Primary school maths: A vicious circle (from TODAY May 8)

[tutormum]

sunflower:

tutormum:

I had a friend whose child from NYPS told me that their students were trained from the word \"go\" i.e. they are grouped into different ability classes and trained for GEP and national competitions. These branded schools are not popular for nothing. When DS3 took his GEP test at a centre, he was only one of the 6 from his school compared to these popular schools which sent them by the bus load. DS3 observed that almost 90% of the students were from the same branded school. When he went to ACS for his maths competition, the same thing happened. I have to send him cos he was the only one who made it to the finals while NYPS which had 40 of them bagging gold had buses and teachers accompanying them. DS3 consoled himself that he was naturally gifted as he had no training whatsoever while those trained by the branded schools had artificial imputed intelligence so nothing glorifying. :faint:

My point is : Yes, it's true that the playing field is not level. Yes, the system needs fixing as majority of the students esp those from neighbourhood schools are disadvantaged. :?:

I'm not sure, just guessing that your son being one of the 6 refers to the 2nd round of GEP testing? I won't be surprised that most come from certain schools, many from those schools do send their children for tuition/enrichment classes such as TLL, but that does not mean that only the rich who can afford to send their children to the extras get into GEP. There are those not so rich but bright ones who get in as well. The 40 of them bagging gold from NYPS are most likely mainly GEP students.

I applaud you, tutormum, for your support to your son who's naturally gifted in Math. This is what I mean by letting your child take the lead. You recognised his talent in this area and gave him appropriate and full support. In addition, the school did recognise his talent and gave him the exposure by registering him for the competition.

:oops: :oops: Actually, I didn't give my DS3 any support. The only support he got from me was to bring him to the test centres. I didn't even teach or help him in his school work cos he's quite independent. His school only gave 'support' after they discovered his talent i.e. after he qualified for the Maths Olympaid finals and got a silver medal. I hope I don't sound ungrateful to state that the school didn't handpick him for the competition cos every pupil was given a chance to sign up if they wanted to try their luck. It was only after his steller performance, did the school ask him to sign up for other competitions and haphazardly gave him some lessons as a sign of support. Honestly I was flabbergasted cos DS3 would grace the stage every year to receive his NSW certificate as he would either score Distinction or Higher Distinction in Maths which would have given them an indication of his talent. In fact, when he was in lower primary, one of his form teachers told me that DS3 was not clever cos if he was, he would have topped his class. I would never forget the day how she haughtily shown me the report book of the top boy to prove her point.
Don't get me wrong. I've shared my DS3 experience to show that there is indeed discrepancies in our system. Of course, DS3 did get his share of good and bad teachers. I'm sure these teachers abound in both 'branded' and 'unbranded' schools. Yet, there is a vast difference in the way the schools are run and our friend, Chenonceau has highlighted them over and over again. My three DS are from the same primary school and their experiences were totally differently. All of them were left very much on their own. I helped DS1 in his maths cos it was his weakest subject. Chinese was DS2 weakest subject and lots of I didn't push to the extent that they must score A or A*. I was happy that they didn't fail and left everything to the school. At times I do reflect and wonder if I should have done things differently and pushed them to be 'scholars'. DS2 secondary teachers told me that he could have greater achievements if :censored: :censored: Both DS1 and DS2 depended on the school solely for their study material cos they thought that would be enough for them. DS3 read since he was 2+ and by the time he entered primary school, he found that the school materials couldn't satisfy his quest for knowledge. :razz: At times, he lamented that I didn't send him to a branded school which would have spurred him onto 'greater height' which meant he would be able to score 270+ for PSLE instead of 250+ :faint:

[sunflower]

Hi tutormum, thanks for sharing in the post above. I do empathise with you on your son’s experience. It was unfortunate that the school did not recognize his talents earlier. Each school’s selection process might differ, but ultimately, the school did recognize his talents and provided opportunities for him.


On the other hand, if he was in a branded school, there might be many as good as him or even better, so much so that comparatively, he might not seemed good enough, and might have been overlooked, hence not even given the chance to be trained or go for competitions?

I have heard of a boy who was very good in Math but not good enough in a branded school (there were many others much better) and hence, was not selected by the school for Math Olympiad training, although he was very keen to join the training. I think that school select by Math exam results and they have a quota (or cut-off mark), and they do set pretty tough papers.

