Newspaper Article: Sorry, your child is not bright enough

[coast]

try:

ksi:

[quote=\"try\"]

MOE does not provide adequate material if they are setting exams which are much harder than what are in textbooks. Just look at the textbooks, ask our children, how many children P4 level and above can score above 70 just by using the textbook and materials from school(excluding top school exam papers)?

Many schools are also streaming the children - some at P2, while others at P3. But the problem with this kind of streaming is that it is not subject specific so it defeats the purpose because teachers cannot provide harder material because some children may be very good in Math but very poor in English(but still manage to get into the top class).

Materials from Learning Lab can be easily set by curriculum specialists in MOE HQ. I have borrowed them from friends to see what the hoo-ha is about so I can attest to the fact that it is something do-able by curriculum specialists or specific HODs/teachers who are given dedicated time to create the material.

Frankly, if MOE HQ is not giving the right support and direction to schools, the outcome is monetary gain for enrichment centres as enrichment centres who are started mostly by ex-school teachers know how to plug this gap.

To be fair, I find that MOE/SEAB sets questions that ARE COVERED conceptually in the classroom. The difference is the questions may not be seen before in any 10-years PSLE series but that is rightfully so if we want to see new emerging little scholars to place them in the right schools. If MOE tests something not within concept, I would have an issue as that is out of context. Just like they can put a big \"X\" in compo for out of point, we can put a big \"X\" to them for out of syllabus concepts too. The thing is this is not the case. I remember 2-3 years back after the difficult PSLE Math paper, there was an interview with some P6 kids. When asked how he found the paper, one boy replied, \"it was diffcult.\" Then when asked, \"were the types of questions set something not taught in class?\" His reply, \"No, the concepts were covered by the teacher but that type of questions, I have not seen them before.\" So you see , we cannot fault MOE for setting questions children have not seen before. If every question is seen before, then it is a test of memory skills. It is fair for MOE to test application skills and truly fair if it is limited only to some questions, not the entire paper, otherwise it would be a tiring paper to do for the majority. THAT, I am against too....because the stamina to complete an exam paper is crucial, no point damaging a child's energy to press on in a major exam with unreasonable number of tough thinking questions. This, I believe, is something SEAB can ensure if they vet their papers thoroughly after setters have set them.

I should have phrased \" MOE does not provide adequate material if SCHOOLS are setting exams which are much harder than what are in textbooks.\"

I agree with ksi that \"MOE/SEAB sets questions that ARE COVERED conceptually in the classroom\". But more and more schools are setting school exam papers which are of the top ten primary school standard. Many schools are using these top ten school papers as preparation(mock papers) for PSLE preparation on top of past PSLE papers which is understandable as all PSLE students are competing against their own cohort.[/quote]Hi ksi and try, thanks for sharing

When Chenonceau and other parents shared their personal experience in KSP that their children fared poorly in some tests because certain things were not taught but tested, I also thought it might just be the schools' internal papers and not PSLE.

But I have my doubts when I realised that (correct me if I am wrong):-

1) Past PSLE papers are not released in full but a 5-year PSLE paper arranged by topics (and you cannot tell which question belongs to which year). Why does MOE not release the full paper? Could it be a small percentage of the questions are not taught by schools in order to \"distinguish\" the top few % of the cohort and hence such questions cannot be released to the public?

2) There is no exact mark for a A*, A, ... which means it could fluctuate from year to year. Why is it necessary to \"bell-curve\" each subject when the overall T-score is already bell-curved to rank each student against the cohort?

Well, maybe there are valid reasons to the above and hopefully I will understand the rationale one day

[corneyAmber]

coast:

While it is good to teach our children to work hard, we have to understand that results are dependent on various factors, some of which are beyond our control Some students or parents also take \"extra efforts\" to extreme and the poor kids spend hours and hours on study, neglecting a balanced life. But I know you don't mean that Just want to point it out in case other parents read it and use it to \"inspire\" their kids to put in even more hours on their studies

Yes you are exactly right to know what I mean. It takes wisdom in a parent to recognise and acknowledge how their kids tick to steer them correctly. You are right to point out that working hard alone is not the only criteria, it requires many accompanying factors. And diligence to me is effective diligence. If a person spends an unhealthy amount of time to try and do well in something, sacrificing many things along the way, then aptitude needs to be checked.

