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

[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

[Chenonceau]

sunflower:

I personally do not think just having textbooks FULL of information is an all-cure.

Did I say it would be a cure-all?

I qualified the request for better textbooks as a beggar would ask for scraps. It's a better than nothing solution.

sunflower:

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.

This is a comment I can completely relate to, and I did suggest it here - http://petunialee.blogspot.com/2012/02/education-system-unable-to-deliver.html. But this is a utopia I dare not ask for. When you've been stone walled for 12 months, you learn to ask for only the scraps - textbooks.

There is plethora of online resources but the Teachers are not teaching with these. DS school sticks closely to the textbooks and workbooks... thin in content though these may be. It is I who opened the door to online Science resources and encouraged my son to make his own textbook.

On this forum, many parents teach their kids science with piles of assessment books. That is the traditional way of teaching and ineffective for the new syllabus and new testing demands. Most parents don't know this and to my observation, many teachers don't either.

sunflower:

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.

Exactly so.

But if the Teachers cannot handle TLLM, they won't be able to handle this. It is a question of implementation. The syllabus is well within the grasp of our kids. It is the teaching service that cannot cope.

sunflower:

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.

I believe one school in Singapore is using our kids as testing subjects. Parents are all transferring their kids out of the school. It must be fun to create your own textbooks but the knowledge with which to create the textbooks needs to come from somewhere... perhaps
(1) hands-on experimentation
(2) moderated discussions
(3) access to other sources of knowledge

I actually get DS to write his own \"textbook\" for Science. I also get him to put on geeky Professor glasses to teach the whole family from Powerpoint slides. These methods do work but they require a complete paradigm shift from traditional educational methods. If the system ...
(1) can't get its head around TLLM
(2) can't get away from extensive testing
then like you, I too don't think it can handle this new method

[Chenonceau]

sunflower:

Chenonceau:

[quote=\"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.[/quote]Ah yes... there is no absolute in everything. I don't think I am so naive as to claim an absolute truth. I never said that tuition is a must and a necessity for EVERYONE. My own kids have no tuition (because I can teach) so I would not say that.

I said tuition has become a necessity. Full stop. Notably, in situations (as you have yourself pointed out) where certain parameters are met...

(1) schools teach inadequately (and we have ascertained that this is not a perception because there are ways to determine whether the school tests beyond what it taught)

(2) parents cannot teach

Of course, there are parents who will send for tuition no matter what. There are also those who don't believe in tuition and will got through great lengths to avoid it. This 2nd set of parents don't get mentioned enough. They exist.

I have also never said that ONLY branded schools identify talent. I made the point that some schools do, and I am well aware that some neighbourhood schools do. This still does not resolve the issue of variance in quality between schools (whether branded or neighbourhood, let's just call them schools). My position on branded/neighbourhood has always been that it doesn't mean anything. One will be horrified at how poorly some branded schools teach... and some neighbourhood schools provide notes of impressive quality. Hopefully, when MOE audits schools, they won't let the school brand name mislead them into thinking such and such is a good school just because it is a popular one.

If we look past the distinction branded/neighbourhood, we are still faced with the problem of variance in quality between schools, are we not? 2 schools within a few km of each other... but providing different quality of education. It was my hope that with ...

(1) a consistent set of more comprehensive-than-now written resources across all schools... there would be a certain core consistency. Quality is provided through the written resources even if the schools fail to teach adeequately.

(2) a national database for Teachers would help to further provide consistency whilst allowing Teachers to respond to INDIVIDUALS (not just classes) when generating worksheets and notes.

(3) a consistent set of more comprehensive-than-now written resources across all schools would mean that the system has redundancy of sorts. Any robust system needs layers of contingencies and back-ups. With textbook resources so thin... you need tuition if you have a bad Teacher. Else, you need a Mother like me... willing and able to source and screen written resources.

Better textbooks and access to syllabus-centric written resources online and in the school libraries PLUS guidance on how to access and use these resources will be good back-up... creating a redundancy that at present is missing.

[Chenonceau]

sunflower:

I personally do not think just having textbooks FULL of information is an all-cure.

I almost never write in absolutes. It's odd that you would understand absolutes from what I wrote. Absolute claims are too easily disproven so I almost never make them. Even the sky is not always blue. Why FULL? Why cure-ALL?

If I dared, I would ask for...
(1) a series of Youtube video experiment demonstrations that any child can log onto
(2) online demonstrations of oral exams that any child can access
(3) online modules full of fun skits and voiceovers detailing the various aspects of PSLE compo writing
- evocativeness of language
- creation of suspense
(3) Etc...

But when the textbooks are so lousy, you kind of assume that such demands would be way beyond the capability of our MOE... so I just asked for better textbooks... not FULLY COMPREHENSIVE textbooks.

