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

[Chenonceau]

sunflower:

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.

Yes... I have experienced that Sakae Sushi has patchy quality and that's why I haven't stepped in there for years. Some chains are more incompetent than others. Why point to the incompetent ones and use them as a model for our MOE?

These restaurants would acknowledge something is very wrong when such inconsistent quality is pointed out. They wouldn't maintain that customers must suck it up because they don't want to micro-manage their outlets. To tackle the issue of consistency, Aji-Sen ramen (and many restaurants) work from a central kitchen. Aji-Sen ramen's soup stock comes out of a sachet that is claimed to be put together in Japan. Chefs are taught how much water to add.

Aji-Sen ramen doesn't try to push everything down to their chefs in the same way MOE pushes everything down to the schools... and their Teachers. Parts of the process that can be centralised is done so as to temper the effects of human inconsistency. Aji-Sen ramen does not expect it's chefs to make soup stock from zero... in the way MOE expects its teachers to write teaching materials.

In addition, I would reckon Sakae Sushi pays a price in reduced earnings. No one collects less tax from me when MOE delivers patchy quality. I would presume that Sakae Sushi also sacks people who are responsible for patchy quality? I don't see any accounting at MOE at present.

Not that I am asking for heads to roll. I am not vindictive. But at least an acknowledgement from MOE that something is wrong... not pat press statements denying, pointing fingers at parents... and claiming world class standards - you would think world class standards would deliver better consistency.

sunflower:

So I guess no absolutes in consistent quality (in this case, restaurant chain) after all.

Again... absolutes are hard to defend. No one is talking about absolute consistency. One would have to be naive to do that. In the case of our MOE, even the menu is different from school to school.

[Chenonceau]

sunflower:

Chenonceau:

[quote=\"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.

Wealth forms only part of the equation...[/quote]Other parents in other schools are just as kiasu... they just have no money to fund it.

[Chenonceau]

sunflower:

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.

Having more comprehensive textbooks and online resources for students (that reach beyond the basics to REAL MEATY content) will help. If the school has decided to test beyond what it taught, it is a clearly unethical practice designed to SCARE parents into getting tuition... and then to have tutors help the school achieve school results.

So, when something unethical goes on in a school, MOE can say \"It's the school's strategy and we don't want to micromanage\"? When a crime takes place in a 3-room HDB flat in Singapore, the government can say \"It's the family's problem and we don't want to micromanage?\"

Then what is a government for? The society would degenerate into a free for all. Perhaps the degree of decentralization in power within MOE has got to the point of a free for all?

And there are ways to do this without micromanaging. Giving textbooks that document what teachers don't teach but do test... is one.

coast:

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.

:goodpost:

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

My son's CA1 this year was MORE difficult that NYPS' SA1 last year. I don't need the top school papers to panic.

[Chenonceau]

sunflower:

:? 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.

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.

My DS has online resources too. They are very very simple. As simple as the textbook. I have told the school. The response from the Teacher was twofold
(1) The school must maintain high standards
(2) The PSLE also tests what we don't teach

[Chenonceau]

phtthp:

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

Thank you phtthp... :snuggles:

[Chenonceau]

tutormum:

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.\"

:thankyou:

Yes... this was my experience too. The teaching is very very traditional and misapplies a syllabus that needs vastly more effective techniques. Again, tutormum's experience as a tutor demonstrates that it is MORE than ONE isolated school that teaches inefficiently and ineffectively... and uses HARD tests as a way to SCARE parents into co-opting an army of tutors to help the school meet KPIs.

[Chenonceau]

sunflower:

Guess now they've learnt their lessons? So they now need to take long long to decide before pushing out any changes.

It's ok to take time to consider. Meanwhile, communicate that this is happening. Do not communicate...
(1) We are world class
(2) All schools are good
(3) PSLE standards have not gone up over the years
(4) Textbooks are lousy because we have decentralized the curriculum
(5) Parents are to blame for the tuition phenomenon
(6) Parents expect more of MOE than it can deliver

It's ok to take time to consider. But do you know, from what they've been telling us that they're considering our feedback or are they just busy defending themselves and their past decisions?

[Chenonceau]

sunflower:

I’ve basically poured out my views on pg 41 regarding the education system in Singapore. I’m actually hoping for a complete overhaul to the whole education system, which includes teacher training and recruitment.


