All Schools are GOOD Schools
-
chamonix:
I am confused too. The myriad of posts are to be blamed :razz: .
Oic... in that case I had better reproduce my previous post against banning tuition here just in case MOE does begin to consider banning tuition... :yikes: Seriously though... I can't see MOE doing it.
I am inclined to think that the most obvious solution may not necessarily be the most effective one. The obvious solution to a rat problem is of course to kill the rats. The real solution is to remove the food source. The obvious solution to the tuition problem is to ban tuition. The real solution is to remove the source of revenue - parents.
MOE has tried to remove the food source by trying to change mindsets via the national newspapers... telling parents that THEY are kiasu and to stop being so kiasu... in the hopes of getting parents to remove the source of tuition centres' revenue - themselves.
However, parents are responding to a different set of incentives (food source again). The tuition centres give material that helps their kids ace the exams set beyond what is taught. These A grades give parents a sense of fulfillment. You think the parent will go cold turkey just because you say they're kiasu? Of course not! A grades are too yummy. Try to tell someone who loves sharkfin to give up sharkfin for no other reason than that he is a jerk for participating in shark murder.
It ain't gonna work.
Instead, the \"jerk\" is gonna get really mad at you for calling him a \"jerk\". And this is exactly what happened when MOE said the tuition phenomenon is the fault of parental kiasu-ism.
We got mad.
Sure... the sharkfin gourmet is a jerk (oops... sorry for those who like sharkfin), and sure... parents ARE kiasu. But jerks don't like to be called jerks for eating what they love. Parents don't like to be called kiasu when they are doing it for those they love. After getting mad at MOE, parents are just gonna do whatever they want. You're not gonna get lasting behavioral change this way.
Two Ways to Pop the Tuition Bubble
The are TWO ways I suggest to remove tuition centres' food source are focused on satiating parents' hunger for (a) high quality written resources given by tuition centres (b) individualized feedback for their children.
(1) MOE should aggressively compete with tuition centres on quality and quantity of written resources and individualized feedback. TLL's classes are 15 at most. Marking is done so throughly that even good compos look like they're BLEEDING ink. They hand out excellent notes. Can MOE compete (we will look at this question later)?
(2) MOE should stop testing beyond what is taught so that you don't spike parents' hunger for resources and feedback by failing their kids for no other reason that that the exam was setting way beyond what was taught. This should not be hard to do.
For sure, some parents are more greedy than others. Some of us love food and will overeat anyway. Some of us need much more food than most. You'll never be able to satisfy these. But that's ok because many many many other parents DON'T overeat.
Can MOE Compete? How can MOE Compete?
(1) Leverage on the plethora of excellent resources already in schools but hiding.
(2) Really make smaller classes come true.
MOE functions on taxpayer funds. Upfront out of pocket expenses for parents are minimal. Their service offering is lower cost for parents and if comparable (or even slightly inferior) in quality, the tuition market will experience the effects of a substitute good (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substitute_good).
Why Banning Tuition Won't Work
The solution I propose is less obvious but will be more effective because banning tuition will make it
(1) go underground (just like the alcohol ban lead to an increase of bootlegging in the USA of the 1920s... but was ineffective in curbing alcoholism)
(2) more expensive and then only people like jedamum will suffer because she REALLY needs tuition and she won't be able to afford it
(3) quite funny for Police Officers to go to work. They'll have to start treating tutors like prostitutes and children like prostitute clients
(4) the world laughed at us for banning chewing gum... If we ban tuition too, they'll die laughing.
(5) the tuition businesses will simply shift to teaching parents how to teach
(6) more Mommies will have to quit and stay home to make up for what MOE's teachers don't have time/resources to reinforce
(7) authors that teach people how to teach will also make money
In conclusion, the solution lies in upping the quality of MOE's essential service to the nation. If this can be properly done, the tuition problem will shrink. It won't ever go away because there ARE students who need it... but kids like mine... independent and willing to learn, won't.
limlim... so sorry bub... I still dun agree that banning tuition is the way to go... We can agree to disagree. -
BeContented:
They shd teach what they want to test. Even if 90% of the class already learnt it somewhere, they still have to teach.Champion:
Yes, Janet, I known this and have seen this happening
So, some school has genuinely set paper that is of average standard but being \"bombarded\" by some parents,\" Why the paper is so easy? Such & such school in our neighbourhood paper is so much difficult and challenging!\" 
Sometimes the schools are also in a dilemma.
Set average papers......get 'bombarded' by some parents on the paper being easy. Then start comparing with other schools and start sourcing for more difficult papers for their kids to try. Worse, start claiming school is not doing a good job to prepare the kids for PSLE, not realistic as kids will get high score and get complacent.
