Asia spending billions on tutors: study
-
autumnbronze:
Your 2nd paragraph, is absolutely true.
The tone adopted is that ALL teachers are bad because they are not doing their job properly [snipped]
And as a clarification, ONE negative experience
should not constitute any kind of sweeping statement.
ps: this post is addressed to limlim.
But, back to your 1st statement again.. isn't that what you're accusing me of? I never say all teachers are bad.
I never say ALL teachers are bad. I acknowledge there are GOOD teachers. Why people do not see that?
And always jumping to the conclusion that I am making sweeping statements.
I am just discussing how we can deal with bad apples(maybe?) and improve the overall situation. Bcoz there are good apples doesn't mean we should ignore bad apples.
And, my next reply will explain part of my stand.. -
autumnbronze:
Thank you for bringing this up.
Ok, I cannot see the relation of your example but this is my very direct response wrt to eating in MRTs.
Eating should be banned in MRTs at all costs. Even if passengers do not intend to litter, there will inevitably be crumbs on the floor, creating a mess and breeding pests ....
It is not an inhumane policy.
My 2 cents.
My reply is, moonlighting, will inevitably lead to potential <conflict of interests> situations and compromise best interests of the school students, even if they do not purposely intend to.
If the person who eats is responsible and careful, there will be NO crumbs at all. But we cannot assume everyone to be responsible to the same degree, isn't it?
Same thing. Good responsible teacher can moonlight and still fulfill their duties well. But we cannot expect all teachers are the same, isn't it?
The problem is, when I talk about how to curb bad practice, pple accuse me of implying all teachers are bad, MOE is bad etc.. which is NOT fair to me.
By suggesting ways to curb bad practice do NOT imply that all teachers are bad. -
verykiasu2010:
MOE should regulate the tuition industry and control.
may be even some of the MOE/teacher bashers are tuition teachers ...... :evil: :evil:
Maybe only allow NIE-trained retired teacher to teach. or engage qualified teachers with relevant teaching certifications. I am fully supportive of this. Although some may disagree.
If tuition is banned, I most welcome it. I feel it is best. And steps to improve the school and eliminate the need to external tuition.
But, others may disagree.. anyway, that is just my personal view. -
S'pore ways work, but only with tuition - Straits Times 14 July 2012
MS YEO Boon Eng argues that our education system facilitates social mobility, and therefore should be maintained as it is ('Tough Singapore way works'; Wednesday).
I beg to differ.
I do not believe that any Singaporean is asking for our system to be dumbed down. What many parents want is a more balanced and rounded education that prepares our children effectively for the future, yet allows them time to play and develop holistically, and gives families time to bond.
The fact that a few exceptional students from lower-income families can succeed despite the current system is not proof that our education system facilitates social mobility.
How can we tell ourselves that all students stand an equal chance of moving up the social ladder, when success in our education system is highly dependent on the extra tuition and enrichment lessons that wealthier parents can afford and poorer parents cannot?
Because of the way our education system is structured and operated, students from lower-income families cannot compete equally with those from better-off families.
That, in principle, is unacceptable.
If our education system is as effective as we like to believe, then we might ask ourselves why so many children need so much extra tutoring at every level.
There is no point having 'free' education when families must spend thousands of dollars more to supplement what is being taught in school, so that their children can cope.
In fact, it would be interesting to find out how Singapore would fare in international educational rankings if we selected children who have not had the benefit of external tutoring to sit the ranking tests.
We must review how our education system operates.
As a nation, we need to be willing to spend more money on education.
We need to have smaller classes and more age-appropriate testing, and discourage the 'tuition' mindset and unhealthy competition, especially among primary schools, for the 'top school' label, as well as stop our obsession with international rankings.
Our schools and their top managements must refocus on the core purpose of education - to educate our children academically and as social beings, and to ensure that every Singaporean child has an equal shot at future success, regardless of whether his family can afford tuition.
Wily Wan (Ms) -
I wouldn’t be surprised if there are tuition center operators or moonlighting school teachers here too.
I don’t see why are are so many opposition when some of the suggestion can only be good for the education industry, such as adopting good practice and regulation.
And controlling the tuition industry, screening tutors etc… or maybe require them to take up part time teaching course to get license to teach. It can only benefit the parents.
And, I am a taxpayer and I am concerned if teachers are devoting the best to the public schools and not private practices.
Of course, am not saying all teachers are bad, MOE no good. -
C’mon, limlim.
