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

[oxyleo]

sunflower:

Chenonceau:

[quote=\"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.

That's the impression I get from reading the many kiasu parents’ posts in the forum.[/quote]Hi Sunflower,

I do hope you will sign back on to this forum thread sometime, or at least, your friends or colleagues will. It is great to have this detailed level of discussion. I think it helps all of us refine our perspectives.

I think it will be impossible to expect parents or kids for that matter to spend a good 12 years of their lives, full-time (prior to Uni) slogging after academic paper excellence to say it doesn't really matter if they do not get into the better schools, IP, unis etc. Perhaps it is safe to say it will matter more to some and less to others. But it should matter. Otherwise they would have signed themselves out of the race, like I hear some have, by putting their children in International schools.

No doubt we have limited spaces in the best schools. It happens anywhere in the world. But the contention really is how these spaces are allocated. If they are allocated based on academic results that are in the first place reflective of one's true academic intelligence, I am pretty sure most would be accepting of the outcome. However, if many spaces are allocated based on academic results, that are to a very large extent supported by paid external classes or highly intelligent parents, I think the contention bears sufficient concern.

A lot of us probably know enough to expect and accept that \"guanxi\" and one's family background (wealth) plays a pivotal part in one's career path in life and in business. But I hope society keeps it at these parts of adult life, and not allow it to encroach into the public education space of mere primary school going children.

[oxyleo]

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]Well, it forms a Heavily Weighted part of the equation at the moment...

[oxyleo]

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.

Hahaha! Thanks Chen. I hope that doesn't make me like Moses Lim aka Tan Ah Teck in that comedy where he always goes \"A long, long, time ago... in the Southern Province in China...\" and everyone tries to scamper away. :celebrate: :celebrate:

[oxyleo]

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 We are only so because we not only attend school, but also extra lessons outside of school, through tuition and enrichment classes. So the \"We\" does not reflect just \"MOE\" alone, but rather \"MOE and its esteemed partners, the tuition and enrichment centers\"
(2) All schools are good Indeed, this one absolutely gets my goat. No doubt, a school is a school, only as a car is a car. But I wouldn't dare say a BMW is a CherryQ without risking stares of bewilderment! Ask any lady who loves handbags if a Hermes Birkin is an LV, or a Bonia bag. Seriously, they are all the same????
(3) PSLE standards have not gone up over the years Yes, only MOE knows the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, because it is highly guarded. We parents only see a small snapshot of it when our children take the PSLE exam.
(4) Textbooks are lousy because we have decentralized the curriculum We need regular reviews around this and the supporting worksheets that schools need as a result of this.
(5) Parents are to blame for the tuition phenomenon Parents have bought into the need for tuition. But they are not Masters of their own destiny. We are all interlinked in this system.
(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?

Indeed, I agree with Chen. Please see my add-ons in blue.

[oxyleo]

Whatever MOE eventually deems fit as a next step, I can only hope it does not result in shoving more work down the throats of teachers.


I wish to reiterate that from my experience with teachers, I am touched by many for their humility, energy and dedication. They are stuck between a rock and a hard place because they are the first point of contact with children and parents, and are also on the payroll of the MOE, making MOE their boss. Teachers therefore pretty much need to try to adapt to feedback from parents, children’s learning styles and problems, and react to new policies rolled out by the MOE. In other words, they implement and deliver, whatever someone up the food chain researches and gets approved. They need to go for professional training, monitor CCAs, mark daily work, attend meetings, conduct zonal workshops etc. Somewhere along the way, someone up the food chain has forgotten these teachers have families, have older folks and younger ones to take care of too at home, and that the amount of work they are asked to do assumes they have more than 12 work hours a day.

In the Corporate World, the attrition rate of staff typically boils down to several things: Pay, incentives, work culture etc. I believe MOE has tried to tweak salaries and offered better advancement for high performing teachers. That is good. But in the Corporate World, a team leader or boss is typically also assessed on how well he/ she can retain their staff. If members of a team are leaving at alarming rates, it does beg the question as to how well-aligned team leader and team member are in terms of what they are expected to deliver and how well they can deliver it.

I hope MOE can reflect upon this, and realize that if a teacher does not seem to deliver what you have asked him/her to do, the solution may not just be to keep sending him/ her for training. It may not even be something doable to begin with.

