Parents, not enrichment centres, are key to result

[coast]

ksi:

To sum it up, it seems that we do not learn Math from the same MOE, perhaps you were brought up overseas. It is time to agree to disagree as our logic will never cross path in this matter if the outcome of us learning the same Math does not seem to match either. I am contented to know that wonderm and pepper spice have similar experiences as me from the same MOE.

It’s the same MOE but different school/ class.

I grew up locally and studied in a neighbourhood school and I remember many in my class (one-thirds or half) became top 10% of PSLE. We came from humble background. My parents do not have to buy a single assessment book and tuition is never heard of.

What is the situation now? How do we make it as much a level playing field?

I am heartened to know that you know of some experience that have benefited without enrichment/ tuition (same goes for pepper spice). Are they the minority? What happens to the majority? I know many schools come out with their own materials to supplement MOE standard textbooks. I have also heard of schools using different materials for different classes.

What’s wrong with this?

The “quality” is dependent on which schools and in some cases, which classes they belong to.

Are there many bright and self-motivated kids who are denied an equal chance in excelling in PSLE compared to others going for enrichment/ tuition/ parent coaching? Why should these kids not given an equal chance to reach their potential?

Yes, there are certainly exceptional kids who did well without enrichment/ tuition. But if we are talking about the majority, we should exclude these exceptions.

My P2 DS tops his Maths without enrichment/ tuition. Besides, he spends at least 80% of his time doing non-academic stuffs (I do not believe in drilling and hence he does not have to spend hours and hours on worksheets and he has not attempted any past years’ school papers except one which was done in school given by his teacher to the whole class).

Is he exceptional bright? I honestly do not think so. I sincerely believe that if MOE provides adequate materials to ALL students, it will make life much easier for teachers and students (and parents who are spending excessive time coaching their kids or sourcing for better materials). My only question is … why isn’t MOE doing it? Why are the schools developing their own materials or use outside materials if MOE materials are adequate? Yes you are right to say that MOE should cater for the majority. Providing adequate materials is for the majority. At the same time, why should we even deny the chance for ANY kid to excel just because he does not belong to certain school/ class/ enrichment/ tuition/ lots of external materials/ excessive parent coaching?

[Chenonceau]

ksi:

The MOE system offers many avenues for a suitable child to be groomed, properly like:

1. OM training(aka HA enrichment) or remedial classes. Remedial classes are still large classes of more conceptual teaching. If Teachers have no time to mark compos for normal 3 or 4 times 40 students, they certainly won't have time for skills practice in remedial.

2. GEP screening or diagnostic tests. We skipped this testing. I wanted to give my son a mainstream education. Why should mainstream education be so lacking? The way I see it, the exact same phenomenon with the sandwich class appears in education. The very poorly off are helped. The very top are groomed. The mainstream is left to cope.

3. Streaming into the top classes or banding with foundation classes
And this is a good proxy for ability? Did you not say yourself that grades don't reflect smartness? Well... streaming uses grades to determine what a child is capable or not capable of learning.

4. Other programmes... This is vague.

ksi:

But if parents keep rejecting the opportunities and wanting to chart their own paths for their children because they know better and end up suffering certain consequences, it would be a conscious decision. It would not be right to turn around and attribute it as a flaw in the system.
That said, the system is not flawless, certainly there is room for improvement, just not those areas being argued so far.

There is only one area under discussion here. Teach heuristics to mainstream... not just to Gifted. I have not made comment of GEP nor streaming etc... What is wrong with teaching heuristics to mainstream students? It rigidifies the brain? It shouldn't ... because the brain develops heuristics on its own with practice anyway.

ksi:

Case closed.

We can agree to disagree. I am fine with that. But with all due respect to a forum moderator, it is not becoming to imply that I say what I say because I am more than extraordinarily kiasu. This has nothing to do with the discussion I am afraid.

[coast]

ksi:

Chenonceau:

[quote=\"wonderm\"]
I agree with many things you said such as better teaching in school will reduce the reliance on external tuition. But I guess we have to agree to disagree with regards to learning of heuristics. By the way, I do know about what was taught and not taught at TLL as I do not just hands off and expect any enrichment centre to produce results.

Yes... we will just have to agree to disagree. Still, I dun think the effort of debating was entirely wasted on your part (nor mine). MOE does pay attention to this forum, and an open and reasonable discussion such as this is informative.

Unfortunately, this discussion will probably give the affirmation to MOE that kiasuparents.com parents are indeed just kiasu. *sigh*[/quote]Why would our discussion in this subject let MOE think that we are indeed kiasu?

My DS is doing well not just in his academics but other aspects in life (he is noted to be always cheerful by teachers and other adults, he won a good conduct award, ...). I have nothing bad to say about his school/ teachers in terms of academics.

Having benefited from our local education system during my times, I cannot help but notice how things have changed. I have heard arguments about why parents will continue to send their enrichment/ tuition/ .... I have no issues with that ... but what's wrong with providing adequate materials to ALL students so that they too can excel if they are bright and motivated? Of course, unless MOE thinks that their materials are already adequate. If so, why schools use other materials (own or external)? What happens to the majority who do not belong to some schools/ classes?

I am speaking up for the majority. I hope every kid gets an equal chance to excel. What's wrong with providing adequate materials to ALL students?

[Chenonceau]

ksi:

Btw, your son is definitely on the bright side. Even when he was at the bottom of the class in P3, he was in the top 2 classes(still top 80 in school), that actually does not make him bottom. Bottom would be bottom in the cohort.