Set tough papers....the kids' grades will drop or worse, fail. Kids get demoralised, parents upset when kids are devastated.....wonder why schools want to 'kill'.
So seriously, damn if they do, damn if they dun. 
They test based on the PSLE standard as set by the ministry.
The criteria shd be, if there is no tuition centers or enrichment centers, what would the progress and standard be? Definitely, it is is not unreasonable to assume that the students doesn't know the topic if the teacher have nvr taught them before.. right?
Hence, just go by this guideline and ignore those who complain about easy paper.. -
janet_lee88:
In principle, I agree with this that the paper can be tough to filter out the better students..
Regarding challenging papers, I would prefer exams to have tough questions to sieve out the A* from the rest. At least kids won't fail.
A* students can score high grades while the As and Bs can still pass exams. Heard PSLE Math getting tougher and tougher.
However, some kiasu parent spoil the market and send their kids to tuition centers to gain the extra advantage and the playing field is not level.
refer to this
http://theonlinecitizen.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Meritocracy-1024x735.jpg
Hence, I am ok with difficult papers but against a playing field that is not level.
How to level the playing field?
Let me quote a scenario..
There is Singapore pools and there is illegal bookies.
If there is legalized betting, why is some bets illegal? It is telling pple that, Look, I give you Singapore Pools. You want to bet, you come to me. It is fair, everyone with the same bet gets the same payout. When illegal bookies operate, some may offer better payout then others, or better payout than Singapore Pools. It is not fair. It may take business from Singapore Pools.. it may get out of control..
Yes, by making private betting illegal, we cannot eradicate illegal betting.. BUT we keep it UNDER CONTROL.
Okie.. bad example.. gambling is a vice.. but you get the idea.... :evil: :evil:
I give you MOE, you want to study, come to me. It is fair, I control the standard and resources, and try the best to give everyone equal opportunity.
Secondary \"establishment\" of \"supplementary\" education in direct competition with MOE is illegal. It is not fair, it undermines the effort of MOE, it may get out of control.
Enrichment outside of curriculum is fine.. it is your choice and freedom to pursue.. But those centers who teaches matter in the curriculum whose only purpose is to gain an unfair advantage in the PSLE or 'O' level is not allowed.
Those who get it in the black market, let it be.. Loopholes.. we try to plug it. or we may close 1 eye. I just want the mainstream masses to be under control and sending out a very strong message. Parents, don't worry about unfair advantages and have faith in the system. I will keep it UNDER CONTROL.. If you want other alternative, you may approach the international schools. You have a choice. I do not allow tuition centers that teaches MOE curriculum, to operate.
private tuition is excluded. bcoz there may be genuine needs for it.
How to achieve control? Make all education establishment including tuition centers and enrichment center require a license. Those that doesn't meet the requirement or against the principle of the system, license not granted. Simple.
Another example.. Smoking in aircon places is banned. How to enforce? I'm not sure.. but it is banned.. it discourage smoking in those areas.. that, is the objective.
Why set a law that you may not be able to enforce effectively? IMHO, I just want to send a strong message. And that, is good enough. -
Hi limlim,
I agree with what you mentioned :rahrah:
Teach what will be tested. Test what has been taught in school.
If schools can do that, parents will not panic as much and bring in tutors. Problems now are:
1)schools do not teach sufficient to pass their own exams,
2)assume all kids attend enrichment.
When kids are well taught in schools, I believe there will be a far lesser need for tutors. What are our kids learning in school everyday ? MOE should look into welfare of teachers. Take away non-core stuff like CCA for eg. When teachers are not tired out with all these stuff, they will be happier. When teachers are doing what they are employed to do, more will want to teach :xedfingers: -
Chenonceau:
if you read my posts carefully, I did not say \"ban tuition\" in any of the posts. I say, \"ban tuition centers\" or the like.
limlim... so sorry bub... I still dun agree that banning tuition is the way to go... We can agree to disagree.
Tuition is necessary for some, we can't fault it. Hope I make my stand clear.
enrichment classes, it's the freedom for pple to pursue their interest, we can't fault it too.. it's their choice.
centers whose sole objective is to provide unfair advantage in the curriculum subject matter, undermines the effort of MOE. This, should not be allowed.
We must allow room for extended learning, but the CORE education in relation to PSLE, O levels etc.. should be under control.
That, is my stand.
My English is not good and I can't express as vividly as many highly educated member here. But I hope the main point has been effectively communicated.
These is just a peasant's POV.. Thanks for reading. -
Why I don’t say ban private tuition?
bcoz, if the student is weak, I believe, these student would reasonably be assumed that they cannot follow class lesson as well… and they NEED individual attention. These student wouldn’t benefit from attending tuition centers classes bcoz they do not get individual attention at all…
If, many students benefit from tuition center classes, it means they can follow lessons w/o individual attention… why then they cannot follow in class? In this case, kindly look at the quality of the teachers… and work from there, and MOE shd not take the easy way and simply outsource to tuition center to do a MOE teacher’s Job!
