Can we bring our students' learning away from tuition?

[Chenonceau]

We have a system that believes that good exams serve to distinguish the best from the best of the very best. What is wrong with having exams that test a given domain... and have students all bunch at the top... and we have low variance and high average in the curve?


Is there a need to distinguish the best from the best of the best? Some people will say there is a need. So... if we insist to test out the best of the best of the best... then the system should UP ITS OWN game in teaching effectiveness so that it doesn't end up testing skills & approaches developed by enrichment centres JUST SO that it can distinguish the best.

When you test skills you don't teach sufficiently nor have time/resources to allow for sufficient skills practice (because your Teachers dunno how or have no time... and your textbooks fail to document so that children can't even self-study), you force parents and students to go for tuition even if they don't want to (or have no money to).

2 solutions. Either...
(1) Don't TEST to the best OR
(2) (if you wanna test to the best) then TEACH to the best EVEN IN mainstream

Challenge your system to narrow the gap (by teaching more OR testing less) instead of challenging parents and kids to keep chasing rising standards of performance. Begin with more comprehensive textbooks so that parents don't have to pay tutors to get that extra material... and Teachers don't have to die WRITING and SELECTING their own material on top of TEACHING, MARKING, SETTING EXAMS, DISCIPLINING, CARING.

HODs have told me \"The best will naturally know because they have natural aptitude.\" This is a joke. The learning has to come from somewhere ... if not Tutors, then from excellent written resources. Children cannot NATURALLY KNOW like they're born knowing. Teachers in schools have no time to provide sufficient skills practice in a skills heavy syllabus. Textbooks look like chick lit. WHERE will the learning come from if not tuition?

Teachers are also leaving the system in droves because they can't bridge the gap.

[limlim]

How about this… MOE should conduct surveys on students to find how many is having tuition, and schools should discourage students from having tuition.


School with very very low % of student having tuition (say, <1%) will be given incentive, and schools with high % of students (say, > 40%) having tuition will be given dis-incentive, or demerit points etc…

So, the teachers will have to do their part to convince parents that tuition is not needed…

Of coz, this is very brief and there may be many considerations… but… would this be in the right direction? To move students away from tuition, this have to start from the root itself… the schools…

[Chenonceau]

This is such a sincere attempt at suggesting an improvement limlim. It's great.


But you can convince all you like... As long as you test more than you teach because you expect the bright ones to NATURALLY KNOW... then no parent will listen to you. Parents will turn to Teachers and ask Teachers to teach more and better. And Teachers will back off because...

(1) They're already overloaded.

(2) They have to WRITE their own textbooks, WRITE exams and practices, TEACH, MARK, CARE, CCA, and WRITE AUDIT REPORTS

The same thing is happening in education as in housing or transport. The rich get richer. The smart get smarter. MOE does not have to play this game by testing skills that only enrichment centres (and rich parents) have the resources to hone. If it wants to test at this range, then TEACH at this range so that tuition is not necessary.

If schools Teach Better OR Test Less, the pressures for tuition will lessen. Else, no parent will listen to any amount of advice to not have tuition.

[Sun_2010]

limlim:

How about this.. MOE should conduct surveys on students to find how many is having tuition, and schools should discourage students from having tuition.


School with very very low % of student having tuition (say, <1%) will be given incentive, and schools with high % of students (say, > 40%) having tuition will be given dis-incentive, or demerit points etc..

So, the teachers will have to do their part to convince parents that tuition is not needed..

Of coz, this is very brief and there may be many considerations.. but.. would this be in the right direction? To move students away from tuition, this have to start from the root itself.. the schools..

I think this is a good idea. it may need fine tuning but the basis is godd.
Make percentage of students taking Tutions /enrichment vs the total no of students taught a major KPI for the teachers and for school.

It is not very fair to the teachers in the beginning given the current environment, but with time the kiasuness of parents will settle down and so will this mad rush.

[limlim]

limlim:

So, the teachers will have to do their part to convince parents that tuition is not needed..

Chenonceau:

But you can convince all you like... As long as you test more than you teach because you expect the bright ones to NATURALLY KNOW... then no parent will listen to you. Parents will turn to Teachers and ask Teachers to teach more and better. And Teachers will back off because...

Papers are set by teachers. So, the standard of the papers is also part of the parameters to convince parents that tuition is really not needed...... They should only test on what they already teach..

[coast]

Chenonceau:

We have a system that believes that good exams serve to distinguish the best from the best of the very best. What is wrong with having exams that test a given domain... and have students all bunch at the top... and we have low variance and high average in the curve?


Is there a need to distinguish the best from the best of the best? Some people will say there is a need. So... if we insist to test out the best of the best of the best... then the system should UP ITS OWN game in teaching effectiveness so that it doesn't end up testing skills & approaches developed by enrichment centres JUST SO that it can distinguish the best.

