MOE to scrap Banding for Secondary Schools
-
nms1:
I think a decision has to be made on what kind of system we want to have. I went to school in the UK and was in a private school but my brothers both went to government schools. When my elder brother was in secondary school we lived in an area where there was no banding so your school was determined by where you lived. What happened? All the pupils were dragged down to the lowest common denominator rather than being pulled up. We moved house when he was going into the equivalent of JC and moved to an area where schools were streamed. He was put into one of the better schools and had a rude awakening as the standards were so much higher. He found it very hard to adjust and I still feel, many years later, that his years in the other school really prevented him from reaching his full potential academically.
Maybe the solution is not to band the schools but to band the children within them. Some schools can create a niche in certain areas but we could have children of all levels in all schools but streamed within their cohort. This may help to take off some of the PSLE pressure as we could then look at providing the opportunity to move between streams. Of course those \"brand name\" schools will still retain their prestige in the short term but maybe over the course of time the playing field can be levelled and pupils may choose a school because of the sports or CCAs offered, because of a strength in art, music or maths. There are numerous possibilities.
Maybe that will happen to SG's secondary school system, 20 years later? :? -
mamago:
Actually, that is quite possible. In all social phenomenon, there is something called parameter shift. In this day and age where competition is WAY hot, the measures announced today cool it down. But when the system cools down so much that it begins to stagnate, its time to step on the pedal again.nms1:
I think a decision has to be made on what kind of system we want to have. I went to school in the UK and was in a private school but my brothers both went to government schools. When my elder brother was in secondary school we lived in an area where there was no banding so your school was determined by where you lived. What happened? All the pupils were dragged down to the lowest common denominator rather than being pulled up. We moved house when he was going into the equivalent of JC and moved to an area where schools were streamed. He was put into one of the better schools and had a rude awakening as the standards were so much higher. He found it very hard to adjust and I still feel, many years later, that his years in the other school really prevented him from reaching his full potential academically.
Maybe the solution is not to band the schools but to band the children within them. Some schools can create a niche in certain areas but we could have children of all levels in all schools but streamed within their cohort. This may help to take off some of the PSLE pressure as we could then look at providing the opportunity to move between streams. Of course those \"brand name\" schools will still retain their prestige in the short term but maybe over the course of time the playing field can be levelled and pupils may choose a school because of the sports or CCAs offered, because of a strength in art, music or maths. There are numerous possibilities.
Maybe that will happen to SG's secondary school system, 20 years later? :?
To keep the car at a steady speed, your foot on the pedal gotta take off and put back, cannot be all the way down all the time. Your car speeds up and crashes. You can't keep your foot off forever too. Your car will stop.
No system feature will be useful or good forever. That might come a day to put banding back in. Constant fine-tuning is necessary. -
I support the scrapping too. Heard from friends of schools asking their students to drop subjects that they did not do well in case it affect the school overall ranking. (I suppose referring to S4 students). Wonder if it is a common practice :yikes:
-
pinky:
I support the scrapping too. Heard from friends of schools asking their students to drop subjects that they did not do well in case it affect the school overall ranking. (I suppose referring to S4 students). Wonder if it is a common practice :yikes:
Yup yup! Don't stress the schools and the schools won't stress our kids. -
slmkhoo:
Kekekeke! Oh well then... we'll just hafta make do with you...
She's in her mid-70s and retired years ago! And she's always shunned any kind of publicity.Chenonceau:
Wow! What fortitude of character to stand firm against system incentives. Not everyone has that strength of character. No wonder she groomed a daughter like you.
She needs to COME BACK and share her wisdom.
-
For me taking away does not change much, maybe it will for later generation. Getting into the sec school is based on meritocracy.
I know that some teachers from lower band schools focus in other aspects. Like helping the at risk kids and trying to motivate and let them succeed on their terms. I'm not sure if the teachers are feeling down becos their objectives are different, they are not trying to top the O level chart. I guess there are teachers who might prefer higher band school, becos not all are able to handle at risk kids or kids who need more scaffolding of information before they are able to grasp the concept or idea. For this group of teachers, they can transfer. I think the teachers from lower band are stressed if the P set unrealistics academic based KPIs :evil:
Even in lower band sec school, there are 1 or 2 top classes that will achieve very good O level results. I see the role of lower band school as a bit different becos the kids graduating from P6 have a spectrum of academic abilities.
I'm just voicing my views, no intention to \"fight\" with Chen. -
SAHM_TAN:
:snuggles: :snuggles: I normally ONLY get riled up when parents slam other parents for being kiasu... and proud... and incompetent. I think it's unkind and rings of a Parent Superiority Complex. I think all parents love their kids. They want the best for their kids. They might not do what is best but they do want to give their kids the best. I have visceral reaction towards comments that judge other parents for what the latter fail at. People don't know. That's all. We should not judge ignorance. We can educate ignorance. Help parents. Gently. Lovingly.For me taking away does not change much, maybe it will for later generation. Getting into the sec school is based on meritocracy.
I know that some teachers from lower band schools focus in other aspects. Like helping the at risk kids and trying to motivate and let them succeed on their terms. I'm not sure if the teachers are feeling down becos their objectives are different, they are not trying to top the O level chart. I guess there are teachers who might prefer higher band school, becos not all are able to handle at risk kids or kids who need more scaffolding of information before they are able to grasp the concept or idea. For this group of teachers, they can transfer. I think the teachers from lower band are stressed if the P set unrealistics academic based KPIs :evil:
Even in lower band sec school, there are 1 or 2 top classes that will achieve very good O level results. I see the role of lower band school as a bit different becos the kids graduating from P6 have a spectrum of academic abilities.
