spectre6888:

lets be clear - even the so-called neighbourhood schools require an average of 80+ to get in. (My sincerest apologies) But i just found out that a secondary school in CCK requires a minimum of 244 to get in to its Express stream !

I do agree that it is us as parents and what is it we are expecting from our kids. just heard on radio this morning that (long ago) as shared by a listener, he got 216 and got a present but his cousin got 267 and got caning ! (for not topping the school).
Like it or not, PSLE is a necessary evil. Its for us and our kids to know where they stand in their cohort at this age. They can do better and parents should take PSLE, 'O' and 'A' levels as milestones check to gauge how our kids had progressed / developed and what else is required. once they are out in the workforce, its their own efforts that counts.
But we as parents owe our kids to help them grow up. Help them understand that the world outside is that much bigger.
While we cannot overemphasize the impact of PSLE, the truth is our kids need to know that there are others who are much much much more brilliant than them. our kid may be 1st in class but not in School. 1st in School but not in Singapore. 1st in Singapore but not in the world. this is believe is important.
sure, many of us are worried that our kids would give up knowing no matter how hard they try, they cannot be the best. do you want them to know now (now when you can help them) or later when they come out to work ?
being a parent is difficult. we need to first bond with our kids so that they can trust us and then we have to both wield the stick and carrot to encourage them to grow and do their best. I believe our kids need to always do their best because the ability to \"geng\" would come naturally !!
so let us as parents help our kids grow, let us push them to do their best but let us not forget we need to be their safety net - for as long as we can and for the little time we have on this earth.

kamom:

beanbear:

Why subject the WHOLE cohort to a very high standard of testing if MANY of these have NO aspiration to go IP, SAP, IB etc.

Agree!!!! Letting all kids do the killer PSLE is not healthy. I believe every child has a talent. Some are just not in the academic field. Some need time to groom, some need help to discover. Letting them sit for such an exam at such a young age, if they fail or don't do well, it leaves a scar behind. Some get out of it and do well later in life, some don't.

In my opinion, not all schools are the same. I know there are some teachers who are not even motivated to teach when they are sent to a less well-known school. Very few teach out of passion. Most teach b'cos it is a job.

beanbear:

I wish there was a choice given to our children. Those who aspire for IP or Top 20 ranked schools - by all means go fight it out with a super duper difficult PSLE. Let the rest of the \"commoners\" take a more \"normal\" PSLE. If we can have differentiated programmes like IP, SAP, IB, etc, then why can't we have differentiated PSLE for different groups. Why subject the WHOLE cohort to a very high standard of testing if MANY of these have NO aspiration to go IP, SAP, IB etc.

wilburlim:

As the PSLE is hitherto enforced in pursuance to the ministry's law, there can be no gainsaying that a person who is free to be so freewheeling as to repudiate its usefulness shall chance upon a dismal future.


These PSLE scores may seem pointless for people when seen in the shallow perspective, but candidly, they affect each and everyone who are 12 years old in Singapore. Despite constantly querying the ministry for the feasibility of the stakes in PSLE, the ministry collectively has no qualms whatsoever due to the captivating rewards of globalisation.

Moreover, the fact that we are not willing to supplant our knowledge-based economy with primary and secondary industries accentuates the need for greater education yardsticks.

Mawar:

Coolkidsrock2:

If children have to continue in the same primary school, it will likely increase the pressure on the parents to ensure that the children are admitted into specific schools.

PSLE is also necessary to sieve out children who may not be academically inclinded so that they may be given an opportunity at something else.

Better put pressure on the parents than the children. :rotflmao:

Coolkidsrock2:

If children have to continue in the same primary school, it will likely increase the pressure on the parents to ensure that the children are admitted into specific schools.

PSLE is also necessary to sieve out children who may not be academically inclinded so that they may be given an opportunity at something else.

BeContented:

Life is about choices - the choices available & the choices we make.


Just because one does not want/need or cannot attain does not mean others should be deprived of those opportunity.

BeContented:

Life is about choices - the choices available & the choices we make.


Just because one does not want/need or cannot attain does not mean others should be deprived of those opportunity.

beanbear:

I'm really concerned about the bottom half of the bell curve. I suspect many of these children who are within that bottom half of the bell curve really wish PSLE need not be so stressful or the pain be alot lessened and many of them aspire to do well, go poly or jc and then onto university.

