Real reason behind Singapore’s obsession with tuition
-
Chenonceau:
It is a common practice for a primary school teacher to teach EMS. Unlike secondary teachers where MOE will assign two teaching subjects to each teacher during their recruitment exercise, primary school teachers recruited are expected to be competent to teach EMS. (Not too sure whether there is any changes now. ) However i believe that the principals in the primary schools have the final say to the staff deployment. The current trend that i have observed is, more schools are having subject -specialization teachers for the P5 and P6 which I think it is good as it is difficult for one to be equally competent in teaching all 3 subjects.
Some Evidence that Primary School Teachers Subject-Specialize
(1) I admit that I could not find any write-up stating that primary school Teachers MUST teach EMS. Still, if we look at it logically, the link I provided above, would not need to be written if it was not ALREADY understood that primary school teachers are expected to teach more than one subject - and thus MOE found it necessary to now specify that Art, Music and PE Teachers henceforth don't have to.
(2) However, cousin of mine is a primary school Math HOD and she assures me that all primary school teachers have to be prepared to teach EMS. I gave Motivation Coaching to 2 primary school teachers who tell me that primary school teachers are expected to teach EMS (and it is a bonus if they are not made to).
(3) In the implementation, it is clear that in some schools, Principals allow Teachers to subject specialize. In other schools, no.... because currently, DS Math Teacher also teaches him Science. In P4, his form teacher taught EMS.
That Some Primary School Teachers Subject-Specialize Means No Policy Agains it?
Lastly, just because some schools allow Teachers to subject-specialize is no clear indication that there is no policy dictating that Teachers MUST teach EMS. Remember the fracas around DSA Appeals last year? The MOE stated that policy-wise, schools were not allowed to accept appeals. Yet schools did... and only stopped when MOE enforced. Might this be the case again?
I agree it could well be that MOE did state that teachers should subject-specialize and did not enforce, and that is why my DS' P4 Teacher handled EMS. His P5&6 Teacher handles Math and Science.
Allowing subject-specialization makes life easier for Teachers too... and that will help them teach better. Why not do it? I am sure there are constraints.
There are constraints. The primary school may not have enough trs to teach a particular subject, maybe english or science if all the teachers that are posted to the school prefer to teach the same subject Maths. Another contraint I heard is in planning of the time table. However, all these constraints can be overcome as shown by schools that have successfully implemented it. The better ones are moving into banding the students according to their strengths in different subjects. -
:rahrah: :rahrah: :goodpost: :hi5: I like.
BeContented:
Why the need to claim credit? :?janet_lee88:
MOE wants to implement this and that new system...but ultimately PSLE is still very much the same, past year paper and memorizing....and it is getting harder year after year.
What's with all the fanciful stuff? To impress WHO? Sure we are superb, but who can truly claim the credit when kids do well?
If I really have to justify, will tell my children
- be thankful they are born in Singapore
- be thankful that we have govt that provide reasonable study opportunities
- be thankful to the teachers who have taught them (没功劳也有苦劳）
- be thankful they are born healthy & normal
- be thankful that the parents can provide enough for them to go school comfortably & conducive environment & support
- give me credit for willing to stay home to take care of them & chauffeur them around
& the daddy to give up car to take MRT from one end to the other so that they can travel in comfort
- give some credit to their tutors for enlightening them when in doubt
- most of all, give themselves credit & a pat on their own shoulder (or back arh??) for willing to adopt the right attitude & study hard !!!
Did I forget anyone else??
Maybe Need to give ksp some credit for all the tips & venue to rant & keep my sanity too
-
PiggyLalala:
Piggy... I may not always agree with you, but thanks for this impartial assessment.