[sunflower]

Chenonceau:

sunflower:

It's a pity that some schools apply the wrong strategy in their teaching and testing. There are some neighbourhood schools that provide very good support, and test within reasonable standards, so much so that tuition is not a necessity.

Just to share. A friend told me she was very grateful to her daughter’s neighbourhood school. Her daughter did not have a good foundation in English. She was identified for Learning Support Programme (LSP) since P1. She responded very well to the programme and could read those thick books by P5. She eventually went to an IP school.

Another case: My neighbour shared that her daughter’s teacher identified her to be very strong in Chinese, and took the time to personally coach her and another classmate every week after school. She did very well and chose a SAP school after PSLE.

Both children depended on school and did not have tuition.

You need not convince me on the quality of neighbourhood schools. I know some far surpass a couple (not all) branded schools in quality of teaching. This still does not resolve the problem of variance in quality between schools.

I'm not trying to convince you on the quality of neighbourhood schools. I gave the examples to show that there's no absolute in everything, and to dispel the notion that:
1. Tuition is a MUST and a necessity for everyone (Case 1 above)
2. ONLY branded schools identify talents and train them, or give them more opportunities to develop their potential (Case 2).
BTW, the girl in Case 2 represented her primary school in competitions as well.

[sunflower]

Chenonceau:

sunflower:

[quote=\"Chenonceau\"]

Okay. Reduce class size to 15-20.

Regarding class size, of course it would benefit all if class size is reduced. But with that number of students in class, our school fees would definitely have to go up, or a significant amount of the budget, in the expense of others, would have to go to education. In some countries, class size in private schools are around that, and parents pay thousands of dollars to get their children into these schools. Already in our independent IP/IB schools with class size of about 20-25, schools fees are really expensive, as compared to normal government schools. There are also many other things to consider, the no. and size of the schools to be built (hopefully we do not build and close down after a few years due to insufficient intake), the no. of teachers that needed to be hired (do we want more foreigners to fill in the gaps?), the population trend etc etc. Taking everything into consideration, I'm not so sure whether it's sustainable.

Someone told me some schools in China have about 60 children in a class. If they are able to maintain discipline and students learn in that kind of environment, we are already very lucky as compared to them.

In fact, I know of some schools that already have 2 form teachers per class to support each other. With the right kind of support and no unnecessary admin and committee work, I'm sure teachers should be able to dedicate their time to the students, teaching, knowing and inspiring them.

Hmmmm... I'm not really interested in the constraints. The fact is, the MOE put in a skills heavy syllabus which requires practice and individualized feedback to properly teach. This means smaller classes. If MOE has no capacity to teach TO the syllabus, then...

(1) Don't pretend education is largely free OR
(2) Keep the syllabus manageable for itself[/quote]In any change of policy, the ministries, and in this case, the MOE would have to decide on the best course of action by thinking through carefully, weighing the pros and cons as well as considering all aspects as it’ll impact its citizens. I don’t think they want to implement something hastily only to later discover costly implications that lead to more problems, like what’s happening now with all those policies initiated by MBT.

[sunflower]

I do not disagree that there’s a variance in the school’s standard and how differently schools are run in Singapore. But how can we expect MOE to dictate how all schools should be run up to a “T”? Education is largely human determinant.


If we’re saying some schools set tough questions even before imparting the relevant knowledge, I would say there are also other schools who test reasonably, according to their students’ ability, and trying to mirror PSLE standards. MOE provides the framework, but principals have full control in the running of the school, and the way they run a school is determined by their education beliefs and their priorities.

The difference in standard in schools and their exams has long prevailed since our time, but why didn’t anyone complain that PSLE papers were very difficult or easy during our time?..or that this or that school set tough papers? That was because school exam papers were not published and widely available. Ignorance is bliss. During our time, there was nothing to compare, we didn’t know so tuition did not seem necessary.

Please do not stress ourselves unnecessarily by looking at top school papers. Now we look at top school papers and imagine PSLE paper is full of challenging questions, which from my past 2 years’ observation, was not the case. Every time, it was just that 1 or 2 questions that were highlighted. People were not happy because they spent so much on tuition and yet cannot score full marks. Think of it rationally, MOE would not set papers as difficult as NYPS (where more than half the paper consists of challenging questions). They have to cater to the majority average students. If not, nearly the whole P6 cohort in Singapore will fail.

