Petition to Review the Singapore Education System
-
Lock:
Let me start by linking us all to a picture of skewed bell curves have the same understanding of what is left skewed and right skewed - http://www.kwiznet.com/p/takeQuiz.php?ChapterID=12045&CurriculumID=42&Num=9.29. As you can see, left skewed means the belly is on the right. Right skewed means the belly is on the left. Please forgive if I correct the sentence above as follows\"I am just thinking, if all is constant. As in parents dun send kids for further enrichment, kids learn as much as they can frm sch, then the bell curve will skew to the left if exams r beyond kids' std.
The problem now that the bell curve keeps skewing to the right is that more and more children are levelling up, not thru sch but thru tuition n enrichments. Even if u remove the bell curve, as long as parents remain kiasu n refuse to accept their children innate abilities and keep pushing, the environment will hv little change.
\"... if all is constant. As in parents dun send kids for further enrichment, kids learn as much as they can frm sch, then the bell curve will skew to the right (with belly to the left) if exams r beyond kids' std\".
The problem now that the bell curve keeps skewing to the left (with belly to the right) is that more and more children are levelling up, not thru sch but thru tuition n enrichments....Lock:
I am just thinking, if all is constant.
Let me now acknowledge your point. It is important to do so because it shows that I have integrated your point into the discussion. I am not countering you. We agree on this point. If all is constant, and nothing changes (no policy review), then yes... parents are kiasu and in this kiasu spirit, they will buy more and more tuition, so that their children can level up.
SOLUTION = Parents must stop being kiasu.
This is the solution that I reject because I see no way to convince hundreds of thousands of parents to be less kiasu. So yes... one of the root causes of the malaise we face today in primary education is that parents are kiasu. We agree on that, but after that? How do you propose to stop parents from being kiasu? Can you change parent behavior by telling them it is a problem?
(1) If yes, how?
(2) If no, then how?
I myself have no answer to \"If yes, how?\" Lock, if you have a workable solution, share it with us. The question \"If no, then how\" leads us to another roadblock. If parental behavior cannot be changed, then it seems we have to live with the status quo (all things remaining constant).
It is because I dunno how to change the behavior of parents by simply TELLING them not to be kiasu, that I turn my energies to analyzing system issues. We are not BLAMING the system. Guilt, emotion, blame etc... are irrelevant. I am trying to ANALYZE the system much as one would analyze a machine to see which parts can be changed. My focus is turned towards the system because I dunno how to change parent behavior by talking/lecturing alone.
However, Lock, if you do have a concrete solution to how parent kiasuism can be reduced without systemic analysis and changes, it is a good time to suggest it. If you don't have a concrete suggestion (that's ok because I don't either) then why pursue this line of analysis? It is unproductive because at the end of this line of analysis, we are forced to conclude the following - There is no solution.
Why not analyze the system to see if there are possibilities for a solution, than harp on parents and how kiasu they are? -
Lock:
Let me acknowledge and show that I agree with your point so that we work towards integrating not arguing. I quite agree that it is not easy for MOE to find teaching resources because...This is about REDUCING CLASS SIZE:
It's always easier for a lay person to say reduce class size and then blame MOE for not doing it. MOE is already trying but it IS really not easy.
Trust me, ALL teachers welcome the small class size idea. But where to get teachers? Where to get quality teachers? I am sure we all don't want any tom, dick or harry to be teaching our kids.
(1) high teacher turnover
(2) leading to lack of teaching resources
Specifically on this point, I am not a layperson. As an I/O Psychologist every client that comes by has a turnover problem. They want me to resolve their turnover issues so that they don't need to train and train new people. They want me to help put in a high performance culture. Believe it or not, I once had a client who told me \"We expect our staff to do impossible things, and we want them to stay\". We found a solution even there.
