Why do you have to be like the others?
-
I am surprised that there are primary schools still adopting the ranking of all the students. I thought that school only practise rewarding top few students in class or cohort. I think this is healthy to encourage other students to work harder and to recognise students’ efforts. It is quite unhealthy to rank everybody especially for the students who are in the last few ranks of the class, they will feel very demoralise and embarass.
When my son was diagnosed with special needs, my sister in law tried to persuade us to bring him to Canada where she migrated. She feels that the education system in Canada is more supportive of special needs students and there are no excessive pressure to excel among the students and parents. Students who are talented in certain academic subjects, arts, music or sports are given opportunity to focus on the discipline they are keen and wish to develop and progress at advance level.
In Singapore, the education system is such that if you are in GEP, you are deemed to be gifted in all subjects and have to persue all subjects at a much advance and indepth level. In main stream, students have to be all rounded as this is reflected in the PSLE scoring system. Unfortunately, I have spoken to numerous parents who feel that their children have to spend more time working hard on the weaker subject at the expense of the subject they are more interested to develop further. I believe this education system may be one of the factor that driven many parents to engage tutors and enrol their children in enrichment classes. Basically, parents may not believe that the school is doing enough to help their children and perhaps this is another form of outsourcing help for their children especially both parents work long hours these days. -
The top few students should spend more time developing in other areas which they are interested in, like arts, music, sports, etc. They should also gain a wide range of knowledge, instead of spending all their time doing countless assessment books of the same subject, just so that they can get perfect marks.
What is the use of having tops students with perfect scores, when they don't know anything else that is not examinable ?
I remember a couple of years back, a mainland Chinese student studying in Singapore, commented that Singaporean students are stupid. I believe he meant that our children are not \"street smart\", and I have to agree that this is true.
[quote]Basically, parents may not believe that the school is doing enough to help their children and perhaps this is another form of outsourcing help for their children especially both parents work long hours these days.[/quote]I heard in this forum, that students who score between 80 - 90 marks are told by the school that they need tuition teachers. How can 80+ marks be considered weak ? But if the whole class gets 90+ marks and above, then the child is weak compared to the rest. Is this kind of comparison really healthy ?
I heard somewhere that a child was sent to the Learning Lab to improve on her English. Her score was 96 out of 100 marks !!! -
Fluffy:
In Singapore, the education system is such that if you are in GEP, you are deemed to be gifted in all subjects and have to persue all subjects at a much advance and indepth level. In main stream, students have to be all rounded as this is reflected in the PSLE scoring system. Unfortunately, I have spoken to numerous parents who feel that their children have to spend more time working hard on the weaker subject at the expense of the subject they are more interested to develop further. I believe this education system may be one of the factor that driven many parents to engage tutors and enrol their children in enrichment classes. Basically, parents may not believe that the school is doing enough to help their children and perhaps this is another form of outsourcing help for their children especially both parents work long hours these days.
In US education system, kids are encouraged to focus and develop on their strengths. In S'pore's, kids are asked to work on the \"weaker\" subjects. Which comes more naturally and which will go further?
-
radiantmum:
Not just in US. I read somewhere that some Scandinavian countries also have something very different from here - very little emphasis on exams in the early years. And they produce great scientists and researchers.Fluffy:
In Singapore, the education system is such that if you are in GEP, you are deemed to be gifted in all subjects and have to persue all subjects at a much advance and indepth level. In main stream, students have to be all rounded as this is reflected in the PSLE scoring system. Unfortunately, I have spoken to numerous parents who feel that their children have to spend more time working hard on the weaker subject at the expense of the subject they are more interested to develop further. I believe this education system may be one of the factor that driven many parents to engage tutors and enrol their children in enrichment classes. Basically, parents may not believe that the school is doing enough to help their children and perhaps this is another form of outsourcing help for their children especially both parents work long hours these days.
In US education system, kids are encouraged to focus and develop on their strengths. In S'pore's, kids are asked to work on the \"weaker\" subjects. Which comes more naturally and which will go further?
Well, at least MOE is doing away with exams for P1 and P2 soon. -
tamarind:
The top few students should spend more time developing in other areas which they are interested in, like arts, music, sports, etc. They should also gain a wide range of knowledge, instead of spending all their time doing countless assessment books of the same subject, just so that they can get perfect marks.
My mum was not educated and she wanted to give me and siblings good education. However, she never pressure us to be top in class but she expected us to read widely and gain more knowledge. She saved to buy us a set of encyclopedia and encouraged us to read the newspaper for current affairs. I started earning my own pocket money every holiday since 13 years old and on reflection, I gain alot of experience and was more \"street smart\" than the average teenagers. By the time I graduated and started working in a MNC, I was able to handle human relationship in the office better than most colleagues. I enjoyed healthy relationship with both people of my age and higher level management.
Children nowadays are told to focus on their study and nothing else by parents, teachers and society! Is that healthy? Many lack \"Life Skills\". I fear for the next generation! -
This could also be one reason why so many singaporeans with average-ability kids want to migrate.
it is definitely policy. you hardly find this kind of crazy Primary level grading in developed countries…
i was talking to my wife about it last night… (she’s so stressed for my P5 son)…
she’s a teacher and she can’t figure out quite a number of the solutions to the P5 math this year… i was telling her… someone up there amongst the govt is not paying enough attention to this…
sure, our primary resource is people in this country… but if you develop so many academically proficient citizens with this type of educational system, what will you eventually churn out? you think they’re gonna want to work in Resorts World? -
the athlete who runs for the love of running, but never takes part in competitions, will forever be an average runner, because he/she is not stressed by the prospect of competition and will never be pushed to the limits.
the athlete who may not love running much (but cannot detest it of course), but is stressed by the prospect of competition, may actually accomplish more than the athlete who runs merely for the love of it, because he/she is being forced to the limits of capability and in doing so, actually expands his/her ability.
