Asia spending billions on tutors: study

[Busymom]

Limlim


This is what you may have overlooked.

ksi:

This is only one area, there could be more and Sun_2010 has mentioned about materials designed which should rightfully belong to the school. Also, how is MOE or school going to track if a teacher is teaching their own students or not? It is again an issue of span of control. In any case, this moonlight issue in the commercial world is clearly spelt out in the hiring contract for most large companies with protection over intellectual property rights and their customer base.

[oxyleo]

I was referring to tuition classes conducted by external vendors held in school premise. Sometimes, I wonder: is it because these tuition teachers possess certain skill sets that seem to able to deliver the lessons more interestingly or some methodologies that seem to be able to help the students to grasp the concepts better? Perhaps, MOE/Schools can find out more and might even consider to adopt these/enhance in their teaching approach. Perhaps, MOE/Schools might want to engage the so called \"Super Tutors\" as their \"Advisors/Consultants\" (make sense?). My thought is: Broadly speaking, here we have people with distinctive roles in 3 entities: \"MOE/Schools\", \"Tuition Centers\" & \"Home\" - if we could provide a \"integrated & neutral\" platform we might be able to \"cool down\" THIS fever. For instance, for simplicity sakes - \"MOE/Schools\" have its own sets of goals/KPIs, \"Tuition Centers\" - P/L driven organizations by and large, \"Home\" - own unique circumstances; Now a very outstanding retired teacher can choose to go this alternative \"integrated & neutral\" platform to reach out instead of just volunteering his/her service to particular Schools/Communities thus restricting its impact. At the same time, this individual can enjoy the freedom/flexibility while doing this. At least, in Pri/Sec educations if we could bring \" essential basic knowledge\" at \"affordable cost/convenient way\" to majority of Singaporeans I think the reliance on \"Tuition Centers\" may reduce.


BlurDad, I like your suggestion very much. It makes great sense. Alleviate the current situation, and optimize resources by getting qualified retirees involved in nurturing the next generation. Apologies I couldn't quote it in full context from your original post. Oh maybe I could, but I didn't know how to. Haha!

[Chenonceau]

Food for Thought... I don't agree with everything but I do agree that with meritocracy, elites believe they are ENTITLED to success whilst others are not... and fail on the attitude of stewardship... and empathy for others who don't succeed.


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/19/opinion/19brooks.html


Again, I don't agree with everything but this is well-written...
http://www.straitstimes.com/STForum/Story/STIStory_822110.html

[oxyleo]

verykiasu2010:

Whether councillor or not, the demand to quote names is for the claimants to back up the claims instead of just repeating hearsay of hearsay, which honestly speaking, has zero credibility unless one is willing to back it up. Keyboard warrior can say anything behind anonymity, parroting others' comments adding salt and vinegar, creating a false front of alarming issues

BUT if they really want to track you down even if you don't name names, they could. That is how they tracked down those who make racial / seditious comments and they are caught by their IP number. If one day MOE decides enough nonsense is enough, they could just do it. As for me and my comments, they are on valid school names which can be validated

This is in addition to my earlier reply to your post. To some extent, whilst naming names gives you a feel of some credibility toward the complainants, naming of names can also be seen by others as a witch hunt, which may be even more detrimental in the greater scheme of things. Like you said, or was it Buds, we don't want this Forum to scare people. That includes teachers who read this forum. The conscious veering away from individual public attacks on teachers and schools by Forummers who sense a tuition phenomenon as unhealthy is actually a display of maturity, for the focus is not on individual blame, or shame, but rather, on suggestions to improving/tackling a system.

In that regard, I see suggestions from Chen and limlim, from a broader sense, as doing just that. Offering suggestions to improve a system. Of course, devils are in the details, and to that I agree healthy debate can assist in fine tuning the suggestions. But the overall approach is a healthy one. at the very least, way healthier than a Blame and Shame tactic towards schools and individual teachers. Having been a teacher before yourself, you probably can identify with this.

[Chenonceau]

oxyleo:

But the overall approach is a healthy one. at the very least, way healthier than a Blame and Shame tactic towards schools and individual teachers. Having been a teacher before yourself, you probably can identify with this.