[corneyAmber]

coast:

Thanks :oops: You are right to use \"probably\". Every child is unique. These are the 3 things that matter most to me for my DS: Good Health, Happy, Good Character. He is doing very well so far but as parents, we have to keep learning and adjust our parenting style especially in this global world and fast-changing society. I suppose things will work out well when there is a strong parent-child bond

I completely agree with the line in bold.

[coast]

ksi:

coast:

While it is good to teach our children to work hard, we have to understand that results are dependent on various factors, some of which are beyond our control Some students or parents also take \"extra efforts\" to extreme and the poor kids spend hours and hours on study, neglecting a balanced life. But I know you don't mean that Just want to point it out in case other parents read it and use it to \"inspire\" their kids to put in even more hours on their studies

Yes you are exactly right to know what I mean. It takes wisdom in a parent to recognise and acknowledge how their kids tick to steer them correctly. You are right to point out that working hard alone is not the only criteria, it requires many accompanying factors. And diligence to me is effective diligence. If a person spends an unhealthy amount of time to try and do well in something, sacrificing many things along the way, then aptitude needs to be checked.

:goodpost:

\"unhealthy amount\" ... if we are talking about primary school academics, then it might not be a question of aptitude but mindset. I chanced upon this article \"Neighbourhood schools producing top PSLE students\" just a few minutes ago :-

http://sg.news.yahoo.com/blogs/what-is-buzzing/neighborhood-schools-producing-top-psle-students-023150377.html

\"Her parents cite her independent study attitude and constant revision that played a significant role in her academic achievements.\"

\"began studying intensely for 5-6 hours a day in June, and the days leading up to the exams placed so much stress on her that she once screamed in tears.\"

\"Even though she always does well in school, she still goes for tuition for Science and Malay subjects.\"

A top scholar from RGPS has tuition in all 4 subjects.

http://news.omy.sg/News/Local%2BNews/Story/OMYStory201112121502-297019.html

ST also interviewed some of the PSLE top scholars and some (or at least one) said she studied 6 to 7 hours daily after school.

I am not judging these kids as they could be leading a happy childhood, enjoy studying long hours or doing this only in the final months of PSLE prep ... but it is sending a wrong signal that our PSLE top scholars require tuition and many hours of study daily for months. It is \"unhealthy\" to me but unlikely a question of aptitude.

[singmathstutor]

ksi:

Yes you are exactly right to know what I mean. It takes wisdom in a parent to recognise and acknowledge how their kids tick to steer them correctly. You are right to point out that working hard alone is not the only criteria, it requires many accompanying factors. And diligence to me is effective diligence. If a person spends an unhealthy amount of time to try and do well in something, sacrificing many things along the way, then aptitude needs to be checked.

Totally agree. I would always tell my children that every child has different learning aptitudes and capabilities. Comparing results with friends shouldn't be the yardstick to gauge his performance. As long as they put in effort on their part and try to maximise what I personally believe they can achieve, I am happy. Both my wife and myself are educators. We do not place outright expectations on their results. If they are deemed to have underachieved, we would have a chat with them and try to work out a mutual understanding on what has gone wrong. Hopefully, we can identify the loose nut and tighten it together. Communication in this aspect is important.

I feel we shouldn't apply any kind of excessive stress on them. They shouldn't do that as well. We allow them to study independently and encourage them to refer to us if they have any problems. By the way, my children do not have any tuition except for a once a week Mother Tongue enrichment class which they have been enjoying so much that we feel they wouldn't \"allow\" us to take them off. They are in a \"Top 10\" neighbourhood primary school and has so far done well in school.

In addition to setting a good studying habit, we would always give them ample playtime at home and with neighbours from the same school. Having a balanced lifestyle is crucial in their growth. Both my wife and I avocate in our belief that \"a happy child in learning is a successful child in learning\".