[sunflower]

I personally do not think just having textbooks FULL of information is an all-cure. Times have changed and exam questions are set differently from what we were used to. In the past, if we can remember and regurgitate, we score, and textbooks provided us with all the necessary information. At this age and time, with knowledge explosion, we need to know how to process and use information from all sources. In other words, we aim to nurture the next generation of thinkers.


Now, PSLE questions are set differently from our time, where they test whether students are able to assimilate knowledge and apply. Hence, teachers seriously need extensive training in order to deliver what’s expected in this new era. Simply dishing out information loaded textbooks is not enough. Teachers need to teach students HOW to use this information and HOW to further acquire more information and expand their knowledge base.

Regarding textbooks, I’ve read of an education model where children do not have any pre-printed textbooks in school. They learnt and remembered more as they created their own unique textbooks. At the same time, children’s creativity and problem solving skills were developed and enhanced. Pretty impressive I must say, when I saw photos of their work. I read it some time back so couldn’t remember off hand what model was that, but I do not think this can work in Singapore, given the current culture of extensive testing.

[sunflower]

I do agree that we need to revamp our education system. I was just trying to offer views from another perspective, so that we can look at things in a more holistic manner. There are bound to be differences in our opinions because of our different experience that shape our thinking.


Before Teach Less Learn More (TLLM) policy, textbooks have traditionally been content heavy. Many complain about so much to remember and syllabus too heavy. Well, there was a review and the syllabus was reduced and they introduce this TLLM. Textbooks were written to reflect this policy, that’s why the much reduced content. Although much less information is printed, I remember textbooks do provide internet links for students to further research on the topic.

Many schools do put in extras such as Onsponge and other assessment books in their booklist. Others such as my DD1 neighbourhood school ordered other assessment books or gave out supplementary notes to their students. What I can say is that most schools try their best to supplement the textbooks.

OK, what I’m discontent about is the implementation of this TLLM. I feel teachers were not well prepared/trained. Every school have their own interpretation and each administer what they thought TLLM means, which can be quite different between schools. Moreover, the way PSLE questions were set did not adjust to the change, and questions set seems to be still in the content heavy style.

With the way it is, personally, I do not think MOE would do much changes to the textbooks, unless there’s a major review/change of syllabus or the scraping or tweaking of the TLLM policy. This teaching methodology is just not suitable for primary school children, where they are still building their foundation. TLLM is only good for later stages, where knowledge is built and developed upon that foundation.

Moreover, the change in the government management style into the business model since the mid 1990s created more harm than good. Instead of serving the people, different ministries/department and for that matter, schools compete with each other to “show off”, to meet KPIs. Pretty sad, everybody in the rat race and lost focus. This resulted in the competiveness even amongst teachers. With the change of the Education minster, I hope there will be a change in the mindset of how schools should be evaluated. Education is about learning and sharing, to collectively build our next generation of people who can move our nation forward.

What I personally feel for MOE to consider:
1. I’ve written this in one of my earlier post, that there should be a centralised online database/forum where teachers can contribute and have access to teaching materials created by teachers and posted in the MOE teachers’ portal/forum. All teachers would have the password to access such sharing of information, where they can comment, share resources, post questions and basically help each other. It is up to the teachers’ discretion whether to use/modify or give out the notes based on their students’ needs.

2. Due to the very specialized knowledge and skills required of the various subjects, especially in the upper primary level, I would suggest that teachers be trained to be subject specialist for a particular subject. Mid to upper primary school teachers shouldn’t be teaching English, Math and Science all lump together, which may create situations such as what Chenonceau’s son encountered, whose teacher may not be competent to teach English but maybe very good in Math or Science.

3. Unnecessary admin/committee work should be eliminated for teachers to focus on their teaching. (In this aspect, I can see that MOE is slowly working towards this by providing more support staff. But still, more can be done.) Teachers then would have more time to mark students’ work properly, to prepare quality teaching materials and to upgrade themselves professionally.

4. Holistically speaking, MOE should seriously review the whole education landscape, to look at successful education models of other countries and take in a thing or two. Should we even have a national exam such as the PSLE, or should the age be adjusted so that it’s fairer to boys, who generally mature later and to cater to late bloomers? Or even review how scores should be calculated, so that it helps/identifies people who may be particularly strong in certain subjects/areas, in order to nurture them, not to penalize them just because they are not equally strong in ALL subjects.