It is a common practice for a primary school teacher to teach EMS. Unlike secondary teachers where MOE will assign two teaching subjects to each teacher during their recruitment exercise, primary school teachers recruited are expected to be competent to teach EMS. (Not too sure whether there is any changes now. ) However i believe that the principals in the primary schools have the final say to the staff deployment. The current trend that i have observed is, more schools are having subject -specialization teachers for the P5 and P6 which I think it is good as it is difficult for one to be equally competent in teaching all 3 subjects.Chenonceau:
Some Evidence that Primary School Teachers Subject-Specialize
(1) I admit that I could not find any write-up stating that primary school Teachers MUST teach EMS. Still, if we look at it logically, the link I provided above, would not need to be written if it was not ALREADY understood that primary school teachers are expected to teach more than one subject - and thus MOE found it necessary to now specify that Art, Music and PE Teachers henceforth don't have to.
(2) However, cousin of mine is a primary school Math HOD and she assures me that all primary school teachers have to be prepared to teach EMS. I gave Motivation Coaching to 2 primary school teachers who tell me that primary school teachers are expected to teach EMS (and it is a bonus if they are not made to).
(3) In the implementation, it is clear that in some schools, Principals allow Teachers to subject specialize. In other schools, no.... because currently, DS Math Teacher also teaches him Science. In P4, his form teacher taught EMS.
That Some Primary School Teachers Subject-Specialize Means No Policy Agains it?
Lastly, just because some schools allow Teachers to subject-specialize is no clear indication that there is no policy dictating that Teachers MUST teach EMS. Remember the fracas around DSA Appeals last year? The MOE stated that policy-wise, schools were not allowed to accept appeals. Yet schools did... and only stopped when MOE enforced. Might this be the case again?
I agree it could well be that MOE did state that teachers should subject-specialize and did not enforce, and that is why my DS' P4 Teacher handled EMS. His P5&6 Teacher handles Math and Science.
Allowing subject-specialization makes life easier for Teachers too... and that will help them teach better. Why not do it? I am sure there are constraints.
There are constraints. The primary school may not have enough trs to teach a particular subject, maybe english or science if all the teachers that are posted to the school prefer to teach the same subject Maths. Another contraint I heard is in planning of the time table. However, all these constraints can be overcome as shown by schools that have successfully implemented it. The better ones are moving into banding the students according to their strengths in different subjects.
-
buds:
The only time i recall one form teacher who teaches all except MT is at P1 level. In some schools, the same form teacher follow up with the same class in P2 and still continue to have the teacher teach EMS. Subsequent years, a different teacher for every subject.
Lucky you! My DS has not been that fortunate. In his school, with the exception of P5, his form teachers taught him EMS including his final P6 year.
In my DD's school it is also similar. So far, its EMS with the exception of P4. This year, P5, her form teacher also takes her EMS.
Whether official policy or not, principal-driven or not, it's happening and I've spoken with the P & VPs, they tell me all the politically correct answers \"Teachers are expected to be able to teach EMS at primary school if required. Of course, there are teachers who request not to....blah blah blah.\"
At my DD's school, Science results have been dropping worse than stock market. I had a heart to heart talk with P to get in Specialists to help Parents & KIds because the school had been left without Science HOD for 2 years. For one of the SA, the highest score in my DD's cohort was 84, and you can imagine the percentage of kids who failed that exam. I could tell that Science teaching was dropping seriously. Was anything done? Nothing. They continue to test at very high standards but teaching is not adequate.
We have had many successful partnerships with Principals and teachers from both the schools my girls have attended/is currently still attending.
I've been involved in my kids' school as well, and of course, some Ps are more open to suggestions on curriculum & teaching. If they don't want you to interfere, they will have good PR skills to ward off your suggestions. With my kids failing at school or grades dropping like stock market, I had consult the Specialists whom I have to pay for.
I'm not a grades-crazy kind of parent. I also didn't believe in tuition. I wanted to believe in the school system. But when my kids started to fail or get borderline grades from P3, and I had to use Grammar Handbooks, Science Handbooks, pay Specialists' Consultants to get learning done, I'm getting really pissed. I feel blessed we're not so poor that we can't afford tuition but with 4 kids, it's definitely a huge financial burden. I speak up for those who can't afford. What about them? -
:goodpost: beanbear !
