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

[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

[coast]

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:

Hi sunflower,

Thank you for responding to my earlier post.

I agree with ALL your 4 points on pg 41.

With MOE's silence on many issues raised, even those from the national newspapers, I have lowered my expectations and just hope that they can introduce some simple measures like publishing the EXACT PSLE past years' papers and enforcing quality teaching materials across all schools/ classes.

Really appreciate your efforts. I have certainly gained from your posts here. Hope to see you here again soon

[oxyleo]

coast:

oxyleo:

[quote=\"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[/quote]Thanks Coast. I've enjoyed reading your posts too.

Thanks for posting the link to the SEAB thread. Very insightful indeed.

I'm really not sure why SEAB has not taken the step to publish its papers. My guess is it could really be to safeguard their knowledge intelligence, perhaps because they are trying to promote our testing standards at Pri 6 level to other countries. You will note that we have the 10 yr series for GCE 'O' levels and 'A' Levels available at bookstores, but this is likely made available only because it is a testing standard that many countries have agreed to adopt at those levels.

Will be happy to hear your thoughts on this.

As for the reply from SEAB about the panel of experts they assemble, and the quality of the paper, comprising of Easy, Average and Difficult, a few interesting questions come to mind:

(1)(a) Would you know if SEAB imposes a T&C on its panel experts involved in the paper setting that anyone leaving the post is required to fulfill an appropriate number of years of gardening leave from the education industry, and is disallowed to take up any role in the private education industry, such as joining or setting up enrichment centers to profit from his/her expertise? I hope any research on this shows such T&C exists.

(b) I also noted that the letter states that some school teachers are involved in the paper setting. I wonder if any transparency on the school teachers involved would help, so that we can ensure a more arms-length approach in how these school teachers are involved with the P6 cohort in their schools. If we see a trend in certain school teachers from certain schools being involved repeatedly, and their schools repeatedly trump the exams, it should warrant an appropriate authority figure looking into the matter.

(2) If we assume that the proportion of Easy, Average and Difficult questions are still maintained year after year, and standards in eacg category are also maintained year after year, I can only imagine that everyone gets the easy right, most get the Average right, and more people each year compared to the previous year are getting the Difficult questions right. If this is so, and SEAB needs to maintain the %tage of kids scoring A*'s and A's, indeed some who thought they scored sufficiently to make the A* or A may fall through the cracks, because SEAB may be hair-splitting papers by decimal places? like 91.9 vs 91.1 that sort of thing?

Again, I must emphasize this is a pure guess. If you know of any information on this, I'll be happy to hear about it.

[Chenonceau]

sunflower:

Have you thought that the many PMs you received might just come from individuals from the 30 or so more popular schools as compared to a nation of 180, which may be a misrepresentation of the real situation?

If you are from MOE, then this MAY be wishful thinking on your part. Of course, I am not sure. I've met many parents from KSP. Almost all support the call for better textbooks and a teacher database... more than half of these parents have kids in neighbourhood schools.

Indeed, my electrician has 4 kids. 1 is taking PSLE this year. He explained to me that he doesn't expect his son to do very well at PSLE but he doesn't blame his son. He said \"I don't have time to teach my son myself and I cannot afford expensive tuition. So, my son won't be very good. But it's ok lah... We must accept that.\"

No doubt, the man fits the bill of the IDEAL parent in the eyes of MOE - bochap, un-kiasu and compliant. Still, the man has noted that his child cannot be successful because neither parent can afford the time to teach... nor the money to buy good quality tuition... which says something about the quality schools are providing.

[Lilac66]

For children of the lower income group who may not be able to cope without some form of tuition, they can try the CDAC. Not too sure about how good the tutors are though, but nevertheless, it's still some form of help..


http://www.cdac.org.sg/eng/programmes/tuition/student.htm

[Chenonceau]

Lilac66:

For children of the lower income group who may not be able to cope without some form of tuition, they can try the CDAC. Not too sure about how good the tutors are though, but nevertheless, it's still some form of help..


http://www.cdac.org.sg/eng/programmes/tuition/student.htm

That's where my electrician's child goes for tuition.