Whilst I agree that this is difficult, I have done it before and can actually see solutions. Research in I/O psychology has moved BEYOND high pay and fast promotion to keep staff engaged and with the organisation. I don't see these staff schemes in MOE... but then I dunno. Unless MOE can provide data and info for analysis, I also cannot see a solution. But at least here, I am reasonably confident that with enough data and info, I can actually see a solution. I feel helpless in solutionning the issue of kiasu parents.
So... it isn't that I disagree that parents are kiasu. I just can't see solutions there. I can see some here. So I focus on system instead. It isn't sour grapes or pointing fingers at system without acknowledging that parents have a role to play. I just find it more worthwhile to spend time here... me. -
Lock:
Again, if we follow this line of thought, then MOE can say \"There is nothing we can do. We have done everything possible\". Really? There are no solutions other than tell parents to be less kiasu?
Schs are kiasu because of parents!mamemo:
I disagree that only parents are kiasu.
I would like to point out a subtlety in mamemo's comment. She wrote \"I disagree that ONLY parents are kiasu...\" She did not say parents are NOT kiasu. She too acknowledges and has integrated your point. However, she asserts that schools are also kiasu, and I agree with her.
Schools are definitely kiasu. One teacher kept my daughter in school till almost midnight for debate training because he was in charge of the debating team and was hungry for promotion. He wanted a win more than I did.
On another occasion, I had to explain to the Principal that my daughter was only in Sec 1, and since I didn't expect a perfect acrobatic gymnastics performance from her, then neither should the school.
On yet another occasion, there was so much homework that I had another sparring session with the principal who asserted that if my daughter was sleeping 3 hours a night, it isn't because there is too much homework, but because she Facebooks and MSNs. I have two kids with amazing self-control. Before I spoke to the Principal only after we had worked out her issues with Facebook and MSN.
Clearly, I had put no pressure on the school... clearly, the Teacher and the Principal was far more kiasu than I. -
Maybe it’s our culture that we are competitive? Think it’s a pre-dominantly asian culture to be competitive (see China, HK, Taiwan, Japan etc) Schools are competitive because Principals want to look good and of course for survival. Similarly, Parents are competitive because they want their children to survive in this competitive society in future.
Another point that’s worth to think about…if MOE keep saying that there is lack of teaching resources, why are we admitting so many foreign students into our system?
With the influx of foreign talent from primary schools to universities to work force, it has made our environment more competitive. My DS is in P1 and has a classmate from China. During orientation, the classmate’s father asked:"Does the school stream the smarter students to better classes in P1?". Just look at the Chinese game show for secondary students on saturday, most of the students are from China. Someone I know has a son who is very bright and aspires to be a doctor (from RI, straight As in "A" levels) He registered for NUS Medicine but was rejected, however as it’s his aspiration to be a doctor, the parents sold a property (luckily they have 2) to send him to UK for college. Later on, the parents came to know that NUS allocates 20-30% of the enrolment to foreign students. The joke is that Singapore needs medical personnel and has been employing doctors from other countries.
It’s always easy to say that foreign students can help to train our kids up for future globalised environment, but a foreign student enrolled (say in RI) means the deprivation of a place to our local students. Yes, although MOE says that no one is deprived of an education in Singapore, but to be realistic, some of our "middle-to-upper band" students are deprived of a education in the top band schools to fully realise their potential. -
Err, I re-read my post and realised that I sound a bit anti-foreigners.
Just to clarify, I welcome our foreign friends, however, I feel that our infrastructure (Education, Housing, Transport etc) needs to be ramped up equally to meet the foreign influx.
-
System Mechanisms Mould Parent Behavior
Whilst I cannot see how telling parents to stop being kiasu can effectively change parent behavior, I CAN see how system changes WILL change behavior.
The incentive for kiasuism comes from the design of the PSLE. As long as the PSLE stays the way it is, you can take away exams at P1 and P2, but schools will find a way to slide in tests. And they do.