I just want to add our experience regarding teacher specialisation :
My ds is current year P6. For his cohort, there are some classes with different teachers teaching E/M/S (ie. specialised) and two classes with 1 teacher teaching EMS. DS from P1-P6, his form teacher teaches EMS. So even within the SAME school, there could be different mode of resource allocation.
Hence, I totally agree whether policy or other reasons, it is happening.
Also totally agree some Principals are more open to suggestions on curriculum & teaching than others. As an off-topic example, over the past few years, a group of parents including myself, have politely requested the school to release marks of compo paper and oral components taken by the children during exams. We spoke to HOD, VP, P....we were politely warded off/stalled. As of the recent P6 SA1 exam, the pupils still do not get the marks (they get a 5marks difference range. eg. 45-50). They also do not get to see the compo paper they did after the exams. As I've asked in other thread, why make the children take an exam and not release their score, or let them see the paper to see where they've gone wrong ? Makes absolutely no sense to me.
I accept that there are constraints but I see opportunities for MOE or schools as a whole to leverage off each other : why is it some schools can workaround constraints and some can't ?
Thinking alound on this issue of tuition, competition to get to \"good\" Secondary schools etc : Currently, GE and mainstream pupils results are taken as a whole for standard deviation and t-score computation. If MOE work out a way to compute the t-score within the mainstream only, will it result in a \"fairer\" t-score within the mainstream and take some pressure off the rat race and tuition scene ? -
there is no MOE policy on subject specialization, NEITHER is there MOE mandatory policy on teaching multiple subjects, viz EMS. Handling EMS by a single teacher could be the fancy of some principals but it does not mean every school is doing it or at every level, nor it is a policy
Also, subject specialization is not equal to non-multiple subject teaching
between black and white there are multiple shades of grey
to say that MOE has a policy that the teachers must handle multiple subjects a matter of policy is utter rubbish. as a policy, if not sure, don’t say it is policy. please don’t mislead other readers who are not well informed or who is not aware that principal has discretion …
please don’t ascribe speculation or personal impression or specific circumstances to be MOE policy, unless you are sure and dead certain it is a policy. I find it very detestable and very misleading
bullshit may be vulgar but not profane, it is impolite to some and it does not pretend to sugar coat the nonsense -
pixiedust:
That is totally irresponsible not to be able to see where the mistakes are and where the improvements need to be made. The principal probably knows the teachers are just simply any how mark the test papers ?
As an off-topic example, over the past few years, a group of parents including myself, have politely requested the school to release marks of compo paper and oral components taken by the children during exams. We spoke to HOD, VP, P....we were politely warded off/stalled. As of the recent P6 SA1 exam, the pupils still do not get the marks (they get a 5marks difference range. eg. 45-50). They also do not get to see the compo paper they did after the exams. As I've asked in other thread, why make the children take an exam and not release their score, or let them see the paper to see where they've gone wrong ? Makes absolutely no sense to me.
There are tow things here : (1) not able to learn from mistakes; and (2) not able to know whether the papers were correctly marked, hence possibly reinforcing learning of wrong things.
This is a dangerous school to be in. Best practice is to be able to discuss the scoring in each component so that effort could be put in the right component to improve learning. This is widely know that many schools do go into such details, each component's strength and weakness exhibited by the studentspixiedust:
The constraints is the ability of the principal to plan and their admin manager's experience / ability in the time tabling between subjects / teachers.I accept that there are constraints but I see opportunities for MOE or schools as a whole to leverage off each other : why is it some schools can workaround constraints and some can't ?
pixiedust:
GEP students have no advantage of mainstream students in PSLE. If anything they are at a disadvantage because they only start to focus on PSLE preparation after P6 SA1. In terms of t-score, they sit the same papers as the mainstream students, and being GEP does not necessarily be scoring higher than mainstream. As a matter of fact, many GEP kids score lower than many mainstream students. The 'pressure' is perceived, not real. Every kid fits onto a point on the normal distribution curveThinking alound on this issue of tuition, competition to get to \"good\" Secondary schools etc : Currently, GE and mainstream pupils results are taken as a whole for standard deviation and t-score computation. If MOE work out a way to compute the t-score within the mainstream only, will it result in a \"fairer\" t-score within the mainstream and take some pressure off the rat race and tuition scene ?
