Parents, not enrichment centres, are key to result

[corneyAmber]

Chenonceau:

wonderm:

You are right. There is no harm learning more techniques if one does not get confused by them. I just wanted to share it is not a \"must\" to know the heuristics. When my boys approach me with a question, I would guide them towards the solution but not just give them the answer. I always remind them not to \"remember\" a fixed way of doing a certain kind of question even if that is tempting and seemed to save time. By doing that too often, they will forget the concept behind.

Yes... flexibility... I quite agree. But when the tools are numerous, the potential for flexible solutionning increases. Also, your kids dun need these heuristics because they have a go-to person. My DS does not... many other kids don't.

The go-to person can be the teacher in school. If we keep thinking no point asking them, then we are under-utilising the teachers as a resource in school. It is nice to know that when my child misses any lesson in school, the teachers, especially Math ones, would always ask if she has any problem doing the homework sheet for Math for the lesson learned. Albeit my child typically needs no help but it is nice to know the teacher asks. For children without much parental help at home or tuition/enrichment and yet perform well, I believe their guidance are the teachers in school, otherwise, where else?

[corneyAmber]

wonderm:

You are right. There is no harm learning more techniques if one does not get confused by them. I just wanted to share it is not a \"must\" to know the heuristics. When my boys approach me with a question, I would guide them towards the solution but not just give them the answer. I always remind them not to \"remember\" a fixed way of doing a certain kind of question even if that is tempting and seemed to save time. By doing that too often, they will forget the concept behind.

:hi5: wonderm, we are from the same school of thought. The interpretation of the problem is key and strong concepts will allow the problem to be solved.
As mentioned, there are kids who can top Math without any tuition or enrichment and I strongly believe it is the understanding that help them.

Granted there is one area possibly a child may benefit,...only may as my personal experience above sharing of 9 steps versus 3 steps is a good example of otherwise, is the speed of solving a question but good old practising can help in speed. I believe Math training is not about fixing the mind too, in fact it attempts to make the brain faculty to be flexible with gymnastics skills and it is practice that makes the skills even more malleable. If a child feels strongly that he/she needs to be exposed to all the heuristics in order to attain this flexibility, then it is like doing gym with an aided brace on the body to assist the movement.

Due to the kiasu spirit around us, where everyone gets attracted to tuition/enrichment for the heuristics, which everyone thinks is a competitive edge for their children. Actually it is a double-edge sword.

[Chenonceau]

ksi:

The go-to person can be the teacher in school. If we keep thinking no point asking them, then we are under-utilising the teachers as a resource in school. It is nice to know that when my child misses any lesson in school, the teachers, especially Math ones, would always ask if she has any problem doing the homework sheet for Math for the lesson learned. Albeit my child typically needs no help but it is nice to know the teacher asks. For children without much parental help at home or tuition/enrichment and yet perform well, I believe their guidance are the teachers in school, otherwise, where else?

It is great that you've got such conscientious teachers. Most people believe that a class of 40 is too large for such individualized attention. So parents pick up the slack again and again and again.

Since we HAVE no go-to person, we tried to ask the Teacher, who replied \"We haven't got to that yet.\" The exam paper the week after contained exactly the same sort of problem that my DS could not figure out. We learnt that there was no point asking. So we sourced for other resources and DS figured it out on his own.

In compo or compre, it is the same thing. Teachers don't have the time to mark enough compos to generate enough writing opportunities needed to reach the level of writing competence.

No... teachers cannot be the go-to person when they have 3 or 4 classes of 40 to teach at a time.

[Chenonceau]

ksi:

If a child feels strongly that he/she needs to be exposed to all the heuristics in order to attain this flexibility, then it is like doing gym with an aided brace on the body to assist the movement.

This is also like saying that you have a car but insist on walking all the way to Europe because you don't want assistance in your movement.

ksi:

As mentioned, there are kids who can top Math without any tuition or enrichment and I strongly believe it is the understanding that help them.

My DS topped Math with neither tuition nor enrichment. In fact, I just found out that many of his classmates are with Learning Lab and he pipped most of them to get to 2nd in class last year. All without tuition nor enrichment.

However, it did still mean that I had to source for material that would expand his range of problem-solving tools so that he could achieve the speed, accuracy and flexibility he needed to in the very little time he needs to prepare for PSLE. Gymnasts do train with weights... they do use balls in their routines too...

It wouldn't hurt to give other kids the same tools through the school instead of stubbornly insisting that the bright ones will figure it out. And if you can't figure it out, then you just have no aptitude.

We wouldn't need the teacher to be the go-to person IF this was systematically taught.

Truth is... the \"bright ones\" learn from enrichment centres.

[jedamum]

Chenonceau:

The only reason that enrichment has now become a necessity is that the schools test heuristics but don't teach them, and thus, they leave a humongous gap for enrichment centres to fill. These enrichment centres fill the gap with much gusto and make a lot of money too because there is NO WAY to do well in school if you don't pay for enrichment.... or source for materials that bridge the gap.

The bright kid with no access to enrichment stands no chance at all because the school teaches less than half of what he needs to know (only the What), and tests more than twice what it teaches (the heuristics too).

Chenonceau:

It is a mainstream exam after all. Should it be that those who do well GET taught because they have parents like me... or parents with money? Schools should teach everyone these basic heuristics and then may the best child win.

