Real reason behind Singapore’s obsession with tuition
-
Hi Optimistforum,
Those are the books that I have been looking for! Care to share here?
TIAoptimistforum:
Well, at the end of the day our kids will benefit from the investment in their education - and that is all that matters.
That being said, I have given my kids a week off work; no doubt they are slowing down in school too, as exams were in May and the school year finishes in July.
As always, I have learned a lot from my Kiasu posters; I also have tips and book tips to share should you need my help. My books are mostly Singaporean assesment books or Englsih and Intelligence books from England, from the good old 50s and 60s. -
Hi Melodies
By books, I meant current Singaporean assessment books. Also, English Language and Intelligence books from the UK, 50s and 60s. -
verykiasu2010:
:hi5:
yes, the conclusion is :- parents' mindset, not that the schools are all so hopeless, not that all the teachers don't teach, not that all the schools are testing beyond what was taught ....... it is all in the mindset of parents who cannot accept when their kids score lower than the peers. it is really a mindset problem of the parents, too small minded that they cannot accept the fact their kids' scores is just 0.000000001 lower than the next guy in t-scoreblessed777:
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/blogs/singaporescene/things-consider-sending-child-tuition-classes-102823408.html
Real reason behind Singapore’s obsession with tuition
By Yahoo! Singapore | SingaporeScene – Wed, Jun 13, 2012
By Daniel Wong
Singapore is a tuition nation.
Previous reports from the Department of Statistics show that households spent $820 million a year on both centre and home-based private tuition.
In addition, the number of tuition centres has increased five times over the past decade. There are now more than 500 centres in Singapore.
In comparison, there are fewer than 400 primary and secondary schools in total.
Through my work as an education excellence coach and speaker, I've had the privilege of speaking to and working with thousands of students. Through these interactions, I estimate (estimate only, not a scientifically derived number) that more than 90% of students attend some form of tuition classes.
Students continually complain about their huge struggle to complete their school and tuition homework, participate actively in their co-curricular activities, and lead a somewhat balanced life.
Most students tell me that they don't get more than 5 or 6 hours of sleep every night because there's just so much they have to do!
Clearly, there's something wrong with this picture.
or the picture is painted wrongly ??
In this article, I'll share my observations about how our obsession with tuition reveals deeper issues we face as a society—issues that go far beyond the pursuit of academic success.
The fear of failure starts with parents(not because the schools are no good nor because the schools don't teach as some parents like to over-generalise)
Parents send their children for tuition classes because they fear their children getting left behind(not because they are stupid). That's a reasonable fear, because it seems like every other student attends classes outside of school.
But the bigger fear that parents have is the fear of failure, not just for their children, but for themselves, too. (nothing to do with education system, everything to do with parents' attitude and mindset)
It's difficult to measure your performance as a parent, so parents often subconsciously gauge their success by how their children are doing in school.
Your child is a straight-A student? Then you must be doing a wonderful job!
Your child is struggling academically? Then you're failing as a parent.
Few parents verbalize it, but these thoughts are at the core of their decision to send their children for tuition classes. At the end of the day, no parent wants to feel like a failure. -- again it is parents, not school nor the system
What parents really want for their children
There are other implications, too. Parents' fear of failure gets passed on to their children, who grow up thinking that the best path is the one that's free from failure, risk and disappointment.
But is that really the best path? No, that's merely the good path, yet it's also the one that parents unintentionally push their children to pursue. A lot of the time, the best path is the one that's full of uncertainty and adversity.
That's why it's generally incorrect to say that parents want what's best for their children, because they usually only want what's good.
Be curious, not competitive
Moreover, parents who are fixated on their children's academic performance instill a spirit of competition in their children. In today's Information Age, however, what's needed in order to excel is a spirit of curiosity, rather than a spirit of competition.
There's an incredible amount of information available on the internet, which means that if you want to become knowledgeable in some field, you probably could. It just requires that you have enough genuine curiosity to compel you to look up the information online.
If students are caught up trying to compete with their peers and outperform them, it's difficult to cultivate a real love for learning and discovery—the things that form the basis of a meaningful education and of long-term success in the Information Age.
Success is more about will than skill (sure or not ? no skill with will power means that over time, the necessary skill is acquired, or acquired by spending a inordinate amount of time on it....sure, eventually succeed, with skill!)