:goodpost:

[oxyleo]

Chenonceau:

Food for Thought... I don't agree with everything but I do agree that with meritocracy, elites believe they are ENTITLED to success whilst others are not... and fail on the attitude of stewardship... and empathy for others who don't succeed.


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/19/opinion/19brooks.html


Again, I don't agree with everything but this is well-written...
http://www.straitstimes.com/STForum/Story/STIStory_822110.html

Chen - thanks! Enjoyed the reads.

In fact, David Brooks has one more which was published in ST yesterday under the Opinion section. I can't seem to locate the link online, but I tracked down this one.

http://www.sacbee.com/2012/07/14/4630373/todays-elite-lacks-the-self-conscious.html

Under another website. Same article, same writer, different title header though. Haha! The one in ST is way subtler.

The takeaway for me from this article is nicely summed up in his last sentence: \"I want to keep the current social order, but I want to give it a different ethos and institutions that are more consistent with its existing ideals.\"

[oxyleo]

Singfrench:

hi nice to see that there are parents on both sides of the argument.


To me the whole issue of tuition is not about individuals and whether u want, dowan or no choice...Neither is it about MOE or ultra-kiasu parents. Every parents wants the best for their child. It may be by giving tuition, enrichment, hobbies, holidays, personal grooming etc etc.

Singfrench, apologies I took so long to come back to your post. Here are my thoughts. Not representative of the rest of the Forummers, just mine. Yes, I agree with your observation. Every parent wants to give their best, and how they define their best is different.

Looking at tuition from an individualistic point of view really favors the elites and breeds an elitist mentality. We have been brought up in this generation where everyone wants to remain elite, become elite or get closer to being elite. It has been inculcated in us that the only way to make it in life is to do well in education. Study hard, go uni, get a good job blahblah.

This para is subject to a fair amount of interpretation. And quite a landmine. Don't want to trip over anything here. Just wanna say meritocracy, which was embraced by many countries, including ours, has classified and sgementised people, all in the spirit of equity really and equal opportunities. Meritocracy was never intended to be a bad thing. Those that emerged the most successful, we classify as the elites. Those that are at the bottom rung, the underprivileged. So your observation on how we were brought up to do well in school etc I think is more a case of wanting to seek a better life that those before us (our parents), rather than aspiring to be an elite. Of course, being an elite in a meritocratic system is tantamount to the highest order, and I'm sure those a rung below aspire towards it, but it is probably not representative of the aspirations of everyone. My own thoughts.

Looking at the bigger picture, tuition is not only responsible for perpetuating this elitism but it is also widening the income gap and reducing social mobility. But who to blame? No point blaming the parents for wanting the best, no point blaming MOE for teacher standards or setting harder than syllabus papers.

Ok I'm not sure about this perpetuating elitism bit. Wont comment on this one, ok?

If everyone had no tuition, no matter how hard they set the papers there'll still be t-scores according to the bell curves, only diff is the bell curve would have a lower correlation to the income of the parents. It is a fact that kids from higher income families (even in developed countries without tuition culture) tend to do better as they have greater family support and more stable family structures. But the fact that tuition has come into play has further skewed the results in favor of the richer parents. This is of course unfair to society at large and definitely unfair to the smart kid from a poor home.

In the 60s, 70s and 80s social mobility was rife and everyone who was determined and worked hard could move up the social ladder. But now with the tuition from a very young age and a very 'uneven' schooling system plus other advantages the rich kid has over his peers, the less affluent can no longer compete. In order to enhance social mobility, so that the poorer have a better chance of moving up, we should look at it from a societal point of view and our policies should be changed to promote more fairness and less elitism.

I agree with promoting more fairness, more in the sense of policies aimed at increasing the probability of success through equal opportunity and informed decision making (note: not equal to ensuring success) for a lower income family child. I'm don't think our policies are intended to promote elitism so to speak, but of course, elites by and large in any system inherently have advantages, including financial resources, enriched upbringing and so on. These are advantages that are inherent on their own, and not necessarily because policies are intended to favor them.

i really don't know how to accomplish this but our million dollar ministers who have a wealth of knowledge and have studied systems from all over the world should make it a mission to promote lowering the income gap and enhancing social mobility in singapore.

