Primary school maths: A vicious circle (from TODAY May 8)
-
Straits Times, 24 May 2012
Policies must co-opt parents effectively
AS A parent and former teacher, I have noticed a widening gap between how children learn and how they are tested in schools.
School syllabuses appear to be increasingly introducing tough questions that may not be developmentally appropriate for the grade levels of the children.
While I applaud the Ministry of Education's (MOE) efforts to promote critical and problem-solving skills, these practices may be detrimental in the long term.
It has been well-documented that children generally develop cognitively in stages.
An average child in Primary 2, for instance, may not yet have developed the capacity for abstract thinking when solving complex problems.
A strong foundation in the rudiments of a subject, however, is critical for successful mastery of such problems at a later stage.
A lack of cognition of this may have implications for children's socio-emotional growth and motivation.
The MOE's stand has been that the levels of difficulty have not increased over the years.
It has further indicated that teachers and experts have been consulted in its curriculum reviews and policies.
While considerable efforts have been invested to address this issue, this top-down approach views the partnership between schooling and families as a uni-directional model.
Research has shown the importance of the voice of parents for policy decisions, as they are co-partners in the education process.
In order to provide authentic teaching and learning for children, education systems must recognise and invest in a deeper understanding of the problem from the parents' perspective.
In other words, the MOE must listen to what parents have to say.
Parents, like teachers, are equally, if not more, important participants in the education process.
Pauline Ho (Ms)
http://www.straitstimes.com/STForum/Story/STIStory_802296.html -
phtthp:
I think MOE's stand is that the level of difficulty has not increased over the years for PSLE and NOT school exams.Straits Times, 24 May 2012
Policies must co-opt parents effectively
AS A parent and former teacher, I have noticed a widening gap between how children learn and how they are tested in schools.
School syllabuses appear to be increasingly introducing tough questions that may not be developmentally appropriate for the grade levels of the children.
The MOE's stand has been that the levels of difficulty have not increased over the years.
In other words, the MOE must listen to what parents have to say.
Parents, like teachers, are equally, if not more, important participants in the education process.
Pauline Ho (Ms)
http://www.straitstimes.com/STForum/Story/STIStory_802296.html
Frankly, I do believe (until proven wrong) that PSLE standard is reasonable and the level of difficulty has not increased over the years. But MOE is NOT publishing the EXACT PSLE past years' papers to prove its stand.
http://www.kiasuparents.com/kiasu/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=35434 -
sunflower:
How can schools mirror the PSLE standards when MOE does NOT publish the EXACT PSLE past years' papers?
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.sunflower:
The issue is not about schools setting tough papers - the issue is whether those difficult questions were taught in class and whether those students who could answer these questions are those who have quality help (outside school).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.
sunflower:
:goodpost: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.
Yes, I strongly agree (and 80% of parents think so too - link below).
http://www.kiasuparents.com/kiasu/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=35434&start=40
But, why is MOE not publishing the EXACT PSLE past years' papers?
2 questions though:-
1) What do you mean by your past 2 years' observation? Students will not be able to remember ALL the questions AFTER the exam, so we will not know the % of 'challenging' questions in a PSLE paper.
2) No matter how difficult/easy a paper is, grades are moderated. Every year 40%++ will get A*/A for Eng, Math, Sci and 80%++ for Chi. So your point 'nearly the whole P6 cohort in Singapore will fail' will never happen. -
Chenonceau:
I support your suggestions. In fact, DS3 managed to view through 30+ of Youtube videos which are relevant to primary school science syllabus as revision for PSLE. It is better than reading tons of assessment books (forget about the textbook - we know how useless it is). I used the video as part of the programme during the science workshop that our tuition centre organised for the children. Sad to say, most of the children gave video viewing the lowest rating compared to the other components. :frustrated: Yet, the workshop received raving response esp for the science experiments. The children told me that their teachers either did only a few if not, none of the experiments in their workbooks and the reason given was the lack of time. If I'm not wrong, Science is only taught once or twice a week. From my experience, a topic can be taught in a 1.5 hr lesson. What I understand from most of my students is that a topic is covered over a 2 to 3 week period. For primary 3, e.g. the topics covered are Diversity, Materials and Magnets (correct me if I am wrong). I teach English, Maths and Science twice weekly 1.5hr each session. Yet, I cover much more than what was taught in school most of the time. My students were given so much reading materials and homework that they literally 'beg' me to give lesser. :nosebleed: Schools have OHP in every classrooms; libraries full of books and materials; funds to spend; etc Lack of resources and time? :scratchhead: If there's one thing that I would say to teachers who really want to help our children it will be \"Treat the students as if they are your own children.\"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. -
coast:
This is the impression I got while speaking to DD1's HOD when she was in P6 2 years' back. He mentioned the school swapped prelims papers with another school to let students practise because these 2 schools found their papers to be quite indicative of PSLE standards.