As long as the PSLE stays the way it is, you can keep parents in the dark about streaming and they will find a way to discern the contours of what the best classes are doing. Now, before anyone asks me to reveal how the PSLE should be changed in the specifics, let me say first that until I have access to info and data, I too don't know.
What I do know is that my behavior has changed in response to a system change recently announced. There will be 7 new IP schools. Till now, I had set my heart on HCI. I realised that VS, NJC and RVH are now IP too. The pool of desirable schools have grown!! I realise also that my friend's daughter who went to NJC, is now in Stanford on a PSC scholarship! Just that one small change in system component has made a difference to my behavior.
Having come to the realization that there are more IP schools, I am far less kiasu today than 4 months ago. I'm not keen to compete for a place in HCI or RI anymore... for all you know, all those who go there are so competitive that my son may never learn to love and care.
I want him to learn to love and care. I want him to know that losing out can be enriching.
I am sorry if I seem to have been disrespectful to RI and HCI. I have no basis because I have not attended any open house as yet, though I do know many young people from both schools (and they're lovely even if a tad too competitive to be properly collaborative). The most competitive parents and children self-select into those schools, perhaps?
Before, the system allowed me no choice. Now, I do have a choice... and I am already less kiasu. The thing is this... there are parents who must have children win out at all costs. Before, the system incentivised me to compete with these people because there were only 5 IP schools.
Today, there are 7 more. This SINGLE system change allows naturally LESS KIASU parents (note that I did not say NOT kiasu) to choose to be less kiasu. So you see, when we find the correct system leverage points, we can change parent behavior. Not all parents surely but there are enough parents like me, Peony and QuiteKSMum who actually see 2nd best as The Best.
DS and I discussed and we have decided that even if his Teacher said that RI is possible if he works hard, we will stick with Work Fun and push just hard enough for other schools, with lower COP. I now have a choice and my level of kiasuism has dropped by a lot.
At present, the larger proportion of PSC scholars come from HCI, RI, NYGH & RGS. Suppose that a quota were set to pick at least 2 scholars from each of the 11 IP schools, then what will happen is that competition into the top 4 schools will be less frenzied. The prospect of a scholarship spurs many to compete for places in the Top 4 schools.
Indeed, talent will be more evenly distributed across 11 IP schools as parents like me with children who have the potential to be in Top 4, choose to go elsewhere just to have a better work-life balance.
System changes, can change parent behavior immediately. Unless we leverage on system components, it will be difficult to dial down parent kiasu-ism. That's why I focus on system. It is not blame, it is hope. -
Chenonceau, I fully agree with "System Mechanisms Mould Parent Behavior"
-
This is the MOE's response to our petition... I haven't read it yet (need to run) but had an understanding with them that their response would be posted in this thread. Parents can feel free to comment. We have a respectful dialogue started and MOE should be watching this thread. It is nice that MOE has responded. I had not hoped for as much.
1. Thank you for your email to Dr Ng Eng Hen, highlighting your blogpost which raises several issues of concern to parents. We recognise the strong desire of parents who want their children to do well and, at the same time, the anxiety they feel over the competitive pressures that their children face.
2. Many students aspire to be admitted into certain popular schools or programmes like the Integrated Programme. So our children strive to achieve the best results possible. This competitive pressure to do well, and to do better than others, is indeed present in our schools. For most, this means getting better PSLE marks.
3. You attributed this competitiveness to the way the PSLE is graded on a bell curve. We would like to explain how PSLE papers are graded. PSLE results are reported in two ways – subject grade and aggregate score. Subject grades are not determined based on a fixed quota of pupils for each grade. There are also no fixed cut-off scores based on a bell-curve distribution. If in a particular year, more children do well, the proportion of higher grades (say, A* and A) would be higher. From year to year, such fluctuations do occur.
