Real reason behind Singapore’s obsession with tuition
-
hokkiengirl:
It's not easy to home-school a child. But if I have reliable teachers for 4 subjects, I will do that.
Very valid point!!! Thanks for bringing this up. I think I will also need to prepare myself to take a stand if the hours spent in school are actually not helping my kids. I think takes great courage and knowledge of your own kid to take this step. Good for you!beanbear:
When my DS spent LESS time at school this year, his grades went UP. So my learning has been, ATTEND LESS SCHOOL, LEARN MORE.
The first 'brave' move I made was to keep my son away from suppl classes this year. No point staying another 3 hours after a long day in school. Come back to bathe, take proper lunch, rest and have customized tuition in the comfort of own home. -
cherryc:
verykiasu2010:
[quote=\"cherryc\"]Yah! Just Teach well, learn well. And kids can play well, sleep well and turn out well.
even so, there will still be kids who play in class and not pay attention and never notice what has been taught, and the parents will still say testing beyond scope, testing what was not taught
We were taught well in the past, that's why we are where we are today right ? Teach well better than teach less or anyhow teach ??[/quote]sure, of course -
We attended school, did homework daily and survived it all. Of course, parents have to monitor kids’ school work. Teachers themselves went to school and know what it was like right? Couldn’t this repeat for our kids?
I repeat, when our school system is teaching adequate and quality stuff, we will depend less on tutors. Btw, I have nothing against tutors. I love them. -
verykiasu2010:
哇塞! this is exactly what i feel is the case for most kids. Trust you to be the one who DARE say it.cherryc:
Yah! Just Teach well, learn well. And kids can play well, sleep well and turn out well.
even so, there will still be kids who play in class and not pay attention and never notice what has been taught, and the parents will still say testing beyond scope, testing what was not taught
People like to talk and air our views, but really.. we are not so good when it comes to listening.
In fact, studies on listening skills indicate that typical adults only listen to between 30 to 50% of what is being said.
so how about the kids? can't be anywhere near 100%, right?
actually both my kids tried it on me before, saying that \"teacher didn't teach.. so dunno how to do..\"
i just tell them nicely, Maybe she did teach, but you weren't paying attention at that time?
and there's no way they could dispute that.. because they KNOW there IS no way they could have been paying 100% attention... :rotflmao:
but of cos i soften the blow by saying they can easily learn on their own to cover what they didn't get taught. -
verykiasu2010:
actually i very much wonder where would Jtoh fit in..? because i'm pretty sure she doesn't fall into any of these groups above...
then all parents and kids become Apple products : iDiotjtoh:
Group 1 and Group 3 parents will go for even more IQ tests and enrichment classes because if they wait until O levels and don't do well there, how? No PSLE certificate to fall back on!!! Only Kindergarten graduation photo!! Cannot!! How can their precious children's future be dependent on just the O level exams?? What if they don't do well??? Must go actively in search of some interim certification ala iPSLE exam. Then some clever iTLL centre will set up interim certification exams and all these parents will flock there. :faint:
-
coast:
...So either the forum writer made a mistake (but SEAB did not find it necessary to correct her mistake in its reply?) or SEAB implied that it is possible (which will be very confusing unless PSLE subject grade is itself bell-curved).
I do believe that the raw scores are \"bell-curved\" adjusted. This is necessary because if we analyse T-score formula, we will find that the conversion factor from raw score is dependent on the raw score itself.
For example, with SD = 11 and mean = 75, the conversion factor is 0.73 for 100 marks but -0.91 for 10 marks. With SD = 13 and mean = 60, the conversion factor is 0.81 for 100 marks to 1.15 for 10 marks.
For certain combination of SD and mean, the conversion factor is independent of the raw score, example when when mean = 65 and SD = 13 or mean = 70 and SD =14...
So I guess the curve need to be adjusted for the ranking method to be fairer.coast:
I fully agree with you.Just to point out though (or am I wrong?):-
1) High likelihood that Mean of Maths is < 77 since 40%++ scored A*/A each year
2) High likelihood that Mean of Chinese is > 77 since 80%++ scored A*/A each year -
Intermezzo:
哇塞! this is exactly what i feel is the case for most kids. Trust you to be the one who DARE say it.verykiasu2010:
[quote=\"cherryc\"]Yah! Just Teach well, learn well. And kids can play well, sleep well and turn out well.
even so, there will still be kids who play in class and not pay attention and never notice what has been taught, and the parents will still say testing beyond scope, testing what was not taught
People like to talk and air our views, but really.. we are not so good when it comes to listening.