:goodpost:

[corneyAmber]

Chenonceau:

In compo or compre, it is the same thing. Teachers don't have the time to mark enough compos to generate enough writing opportunities needed to reach the level of writing competence.

I agree the compo writing opportunities are not enough, about 5 per semester. I recognise there are flaws in the system but we have to net down which are truly flaws and which are expectations.

[pepper spice]

ksi:

wonderm:

You are right. There is no harm learning more techniques if one does not get confused by them. I just wanted to share it is not a \"must\" to know the heuristics. When my boys approach me with a question, I would guide them towards the solution but not just give them the answer. I always remind them not to \"remember\" a fixed way of doing a certain kind of question even if that is tempting and seemed to save time. By doing that too often, they will forget the concept behind.

:hi5: wonderm, we are from the same school of thought. The interpretation of the problem is key and strong concepts will allow the problem to be solved.
As mentioned, there are kids who can top Math without any tuition or enrichment and I strongly believe it is the understanding that help them.
.

I also agree that it is not a \"must\" to know heuristics. Son survived primary school math pretty well without tuitions or parental coaching, most of the time he creates his own solutions. You said it correctly, it is the understanding that helps him, not rote learning or drilling.

[corneyAmber]

Chenonceau:

ksi:

If a child feels strongly that he/she needs to be exposed to all the heuristics in order to attain this flexibility, then it is like doing gym with an aided brace on the body to assist the movement.

This is also like saying that you have a car but insist on walking all the way to Europe because you don't want assistance in your movement.

This analogy is off tangent unfortunately because in reality, the heuristics DO NOT guarantee the effect of speed like a car does for EVERYONE. As mentioned, I know MANY children who learned the heuristics and some even from GEP teachers but no progress is seen. Many who went to TLL resulted the same and dropped out, ended up sharing that it was too difficult. Your problem statement may be right that Math gets tough for the majority but the recommendation of learning heuristics as a solution is overly simplistic as Math is not about heuristics, heuristics is business-driven.

The focus on heuristics is because you believe your bright child, given materials on heuristics booster jab, is like a magic pill can see miracles happening and that is solving the problem at the top 10% of the bright kids which your child belongs to and the competition is pitched at that level for him that is close to your heart, rightfully so too. But my point is it does not work for everyone(double-edged sword, remember?) if your concern is for everyone, and understanding the concepts thoroughly in Math does help everyone, even the very weak and this is what MOE is trying to achieve. And understanding the concepts well has a longer mileage as in foundation into secondary school Math. A quick fix is never the way to go for the majority, all these while, unknowingly, the focus is on the top 10% and how to get to top 1-5%. Is that the majority?

[corneyAmber]

pepper spice:

ksi:

[quote=\"wonderm\"]

You are right. There is no harm learning more techniques if one does not get confused by them. I just wanted to share it is not a \"must\" to know the heuristics. When my boys approach me with a question, I would guide them towards the solution but not just give them the answer. I always remind them not to \"remember\" a fixed way of doing a certain kind of question even if that is tempting and seemed to save time. By doing that too often, they will forget the concept behind.

:hi5: wonderm, we are from the same school of thought. The interpretation of the problem is key and strong concepts will allow the problem to be solved.
As mentioned, there are kids who can top Math without any tuition or enrichment and I strongly believe it is the understanding that help them.
.

I also agree that it is not a \"must\" to know heuristics. Son survived primary school math pretty well without tuitions or parental coaching, most of the time he creates his own solutions. You said it correctly, it is the understanding that helps him, not rote learning or drilling.[/quote]Congrats to your child! :celebrate:

[wonderm]

ksi:

This analogy is off tangent unfortunately because in reality, the heuristics DO NOT guarantee the effect of speed like a car does for EVERYONE. As mentioned, I know MANY children who learned the heuristics and some even from GEP teachers but no progress is seen. Many who went to TLL resulted the same and dropped out, ended up sharing that it was too difficult. Your problem statement may be right that Math gets tough for the majority but the recommendation of learning heuristics as a solution is overly simplistic as Math is not about heuristics, heuristics is business-driven.


The focus on heuristics is because you believe your bright child, given materials on heuristics booster jab, is like a magic pill can see miracles happening and that is solving the problem at the top 10% of the bright kids which your child belongs to and the competition is pitched at that level for him that is close to your heart, rightfully so too. But my point is it does not work for everyone(double-edged sword, remember?) if your concern is for everyone, and understanding the concepts thoroughly in Math does help everyone, even the very weak and this is what MOE is trying to achieve. And understanding the concepts well has a longer mileage as in foundation into secondary school Math. A quick fix is never the way to go for the majority, all these while, unknowingly, the focus is on the top 10% and how to get to top 1-5%. Is that the majority?

Well said. My ds1 attended TLL when he was in upper primary. He benefited a lot from the teaching and especially the exposure to more challenging questions. They were not taught heuristics and the teaching was grouped according to maths concepts. For students who are already doing relatively well in maths, it is important to have exposure to more challenging sums if he wants to score even higher. It is true many students will benefit from the 1:1 tutoring or small class teaching. But I don't think it is just about heuristics. It is not as simple as \"include heuristics in school curriculum, then no more need for maths tuition or enrichment\". It is important to understand the concept well and do more practices of appropriate difficulty level. There is indeed no magic pill and \"quick fixes\" can backfire in the long run.