Asia spending billions on tutors: study

[autumnbronze]

FQW:

SAHM_TAN:

My point is that from my observation of my kids, I know small until cannot be small sample size, kids by nature love and want to learn. They are terrible curious creatures. It's not a typo when I state terrible. We do not need to nurture their love for learning. We just need to make sure we don't extinguish it.

I so totally agree with you on this one. This is also what Glenn Doman preached about early childhood education. The thing is, a child's educational journey doesn't start when he reaches P1. It starts way before that and we parents play a big part in the grooming and motivational aspects [though I reserve judgement on the effectiveness of sending kids to 2 kindy per day].

If we put in consistent effort to educate our kids during the early years, in future no matter what external competition they face such as in the form of smart foreign students coming in, I believe they will hold their own and fulfil their potential. Isn't that enough?

Some sure ways to extinguish the fire in our kids are a) expect perfection all the time, nit-picking every small mistake that they make b) bore them by only exposing them to content found within MOE's exam syllabus c) physcially punishing them when they don't meet our expection [to me, this is the biggest disincentive to learn for the quest of knowledge].

:goodpost:

[autumnbronze]

3Boys:

autumnbronze:

Just started reading from pg1.

So what should the state do then, since it's a social problem?? Come up with YET another 'fine' :evil: :evil:

I honestly find it very befuddling why in this era when people are railing AGAINST a nanny state, that the same people are asking for even MORE government intervention. Shed those apron strings, for heaven's sake.

Couldn't agree with you more on this :hi5:

Edited: sarcasm intended in first post

[autumnbronze]

3Boys:

limlim:

As for kiasu parents, you can't do anything about them, there is no point talking about them and put all the blame on them, then what?

I do not dispute or disagree that some kiasu parents maybe an important cause..

But it is meaningless to talk about them.

If they are an important cause, why is it meaningless to talk about them? If attitudes don't change, can anything the MOE do be enough?

:goodpost:

[wonderm]

3Boys:

autumnbronze:

Just started reading from pg1.

So what should the state do then, since it's a social problem?? Come up with YET another 'fine' :evil: :evil:

I honestly find it very befuddling why in this era when people are railing AGAINST a nanny state, that the same people are asking for even MORE government intervention. Shed those apron strings, for heaven's sake.

Agree. I thought we want to be given more freedom to decide for ourselves and our own children?

For those who believe tuition is harmful, just don't send the kids. Yes, some teachers' own children attend tuition. Yes, some centres claim that the top PSLE scorers attended their classes. Why should any of these bother you if you think tuition is harmful for your own kids and you don't believe these tuition centres are of much use?

[Lilac66]

If it’s a social problem, then is it the chicken or egg that came first?


Is it because the tuition centres are helping kids push up standards so much so that other kids can’t cope without tuition, or is the standard going up that the tuition centres come in to plug the gap?

Basically what is the contributing factor to this phenomenon throughout Asia? It’s really not too common to hear of kids who excel w/o tuition (of course there are, but definitely the minority). I pity these kids who may suffer burn-out soon. My earlier tongue-in-cheek post about more kids being sent to IMH is not totally in jest actually. Personally know of a friend whose kid was sent there for treatment.

When I tell neighbours or friends my kid does not have tuition (except for Chinese,which I could coach myself but hubby wanted to take the load off me), they’ll give me a "are you sure?" look. That’s a gauge of how common tuition is.

I’m not against tuition or advocate that it’s something "evil", but I just hope that somehow this academic thing doesn’t overtake our kids’ lives. There should be a balance.

Something has to be done, but who will do it? I haven’t the slightest idea.

[oxyleo]

wonderm:

3Boys:

[quote=\"autumnbronze\"]
Just started reading from pg1.

So what should the state do then, since it's a social problem?? Come up with YET another 'fine' :evil: :evil:

I honestly find it very befuddling why in this era when people are railing AGAINST a nanny state, that the same people are asking for even MORE government intervention. Shed those apron strings, for heaven's sake.

Agree. I thought we want to be given more freedom to decide for ourselves and our own children?

For those who believe tuition is harmful, just don't send the kids. Yes, some teachers' own children attend tuition. Yes, some centres claim that the top PSLE scorers attended their classes. Why should any of these bother you if you think tuition is harmful for your own kids and you don't believe these tuition centres are of much use?[/quote]Yes, I understand what you mean, but I think a lot of this has to do with relativity. Especially when you are talking about increasing trends, huge proportions, vs those that choose to do the contrary, that sort of thing.

Take for eg, if an increasing number of people around you have been attending this investment talk because it purportedly teaches people things that are exclusive, and this information allows you to make wise choices about investing, and you even hear that many who attended have benefited from it by making better investment choices, would you not sign up? Would it not be surprising that more begin to sign up?

I agree that as a parent, we need to make the best choice for our children, but parents are in a way also signing up their children for tuition because they feel they need to level the playing field for their child. That is a huge factor here.

A level playing field is a reason why in a beauty contest, anyone found with cosmetic surgery to attain artificial beauty is disqualified; why sportsman are tested for steroids/ doping before competing events. No one says you cannot do surgery if you are born with a cleft lip, or you cannot take painkillers if you are a sportsman in pain, but there are guidelines to competitions to ensure - A Level Playing field.

