Real reason behind Singapore’s obsession with tuition

[limlim]

jedamum:

limlim:

[quote=\"ksi\"]
Tuition is a must-have to solve a known problem. Enrichment solves future problems which may or may not exist but people still want to do it.

If tuition is a must have, wouldn't it be better if it is administered by the schools?

The school can engage professionals to coach the \"identified\" kids..

:goodpost:
but then wont schs indirectly admit that their teachers are not 'professionals'? :? [/quote]If 90% of their students need tuition.... you say leh..? can they be consider professionals in this case..? :evil: :evil:

If <1% needs additional help, it clearly shows that it is isolated cases and not a reflection of the teacher's inability..

If the teachers can manage.. they can administer the tuition themselves..

If they do not want to overload the teachers.. can consider engaging outside help.... in which case, of coz, the tutors are vetted carefully.

[corneyAmber]

Funz:

Hmmm.. let me recall about the compo.


I know they do get back their compos both Chinese and English, that they do in class. With corrections and all. They are given the good compos written by their friends as reference as well.

For SA1, the compo was not returned. DD was absent for that period as well but according to her the class got to see their compos but had to return them to the teachers after the teachers have given them pointers.

Yes that is the practice that we have as well. (Cat 2)

[verykiasu2010]

firefly38:

verykiasu2010:

[quote=\"janet_lee88\"]I am disappointed, very disappointed that such vital info cannot be revealed.

Was told that heads will roll if compo marks are told.

I am very skeptical

Was told by who? If you don't mind sharing, jan..

In my DS' previous school ( a neighbourhood sch) as well as his current school (a GEP sch), teachers return ALL exam papers and go through the answers with the pupils in class. Pupils check through the papers and approach the teachers, should there be any erros in marking (yes, there are errors in marking, sometimes). Pupils then bring the exam papers home for parents to look through and sign. There is a Cover Page (for every subject) to show the breakdown of every single component (eg. Oral, LC, Compo, every section of Paper 2, and Total). After parents look through and sign, pupils bring the exam papers back to class the next day. Teachers collect the exam papers back for final computation of marks. After the marks of all subjects have been finalised and computed in the Report Books, the exam papers are returned to the pupils for filing, and the files are kept at home for revision..

With the exception of DS1's P4-P6 Social Studies GEP exam papers.. I have, in my home now, all the exam papers of all the subjects for both my DSs.[/quote]that is what we had. got to sign and acknowledge the marks for every test and assignment, and for compo, there is always a re-write of the whole compo based on the necessary corrections and teachers would still mark it to make sure corrections are correct.

I can also say most of the schools are practising the above as firefly38 has described :evil: (based on those I know)

[verykiasu2010]

limlim:

If 90% of their students need tuition.... you say leh..? can they be consider professionals in this case..? :evil: :evil:

If <1% needs additional help, it clearly shows that it is isolated cases and not a reflection of the teacher's inability..

If the teachers can manage.. they can administer the tuition themselves..

If they do not want to overload the teachers.. can consider engaging outside help.... in which case, of coz, the tutors are vetted carefully.

the 90% need tuition has no basis

you can disagree with me

[verykiasu2010]

ksi:

I agree with you, the category of 'enrichment' kids are the one who do not need but still want to go for other reasons and they have the option to stop any time if they want. Are they being included into this \"tuition\" nation? I hope not, they should be excluded because theirs is a good-to-hv case.

for some, the \"need\" is to pull up from the F grade

for some, the \"need\" is to ensure don't drop below A*, and even for A*, its must be a high A*

one man's meat is another's poison

neither is Singapore unique ..... enrichment and tuitions are prevalent in Malaysia, China, Taiwan, HK, Korea, and isolated cases in France and US generally described in 'hothousing' instead of calling it enrichment

[corneyAmber]

verykiasu2010:

firefly38:

I am very skeptical

Was told by who? If you don't mind sharing, jan..

In my DS' previous school ( a neighbourhood sch) as well as his current school (a GEP sch), teachers return ALL exam papers and go through the answers with the pupils in class. Pupils check through the papers and approach the teachers, should there be any erros in marking (yes, there are errors in marking, sometimes). Pupils then bring the exam papers home for parents to look through and sign. There is a Cover Page (for every subject) to show the breakdown of every single component (eg. Oral, LC, Compo, every section of Paper 2, and Total). After parents look through and sign, pupils bring the exam papers back to class the next day. Teachers collect the exam papers back for final computation of marks. After the marks of all subjects have been finalised and computed in the Report Books, the exam papers are returned to the pupils for filing, and the files are kept at home for revision..

With the exception of DS1's P4-P6 Social Studies GEP exam papers.. I have, in my home now, all the exam papers of all the subjects for both my DSs.

that is what we had. got to sign and acknowledge the marks for every test and assignment, and for compo, there is always a re-write of the whole compo based on the necessary corrections and teachers would still mark it to make sure corrections are correct.

I can also say most of the schools are practising the above as firefly38 has described :evil: (based on those I know)

Ours return all exam papers except compos & LC only but the kids still get to view those papers not returned.