So, private tuition and tuition centers target different market. One shd be allowed, the other shd not. -
limlim:
Singaporeans are all very shy and reserved. They prefer to keep things to themselves, hence no feedback to teachers, HOD, principal, MOE etc that the teachers (some, not all lah) could not make it or not doing it right. Thus MOE was deceived by parents that all things are okay.Why I don't say ban private tuition?
bcoz, if the student is weak, I believe, these student would reasonably be assumed that they cannot follow class lesson as well.. and they NEED individual attention. These student wouldn't benefit from attending tuition centers classes bcoz they do not get individual attention at all..
If, many students benefit from tuition center classes, it means they can follow lessons w/o individual attention.. why then they cannot follow in class? In this case, kindly look at the quality of the teachers.. and work from there, and MOE shd not take the easy way and simply outsource to tuition center to do a MOE teacher's Job!
So, private tuition and tuition centers target different market. One shd be allowed, the other shd not.
Also, Singaporeans are all very selfish. They know the problem. The solve the problem themselves quietly by getting tuition for the kids and hence the kids perform and hush hush not to tell the school and other parents about the problem. That way the kids perform \"ahead\" of the peers..... kiasu mah ......
I say \"Singaporeans are all ......\" as an intended generalisation ....... :siam: :siam:
-
limlim... Thanks for clarifying. I hear you.
You are saying that...
(1) one-to-one tuition should be allowed (to help those who are really weak)
(2) ban only big group tuition
The sequence of events you envisage is as follows...
(1) Ban big group tuition centres
(2) Kids will all fail without recourse (because got no one to turn to)
(3) MOE teachers must step up and take charge or else kids will keep failing
(4) MOE will be forced to improve teaching support
How I see it is that between Steps (2) and (3) there is...
Step 2(a) - Kids will be super stressed and parents will be super angry. Given that a large number of parents are currently into tuition, this is the best way to lose a lot of votes. It is also at this point when Chenonceau can laugh all the way to the bank because all parents will be clamouring for How To Teach Children Workshop.
Next, between Steps (3) and (4) there is...
Step 3(a) - MOE teachers will suddenly be carrying double load. The teaching that was done by the tuition centres will drop on them like a ton of bricks and then they will be very stressed and low in morale... and they will quit the service in droves.
Then, finally, seeing all that pain (parents, children, teachers), MOE will start to invest in teacher support and better textbooks. Let's say that the time lag to complete the development of a Teacher Resources e-database and to redesign the school incentives is 12 months (at the fastest). This means that there will be hurting parents, children and teachers for a whole 12 months.
The social costs of banning tuition is very high in the short term.
The more gentle way of doing it is...
(1) Introduce system-wide teaching quality strengtheners like better textbooks, an e-resources Teacher database and smaller classes
(2) Go easy on the testing until the teaching is strong enough to test more aggressively
(3) Once teaching quality is enhanced in schools, a large number of parents will naturally try to save money on tuition. Other parents will choose to give their kids play time.
In the process, no one gets hurt... except of course, tuition centre profits. The logic is simple. What would I do if my child steals food? I can punish the child (which causes pain) or I can understand that only hungry children choose food. Feed that stealing child enough and the child might even refuse to eat food (a no pain solution). Feed parents and children enough high quality teaching from within MOE and there will be far less reason for them to desire tuition.
You won't reduce tuition to a zero, but it won't be the monster it is today, where parents hire tutors to help with tuition homework... where parents hire others to do easy homework. -
Out of curiosity … when we say schools/PSLE test beyond what is taught, are we talking about all 4 subjects or are we talking about one or two, or just certain components in the subjects.
-
Chenonceau:
at the very least.. ban tuition advertisement..
The social costs of banning tuition is very high in the short term.
No more misleading ads.. and parents find tutors by word of mouth.. not a bad thing ya..
wouldn't hurt anyone (parents/students/schools), isn't it?
I also don't agree that teachers will get double workload. it is their job in the first place.
At the end of the day, My view is this.. If tuition became a main component of the education system, it only show 1 thing.. that MOE failed miserably.. The national education program would be like a joke..
No body trust the school teachers to deliver quality education anymore..
And I wonder if teachers, if driven by passion, still have any pride in the profession.
Previously..
Parent A to parent B: Wah.. the whole class got 25x.. these school have very good teachers..
Next time..
Parent A to parent B: Wah.. the whole class got 25x.. the students must have very good tutors or attended very good tuition centers... (Hello, what happen to the teachers?)
A teacher's contribution would be diminished.. good for the pple? good for the nation?
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