Revisiting the drawing board about its policies should not be viewed as a sign of weakness on the part of MOE. If anything, I see it as a sign of great strength and humility, which are important principles in Public Service. MOE will gain more supporters and respect during the course.

[Chenonceau]

oxyleo:

Whatever MOE eventually deems fit as a next step, I can only hope it does not result in shoving more work down the throats of teachers.


I wish to reiterate that from my experience with teachers, I am touched by many for their humility, energy and dedication. They are stuck between a rock and a hard place because they are the first point of contact with children and parents, and are also on the payroll of the MOE, making MOE their boss. Teachers therefore pretty much need to try to adapt to feedback from parents, children's learning styles and problems, and react to new policies rolled out by the MOE. In other words, they implement and deliver, whatever someone up the food chain researches and gets approved. They need to go for professional training, monitor CCAs, mark daily work, attend meetings, conduct zonal workshops etc. Somewhere along the way, someone up the food chain has forgotten these teachers have families, have older folks and younger ones to take care of too at home, and that the amount of work they are asked to do assumes they have more than 12 work hours a day.

In the Corporate World, the attrition rate of staff typically boils down to several things: Pay, incentives, work culture etc. I believe MOE has tried to tweak salaries and offered better advancement for high performing teachers. That is good. But in the Corporate World, a team leader or boss is typically also assessed on how well he/ she can retain their staff. If members of a team are leaving at alarming rates, it does beg the question as to how well-aligned team leader and team member are in terms of what they are expected to deliver and how well they can deliver it.

I hope MOE can reflect upon this, and realize that if a teacher does not seem to deliver what you have asked him/her to do, the solution may not just be to keep sending him/ her for training. It may not even be something doable to begin with.

Revisiting the drawing board about its policies should not be viewed as a sign of weakness on the part of MOE. If anything, I see it as a sign of great strength and humility, which are important principles in Public Service. MOE will gain more supporters and respect during the course.

:goodpost:

Yes. MOE... reach out and help us. We need you.

[Chenonceau]

sunflower:

Chenonceau:

[quote=\"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. [/quote]
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/player/p00s473l

This link snapshots the state of the art thinking on whether or not to give monetary incentives for character development. It seems MOE did not take long enough to consider this properly. So, I dunno what is taking them so long to consider the case for better textbooks and an online teacher database...

[Intermezzo]

Chenonceau:

Yes. MOE... reach out and help us. We need you.

:hugs:
All the best ~

[Chenonceau]

Intermezzo:

Chenonceau:

Yes. MOE... reach out and help us. We need you.

:hugs:
All the best ~

:love:

[coast]

oxyleo:

coast:

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.

Hi oxyleo,

I have seen quite a number of your posts. I agree with most of your views and am really glad to see you on board here. :rahrah: Btw, our kids are both in P2.

I doubt that MOE will use moderated grades (A*, A, …) of the candidates to justify this case. To me, moderated grades are like quotas for IP, Express, NA, NT, … etc where unless there are major changes (which would be announced and likely debated in Parliament), the % is more or less the same each year. For PSLE, it has been 40++ % for A*/A for Eng, Maths and Sci & 80++% A*/A for Chi these few years.

I just found this SEAB reply from the internet:-

We appreciate the concerns of parents and would like to take this
opportunity to explain that the Singapore Examinations and Assessment
Board (SEAB) has in place a careful and rigorous process to ensure that
PSLE papers have an appropriate balance of easier and more difficult
questions, and are comparable in standard to those of previous years.

The panel responsible for developing the Mathematics paper
comprises experienced school teachers, subject specialists from the Ministry
Of Education and assessment specialists from SEAB. The panel members
are well-versed with the Mathematics syllabus and with what students of
different abilities can do.

You can read more from the link below

http://www.seab.gov.sg/publicCommunications/mediaReplies/PSLE_TODAY_Forum_Reply_20071015.pdf

I believe SEAB's stand remains the same even though the above article is dated 2007. But what I do not understand is … since SEAB has a careful and rigorous process to ensure that PSLE papers have an appropriate balance of easier and more difficult
questions, and are comparable in standard to those of previous years …

WHY NOT publish the EXACT PSLE past years’ papers? If there is any reason that the papers cannot be published, then at least explain the rationale of that decision to important stakeholders like parents.

http://www.kiasuparents.com/kiasu/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=35434