[Chenonceau]

sunflower:

I could have chosen any secondary school to my liking after PSLE, but decided on an ordinary one near home. Went to one of the top JC, and eventually cross path with classmates who chose to go elite secondary schools. (Err...but I must confess lah, I'll probably choose to go to one of the IP schools now because too lazy to take \"O\" levels. Ha, ha...) But even cannot get in so what? Even Pritam Singh who studied in JJC went to NUS, and also got scholarship to study overseas.

My issue with the system is not access to university. Or who gets into IP or top schools. It is in its inability to teach efficiently and effectively... that makes it necessary for kids to have tuition. This closes the door of choice educational opportunities to those bright ones (who had no tuition) who would otherwise have qualified. At the very least, provide alternative learning modes than the Teacher (better textbooks... online multimedia instructional tools accessible to all kids).

The teacher database you suggested is a great efficiency tool and will improve teacher effectiveness. If kids had guided and unfettered independent access to an evolved \"textbook\" in the form of videos etc... it will also improve efficiency and effectiveness.

Just because people can gradually mosey their way into university is no excuse for a system stuck in the old ways of teaching (as you have noted many Teachers don't know how to TLLM) with a vastly evolved syllabus (best taught with TLLM) and thin textbooks. Of course, people have pointed out that some schools use IT to great effect... others have iPADS and such... but the question is... HOW MANY schools?

I don't know how many schools teach effectively and efficiently, and does justice to the syllabus as it was originally designed to be taught. I don't know how many parents go through what I went through. We won't know till 2016... or unless MOE makes an effort to seriously look into this BEFORE 2016.

It takes time to get teachers up to speed. Meanwhile, strengthen the system with written and multimedia resources accessible to all... strengthen the system with a database for Teachers.

[Chenonceau]

sunflower:

If one is willing to do 80 or more hours of volunteering just to get into phase 2B, or getting the child from one end of Singapore to the other end (where the school is located), or is willing to spend millions to get a property close to the school, and all these do not translate into more kiasu, I do not know what is.

It translates into wealth. These people have the time to spare volunteering... and the money to afford the properties.

[oxyleo]

Wanted to share this from STForum. Written by a parent and former teacher.


http://www.straitstimes.com/STForum/Story/STIStory_802296.html

What she says is in line with DPM Teo's new guiding principles suggested for Public Service officers.

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1203603/1/.html

[oxyleo]

I also strongly recommend reading the Opinion section of the Straits Times. Columns are likely written by the Opinion editor of the ST herself or the ST Editor himself.



Whilst these columns are written in varying contexts, such as pertaining to school volunteering, and opportunities in general in society, she sums up her columns, both times, on consecutive days, very aptly, and her reference to social mobility is very much underlying the arguments in this thread as well, for a more level playing field through better textbooks, centralized database etc:


(1) yesterday, Fri May 25, 2012 - Value and Values of school volunteers (A34)

"Volunteering is likely to favor the well-off, who can afford to take time out, over blue-collar workers and hawkers who have to struggle to spare even a day’s earnings. The emphasis on projects will reinforce the connection between parental income and education in determining which child has a better chance of getting in. This development can hardly improve social mobility, an objective which schools should support. Indeed, schools are the crucibles of mobility in a society like Singapore where education underwrites meritocracy, as it should."

The need for tuition or smarter parents to perform well in school today likewise favors the same profile of parents and children that the Parent Volunteer scheme favors.

(2) today, Sat May 26, 2012 - Keeping alive the opportunity society (A36).

"A study by the Finance Ministry found moderate to high mobility here, but the fathers surveyed averaged more than 50 years of age and the ministry cautioned that the study might not apply to future generations. Also, whilst the poor have a chance of moving up, those from well-off homes have a higher probability of succeeding for a host of reasons like better financial support for study and cultural capital. Rising inequality is a worldwide phenomenon. It bears watching to ensure that society strives to keep hopes of moving up alive."

I know some may say "show me the numbers" before it justifies for a change. And indeed that may seem like a very good way to end all discussion on the matter. However, as the Opinion column highlights, the inequality phenomenon bears watching.

If we wait until its too late, one possible way that "numbers" present themselves will be through the next Nationwide election. Because as some have highlighted, no one at an individual level is in a capacity to make a good gauge on the best direction going forward, and MOE themselves are not going to try to really do a survey or poll to find out what the nation hopes for collectively.

That will be a sad day for me which I am hoping to avert.

[Chenonceau]

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.

The Australians seem to have agreed with you ... http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/productivity-report-calls-for-scrapping-of-teacher-bonus-20120503-1y1vt.html

... but they are smart... they thought critically about this before adopting a KPI structure that encourages competition more than collaboration.