[Chenonceau]

sunflower:

I do not disagree that there’s a variance in the school’s standard and how differently schools are run in Singapore. But how can we expect MOE to dictate how all schools should be run up to a “T”? Education is largely human determinant.

Again... same comment. Many MNCs have found a way to maintain consistency in businesses with human determinant. So yes... this is what I expect. Just watch them and learn.

sunflower:

If we’re saying some schools set tough questions even before imparting the relevant knowledge, I would say there are also other schools who test reasonably, according to their students’ ability, and trying to mirror PSLE standards. MOE provides the framework, but principals have full control in the running of the school, and the way they run a school is determined by their education beliefs and their priorities.

It should not be left to the whim of Principals. There should be a coherent philosophy that unites all schools. The schools cannot just function by Principal alone. They need to take into account a diligently thought through and well-crafted philosophy that underpins the nation's education.

sunflower:

The difference in standard in schools and their exams has long prevailed since our time, but why didn’t anyone complain that PSLE papers were very difficult or easy during our time?...or that this or that school set tough papers? That was because school exam papers were not published and widely available. Ignorance is bliss. During our time, there was nothing to compare, we didn’t know so tuition did not seem necessary.

Please do not stress ourselves unnecessarily by looking at top school papers. Now we look at top school papers and imagine PSLE paper is full of challenging questions, which from my past 2 years’ observation, was not the case. Every time, it was just that 1 or 2 questions that were highlighted. People were not happy because they spent so much on tuition and yet cannot score full marks. Think of it rationally, MOE would not set papers as difficult as NYPS (where more than half the paper consists of challenging questions). They have to cater to the majority average students. If not, nearly the whole P6 cohort in Singapore will fail.

Ummmm... my DS' school sets equally hard papers even though the school appears nowhere in a top school paper collection. I don't need the top school papers to panic. This does not mean that the school teaches to that standard (nor do we have a GEP cohort). The response is... \"The bright ones naturally know.\"

[Chenonceau]

sunflower:

Before Teach Less Learn More (TLLM) policy, textbooks have traditionally been content heavy. Many complain about so much to remember and syllabus too heavy. Well, there was a review and the syllabus was reduced and they introduce this TLLM. Textbooks were written to reflect this policy, that’s why the much reduced content. Although much less information is printed, I remember textbooks do provide internet links for students to further research on the topic.

This makes no sense. Just because people complain there is too much to remember, the solution is to write less into textbook and put in even more content in the exams?

The links provided are not enough. To handle his exams last year... we needed...
(1) a specialized book on Science exam answering technique
(2) 1 set of guide books 1 ft high featuring Upper and Lower Primary Science syllabus
(3) An average of 4 hours a week of internet search using keywords from the 1 ft high source of materials
(4) Hands-on experimentation since age 2

sunflower:

Many schools do put in extras such as Onsponge and other assessment books in their booklist. Others such as my DD1 neighbourhood school ordered other assessment books or gave out supplementary notes to their students. What I can say is that most schools try their best to supplement the textbooks.

SOME schools try their best. Others don't try at all. We are back to the issue of variance in quality amongst schools which most people think an un-solvable problem. SOME schools use Onsponge. Others don't at all. Again... variance in quality.

Again... same comment. Many MNCs have found a way to maintain consistency in businesses with a high level of human determinant. So yes... this is what I expect. Just watch them and learn.

sunflower:

OK, what I’m discontent about is the implementation of this TLLM. I feel teachers were not well prepared/trained. Every school have their own interpretation and each administer what they thought TLLM means, which can be quite different between schools. Moreover, the way PSLE questions were set did not adjust to the change, and questions set seems to be still in the content heavy style.

I agree

sunflower:

With the way it is, personally, I do not think MOE would do much changes to the textbooks, unless there’s a major review/change of syllabus or the scraping or tweaking of the TLLM policy. This teaching methodology is just not suitable for primary school children, where they are still building their foundation. TLLM is only good for later stages, where knowledge is built and developed upon that foundation.