[singmathstutor]

ksi:

coast:

Thanks :oops: You are right to use \"probably\". Every child is unique. These are the 3 things that matter most to me for my DS: Good Health, Happy, Good Character. He is doing very well so far but as parents, we have to keep learning and adjust our parenting style especially in this global world and fast-changing society. I suppose things will work out well when there is a strong parent-child bond

I completely agree with the line in bold.

Totally concur with the statement as well!

[jtoh]

coast:

\"unhealthy amount\" ... if we are talking about primary school academics, then it might not be a question of aptitude but mindset. I chanced upon this article \"Neighbourhood schools producing top PSLE students\" just a few minutes ago :-

http://sg.news.yahoo.com/blogs/what-is-buzzing/neighborhood-schools-producing-top-psle-students-023150377.html

\"Her parents cite her independent study attitude and constant revision that played a significant role in her academic achievements.\"

\"began studying intensely for 5-6 hours a day in June, and the days leading up to the exams placed so much stress on her that she once screamed in tears.\"

\"Even though she always does well in school, she still goes for tuition for Science and Malay subjects.\"

A top scholar from RGPS has tuition in all 4 subjects.

http://news.omy.sg/News/Local%2BNews/Story/OMYStory201112121502-297019.html

ST also interviewed some of the PSLE top scholars and some (or at least one) said she studied 6 to 7 hours daily after school.

I am not judging these kids as they could be leading a happy childhood, enjoy studying long hours or doing this only in the final months of PSLE prep ... but it is sending a wrong signal that our PSLE top scholars require tuition and many hours of study daily for months. It is \"unhealthy\" to me but unlikely a question of aptitude.

I read these articles about top P6 students who study 5-6 hours or 8-9 hours daily in the run-up to PSLE and I wonder where's their childhood? And some of these students also attend music lessons and I wonder where do they find the hours in a day. When do they have time to play? I tell my dd about the schedules of my P6 neighbour and she says I was a good mother for not stressing her out during PSLE.

[Chenonceau]

Deleted

[Chenonceau]

jtoh:

I read these articles about top P6 students who study 5-6 hours or 8-9 hours daily in the run-up to PSLE and I wonder where's their childhood? And some of these students also attend music lessons and I wonder where do they find the hours in a day. When do they have time to play? I tell my dd about the schedules of my P6 neighbour and she says I was a good mother for not stressing her out during PSLE.

They perform better when they get to play enough. And their development in other important areas is not stunted either.

[Busymom]

ksi:

try:

I should have phrased \" MOE does not provide adequate material if SCHOOLS are setting exams which are much harder than what are in textbooks.\"

I agree with ksi that \"MOE/SEAB sets questions that ARE COVERED conceptually in the classroom\". But more and more schools are setting school exam papers which are of the top ten primary school standard. Many schools are using these top ten school papers as preparation(mock papers) for PSLE preparation on top of past PSLE papers which is understandable as all PSLE students are competing against their own cohort.

Yes actually for the top 10 schools, I don't think they teach every kind of questions too, those kind of application questions are really for the children to think about it themselves. If we all agree that concepts are covered in school, then really whatever the questions are as long as they cover the concepts, it is a \"may the best student shine\" approach. Then of course parents try to level that up by providing alot of additional help in their own creative way. As parents we need to recognise if our kids have concepts issue. If concept is an issue, then every question will appear like a new question. So we need to ascertain further if the concept is not taught properly in school or our kids simply have a mental block on certain concept. If a concept is not taught properly in school as in the majority of the class is struggling, then it can be raised as an issue. I really do not expect all kinds of questions to be taught to my child to mean that she has been prepared well for PSLE. Perhaps for PSLE she is so-called prepared well if all kinds of questions are taught but in handling life, I think she is severely handicapped. JMHO.

Fully agree with you on the higlighted sentence. That would be my approach as well.

We can't expect every child to get an A* for an exam. I think parents are also not expecting that, to be honest.

The main issue perhaps, is how some schools have been setting their papers, which could be demoralising for the students if the papers are set too difficult. At times, it may also be a case of students requiring some time to digest the concept before they are being tested. I still remember a time when almost my entire class failed our first A Math test... but everyone did well in the end.