How can schools mirror the PSLE standards when MOE does NOT publish the EXACT PSLE past years' papers?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.
My guess is that after so many years of marking PSLE papers, the HODs/teachers have a sense of the standards and what to expect.coast:
If the school tests before imparting relevant knowledge and reasons given not convincing, then the school has not been doing its due diligence. I'm not sure what MOE can do about this. This is the strategy that the school has decided to take to achieve certain objectives. Do we expect MOE to dictate to all schools that they can't do that and penalize them for doing so? It would be so micromanaging.
The issue is not about schools setting tough papers - the issue is whether those difficult questions were taught in class and whether those students who could answer these questions are those who have quality help (outside school).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.
coast:
:thankyou:
:goodpost:sunflower:
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.
Yes, I strongly agree (and 80% of parents think so too - link below).
http://www.kiasuparents.com/kiasu/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=35434&start=40coast:
I've mentioned in one of my earlier post but you might have missed out. It's just a general feel, from my DD1 who took PSLE 2 years' back, from talking to friends/neighbours and other parents and kaypo reading post PSLE extensive discussions in forums for the past 2 years.2 questions though:-
1) What do you mean by your past 2 years' observation? Students will not be able to remember ALL the questions AFTER the exam, so we will not know the % of 'challenging' questions in a PSLE paper.coast:
Kekeke, you have been very specific. I was just exaggerating to put my point across lah.2) No matter how difficult/easy a paper is, grades are moderated. Every year 40%++ will get A*/A for Eng, Math, Sci and 80%++ for Chi. So your point 'nearly the whole P6 cohort in Singapore will fail' will never happen.
-
Chenonceau:
That's the impression I get from reading the many kiasu parents’ posts in the forum.
My issue with the system is not access to university. Or who gets into IP or top schools.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. -
Chenonceau:
Wealth forms only part of the equation...
It translates into wealth. These people have the time to spare volunteering... and the money to afford the properties.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. -
Chenonceau:
I don't know why, but that's the impression I (or maybe some other parents as well?) got from your posts. That's why in one of my previous post, I've placed some parameters when deciding on the necessity of tuition, so that it doesn't sound so absolute.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?Chenonceau:
:? Now I REALLY wonder is it an isolated case of your child's school? Schools are supposed to have e-learning (online learning). The 2 neighbourhood primary schools that my children attend subscribe to online learning portal where they are assigned to do homework online and can access online learning materials such as some of what you've suggested above.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...
BTW, the learning portals that these 2 schools subscribe to are different, but provide similar resources. Moreover, I do hear of many other schools subscribing to similar type e-learning portals. Teachers also conduct dialogue sessions with parents to share online resources.
I seriously think there's something wrong. Pray tell the school, it'll help the children studying there. -
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
Guess now they've learnt their lessons? So they now need to take long long to decide before pushing out any changes.
-
Chenonceau:
:? Data?
Chenonceau,3Boys:
[quote=\"Chenonceau\"]
(2) There is no business in the world that does not depend on humans. EVEN in industries that rely heavily on robotics and equipment, the quality of service or products rely on humans. If MNCs can ensure consistency worldwide, what's so difficult about putting in processes to ensure consistency in Singapore schools? If restaurant chains (very dependent on humans) can ensure consistent quality from one end of Singapore to another... why is it impossible for schools to have a basic core consistency?
I would like to see data showing that MNCs have a higher level of internal consistency than MOE, or that MOE's level of, to quote, 'basic core consistency' is inadequate. Even if we were to have a core 'curriculum' or reference material available, who is to say that the private sector could not then do even better, but at much higher cost? Who could then access that? Private tuition already offers 1;1 teaching, should MOE look to replicate that then, so that the less well off are not disadvantaged? In the search for absolute equality, that is the logical end point, is it not?
Ummm... Ichiban Sushi serves the same menu whether in Toa Payoh or ...
Ummm... the design and quality of a Louis Vuitton bag whether you buy in China or in France?
Ummm... DHL sorting centres' service standards worldwide...
Ummm... McKinsey when serving a single global client in different locations needs to be mindful of the same terms of engagement... and draws from the same knowledge management database.[/quote]Hmm...I'm not so sure of that. I've heard of friends commenting that certain Sakae Sushi outlet serves better food as compared to some of its other outlets (in particular, a branch that they just would not go because the food tastes lousy). Or they would prefer to go to a certain Ajisan outlet because the food's better. Same menu throughout the chain, but seems that some chefs are better or worst than others.
A case in point: A friend actually commented on a noticeable difference in her favourite dish when the chef left a particular Ajisan outlet.
So I guess no absolutes in consistent quality (in this case, restaurant chain) after all.
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