MP echoes calls for PSLE to be scrapped

[janet88]

Lilac66:

Our education system needs some tweaking but it's not in such a dire state as in needing a total revamp. I'm definitely not in favour of abolishing the PSLE. As much as I agree with no banding,less homework with more time for other pursuits, no PSLE seems a drastic move.

I agree that those MPs with children in kindy/lower primary are stressed with the high expectation of PSLE, the extra coaching (aka tuition) required and the kids' mental state...or else they will not call for scrapping.

If I may say this, I hope P5 isn't such a big jump from P4. Last year was pure hell for all of us :frustrated: . It's hard to believe my son can fail Math in his first CA when he had 84 in P4 SA2. Why such a drastic change???

[2hotTOhandle]

don’t think this will work!

[MMM]

We can have more \"through-train\" schools, where students gain entry to affiliated secondary schools without a common exam.

While solving one problem, we are creating another... Just imagine the pressure is now shifted to the already highly pressured P1 registration process. Parents now need to make sure their kids go to a school with a good affiliated secondary school...

[Funz]

Chenonceau:

Dumb.


It's like. I have a fever. I don't like having a fever. So ok! Let's break the thermometer!

And the MOE's response will be ok ok, you don't have fever, it is not a fever. It is high temperature.

[verykiasu2010]

Funz:

Chenonceau:

Dumb.


It's like. I have a fever. I don't like having a fever. So ok! Let's break the thermometer!

And the MOE's response will be ok ok, you don't have fever, it is not a fever. It is high temperature.

you need ponding then, oooops, i mean, sponging

[Chenonceau]

Funz:

Chenonceau:

Dumb.


It's like. I have a fever. I don't like having a fever. So ok! Let's break the thermometer!

And the MOE's response will be ok ok, you don't have fever, it is not a fever. It is high temperature.

:rotflmao:

[Chenonceau]

verykiasu2010:

Funz:

[quote=\"Chenonceau\"]Dumb.


It's like. I have a fever. I don't like having a fever. So ok! Let's break the thermometer!

And the MOE's response will be ok ok, you don't have fever, it is not a fever. It is high temperature.

you need ponding then, oooops, i mean, sponging[/quote]Ponding... OUCH!!

[nansk]

MMM:

We can have more \"through-train\" schools, where students gain entry to affiliated secondary schools without a common exam.

While solving one problem, we are creating another... Just imagine the pressure is now shifted to the already highly pressured P1 registration process. Parents now need to make sure their kids go to a school with a good affiliated secondary school...

I feel that grade 6 (age 12) is too early for all children to be ready, to be mature enough, to sit for an important, national-level exam. Yet, to prevent the P1 registration process from becoming more high-stakes, we need some kind of testing at higher levels.

My suggestion is to have primary schools go on till grade 8. Then conduct a PSLE-type exam at the end of 8th. Those two extra years will give most children time to mature and to appreciate the importance of being well-prepared for the PSLE.

[AdvancedAcademia]

I appreciate the effort and sentiment evident from MPs thinking through the issues in education. Something which was desperately lacking in my opinion before the "new normal" arrived. However, I fundamentally disagree on 2 of his points; the abolishment of PSLE and the establishment of privatised schools.


His argument is that the PSLE leads to competition and should therefore be abolished is flawed to say the least. Because ultimately whichever mechanism is designed to determine who gets into which Secondary school, will create competition. This merely shifts the problem from one arena of education to the other. Besides, the problem is not really with academic competition. Indeed, competition when taken in the right perspective is healthy. Rather the problem is with the type of questions that SEAB sets for the PSLE. If you study in detail the questions posed by the PSLE, any teacher/tutor worth his salt, would tell you that most students will be able to do well, regardless of subjects, if sufficient time and appropriate rote-learning was applied.