In fact, studies on listening skills indicate that typical adults only listen to between 30 to 50% of what is being said.
so how about the kids? can't be anywhere near 100%, right?
actually both my kids tried it on me before, saying that \"teacher didn't teach.. so dunno how to do..\"
i just tell them nicely, Maybe she did teach, but you weren't paying attention at that time?
and there's no way they could dispute that.. because they KNOW there IS no way they could have been paying 100% attention... :rotflmao:
but of cos i soften the blow by saying they can easily learn on their own to cover what they didn't get taught.[/quote]This point was made before by VKS2010 12 months or so ago. And it was convincing. Fine... the Teacher may have taught, but did the kids HEAR. To me, it sounds like an excuse to make a bad situation look halfway good. But well... let us give the teachers the benefit of the doubt, shall we?
This is why I suggested the following...
Have better textbooks... or other erstwhile written resources (notes, online resources) so kids can cover the material on their own. But then of course, people have a whole host of reasons why textbooks are lousy... and why kids of 7, 8 or 9 are expected to ...
(1) realise that they need to do library search à la IP student in secondary school
(2) traipse off to the library all by themselves (if their parents are both working)
When DD flunked out in Sec 1, I said that there was no excuse. Even if Teachers don't teach, she was old enough to dig into the library and buy books on Amazon. Sorry, still no tuition for you. But primary school?
At the very least, provide a biblio referencing material that is available in the school library... or on the school intranet (providing access to terminals within the school library for kids who have no laptops at home) so that these kids who listen but don't hear can study on their own.
Next, why should we give the Teachers this benefit of the doubt? There is equal possiblity that the material WAS NOT taught. What is taught should reflect in homework right? Or does the system expect all our kids to be like GEP ones (or kids with eidetic memory) - can retain and ONE glance. So when all my DS gets is EASY workbook homework and his exams are more difficult than NYPS', then what are we supposed to conclude - that his Teacher surely DID teach and so I punisn my son for NOT listening. OR do I consider the possiblity (which I know is true because TWO Teachers confirmed that exams test beyond - (1) one said \"The bright ones naturally know. (2) the other said \"We do that because the PSLE also tests what we have not taught. My son went through that too.\").
Like I said, I am happy that people like Intermezzo and VKS2010 have been able to easily bridge the holes in the system that others cannot easily bridge. What I don't understand is why you would prevent parents in pain from seeking recourse by...
(1) blaming them
(2) making excuses for Teachers (they taught but your kid did not listen)
(3) making excuses for the system (they have constraints)
It's like water supply. Let's suppose that water supply in Singapore delivered poor quality water to some parts of town. In your part of town, water is clean and comes of the tap consistently. Why would you point at others in another part of town that DOESN'T get clean water off the tap and say...
(1) it's your fault - the water is clean but you think it's dirty. It's your mindset.
(2) the water that came through was clean. You dirtied it.
(3) the system that delivers water has constraints
(4) dirty water? Help yourself lor.... set up your own water purifier.
Believe me... when I write this post, I am quite as worried of getting slammed by people who write \"sian\" or by a raging bear. It's no fun to be doing what I am doing. Yet, there is a reality out there that I am seeing. In the long term, it is not good for our country. So I speak out. First, in private. Next, here. I am glad that there are others (independent of me) who also see that... and care enough to speak out.
We're not trying to blast the system for the sake of blasting. There are issue to address. When we say Teachers don't teach, then you say they did but kids didn't listen. So fine... study on your own. Using what? Textbooks?
I suppose it is to be expected that people live different lives and have different experiences. So you don't agree with our stories of pain. I don't blame you. Nonetheless, Singapore belongs to all of us (to those who get clean/good water/education... and to those who don't) and I envisage our future here. DD, with 8 distinctions at 'A' levels, chose NUS. This is home.
As such, we do what we can to help our country improve. I'm sorry if it offends your sense of contentedness.