[corneyAmber]

verykiasu2010:

ksi:

I agree with you, the category of 'enrichment' kids are the one who do not need but still want to go for other reasons and they have the option to stop any time if they want. Are they being included into this \"tuition\" nation? I hope not, they should be excluded because theirs is a good-to-hv case.

for some, the \"need\" is to pull up from the F grade

for some, the \"need\" is to ensure don't drop below A*, and even for A*, its must be a high A*

one man's meat is another's poison

neither is Singapore unique ..... enrichment and tuitions are prevalent in Malaysia, China, Taiwan, HK, Korea, and isolated cases in France and US generally described in 'hothousing' instead of calling it enrichment

That is because in France and US they home school the kids on the enrichment which is also found here in SG practised by some families who claimed no enrichment and tuition for their kids. In any case, I have no issue about enrichment, hothousing, whatsoever people want to do to help their children improve their grades from A to A* or maintain A*. As Schweppes put it aptly, people just want to fight for the limited resources to have a better life called survival, enrich all they want but that is not tuition because they can already make the baseline mark to suggest competency in a subject.

So if we mix up needs and wants, how is MOE going to respond to that?

[verykiasu2010]

ksi:

That is because in France and US they home school the kids on the enrichment which is also found here in SG practised by some families who claimed no enrichment and tuition for their kids.

errr, I was actually referring to those who engage professors to specially tutor the kids .... for those US and French people (people I happen to know)

ksi:

In any case, I have no issue about enrichment, hothousing, whatsoever people want to do to help their children improve their grades from A to A* or maintain A*. As Schweppes put it aptly, people just want to fight for the limited resources to have a better life called survival, enrich all they want but that is not tuition because they can already make the baseline mark to suggest competency in a subject.

So if we mix up needs and wants, how is MOE going to respond to that?

that is why it is misleading to just hang on to the unsubstantiated handle \"90% need tuition\"...... and everyone jumping into the band-wagon to bash schools and teachers and MOE as if all the blames are on them.....and people got offended when pointed out that some of the issues have the parents themselves to blame. (note : no specific reference to anyone)

[schweppes]

verykiasu2010:

for some, the \"need\" is to pull up from the F grade

for some, the \"need\" is to ensure don't drop below A*, and even for A*, its must be a high A*

one man's meat is another's poison

if I may just tweak your example slightly, it should be the \"need\" to pull up from an F grade and the \"want\" to ensure that marks don't drop below A*
(vk, :please: please don't throw male cow dung my way, hor :siam: :please: :please: )


Going by Philip Kotler's (Marketing 101 guru), his definition is as such:

Needs - a state of self deprivation
This refers to basic needs, such as physical needs for food, warmth, safety, social needs for belonging and affection and individual needs for knowledge and self-expression.

This is where basic education comes in. When students are failing or getting borderline pass, parents see an urgent need to help the child to pass. Does not matter whether the child is a gifted, bright or a weak student, all parents, including the child himself, knows that he needs to pass his studies. That's the basic requirement.


Wants - the form taken by a human need as shaped by culture and individual personality

Wants are shaped by society. So, in Spore, society, unfortunately doesn't take too kindly to failures. It's also about mian zi (face saving). For some parents, they see the child's success in studies or work as a reflection of their success in life.

The wants come about because society is not satisfied with a borderline pass. It's hard to accept mediocrity in Spore. So, there is this \"want\" to get an A


Demands - human wants that are backed by buying power
Given their wants and resources, some will start to demand for products with benefits that provide the most value and satisfaction.

And this is where the likes of TLL comes in. They have a minimum entry requirement where they take in students who are already amongst the top students. Their \"assurance\" to parents who can afford the fees, is that TLL will provide quality enrichment and mentoring and also to ensure that the grades will not slip.

So, for kids who are already A students, parents will still continue to send their kids to TLL because they want to ensure that (1) grades do not slip (2) kid continues to receive the best educare and best available resources available.

ksi:

So if we mix up needs and wants, how is MOE going to respond to that?

Sometimes, i also wonder how MOE should respond. On one hand, we want them to regulate the industry and on the other hand, we also don't want too much policing. A delicate balance.

Think easier said than done for MOE to proclaim \"ban all tuition\". As long as parents see a need for tuition for their kids, there will be tutors abound. It's a free market out there.

[wonderm]

Reading all the analysis about "needs" and "wants" as well as different mentalities of parents make me think about my own mentality.


For my children, what they had were enrichment and not tuition. That was partly because they were not failing exams, also partly because I was the one providing the necessary 1:1 consultation and monitoring, similar to what tutors do if the parents don’t have the time for that.

So it was "want" and not "need" based on what were discussed. However, we were not so concerned about getting from A to A* or maintaining A* because the grades themselves do not matter very much to me, since they really depend on how difficult are the exam papers. Even relative performance within their class or school weren’t that important. What we really cared about was whether the children were learning (or how much they were really learning). They attended some enrichment classes because they had the potential and interests to learn more. With smaller classes and students of similar abilities, lessons at enrichment centres were very productive and my children benefited from them. Of course, as parents, we had to make sure that they still have time for relaxation and other activities. We also had to make sure they learn to become self-learners as they grow up and not be over-reliant on such external out-of-school lessons.