Of course, the athlete who accomplishes the most, is one who loves running and competition, both at the same time.
But how many of us and our children belong to the last category?
The abolishment of exams is the start to the decline of education. The Scandinavian countries have just started this policy…lets wait another 20 years to see the "fruit" of such a policy. It will inevitably lead to the decline of their education. -
skunk:
skunk, this is very insightful. Thank you! It echoes what our PM said about Singaporeans having to be on our toes all the time, despite the stress it brings, otherwise Singapore may degenerate back to a kampung.the athlete who runs for the love of running, but never takes part in competitions, will forever be an average runner, because he/she is not stressed by the prospect of competition and will never be pushed to the limits.
the athlete who may not love running much (but cannot detest it of course), but is stressed by the prospect of competition, may actually accomplish more than the athlete who runs merely for the love of it, because he/she is being forced to the limits of capability and in doing so, actually expands his/her ability.
Of course, the athlete who accomplishes the most, is one who loves running and competition, both at the same time.
But how many of us and our children belong to the last category?
The abolishment of exams is the start to the decline of education. The Scandinavian countries have just started this policy...lets wait another 20 years to see the \"fruit\" of such a policy. It will inevitably lead to the decline of their education.
But I would like to put forth another argument. We ourselves are the products of an educational system that has produced a few generations of hardworking and process-oriented worker bees, unparalleled in delivering high-quality products and services, but generally lacking in business agility due to the rigid system we went through. Will the changes we make to our educational system address the issue of us lacking in entrepreneurial creativity? Or are they intended to create more efficient worker bees? -
Fluffy:
Fluffy, you have a wonderful mum ! I fully agree with her way of doing and she was doing the right way to educate and nuture her children. :celebrate:My mum was not educated and she wanted to give me and siblings good education. However, she never pressure us to be top in class but she expected us to read widely and gain more knowledge. She saved to buy us a set of encyclopedia and encouraged us to read the newspaper for current affairs. I started earning my own pocket money every holiday since 13 years old and on reflection, I gain alot of experience and was more \"street smart\" than the average teenagers. By the time I graduated and started working in a MNC, I was able to handle human relationship in the office better than most colleagues. I enjoyed healthy relationship with both people of my age and higher level management.
Children nowadays are told to focus on their study and nothing else by parents, teachers and society! Is that healthy? Many lack \"Life Skills\". I fear for the next generation! -
I have never been a strong supporter of the Singapore Education system. However, in recent years, I do feel that they are making an effort for an all-rounder education as well as developing their talents, hence the setting up of sports school, School of science and technology etc…
It’s a little unfair to comment that they are focusing only on academic since DSA was set up to recognise students who are gifted in a particular area and to be placed in a school that can nurture the talent. The minimum requirement is a grade that will allow them to enter the minimum stream in the school. i.e. if the school only has express streams and the cutoff point may be 240 but as long as the student attains a minimum point to get into express stream for that yr e.g. 210 and has gain DSA into the school, the school will accept the student.
Some may argue that if the student scored 210 and joins a 240 cohort, he may not be able to cope with the work. But look at US, even if a student gets a football scholarship, he is expected to at least pass all his subjects otherwise he would be in danger of losing his scholarship.
As for special needs students, there are a number of schools that have been set up for children with special needs. For example, Anderson Pri has help for dyslexic students, Pathlight was set up for autistic students,etc.
Having said that, I do agree on certain points though, which is ranking of students. I know that some schools rank the students by their results and the students with the overall results are streamed into the "best" class whereas the poorest ones are all streamed into the "last" class. Young children can be cruel at times as they have not learned the finer art of tact and thus, this kind of streaming is only going to hurt the self-esteem of the so-called "poorer" students and this may cast a shadow on them. Having a good mix of good and poor students can actually benefit the children more on character building in terms of understanding that everyone’s abilities are different and not creating an "elitist" mindset in them.
Tests, exams and grades are nonetheless important still as it helps the educators to identify if a student understands a subject thoroughly. Therefore, it is still beneficial for students to have mini tests on topics and a final exam to see if they can identify the topic and apply the knowledge accurately.
Looking at MOE’s framework and the direction that they are moving in, it is an encouraging sign. However, educators themselves i.e. principals and teachers, must identify with the principles and ideology before we can move on to an all-rounder education. This is because if the schools do not subscribe to an all-rounder education and focuses only on pushing students to attain higher academic results to polish up their own report card at the end of every PSLE year, students will still be subjected to the stress academically.
But then again, why are schools results-oriented? That is because, we as parents, are results-oriented as well. It has always been human nature to compare yourself with others, therefore, knowingly or unknowingly, we may have compared the children academically as this is the most common yardstick to measure our children by. When we choose a school, do we choose one that is nearest or do we choose one that has produced excellent results? If we ourselves cannot stop comparing, then who are we to say that schools should not push children for better results?
To nurture interest in a child cannot be done in a short period of time. When parents don’t see results, they blame the school. Thus, schools can only focus on the only thing that is measurable, which are results. It is a vicious cycle and we as parents have to manage our own expectations as well before real change can take place…
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