Parents, not enrichment centres, are key to result
-
ksi:
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.
: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.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.
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.
. -
Chenonceau:
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.
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:
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.
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? -
pepper spice:
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:
: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.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.
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.
. -
ksi:
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.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? -
wonderm:
Not everyone has the resources to pay for TLL. We shouldn't have to pay for TLL for our kids to do well. My worry is this. Parents who pay others (like TLL) to do the teaching may not be entirely aware of what IS taught at enrichment. The centre needs only to produce results for you. Why would it need to share with you exactly what goes on in class?
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.
I direct my DS' journey entirely. He works entirely independently. This means that we know exactly what needs to be taught but isn't.
Heuristics such as those I have shared are not proprietary to TLL. As such, if they use it to teach with, they would be infringing on someone else's copyright. They'll have developed their own and exposed these to the kids through practice.
You are both right. With enough practice, everyone develops heuristics. With enough exposure the brain develops heuristics on its own. But this is different than saying...
(1) Students who aren't good just have no aptitude because they haven't developed any of their own heuristics naturally.
It is too easy to blame MOE's inept teaching on student lack of aptitude. The children can't defend themselves when they're labelled \"not smart\". If centres like MathHeuristics and ScienceHeuristics thrive, it is because MOE won't face up to their evolved responsibilities. The PSLE syllabus is skills heavy. Yet, MOE does a poor job teaching skills BECAUSE it thinks the kids will pick it up naturally.
(2) Heuristics dumb down the mind and make it inflexible.
The brain NATURALLY evolves heuristics with practice. Even if you don't teach them, the brain evolves them. So more practice makes you more inflexible then? Given enough time and exposure everyone develops heuristics. This was ksi's own statement.
I am sorry that I am insistent on this point. I really have nothing against both of you. I seriously believe that many children will benefit from greater exposure to basic heuristics. -
ksi:
It does not have to be business-driven if MOE teaches them.
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.ksi:
Bright children (from poor families) too are the purview of MOE.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.
ksi:
Understanding the concepts thoroughly is definitely important. I have never said otherwise. MOE has no problems teaching concepts. It's like saying knowing the alphabet is essential to learning to read. MOE has no problems here. Not even since it started.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.
It's the beyond-that which poses problem if MOE TESTS way way beyond and only teaches the basics (i.e., concepts) that only the weakest can understand. So are we calibrating a TEACHING system to cater to the very weakest only... paired with a TESTING system to test to the very best?Then there is a gap right?
This certainly seems to be the case. We should be fair to the kids. We should teach better and teach more if we wanna test more. Else, dun test so much because what we end up doing is to test what enrichment centres teach. I never wanted any of these extra enrichment for my DS. In P2, he was invited to Math Olympiad training. I said no. But in P5, I discovered that Olympiad difficulty math is a part of every exam paper. So this time, we have accepted the school's invitation to train him in the next Math Olympiad. My poor DS looked at me with pleading eyes, half afraid that I was gonna reject again. But I have learnt my lesson.
He won't get gold I dun think... but it'll help in PSLE.ksi:
I am not talking bypassing concepts to get to heuristics i.e., a quick fix. One of course has to teach the concepts properly. We have to remember that the brain, with enough practice, naturally evolves its own heuristics. You made this comment yourself to defend a system that steadfastly WON'T teach heuristics. Since when should a suggestion TO TEACH HEURISTICS come to mean DON'T TEACH CONCEPTS?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?
Whether you like it or not, your brain does naturally develop heuristics, at every level of processing from mechanical to creative. This is why more practice gives you speed. The techniques my son uses are not just those taught to him. From practice and exposure to challenging and what he calls \"interesting problems\" he evolves his own heuristics. I'm not asking for much. Just teach the basic set in schools because the average kid does need it as a starter kit on his/her own journey of heuristic development. It is not enough just to teach heuristics. The child needs practice to gain flexibility. This, we agree on. GEP students who are taught but still do poorly lack practice perhaps?
I very sincerely don't think my DS is any much brighter than the next child. One mustn't be inveigled by the Edusave award he got last year. He spent P1 to P3 languishing as one of the \"not smart ones\". In P3 in fact, he was very close to the bottom. Friends have brought me their little kids... complained that these lack focus... aren't bright. When I begin to work with them, they open up and they bloom a bit... right in front of me. No... you get me wrong, I am not thinking of the brightest children when I make this suggestion.
I quite agree that primary school math does not lay a good foundation for secondary school math. The models train the brain in a way very different than the bent of mind required in secondary school math. The other heuristics too will have this effect I suspect. However, to get to secondary school, we have to tackle PSLE first. We didn't write the primary math syllabus (nor the exams that test it) with its unsaid and untaught focus on heuristics. MOE did.