Oh boy... I agree.

sunflower:

Moreover, the change in the government management style into the business model since the mid 1990s created more harm than good. Instead of serving the people, different ministries/department and for that matter, schools compete with each other to “show off”, to meet KPIs. Pretty sad, everybody in the rat race and lost focus. This resulted in the competiveness even amongst teachers. With the change of the Education minster, I hope there will be a change in the mindset of how schools should be evaluated. Education is about learning and sharing, to collectively build our next generation of people who can move our nation forward.

This hits the bulls eye.

sunflower:

What I personally feel for MOE to consider:
1. I’ve written this in one of my earlier post, that there should be a centralised online database/forum where teachers can contribute and have access to teaching materials created by teachers and posted in the MOE teachers’ portal/forum. All teachers would have the password to access such sharing of information, where they can comment, share resources, post questions and basically help each other. It is up to the teachers' discretion whether to use/modify or give out the notes based on their students' needs.

I had suggested this too MANY times... and to individuals in MOE.
Notably in point 6 of this blogpost... http://petunialee.blogspot.com/2012/03/world-class-but-also-barely-literate.html

sunflower:

2. Due to the very specialized knowledge and skills required of the various subjects, especially in the upper primary level, I would suggest that teachers be trained to be subject specialist for a particular subject. Mid to upper primary school teachers shouldn’t be teaching English, Math and Science all lump together, which may create situations such as what Chenonceau’s son encountered, whose teacher may not be competent to teach English but maybe very good in Math or Science..

Oh... absolutely!

sunflower:

3. Unnecessary admin/committee work should be eliminated for teachers to focus on their teaching. (In this aspect, I can see that MOE is slowly working towards this by providing more support staff. But still, more can be done.) Teachers then would have more time to mark students’ work properly, to prepare quality teaching materials and to upgrade themselves professionally.

I agree.

sunflower:

4. Holistically speaking, MOE should seriously review the whole education landscape, to look at successful education models of other countries and take in a thing or two. Should we even have a national exam such as the PSLE, or should the age be adjusted so that it’s fairer to boys, who generally mature later and to cater to late bloomers? Or even review how scores should be calculated, so that it helps/identifies people who may be particularly strong in certain subjects/areas, in order to nurture them, not to penalize them just because they are not equally strong in ALL subjects.

I hadn't thought of the point in red. But I think it is absolutely lovely.

sunflower:

I do agree that we need to revamp our education system. I was just trying to offer views from another perspective, so that we can look at things in a more holistic manner. There are bound to be differences in our opinions because of our different experience that shape our thinking.

I am grateful you took the time to write.

As you can see, we do not differ greatly in opinion on the system. Unfortunately, I have been trying to engage MOE on the points you mentioned above for the past 12 months. When you talk to a wall, after a while, you begin to shout. I know it is inelegant of me... and my posts seem to tug HARD at the rope in a certain direction... but that is because MOE has not been forthcoming with dialogue and open discussion. Only one public denial after another... and empty claims of being world class.

Meanwhile a world class system liberally flouts a well documented research finding (by world-renowned researchers of autonomous motivation) by offering MONEY to build character.

MOE's PR people must come to the realization that pat press statements will NOT change the experiences people have lived through. At the end of the day, it really boils down to HOW MANY people experienced what I have gone through with my son... and what my friends are going through... and how many more parents will go through what I have gone through in the next few years till 2016.

For 12 months, I have been putting into words our malaise... but if a parent's experience cannot be related to my words, he/she will be repelled, and prompted to write a vigorous riposte. Some parents have done so. However, if your experience can be related to my words, then my words will help to express your malaise... and then I get PM after PM encouraging me to write even when I am about to give up. These are the same silent voters in the KSP polls who vote Unhappy.

In the final analysis, it's the numbers of people who HAVE actually experienced what I have... my words don't count unless they resonate with another's real life experience. The mistake MOE made is that it thought it could speak words that are contrary to the reality we live and with words, deny or make the world right.

[Chenonceau]

sunflower:

In any change of policy, the ministries, and in this case, the MOE would have to decide on the best course of action by thinking through carefully, weighing the pros and cons as well as considering all aspects as it’ll impact its citizens. I don’t think they want to implement something hastily only to later discover costly implications that lead to more problems, like what’s happening now with all those policies initiated by MBT.

They should have thought through TLLM before they implemented it then... Because, with TLLM they now ..

(1) Have to pretend education is largely free AND
(2) Cannot manage to teach adequately to their own syllabus