I wish there was a choice given to our children. Those who aspire for IP or Top 20 ranked schools - by all means go fight it out with a super duper difficult PSLE. Let the rest of the \"commoners\" take a more \"normal\" PSLE. If we can have differentiated programmes like IP, SAP, IB, etc, then why can't we have differentiated PSLE for different groups. Why subject the WHOLE cohort to a very high standard of testing if MANY of these have NO aspiration to go IP, SAP, IB etc.

slmkhoo:

Will_lim:

Thanks for the replies guys.


Correct me if I'm wrong, in most western countries like the US, the students only take SATs at the end of high school and bam! they go to university. So, the kids there are on pretty much the same playing field all the way till they are 18 years old. Whereas in Singapore, students have to take PSLE, \"O\", \"N\", and \"A\" Levels before they finally reach university. It's like just when you think it's over, you are up against the next big exam already. It's an exam-crazy culture.

I actually prefer the US's education system because firstly, it is much less stressful than our education system. Secondly, it builds better self-esteem because students are not given this message that they are lousier than other students in \"better\" schools at a young age. I remember when I was young, I would go for inter-school competitions and when I knew I was up against a good school, my morale would already deflate a little bit. Sometimes, I give my kid a Raffles paper to do and he is like \"wuh, cannot la...they are too smart for me..\" My son like me, had already lost the battle even before we stepped into the battlefield.

Perhaps, this constant streaming is necessary for our country because of our limited resources. After all, we don't have that many schools like in the US. Over there, they have about 200 plus universities. We only have 3 so far. Therefore, competition is necessary because of the low supply. Sigh.

I don't think this is entirely true. US kids don't go through big public exams in earlier years, but there is some separation of more academic kids from the less academic. This is done more by pull out classes or differentiating the work required. There is also stiff competition for certain schools at all levels, except that it's by where you live, and sometimes entrance tests, only that some parents may not try as hard as Singapore parents. But yes, it's a lot less stressful.

There is a downside to the esteem-building in US schools, though. Kids get used to being praised and getting high grades, so they 'don't know that they don't know', if you know what I mean.

beanbear:

slmkhoo:

I'm really concerned about the bottom half of the bell curve. I suspect many of these children who are within that bottom half of the bell curve really wish PSLE need not be so stressful or the pain be alot lessened and many of them aspire to do well, go poly or jc and then onto university. How do we let them experience success during primary school such that they feel they can \"dare\" to aspire, that they are smart, that they can learn well and that they deserve to go to university if they so choose. If you put yourself in any child's shoes and if they have been scoring 50s - 60s or failling or near failing from P4 or P5 onwards, how do you given them evidence that they can do well. Of course, home environment is important. But seriously, what messages are we sending children if we subject them to experiences of failure or near failure over and over again? I disagree this is the way to teach resilience. This is creating a generation of low-esteem kids. We do not create a school environment where young children feel they can make it. Instead, we scare the hell out of them.

Am not sure if changing the school environment will help these children as the root causes appear to be more family related. My DC are in a school where the social-economic backgrounds of the students are very diverse. At the minimum, I know hardly any parents turn up during parent-teaching meetings for some of the classes. I had interacted with some parents whose children scored below 200 for PSLE. Mindset of the parents are different, the habits and environment are different. An analogy will be like the difference between a child who is brought up by a stay-at-home mum and one brought up by a domestic helper. Not the same.

The issues relating to this group of kids are manifold and the problems will continue in a vicious cycle, possibly worsening with each generation as globalisation creates an increase in inequality within countries. We may not even know where to begin solving the problem and the society and schools can only do so much.

I wish there was a choice given to our children. Those who aspire for IP or Top 20 ranked schools - by all means go fight it out with a super duper difficult PSLE. Let the rest of the \"commoners\" take a more \"normal\" PSLE. If we can have differentiated programmes like IP, SAP, IB, etc, then why can't we have differentiated PSLE for different groups. Why subject the WHOLE cohort to a very high standard of testing if MANY of these have NO aspiration to go IP, SAP, IB etc.