Lastly, there are primary schools that use Onsponge as a textbook. These kids get systematic teaching in heuristics ON TOP OF concepts. And the results have been very good indeed. -
Chenonceau:
I agree with many things you said such as better teaching in school will reduce the reliance on external tuition. But I guess we have to agree to disagree with regards to learning of heuristics. By the way, I do know about what was taught and not taught at TLL as I do not just hands off and expect any enrichment centre to produce results. I was and am still guiding my children in their learning journey long after ds1 left TLL, hence I know how they approach and solve challenging maths sums. I am tempted to claim that they learn independently and do well in maths but I am also aware that they have the benefit of a \"go to person\" at home when they are really stuck. To be fair, their school teachers are more than willing and able to help them even if they don't have me. Again I understand not everyone is as fortunate and I fully support the need to improve school teaching in general.
Not everyone has the resources to pay for TLL. We shouldn't have to pay for TLL for our kids to do well. My worry is this. Parents who pay others (like TLL) to do the teaching may not be entirely aware of what IS taught at enrichment. The centre needs only to produce results for you. Why would it need to share with you exactly what goes on in class?wonderm:
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.
I direct my DS' journey entirely. He works entirely independently. This means that we know exactly what needs to be taught but isn't.
Heuristics such as those I have shared are not proprietary to TLL. As such, if they use it to teach with, they would be infringing on someone else's copyright. They'll have developed their own and exposed these to the kids through practice.
You are both right. With enough practice, everyone develops heuristics. With enough exposure the brain develops heuristics on its own. But this is different than saying...
(1) Students who aren't good just have no aptitude because they haven't developed any of their own heuristics naturally.
It is too easy to blame MOE's inept teaching on student lack of aptitude. The children can't defend themselves when they're labelled \"not smart\". If centres like MathHeuristics and ScienceHeuristics thrive, it is because MOE won't face up to their evolved responsibilities. The PSLE syllabus is skills heavy. Yet, MOE does a poor job teaching skills BECAUSE it thinks the kids will pick it up naturally.
(2) Heuristics dumb down the mind and make it inflexible.
The brain NATURALLY evolves heuristics with practice. Even if you don't teach them, the brain evolves them. So more practice makes you more inflexible then? Given enough time and exposure everyone develops heuristics. This was ksi's own statement.
I am sorry that I am insistent on this point. I really have nothing against both of you. I seriously believe that many children will benefit from greater exposure to basic heuristics. -
wonderm:
Yes... we will just have to agree to disagree. Still, I dun think the effort of debating was entirely wasted on your part (nor mine). MOE does pay attention to this forum, and an open and reasonable discussion such as this is informative.
I agree with many things you said such as better teaching in school will reduce the reliance on external tuition. But I guess we have to agree to disagree with regards to learning of heuristics. By the way, I do know about what was taught and not taught at TLL as I do not just hands off and expect any enrichment centre to produce results. -
To sum it up, it seems that we do not learn Math from the same MOE, perhaps you were brought up overseas.
It is time to agree to disagree as our logic will never cross path in this matter if the outcome of us learning the same Math does not seem to match either. I am contented to know that wonderm and pepper spice have similar experiences as me from the same MOE.
Btw, your son is definitely on the bright side. Even when he was at the bottom of the class in P3, he was in the top 2 classes(still top 80 in school), that actually does not make him bottom. Bottom would be bottom in the cohort.
The MOE system offers many avenues for a suitable child to be groomed, properly like:
1. OM training(aka HA enrichment) or remedial classes
2. GEP screening or diagnostic tests
3. Streaming into the top classes or banding with foundation classes
4. Other programmes...
But if parents keep rejecting the opportunities and wanting to chart their own paths for their children because they know better and end up suffering certain consequences, it would be a conscious decision. It would not be right to turn around and attribute it as a flaw in the system.
That said, the system is not flawless, certainly there is room for improvement, just not those areas being argued so far.
Case closed. -
Chenonceau:
Unfortunately, this discussion will probably give the affirmation to MOE that kiasuparents.com parents are indeed just kiasu. *sigh*
Yes... we will just have to agree to disagree. Still, I dun think the effort of debating was entirely wasted on your part (nor mine). MOE does pay attention to this forum, and an open and reasonable discussion such as this is informative.wonderm:
I agree with many things you said such as better teaching in school will reduce the reliance on external tuition. But I guess we have to agree to disagree with regards to learning of heuristics. By the way, I do know about what was taught and not taught at TLL as I do not just hands off and expect any enrichment centre to produce results.
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 š
Register Login