-
oxyleo:
:goodpost:It is evident not everyone's experiences are the same. Do note we may all be comparing experiences occurring within different timelines. Some of us have kids who are already working adults. Some have kids who are too young or in lower pri to even fathom the stress encountered in upp Pri. Some don't even get involved with teaching their children. Hopefully we can all try to understand from the experiences shared by everyone here in its rightful context.
If we are always stuck in an air-con room, it's going to be difficult to understand someone's complaint about the horrific sweltering heat.
If we are used to driving or being chauffeured around, it is going to be difficult to understand why some people complain about bus delays in the sweltering heat. We may want to try it for ourselves first before brushing it off as a complaint. It is also way different if you are dressed in exercise gear for a leisurely run, and shower thereafter, vs perspiring in the heat when you are dressed in work attire heading for the next 10 hours of work. Very, very different experiences.
If we visit The Marketplace at Tanglin Mall for weekly grocery shopping, we are not going to understand why everyone else seems to complain how overcrowded every other mall seems to be on weekends.
there is no policy that says every supermarket has to be like Tanglin Mall, is there ?
there is no policy that says going to work must take bus, is there ? there is also no policy that says must shop at Tanglin Mall or NTUC
if you take bus, please don't say it is a policy to take bus
if you are chauffeured, don't say it is a policy not to take bus
it is absurd that people can ascribe it to MOE policy when it is very much principal's discretion and decision point, and then everything is MOE's fault again -
verykiasu2010:
I must agree with vks2010.
GEP students have no advantage of mainstream students in PSLE. If anything they are at a disadvantage because they only start to focus on PSLE preparation after P6 SA1. In terms of t-score, they sit the same papers as the mainstream students, and being GEP does not necessarily be scoring higher than mainstream. As a matter of fact, many GEP kids score lower than many mainstream students. The 'pressure' is perceived, not real. Every kid fits onto a point on the normal distribution curvepixiedust:
Thinking alound on this issue of tuition, competition to get to \"good\" Secondary schools etc : Currently, GE and mainstream pupils results are taken as a whole for standard deviation and t-score computation. If MOE work out a way to compute the t-score within the mainstream only, will it result in a \"fairer\" t-score within the mainstream and take some pressure off the rat race and tuition scene ?
Whether there is GEP or not, these kids are already supposed to be the 'smarter' lot. There's only 1% of them & taking them out will not give a true indication of how the kids really perform. It's like let's take china out of the olympics table-tennis competitions...... :siam: -
verykiasu2010:
...That is totally irresponsible not to be able to see where the mistakes are and where the improvements need to be made. The principal probably knows the teachers are just simply any how mark the test papers ? ...........This is a dangerous school to be in.......
Well, whoever has the power to make the decision probably doesn't think it is irresponsible, or has other \"constraints\". I've checked with my friends, some of their kids school return the paper to the children in class (but not allowed to bring home) and also release the score, but there is ONE other school which also refuses to release the mark and return the paper so our school is not the only one. One of my friends even wrote to the new Education Minister on this.
Again, policy or whatnot, this is what is happening.
Why must parents fight these \"wars\" with the schools ?
No, I don't expect all supermarkets to be Tanglin Mall Market Place.
but for government primary schools, I would expect all to have similar framework eg. NTUC. I can accept services and selection may be better at certain branches, there should be a baseline that all should cover. Like some kind of \"standard of business operation\".
If we have Tanglin Mall Market Place and wet markets, then can we shake our fingers at those who don't stay near Tanglin Mall and had to go to wet markets, and consequently denied access to some resources/knowledge, to want to go tuition ?
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login