Furthermore, if students feel like they're being forced to improve academically, there's a limit to how successful they can become. To achieve success—I'll go one step further and use the word \"greatness\"—in any field, you need to make a conscious decision to be great.
After all, no great pianist, athlete, engineer, doctor, mechanic, nurse or entrepreneur became that way without intentionally choosing the path of excellence.
You can't force anyone to become great. It's possible to force someone to become mediocre or even good, but greatness requires commitment.
If parents make their children go for tuition classes without also empowering them to take full responsibility for their own education, it's impossible for the children to become great students.
At the heart of it, greatness is much more a matter of will than it is of skill. Before we teach our students the skill of studying more effectively and of doing better on exams, we need to encourage them to make a deliberate choice about their education, their future and their life.
Tuition isn't a bad thing
Just to be clear, on its own, tuition isn't a horrible thing. I have no doubt that tuition classes can help children to become more disciplined, knowledgeable, hardworking and determined.
Nevertheless, if it's not done with the correct mindset, sending children for tuition classes can be dangerous.
It's possible that we're currently creating a generation of sleep-deprived, overworked, unfulfilled, and unhappy students. I fear that this generation of unhappy students is going to become a generation of unhappy workers and, later on, a generation of unhappy parents. so simplistic !
This is a problem we cannot ignore.
So whether you, as a parent, decide to send your children for tuition classes or not, I urge you to make that decision with the right perspective. Make sure your children understand that it's more important to finish well than it is to finish first.
The future of our country depends on it.
Daniel Wong is the author of \"The Happy Student: 5 Steps to Academic Fulfillment and Success\". He is also an education excellence coach and speaker. He writes regularly about topics related to education, career and personal development at Living Large. -
Imami:
Here's my take on this.
But how would parents know if IP is/is not suitable for their children?
My child is still very young, so I don't really know about IP although my niece and nephew (a pair of twins) are IP students.
Speaking from personal experience interacting with IP students, those who can survive and do well in IP need to be self-motivated to study and have the discipline to do the necessary work. I believe that the IP schools generally offer very good programmes. However, they do expect the students to do a fair bit of independent study and THINKING. Tests are mostly internal, so the student can actually cruise along in a false state of complacency even if they don't do well, as they will just move on to the next level. That is very dangerous, as it means that they are not really prepared for anything at all. Even if they are bright, if they are lazy and refuse to put in effort, being in the IP will do them no good. Too many IP students have the reputation of being able to talk a lot but not do proper written work (because it is too tedious and requires proper, systematic critical thinking. Talking is SOOOO much easier and more fun!!! ) These are the ones who end up not doing well for the A-levels or leaving the IP halfway.
How is IP then different from an O-level education? The latter is very geared towards preparing the students for exams. Therefore, it is content-heavy and tests skills intensively. Students with this background who go on the JC are thus very well prepared for the stress and rigour of the A-levels. Do they lose out in terms of analysis and creativity? Not for the bright ones, of course, but even for the average ones, as long as they are willing to try, they eventually manage to grasp the necessary skills. So it would seem that it boils down to attitude.
Let's look at my eldest son, for example. He is pretty bright (I think lah), but he is severely lacking in discipline. I would hesitate to send him to an IP school with no O-level back-up as he needs constant reminders from test scores that he ain't all that hot in the academic arena and he needs to put in constant effort. I think being in an O-level programme will do him good as it would inculcate the values of hard work and discipline.
The problem now is that too many 'good' schools with a strong background in producing stellar O-level results are becoming IP schools. I'm no longer left with many ideal choices and I'm reconsidering my options. Please note that IP schools ultimately prepare students for the A-level exams, so parents may want to consider if the school has a decent track record in that area. At the end of the day, there are no IP certs and exams; only A-level certs. Please read between the lines for what that means. -
hokkiengirl:
if the IP program and IP schools are so hopeless and useless, why then year after year the few IP schools produce the most number of A level distinctions in H2 and H3 subjects as well as getting the lion's share of all scholarships for uni courses ?
Here's my take on this.Imami:
But how would parents know if IP is/is not suitable for their children?
My child is still very young, so I don't really know about IP although my niece and nephew (a pair of twins) are IP students.