When you test skills you don't teach sufficiently nor have time/resources to allow for sufficient skills practice (because your Teachers dunno how or have no time... and your textbooks fail to document so that children can't even self-study), you force parents and students to go for tuition even if they don't want to (or have no money to).

Let's say MOE believes and won't change the need to distinguish the best from the best of the best.

MOE has the statistics from PSLE past years' papers which are the \"killer\" questions (i.e., a small % managed to solve them). Can they look at MOE textbooks and ask ... can a 12-year old solve this with the textbooks? Look further into the statistics, what is the background (family income, school, class) that these students come from, any conclusion? Unfortunately we cannot \"track\" students who had enrichment, tuition, ... etc. Otherwise the picture might be clearer.

I believe MOE or SEAB has already done some of the above (SEAB has given official replies that they are making sure PSLE maintains the same level of difficulties ... so they must have analyse both the questions as well as the results?).

Frankly, I am not sure whether the stress (and the over-reliance of tuition/ enrichment) is due to schools (internal exams) or MOE (PSLE). Schools (esp the top schools) have always made their internal exams more difficult than the standard PSLE/ O levels/ ... Parents/ Schools made their students practise top schools' past year papers but in actual fact, some of the questions there might be beyond PSLE complexity.

Are we barking at the wrong tree? We will not know as MOE/ SEAB does not release the exact past year PSLE papers. I am not even sure if principals/ HODs have access to the actual past year PSLE papers. The \"hiding\" of certain questions (for whatever reasons) only serve to make schools (assuming they do not have access to actual PSLE papers) and enrichment centres raising their \"standards\" higher and higher. I once heard of a top school (with its own Maths materials) setting the standard so high that its students did not do well for PSLE Maths in a particular year ... it seems that the students were focusing too much on difficult questions and in the process, they could not do well for PSLE Maths.

[coast]

Sun_2010:

limlim:

How about this.. MOE should conduct surveys on students to find how many is having tuition, and schools should discourage students from having tuition.


School with very very low % of student having tuition (say, <1%) will be given incentive, and schools with high % of students (say, > 40%) having tuition will be given dis-incentive, or demerit points etc..

So, the teachers will have to do their part to convince parents that tuition is not needed..

Of coz, this is very brief and there may be many considerations.. but.. would this be in the right direction? To move students away from tuition, this have to start from the root itself.. the schools..

I think this is a good idea. it may need fine tuning but the basis is godd.
Make percentage of students taking Tutions /enrichment vs the total no of students taught a major KPI for the teachers and for school.

It is not very fair to the teachers in the beginning given the current environment, but with time the kiasuness of parents will settle down and so will this mad rush.

Good idea but how do one track whether students take tuition/ enrichment? :?

[tutormum]

IMHO, the only way to get children away from tuition is to keep them in school the whole day so that they will not have time for tuition. :evil: How many parents or even children themselves can look back 20 or 30 years down the road and say with conviction that if the children did not have tuition back then, life would have been the same, i.e. tuition didn't really make a difference in their lives. Meanwhile, how many would say honestly that all those hard work in getting through HCL, IP, triple science or whichever that parents and children spend anguish effort and heartache on did help the children in their present profession. My main point is, are the children working towards their future with the relevant goals in mind? I always believe in fighting those battles worth fighting and the rest is secondary.

[coast]

limlim:

limlim:

So, the teachers will have to do their part to convince parents that tuition is not needed..

Chenonceau:

But you can convince all you like... As long as you test more than you teach because you expect the bright ones to NATURALLY KNOW... then no parent will listen to you. Parents will turn to Teachers and ask Teachers to teach more and better. And Teachers will back off because...

Papers are set by teachers. So, the standard of the papers is also part of the parameters to convince parents that tuition is really not needed...... They should only test on what they already teach..

I don't think it will work because what matters most is PSLE. Parents have access to top schools' exam papers and I have already heard on different occasions comments like this school's papers very easy, not sure how their students can handle PSLE, this school's papers very difficult, .....

[Chenonceau]

limlim:

limlim:

So, the teachers will have to do their part to convince parents that tuition is not needed..

Chenonceau:

But you can convince all you like... As long as you test more than you teach because you expect the bright ones to NATURALLY KNOW... then no parent will listen to you. Parents will turn to Teachers and ask Teachers to teach more and better. And Teachers will back off because...

Papers are set by teachers. So, the standard of the papers is also part of the parameters to convince parents that tuition is really not needed...... They should only test on what they already teach..

Thanks for clarifying. I see what you mean now. Then the (perceived) difficulty of PSLE, how?