4. In order to add up the marks scored in each of the 4 subjects into a total aggregate score, the Singapore Examinations and Assessments Board (SEAB) uses a device called the transformed score (T-score). This is a device statisticians use to add up scores from different subjects in one examination. The transformation aims to account for the different characteristics of different subjects. The transformation process preserves the rank order of students. The child with the higher marks ranks above another with lower marks.
5. SEAB also does not allow the difficulty of examinations to ratchet up every year. The papers are set by experienced examiners in accordance with the test blueprint, which spells out the coverage of the syllabus and specifies the distribution of questions of different difficulty levels. In addition, SEAB also puts in place statistical processes to calibrate the difficulty level of each question and control the overall standard of the paper so as to ensure that the standard is comparable to those of the previous years.
6. These notwithstanding, we do recognise that there is competition in the system. Over time, as aspirations rise and as people see that hardworking students do reach their goals, across the country, parents and teachers encourage their children to work harder. This is not entirely a bad thing, but it does bring in its wake many social consequences.
7. A potential hazard is an obsessive drive to compete in order to do better in examinations as the sole outcome of education, often at the expense of other equally important goals of learning. Excessive tuition is one manifestation of this drive, with cram schools in South Korea and Japan as prime examples. We are mindful of the dangers of going down that road and are putting in place more measures to shift the emphasis in the education system to a more holistic approach, which focuses on a balance of values, skills and knowledge.
8. But doing away with exams is not the solution. South Korea did away with national entrance exams into its secondary schools in 1969. Apart from other problems it caused, the pressure on students did not abate. We believe that exams are integral in any sound education system, and it is a generally fair way to decide on school admission.
9. Your idea of declaring a group of schools as good schools is an interesting one. But how do we get consensus to move from what we have – which is one where students choose schools and compete on the basis of PSLE aggregate - to one where by policy, we add some other rules, like defining each school to comprise students of a certain range (in your example 240-280) and then randomly assigning them. How about the children who score below 240? Why 240? Why not mix across more ability groups?
10. These questions illustrate the challenges of designing a public education system that is fair and also meets the needs of the 40,000 students in each cohort. But we do not stop trying to find better ways.
11. For example, we do have something that is similar in intent to your suggestion – the Direct Schools Admission scheme. Students who can demonstrate their talents or achievements in areas (both academic and non-academic) which the schools are selecting students can receive offers from schools before the PSLE. This allows a wider range of students to access the popular schools. Indeed, today, all schools with DSA, especially the popular schools, see a wider range of PSLE T-score than before.
12. We have also expanded the Integrated Programme (IP) to more schools. The new IP schools will offer dual tracks – the IP track and the ‘O’ level track. This caters to a wider range of academic ability, and allows for late bloomers or early bloomers to switch tracks.
13. Schools catering to students with talents in specific fields – sports, mathematics and science, the arts, and applied learning – select students using other dimensions. They are popular with many students and their parents. They break the sole reliance on PSLE results.
14. Beyond the schools, there are also DSA-like pathways for admission into pre-university institutions, the polytechnics and universities. Polytechnic capacity is being expanded by 20%, and new programmes are being introduced. With the set up of new institutions like the Singapore Institute of Technology, Singapore University of Technology and Design, Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine and Yale-NUS College, we are on track to increasing the university cohort participation rate to 30% by 2015.
15. Selecting students on the basis of examination results is not a perfect system, but it is one which encourages effort, allows children from different backgrounds to compete and strive for what they want to achieve. Rather than changing the rules completely, which may also not be viewed as fair, we can retain the current system, and graft onto it features that modulate the rigidity and downside consequences, like having DSA and dual-track schools, and different types of tertiary institutions.
16. Even as we do so, we continue to work hard to uplift all schools, to resource them better and to encourage more of them to develop distinctive niches that attract students. You may have read about the 14 additional primary schools and 6 secondary schools with niche programmes, bringing the total number of such schools to 178.