So you suggestion of [the criteria of] licensing tutors is based solely on their academic qualification? That’s a lazy way to licensing issit? I for one, doesnt have any teaching ‘certification’, but I dare say I’m well qualified to coach any lower pri sch pupils with similar ability as my child, having worked closely with him for the last few years.
Your suggested criteria of licensing ‘qualified’ tutors would have in one swoop, disqualified many experienced and good tutors - when the responsibility of gauging the suitability of tutor-pupil combination is solely a parent’s prerogative to make. The chemistry of teaching is one of soft skill as well, not just binary - have/don’t have cert so straight forward.
But before we get ahead of ourselves, what do we hope to achieve in all this [licensing]? -
buds:
:hugs: Likewise, some of us who are \"challenging\" the status quo are also misrepresented as making sweeping statements. Spreading myths.
Sadly, it's always been misrepresented as having the perfect life or the perfect children...Busymom:
I do not think that some forummers here lack empathy per se. It is perhaps the constant \"attacking\" by some on MOE and teachers over multiple threads in this forum over the last few months that caused some wanting to speak up and present an alternative view to balance things up a bit.
Between the lines, we have shared plenty and exhaustively... but oh well... nobody truly listens... or reads (in this case)...
The feeling is mutual. In that sense, we are square on this? :celebrate:
-
cherryc:
S'pore ways work, but only with tuition - Straits Times 14 July 2012
MS YEO Boon Eng argues that our education system facilitates social mobility, and therefore should be maintained as it is ('Tough Singapore way works'; Wednesday).
I beg to differ.
I do not believe that any Singaporean is asking for our system to be dumbed down. What many parents want is a more balanced and rounded education that prepares our children effectively for the future, yet allows them time to play and develop holistically, and gives families time to bond.
The fact that a few exceptional students from lower-income families can succeed despite the current system is not proof that our education system facilitates social mobility.
How can we tell ourselves that all students stand an equal chance of moving up the social ladder, when success in our education system is highly dependent on the extra tuition and enrichment lessons that wealthier parents can afford and poorer parents cannot?
Because of the way our education system is structured and operated, students from lower-income families cannot compete equally with those from better-off families.
That, in principle, is unacceptable.
If our education system is as effective as we like to believe, then we might ask ourselves why so many children need so much extra tutoring at every level.
There is no point having 'free' education when families must spend thousands of dollars more to supplement what is being taught in school, so that their children can cope.
In fact, it would be interesting to find out how Singapore would fare in international educational rankings if we selected children who have not had the benefit of external tutoring to sit the ranking tests.
We must review how our education system operates.
As a nation, we need to be willing to spend more money on education.
We need to have smaller classes and more age-appropriate testing, and discourage the 'tuition' mindset and unhealthy competition, especially among primary schools, for the 'top school' label, as well as stop our obsession with international rankings.
Our schools and their top managements must refocus on the core purpose of education - to educate our children academically and as social beings, and to ensure that every Singaporean child has an equal shot at future success, regardless of whether his family can afford tuition.
Wily Wan (Ms)
Thanks cherryc for posting this article. Believe it or not, I had wanted to post this too. Telepathy again? Lol!
Anyway, it's a good piece to chew over. :celebrate: -
limlim:
I'm also a taxpayer and I'm concerned when I see suggestions that will consume a lot of resources if implemented, but in return yields debatable, if any benefit - similar viewpoint as mentioned by others earlier.
And, I am a taxpayer and I am concerned if teachers are devoting the best to the public schools and not private practice.
Of course, am not saying all teachers are bad, MOE no good. -
oxyleo:
:hugs: Likewise, some of us who are \"challenging\" the status quo are also misrepresented as making sweeping statements. Spreading myths.
Sadly, it's always been misrepresented as having the perfect life or the perfect children...buds:
[quote=\"Busymom\"]I do not think that some forummers here lack empathy per se. It is perhaps the constant \"attacking\" by some on MOE and teachers over multiple threads in this forum over the last few months that caused some wanting to speak up and present an alternative view to balance things up a bit.
Between the lines, we have shared plenty and exhaustively... but oh well... nobody truly listens... or reads (in this case)...
The feeling is mutual. In that sense, we are square on this? :celebrate:[/quote]may not be mutual
MOE bashers and teacher bashers are unwilling to quote which school, don't even talk about which teacher. constant repeating the same accusations but unwilling to even name the school, has zero credibility. if one is so unhappy then why afraid to name the school ?
people quoting examples of teachers who care inevitably quote the school name as well.
who is spreading myths ? if the schools are so bad then why the rush for it in pri 1 registration year after year? stupid right ? (not referring to you)
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