Yes, I think our ministers are discussing these areas and exploring ways to do that, and education is certainly one way to look into to do so.

After some discussion with friends, some suggestions might be:

-- longer school day with (subcontracted) homework supervision and extra activities available for all within the school setting. (Parents would not have to worry about child care too)

This is already available in a number of schools. Don't know proportion of schools though. It's the student care service. The one in my son's school is called Morning Star. Offers what you describe above. Pupils from schools that don't offer this service typically take a school bus to another student care near their home maybe.

-- lower the stakes of PSLE: No selective transition from Pri to Sec. Kids below 12 have lower intrinsic motivation and hence need more adult involvement. (tutor or parental coaching favors the rich). IMHO good PSLE results is not necessarily a reflection of a child's true intelligence or motivation (just a measure of how much coaching he's had). I also think a child with too much external pushing will have trouble developing his own intrinsic motivation to do well independantly later in life. (but thats another issue)

This one is very very tricky. They call this the dumbing down effect. And because we have the effects of the UK to witness for ourselves, many are concerned, rightly so, and horrified if the current pressure from tuition leads to MOE taking this step. I actually dont think we should do this, taking away PSLE, tests etc. It is very painful I agree, and access to tuition makes it much worse, but we all mostly agree it is impossible to ban tuition and there are also negative consequences to doing away with tests or lowering standards too, namely the dumbing down effect. So my view is, as a first step, that schools be made perhaps to abide by clearer guidelines of uniformity. Textbooks, and a centralized online resource, like Chen suggests are a fantastic first step. Also, allowing parents to make informed decisions. Right now, our decisions are largely based on PSLE results. Perhaps we need to also have schools disclose if they do intend to screen children from the 1st week of P1, or need children to enter P1 having mastered HYPY and reading standards up to age 8. Today, not all do. Some do, some don't. Or whether children who score below a certain grade in spelling or tests per level will have to do remedial in school. Currently, each school is different. In some, it may be 80 marks and below, in others, 60 marks and below. Stuff like that. If we want to allow schools to make such decisions autonomously, in terms of how they test and when they stream, we could do better in how they disclose information to parents so that choices are made based on informed decisions. No unnecessary rude shocks.

-- no more elite schools: truly equal opportunities for all. e.g.: setting a quota based on household income (e.g. every school must have 20 % of the lowest 20%tile), trying to make core teaching more uniform across all schools, less focus on t-scores.

This one probably won't go down well, although some will secretly wish for it. Haha! Like I mentioned earlier, it is probably more palatable to consider increasing probability of success for those in the lower income category, rather than doing away with elite/ branded schools altogether.

That was a rant about a much discussed issues within my circle of friends.
Feel free to disagree would love to hear other opinions.

Geez I hope I didn't trip over any land mines here. If I suddenly disappear from this forum... :?: :imdrowning:

[Lilac66]

oxyleo:

Geez I hope I didn't trip over any land mines here. If I suddenly disappear from this forum... :?: :imdrowning:

haha, my sentiments too. But if you really disappear , to reappear again after recuperating, your \"功力\" will then be 2X, 3X, 10X more than now.(to borrow CHC Kong Hee's words)

[oxyleo]

Lilac66:

oxyleo:

Geez I hope I didn't trip over any land mines here. If I suddenly disappear from this forum... :?: :imdrowning:

haha, my sentiments too. But if you really disappear , to reappear again after recuperating, your \"功力\" will then be 2X, 3X, 10X more than now.(to borrow CHC Kong Hee's words)

:rotflmao: lilac66 - like not so 值得 for me hor? People disappear after getting to live in Sentosa Cove and owning property in Beverly Hills. Me ain't no such good life leh. No fair lah! Hahahaha!

[Chenonceau]

oxyleo:

http://www.sacbee.com/2012/07/14/4630373/todays-elite-lacks-the-self-conscious.html

Pleasure to read. Thanks a bunch.