17. In terms of physical infrastructure, MOE is progressively adding new or enhanced facilities to all schools. These include computer laboratories, media resource libraries, pastoral care rooms, health & fitness rooms, and indoor sports hall. We have also focused on recruiting more quality teachers, and developing their skills throughout their careers. This is a key priority for us. MOE met its 2010 target of having 30,000 teachers and targets to grow the teaching force further to 33,000 by 2015.
18. You mentioned that class sizes have changed little over the years. You may remember that the class size at Primary 1 was reduced from 40 to 30 in 2005 and for Primary 2 in 2006. The smaller class sizes help to smoothen the transition from pre-school to formal schooling.
19. Beyond reducing class size for the lower primary years, the larger teaching force has allowed us to better customise our teaching to meet the needs of students. Students who have weak literacy or numeracy skills at Primary 1 receive coaching via the Learning Support Programmes in groups of 8-10. At the secondary and JC levels, students now have a wider range of subject combinations, enjoy greater flexibility between courses and streams (e.g. Normal (Academic) students offering ‘O’ level subjects in Sec 4, Normal (Technical) students offering Normal (Academic) subjects). There are also new co-curricular activities in schools, more enrichment programmes, including overseas visits, to develop students holistically. For teachers too, having more teachers provide the space for them to upgrade themselves, to undertake professional development, which in turn benefit students.
20. All in, we have improved our pupil teacher ratio or PTR (number of students divided by number of teachers). Between 2006 and 2010, Pupil-Teacher ratio has been reduced from 21.9 to 18.8 in primary schools and 18.9 to 16.1 in secondary schools. The 2010 PTRs are close to the average in the OECD countries.
21. Put another way, between 2006-2010, on average, each primary school was given 6 more teachers, while each secondary school was given 10 more teachers. (Between 2004 and 2010, the increase was 1,700 [additional 10 per school on average] for primary schools and 1,900 [additional 10 per school on average] for secondary schools.) If we reach our 2015 target teaching force size, compared to their current number of teachers, our primary and secondary schools will add a further of about 5 teachers each.
22. These additional teachers have not been deployed to reduce class size, but to improve education in the ways described above. We have been careful not to make class size reduction an end in itself. While it would be ideal to have small classes with every one taught by good teachers, the reality is that the supply of good people to be teachers is limited. Studies by the OECD and McKinsey have indicated that the quality of education is not simply a factor of more spending or smaller class sizes, but the result of a judicious choice of policy measures that maximise learning outcomes. Countries which recruit good candidates to be teachers and pay them well, like Korea and Singapore, show good results in international benchmarking tests.
23. We have also been creative in expanding the supply sources for good quality teachers. In addition to recruiting fresh graduates, we have been successful in recruiting individuals making mid-career switches and also a small number of foreign teachers with specialist expertise. We have also provided teachers with more support by recruiting allied educators who assist teachers with teaching, or provide counseling and learning support for students.
24. How we shape the education system to make it more student-centric is a work-in-progress. We are glad our students do well in international benchmarking tests and are welcomed in overseas universities. But we need to constantly make improvements, enhance the quality of the educational experience, and help our students learn well and also form happy memories of their school days. The inputs and suggestions from parents like yourself encourage us to keep trying harder.
25. Thank you for giving us this opportunity to clarify these matters of concern to parents. We are happy to continue to hear your views and feedback. You may wish to drop me a note with your views. -
I think, I on the other hand may become more Kiasu. Today more schools are turning IP. IP traditionally mean richer curriculum for more capable kids. So more IP to cater to more capable kids. So if time comes for my DD to take her PSLE and she cannot make it into an IP school, does that mean she is lagging?
-
Funz:
I think, I on the other hand may become more Kiasu. Today more schools are turning IP. IP traditionally mean richer curriculum for more capable kids. So more IP to cater to more capable kids. So if time comes for my DD to take her PSLE and she cannot make it into an IP school, does that mean she is lagging?
I think you've made a nice point here.
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