I’m not looking for measures for MOE to adopt so as to make the current education system works.

I’ve said my piece and would probably have no more time to engage in further discussions.

All the best to Chenonceau on your mission and I wish you well.

Cheers!

:celebrate:

You've written holistically and well. You've reminded me that I have perhaps overemphasized some aspects. I would heartily support you in your call for an overhaul even though I think it is too much to expect from an MOE in denial.

In the main, I agree with much of what you wrote on pg 41. :celebrate:

It takes a long time to train teachers and help them amass enough experience. Meanwhile, provide better textbooks (to help motivated students learn) and an online Teacher database (to support teachers). The following was documented in MOE's website...http://www.moe.gov.sg/media/press/2009/07/inaugural-international-educat.php

For good teachers to deliver quality teaching, they would need the support of a nurturing school environment, high-quality curricular materials, and access to community resources. Emphasis should be placed on continuous professional development, as in the case of Sweden and Australia (Victoria), and fostering a culture of learning and collaboration among educators, as seen in Japan. The fraternity of educators should evolve a consensus around good professional practice. Professionalising the teaching force and resourcing this well would build pride in the profession and enhance job satisfaction”

Our poor teachers have to write all their own teaching materials because the textbooks are so lousy. This is not access to high-quality curricular materials. Our poor Teachers evolve in a KPI-driven individual bonus culture that encourages competition. This is not a culture of learning and collaboration.

[oxyleo]

coast:

phtthp:

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

I think MOE's stand is that the level of difficulty has not increased over the years for PSLE and NOT school exams.

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

Hi Coast,

The question of PSLE standards is indeed a complex one to answer.

This is really my guess only, until such time that we can ever get anything more detailed from MOE -
MOE's claim that PSLE standards has not risen is based on the output of the candidates i.e. the PSLE results. If results are consistent year after year, number of A*'s, A's, B's etc, they can say there is no conclusive evidence to show that standards have risen relative to the standards of the children taking the exam.

Think of PSLE akin to a beauty contest. 20 years ago, contestant of Miss Universe would mostly have strutted the stage in their mostly natural form. And judges would have judged them based on the same set of criteria. Poise, Vital statistics, How they answer questions etc.

Imagine it now today, same beauty contest, same criteria, same judgement on poise, vital statistics, How they answer questions etc. Only difference is now, the contestants are allowed to participate even if they have had cosmetic surgery (in a sense like what extra \"enrichment\" class seek to do) before. One can only imagine how standards of the contestants would have risen. If one is allowed to do it, again it is unlikely most, if not all will start to do it.

When we ask the pageant organizers if standards of judging have gone up, they will likely say No. Same criteria, same structure of contest, i.e. bikini round, evening gown round, question and answer round etc. There is still only one crowned Ms Universe, one 1st runner-up and one 2nd runner-up. Technically, they are not wrong to say No, but they forgot that they did \"allow\" the situation where cosmetic surgery is now allowed, thereby artificially increasing the standards overall for everyone.

[Chenonceau]

oxyleo:

This is really my guess only, until such time that we can ever get anything more detailed from MOE -
MOE's claim that PSLE standards has not risen is based on the output of the candidates i.e. the PSLE results. If results are consistent year after year, number of A*'s, A's, B's etc, they can say there is no conclusive evidence to show that standards have risen relative to the standards of the children taking the exam.

Think of PSLE akin to a beauty contest. 20 years ago, contestant of Miss Universe would mostly have strutted the stage in their mostly natural form. And judges would have judged them based on the same set of criteria. Poise, Vital statistics, How they answer questions etc.

Imagine it now today, same beauty contest, same criteria, same judgement on poise, vital statistics, How they answer questions etc. Only difference is now, the contestants are allowed to participate even if they have had cosmetic surgery (in a sense like what extra \"enrichment\" class seek to do) before. One can only imagine how standards of the contestants would have risen. If one is allowed to do it, again it is unlikely most, if not all will start to do it.

When we ask the pageant organizers if standards of judging have gone up, they will likely say No. Same criteria, same structure of contest, i.e. bikini round, evening gown round, question and answer round etc. Technically, they are not wrong to say No, but they forgot that they did \"allow\" the situation where cosmetic surgery is now allowed, thereby artificially increasing the standards overall for everyone.

You have a talent for insightful analogies. This is an amazing one.