Speaking from personal experience interacting with IP students, those who can survive and do well in IP need to be self-motivated to study and have the discipline to do the necessary work. I believe that the IP schools generally offer very good programmes. However, they do expect the students to do a fair bit of independent study and THINKING. Tests are mostly internal, so the student can actually cruise along in a false state of complacency even if they don't do well, as they will just move on to the next level. That is very dangerous, as it means that they are not really prepared for anything at all. Even if they are bright, if they are lazy and refuse to put in effort, being in the IP will do them no good. Too many IP students have the reputation of being able to talk a lot but not do proper written work (because it is too tedious and requires proper, systematic critical thinking. Talking is SOOOO much easier and more fun!!! ) These are the ones who end up not doing well for the A-levels or leaving the IP halfway.
How is IP then different from an O-level education? The latter is very geared towards preparing the students for exams. Therefore, it is content-heavy and tests skills intensively. Students with this background who go on the JC are thus very well prepared for the stress and rigour of the A-levels. Do they lose out in terms of analysis and creativity? Not for the bright ones, of course, but even for the average ones, as long as they are willing to try, they eventually manage to grasp the necessary skills. So it would seem that it boils down to attitude.
Let's look at my eldest son, for example. He is pretty bright (I think lah), but he is severely lacking in discipline. I would hesitate to send him to an IP school with no O-level back-up as he needs constant reminders from test scores that he ain't all that hot in the academic arena and he needs to put in constant effort. I think being in an O-level programme will do him good as it would inculcate the values of hard work and discipline.
The problem now is that too many 'good' schools with a strong background in producing stellar O-level results are becoming IP schools. I'm no longer left with many ideal choices and I'm reconsidering my options. Please note that IP schools ultimately prepare students for the A-level exams, so parents may want to consider if the school has a decent track record in that area. At the end of the day, there are no IP certs and exams; only A-level certs. Please read between the lines for what that means.
MOE states that IP school / program is meant for those who are clearly uni bound, by whichever route. The idea is to save time from O level preparation to do more meaningful stuff for the kids. It does not mean IP is lower standard or less rigourous -
I don't think hokkiengirl meant to say that IP is useless. She did qualify that it is a path that works well for independent and self-motivated learners... and then she qualified that... \"Tests are mostly internal, so the student can actually cruise along in a false state of complacency even if they don't do well, as they will just move on to the next level. That is very dangerous, as it means that they are not really prepared for anything at all.\"
-
Chenonceau:
I don't think hokkiengirl meant to say that IP is useless. She did qualify that it is a path that works well for independent and self-motivated learners... and then she qualified that... \"Tests are mostly internal, so the student can actually cruise along in a false state of complacency even if they don't do well, as they will just move on to the next level. That is very dangerous, as it means that they are not really prepared for anything at all.\"
that is a very misleading statement. that is why I asked if they are so \"useless\" why then the IP graduates got most of the scholarships and got the most distinctions in H2 and H3 subjects, if the student can actually cruise along in a false state of complacency even if they don't do well, as they will just move on to the next level. -
verykiasu2010:
Misleading only if taken out of context. If you read her whole post the context is clear lah... BTW, need investment advice. PM-ed you. Dun mind... help help ok? :please:Chenonceau:
I don't think hokkiengirl meant to say that IP is useless. She did qualify that it is a path that works well for independent and self-motivated learners... and then she qualified that... \"Tests are mostly internal, so the student can actually cruise along in a false state of complacency even if they don't do well, as they will just move on to the next level. That is very dangerous, as it means that they are not really prepared for anything at all.\"
that is a very misleading statement. that is why I asked if they are so \"useless\" why then the IP graduates got most of the scholarships and got the most distinctions in H2 and H3 subjects, if the student can actually cruise along in a false state of complacency even if they don't do well, as they will just move on to the next level. -
i think people who has no knowledge of the IP content and system should not make sweeping statements as if it is gospel truth. that is very misleading and unhelpful to other readers who may mistake it to be the norm
-
atutor2001:
Really??optimistforum:
.... I get the feeling, frm recent posts, that Singapore educaton success is mostly attributable to out of school tutoring rather than the perceived quality of your schools. Am I right? ....
An average kid (quite hardworking) without tuition or supplementary exercises from parents will be very lucky to get 220 in PSLE, generally will be less than 210. Any normal playful kid without tuition or supplementary exercises from parents is guaranteed 200 and below. Relevant extra work is definitely needed to achieve 240 and above.