The poor quality of questions is why the tuition industry is flourishing. It has nothing to do with the quality of teachers in schools, the elite status of GEP students, top primary schools pushing up grades or whatever popular rumour dribble is floating around in online forums now… The simple truth is that SEAB sets poor questions where answers can be regurgitated, leading to schools and parents trying to get their DSs/DDs to memorize wagon loads of information. Those who are slower in learning or need greater reassurance, turn to the tuition industry who formulate "better" ways to help pupils memorize and regurgitate information. Some of the pressures within the education system would be alleviated if the assessment undergoes a radical change. If SEAB refocuses their assessments towards assessing pupils understanding rather than memory, things would be so different. To illustrate, let me use a subject which I’m most familiar with, English: Imagine if for English assessments, SEAB require pupils to write a response to a poem, design a website teaching grammar to lower primary pupils, write a real narrative story (not those nauseating predictable stories available in Popular), retell a fairy tale from a different perspective, etc… These kinds of questions will force schools to relook how they teach English, as questions become less about how much pupils have committed to memory, but rather, how they apply their understanding. In this way, the assessment is more discriminating, which allows secondary schools to have a clearer understanding of the kind of pupils they are receiving; parents cant send kids to tuition as many tuition centers would lack the capacity to predict such questions and teach to the test and ultimately our DSs/DDs will learn English the way it should be taught.

Secondly, I disagree with his proposal to create private primary schools. As some parents have rightly pointed out, this would lead to a situation where private schools would "leech" the best teachers out of government schools and ultimately, we as a nation, would be poorer for it. Its a well know fact that the teachers in private schools like RI, ACS(I) and HCI receive a better pay packet and benefits than public schools, which as a result, has attracted many of the best public school teachers to join private schools. The only redeeming factor is that for public schools teachers, they have more mobility.

He also probably did not think about the knock on effect it would have on Secondary and JC admission and on the growing social divide. If we had private primary schools, even more people would feel pressured to have their kids admitted into private schools as it would be perceived that these schools give a better chance at further education later on in life. (Something which is happening in the American and UK educational system) Wouldn’t that squeeze out the spaces available in our "top" schools who are already facing pressures due to DSA and IP? It would also create a greater social divide as those families who are in the lower income bracket would never be able to afford the fees to gain entry into private schools thus exacerbating the problem. Overall, a poorly thought out proposal.

Alternatively, I would rather MOE stop pussy footing around and deal with the problem at the core; improving the quality of teachers. There are many great teachers in our system, I’m friends with many of them. They are deeply concerned about the welfare of their pupils, they work long and hard to help improve their academic grades and they push pupils to give their all. Sadly, however, many of them feel disillusioned as they see their workload being increasingly burdened with non-teaching tasks while at the same time witness their less-committed colleagues being remunerated in roughly the same way. (The PB is a joke when compared to the private sector) MOE should have the courage to implement major changes in their HR policies by remunerating teachers in a manner that is comparable to the private sector and commensurately demand that teachers, who are not up to mark in terms of their teaching and in their care of students, to leave. Professionalize the teaching profession to that of the status of doctors, in the way that doctors who fail at their duty are taken to task and lose their license to practice medicine, but at the same time are remunerated well to encourage them to join the profession. In this way, MOE might also reduce the number of good teachers becoming disgruntled by the system and quit to become private tutors in the end.

[Funz]

nansk:

MMM:

We can have more \"through-train\" schools, where students gain entry to affiliated secondary schools without a common exam.

While solving one problem, we are creating another... Just imagine the pressure is now shifted to the already highly pressured P1 registration process. Parents now need to make sure their kids go to a school with a good affiliated secondary school...

I feel that grade 6 (age 12) is too early for all children to be ready, to be mature enough, to sit for an important, national-level exam. Yet, to prevent the P1 registration process from becoming more high-stakes, we need some kind of testing at higher levels.

My suggestion is to have primary schools go on till grade 8. Then conduct a PSLE-type exam at the end of 8th. Those two extra years will give most children time to mature and to appreciate the importance of being well-prepared for the PSLE.

I am giving myself nightmares.

One scary scenario I am imagining, 'o' level standard testing is brought down to grade 8 and the kids who make it proceed to the next 4yrs of schooling which will lead to exam for uni placement.