Any robust system should have contingencies. Hospitals have back-up electricity in case of power outage. In the past, teachers taught but those who fell ill or had CCA, relied on textbooks. Textbooks were the back-up.... the contingency mode for delivering knowledge. Today, the textbooks are so lousy that if ...
(1) Teachers don't teach
(2) Students fail to hear
There is no contingency system to deliver knowledge except...
(1) guidebooks parents have to source and buy
(2) internet resources parents have to help source for
(3) tutor materials
(4) tutors -
Chenonceau:
:hi5: Chenonceau ( :offtopic: want to have some chwee kueh for breakfast? :evil: ).
This is why I suggested the following...
Have better textbooks... or other erstwhile written resources (notes, online resources) so kids can cover the material on their own. But then of course, people have a whole host of reasons why textbooks are lousy... and why kids of 7, 8 or 9 are expected to ...
(1) realise that they need to do library search à la IP student in secondary school
(2) traipse off to the library all by themselves (if their parents are both working)
I don't understand (or maybe I am very slow and ignorant :lightrod: ) -- there are errors on the textbook, especially the Chinese Language textbook and yet the cover said it is approved for use till 20xx year. Then as you think that they will change the content inside the book, you will find that the mistakes are still there but just that the cover page change the approval of use till year 20xx year! :faint:
I remembered checking with my DD1 CL T 3 years ago when she was in P1 regarding the errors and then now 3 years later, I am doing the same again!
-
Champion:
Chwee kueh... hmmmmmm... haven't had breakfast yet!! Are you having chwee kueh?
:hi5: Chenonceau ( :offtopic: want to have some chwee kueh for breakfast? :evil: ).Chenonceau:
This is why I suggested the following...
Have better textbooks... or other erstwhile written resources (notes, online resources) so kids can cover the material on their own. But then of course, people have a whole host of reasons why textbooks are lousy... and why kids of 7, 8 or 9 are expected to ...
(1) realise that they need to do library search à la IP student in secondary school
(2) traipse off to the library all by themselves (if their parents are both working)
I don't understand (or maybe I am very slow and ignorant :lightrod: ) -- there are errors on the textbook, especially the Chinese Language textbook and yet the cover said it is approved for use till 20xx year. Then as you think that they will change the content inside the book, you will find that the mistakes are still there but just that the cover page change the approval of use till year 20xx year! :faint:
I remembered checking with my DD1 CL T 3 years ago when she was in P1 regarding the errors and then now 3 years later, I am doing the same again! -
Intermezzo:
哇塞! this is exactly what i feel is the case for most kids. Trust you to be the one who DARE say it.verykiasu2010:
[quote=\"cherryc\"]Yah! Just Teach well, learn well. And kids can play well, sleep well and turn out well.
even so, there will still be kids who play in class and not pay attention and never notice what has been taught, and the parents will still say testing beyond scope, testing what was not taught
People like to talk and air our views, but really.. we are not so good when it comes to listening.
In fact, studies on listening skills indicate that typical adults only listen to between 30 to 50% of what is being said.
so how about the kids? can't be anywhere near 100%, right?
actually both my kids tried it on me before, saying that \"teacher didn't teach.. so dunno how to do..\"
i just tell them nicely, Maybe she did teach, but you weren't paying attention at that time?
and there's no way they could dispute that.. because they KNOW there IS no way they could have been paying 100% attention... :rotflmao:
but of cos i soften the blow by saying they can easily learn on their own to cover what they didn't get taught.[/quote]we happen to know quite a number of parents whose kids were in the same level / same class as my kids when they were in pri school. while waiting for them to complete the competition, we parents talked for hours.
the interesting discovery was that many parents complained about topics not taught and got tested. we asked our own kids whether it was true. my DS could even quote the date the topic was taught and he could pull out his own notes made on that day in class, and the worksheet given ...... yes my DS has a reputation of making notes and compilation of teachers' notes. (only discovered about his reputation recently).
at the end of the year, he lent his complete file to the teacher for comparison of completeness
of course we never say their kids did not pay attention lah, may be the teacher was not loud enough, only front row students could hear ?
but this is only anecdote from one school. my kids did not attend other pri schools so cannot comment on others
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
Online Users
Statistics
Popular Topics
