworking students who chionging for exams. e.g. ACS(I) vs ACS.
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