This is definitely nice to know. I will let him know this so he can feel good later today, especially since he did it without my help and without tuition.

[Chenonceau]

coast:

Why would our discussion in this subject let MOE think that we are indeed kiasu?

My DS is doing well not just in his academics but other aspects in life (he is noted to be always cheerful by teachers and other adults, he won a good conduct award, ...). I have nothing bad to say about his school/ teachers in terms of academics.

Having benefited from our local education system during my times, I cannot help but notice how things have changed. I have heard arguments about why parents will continue to send their enrichment/ tuition/ .... I have no issues with that ... but what's wrong with providing adequate materials to ALL students so that they too can excel if they are bright and motivated? Of course, unless MOE thinks that their materials are already adequate. If so, why schools use other materials (own or external)? What happens to the majority who do not belong to some schools/ classes?

I am speaking up for the majority. I hope every kid gets an equal chance to excel. What's wrong with providing adequate materials to ALL students?

Exactly so...

[awfullyKS]

I think if teachers were equipped to teach well, that will go a long way to help the problem. My sister who was in NIE said that she learnt some general principles of teaching. For specifics, she was exposed to what heuristics were but tts about it. So when she was put into the school and asked to teach P5, she was ill-equipped. She did not know the heuristic methods herself and had to buy assessment books to try to figure it out. For english, she was also at a loss to be able to explain the rules of synthesis for eg. If she did not bother to put in extra research and hard work, she would have been another ineffective teacher.


I am wondering why can’t NIE teach the teachers more specific skills to teach. The teachers themselves are not familiar with heuristics and they know English but they do not know the exact rules to explain for eg why this verb works and this does not work.

In the end, the teachers just give up and that is why we are sending our kids to school to learn nothing much.

[Kodomosuki]

Don’t quote me but this some rumour I heard.

They are more than one way of solving problem Sums.
Why model is taught only in sch ?
MOE has invested millions of dollars on model . Teachers, textbooks and other resources.
What are they going to do with all these investment if other method proves better.
In PSLE , if a child does not use model diagram , but other methods , points are given .
Currently, my children are learning other method than models And they are so excited with this method and Looking forward to the centre every week.

[Chenonceau]

awfullyKS:

I think if teachers were equipped to teach well, that will go a long way to help the problem. My sister who was in NIE said that she learnt some general principles of teaching. For specifics, she was exposed to what heuristics were but tts about it. So when she was put into the school and asked to teach P5, she was ill-equipped. She did not know the heuristic methods herself and had to buy assessment books to try to figure it out. For english, she was also at a loss to be able to explain the rules of synthesis for eg. If she did not bother to put in extra research and hard work, she would have been another ineffective teacher.


I am wondering why can't NIE teach the teachers more specific skills to teach. The teachers themselves are not familiar with heuristics and they know English but they do not know the exact rules to explain for eg why this verb works and this does not work.

In the end, the teachers just give up and that is why we are sending our kids to school to learn nothing much.

I would be happy enough with more comprehensive textbooks that document concepts and heuristics. This way, it takes the pressure off Teachers. It'll guide Teachers in their teaching and it'll offload them the need to WRITE resources. They can focus on teaching and marking. Teachers who are themselves lost can let themselves be guided by the textbooks. This could stem the outflow of Teachers too because it'll be so much less stressful than having to WRITE resources, FIND resources AND teach PLUS mark. Right now, if Teachers don't do what they are supposed to do in class (or dunno how to), NO ONE KNOWS... and the children DON'T HAVE OTHER RECOURSE except Tutors, after they do poorly at an exam.

Put everything children need to know in the textbooks (or a bibliographic list that is easily available from the library or e-library), and children with no access to external help (and stuck with ineffective Teachers) still have a fighting chance.

Then slowly... slowly, MOE can set about resolving the Teacher quality and quantity problem. Get a good base of educational materials flowing THROUGH the system and it'll already go a long way in leveling the playing field AND take the load of Teachers. This should not be difficult to do in this internet age.

Who are we to decide that such and such a class CANNOT COPE or WILL BE CONFUSED by such a such material? What if the child ended up there because in one year, his Mom came down with cancer... his Dad landed in jail? So ending up in the wrong class means that he'll be fed easy stuff way below his ability? At least, if comprehensive written resources are easy to access from anywhere within the system, this child can help himself even if the Teachers think he CANNOT cope with more.

[Nebbermind]

Kodomosuki:

Don't quote me but this some rumour I heard.

They are more than one way of solving problem Sums.
Why model is taught only in sch ?
MOE has invested millions of dollars on model . Teachers, textbooks and other resources.
What are they going to do with all these investment if other method proves better.
In PSLE , if a child does not use model diagram , but other methods , points are given .
Currently, my children are learning other method than models And they are so excited with this method and Looking forward to the centre every week.

I believe they will eventually learn other methods. But knowing the 'model method' allows the kids to solve more complex math (which would in our time require algebra or whatever) when they r in lower pri.

[Nebbermind]

limlim:

Wah.. so many parents the kids only need to focus on understand maths to do maths..


My DD in P1 last year was struggling with maths.. not bcoz she can't count but bcoz she don't understand the English.

When I read the problems/questions, I felt that the language used is too chim for P1 already.

would be nice if u can quote a couple of examples. I thought it's quite manageable.