Lastly, about being a Nanny state -
Not wanting to be a Nanny State does not mean zero control or regulation or governance, or intervention at the right time. A good state would still require stewardship, guidance, management and balance.
When a child fights for independence, a good parent is happy, but also knows that it doesnt mean you disappear from his life. The parent says,\"I'll be here if you need me,\" and offers assistance when deemed necessary.

As a child and parent never ever decouple, neither does state and it's people.

[wonderm]

oxyleo:

Yes, I understand what you mean, but I think a lot of this has to do with relativity. Especially when you are talking about increasing trends, huge proportions, vs those that choose to do the contrary, that sort of thing.


Take for eg, if an increasing number of people around you have been attending this investment talk because it purportedly teaches people things that are exclusive, and this information allows you to make wise choices about investing, and you even hear that many who attended have benefited from it by making better investment choices, would you not sign up? Would it not be surprising that more begin to sign up?.

I understand what you mean - reasonable. Just for the fun of argument, if there is such investment talk, I may indeed be tempted to sign up to find out more. After attending, I would consider and decide if the recommended investment makes sense and if it suits my risks profile before taking the plunge.

oxyleo:

I agree that as a parent, we need to make the best choice for our children, but parents are in a way also signing up their children for tuition because they feel they need to level the playing field for their child. That is a huge factor here.

A level playing field is a reason why in a beauty contest, anyone found with cosmetic surgery to attain artificial beauty is disqualified; why sportsman are tested for steroids/ doping before competing events. No one says you cannot do surgery if you are born with a cleft lip, or you cannot take painkillers if you are a sportsman in pain, but there are guidelines to competitions to ensure - A Level Playing field.

I agree it is good to level the playing field for everyone. However, as I said before, it is not easy. Banning tuition will make it even more difficult for those who are less privileged. My children are lucky because they could consult me if they have questions and I also teach them how to do self-study and be independent learners. Some other kids may be lucky in different ways, e.g. born with a very high IQ.

oxyleo:

Lastly, about being a Nanny state -
Not wanting to be a Nanny State does not mean zero control or regulation or governance, or intervention at the right time. A good state would still require stewardship, guidance, management and balance.
When a child fights for independence, a good parent is happy, but also knows that it doesnt mean you disappear from his life. The parent says,\"I'll be here if you need me,\" and offers assistance when deemed necessary.

As a child and parent never ever decouple, neither does state and it's people.

This is the only part I don't really agree. Yes, state should never be of zero control or regulation, but tuition industry is not one which I would ask for more regulation. But this is personal opinion. Just like whether public transport should be privatised, it is arguable.

Lastly, thanks for sharing your views. This is what the forum is about - sharing different views and perspectives in a friendly way. :lovesite:

[corneyAmber]

I too do not believe in regulating the tuition industry. It is all about demand and supply. The demand will diminish significantly if the majority of the children are not finding it hard to keep up with the standards and enjoy learning. However, if majority of the parents are rich and want to put their children to enrichment or tuition just to push them to a grade that they expect, then that is their call and their self-imposed stress.


The words in bold is a problem statement, if the demand persists due to majority finding it hard to cope.

If we do want MOE to do anything, it should be something within their span of control such as the teachers and the school, not the tuition industry nor the parents' aspirations.

I also believe in us keeping our education standards high but how high is high? In today's context, some of the accelerated learning could be stretching the children too much until they are lack in sleep and often falling ill. The schools and teachers have expectations as well so streaming kind of limit the stress to the high ability classes. We need to look out for such symptoms. My personal guide is my child must have at least 9-10 hours of sleep, no dark rings, no eye bags, running about cheerfully daily with a stress less face and fall ill at most 5 times a year. Then I know the rigours of academic is not taking a toll on her.

So if we really want to understand if the children are coping in Singapore, just walk around and look at their faces and observe what you see in the majority.

[wonderm]

ksi:

I too do not believe in regulating the tuition industry. It is all about demand and supply. The demand will diminish significantly if the majority of the children are not finding it hard to keep up with the standards and enjoy learning. However, if majority of the parents are rich and want to put their children to enrichment or tuition just to push them to a grade that they expect, then that is their call and their self-imposed stress.


The words in bold is a problem statement, if the demand persists due to majority finding it hard to cope.

If we do want MOE to do anything, it should be something within their span of control such as the teachers and the school, not the tuition industry nor the parents' aspirations.

I also believe in us keeping our education standards high but how high is high? In today's context, some of the accelerated learning could be stretching the children too much until they are lack in sleep and often falling ill. The schools and teachers have expectations as well so streaming kind of limit the stress to the high ability classes. We need to look out for such symptoms. My personal guide is my child must have at least 9-10 hours of sleep, no dark rings, no eye bags, running about cheerfully daily with a stress less face and fall ill at most 5 times a year. Then I know the rigours of academic is not taking a toll on her.

So if we really want to understand if the children are coping in Singapore, just walk around and look at their faces and observe what you see in the majority.

Hey, I never look at it this way but I think that's a good guide. For my kids, it is 7-8 hours of sleep during weekdays with occasional afternoon nap, more during weekends. Falling ill 5 times a year sounds like a lot, it is none or 1-2 times at the most. Maybe the details are not very important, we know they are ok if they are generally healthy, happy, enthusiastic, not too tired nor stressed.

[oxyleo]

Hi wonderm,


Likewise, I truly appreciate your sharing. Enjoyed reading it, and enjoyed how you shared it.