I'm just voicing my views, no intention to \"fight\" with Chen.
However bad parents are, when they come for motivation coaching after reading my book, they REALLY REALLY put in superhuman effort to be better parents because they LOVE their kids. It's so much more rewarding to work with parents than with managers. Managers don't try as hard. They don't move mountains to become better fast. Parents do. Partly because it's also THEIR money I guess (not the company's)... but largely because they really love their kids.
It makes me angry when parents slam other parents for their lack of parenting skills. I strongly feel we must honor the love all parents feel for their kids. You're not slamming parents so I have no visceral reaction.
I didn't see this issue from your perspective so it just adds richness to my mental picture of the issue.
-
slmkhoo:
:goodpost: :goodpost: Even though I also thought nms1 made sense with her perspective of the non-banded system... and it's wonderful that an \"ang moh\" is Singaporean enough to care about our system. Excellent discussion!
I think there will always be schools which have higher academic standards and those with other strengths. Being dragged down to the lowest common denominator is almost inevitable since students are social creatures. Banding within schools is good, but if the banding has to stretch from very high to very low (we're just talking academics here, not morals or value) then individual schools are unlikely to be able to resource the banding. However, what we as a society can do is stop rewarding schools just because of their absolute exam results. I like the 'value added' award because it compares the exam results with the intake, and is a better measure of what the school has done to educate their students. If the school takes in the top 3% of the cohort, should they be given much glory for producing the top 3% at the next public exam? A lot more should be made of schools which take in the bottom 30%, say, and produce results around the 50% mark. At the same time, much more needs to be made of schools' niche areas whatever they may be. And again, schools which have students from homes where a lot of support is provided should not be glorified above schools where students have little support. To use my mother's school as an example again, she said that unlike some 'top schools', her student sportsmen only had coaching provided in the school as they could not afford private coaching, and the school had to provide everything, from equipment to clothes to shoes to transportation. If a team from such school does well (even if it doesn't win), surely it is a greater achievement that those from schools whose students have plenty. Maybe our media coverage needs to reflect these new values and help change the mindset of the majority. -
slmkhoo:
:hi5: Good post
I think there will always be schools which have higher academic standards and those with other strengths. Being dragged down to the lowest common denominator is almost inevitable since students are social creatures. Banding within schools is good, but if the banding has to stretch from very high to very low (we're just talking academics here, not morals or value) then individual schools are unlikely to be able to resource the banding. However, what we as a society can do is stop rewarding schools just because of their absolute exam results. I like the 'value added' award because it compares the exam results with the intake, and is a better measure of what the school has done to educate their students. If the school takes in the top 3% of the cohort, should they be given much glory for producing the top 3% at the next public exam? A lot more should be made of schools which take in the bottom 30%, say, and produce results around the 50% mark. At the same time, much more needs to be made of schools' niche areas whatever they may be. And again, schools which have students from homes where a lot of support is provided should not be glorified above schools where students have little support. To use my mother's school as an example again, she said that unlike some 'top schools', her student sportsmen only had coaching provided in the school as they could not afford private coaching, and the school had to provide everything, from equipment to clothes to shoes to transportation. If a team from such school does well (even if it doesn't win), surely it is a greater achievement that those from schools whose students have plenty. Maybe our media coverage needs to reflect these new values and help change the mindset of the majority.nms1:
I think a decision has to be made on what kind of system we want to have. I went to school in the UK and was in a private school but my brothers both went to government schools. When my elder brother was in secondary school we lived in an area where there was no banding so your school was determined by where you lived. What happened? All the pupils were dragged down to the lowest common denominator rather than being pulled up. We moved house when he was going into the equivalent of JC and moved to an area where schools were streamed. He was put into one of the better schools and had a rude awakening as the standards were so much higher. He found it very hard to adjust and I still feel, many years later, that his years in the other school really prevented him from reaching his full potential academically.
Maybe the solution is not to band the schools but to band the children within them. Some schools can create a niche in certain areas but we could have children of all levels in all schools but streamed within their cohort. This may help to take off some of the PSLE pressure as we could then look at providing the opportunity to move between streams. Of course those \"brand name\" schools will still retain their prestige in the short term but maybe over the course of time the playing field can be levelled and pupils may choose a school because of the sports or CCAs offered, because of a strength in art, music or maths. There are numerous possibilities.
-
Chenonceau:
:snuggles: :snuggles: I normally ONLY get riled up when parents slam other parents for being kiasu... and proud... and incompetent. I think it's unkind and rings of a Parent Superiority Complex. I think all parents love their kids. They want the best for their kids. They might not do what is best but they do want to give their kids the best. I have visceral reaction towards comments that judge other parents for what the latter fail at. People don't know. That's all. We should not judge ignorance. We can educate ignorance. Help parents. Gently. Lovingly.
However bad parents are, when they come for motivation coaching after reading my book, they REALLY REALLY put in superhuman effort to be better parents because they LOVE their kids. It's so much more rewarding to work with parents than with managers. Managers don't try as hard. They don't move mountains to become better fast. Parents do. Partly because it's also THEIR money I guess (not the company's)... but largely because they really love their kids.
It makes me angry when parents slam other parents for their lack of parenting skills. I strongly feel we must honor the love all parents feel for their kids. You're not slamming parents so I have no visceral reaction.
I didn't see this issue from your perspective so it just adds richness to my mental picture of the issue.
That's the root to all the problems ....
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 š
Register Login
