Tuition not the way to success
Nov 29, 2008
Tuition not the way to success
WHEN I collected my Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) results in 1985, I was told I had been selected to attend a Special Assistance Plan (SAP) secondary school. This sudden 'promotion' did my parents proud but it gave me much stress. The moment I started at the SAP school, I fell from being the top girl to being among the top 15. For the first time in my life, I knew I was simply 'not good enough' and was bitterly disappointed with myself.
Since almost everyone ahead of me had tuition of various kinds, I told my parents I needed help too.It was not long before my single-income family began to channel huge amounts towards education investment - tuition for me and my three siblings. One day, the principal of my SAP school in Katong asked to meet my parents concerning my lacklustre grades. He wanted me to drop chemistry and English literature specifically, 'so as not to pull down the school standard'. After my mother pleaded with him tearfully, this humiliating episode ended with more tuition for me and less retirement funds for my food-seller parents. In all, I had tuition in six out of 10 subjects, not because I did badly, but because I was not good enough to achieve the As and Bs the school was furiously churning out.
Ironically, I ended up with 8As and 2Bs in my O levels. 2Bs coincidentally were in subjects where I had no tuition, English and Chinese as first languages. At the college of my choice, I had tuition again in two out of four subjects - Principles of Accounting and Mathematics C, where I was struggling due to lack of interest. Eventually, I ended up with a degree in accountancy when my interests were clearly art, music, dance and French since I was very young.
However, as the eldest child, I did not have the liberty to follow my dreams but was encouraged to compete in the mainstream and be a 'doctor, lawyer or accountant' and help the family financially. As a squeamish, peace-loving individual, I graduated with an accountancy degree that now lies forgotten. I quit auditing which was super dull and did sales instead, so as to help finance the family, including the tertiary education of my three siblings.
Now I am a parent and a full-time housewife, I am disgusted by the number of primary school pupils taking tuition classes. Even toddlers are not spared, with enrichment courses in phonetics and mathematics. Having been through the pressure-cooker education system, where the rich and exam-smart clearly had an advantage, I and my master's degree-turned-pianist husband decided to homeschool our child. We prefer to guide her and help her develop in areas where her interest and passion lie, be they in music, art, dance, sports or even academics. After all, as loving parents, we want her to enjoy her childhood and cultivate the joy of learning, which is far more important than passing so many tests and exams in order to obtain more paper qualifications.
Perhaps it is time for other parents to reflect as well. Children these days have so much education-related stress that, for many, the joy of learning is clearly lacking. What has become of our nation, when tuition is an integral part of achieving so-called 'success' in life and at work? Clearly, the many tuition centres are not complaining and nor are the many current and retired school teachers who supplement their income by providing tuition classes and writing assessment materials.
Rebecca Wang (Mdm)
Labels: PSLE
Tuition may help, but academic success is really down to the student
Nov 29, 2008
Tuition may help, but academic success is really down to the student
I REFER to Ms Pamela Liu's letter on Wednesday, 'It's about who can find better tutors'. I was deeply hurt as her letter insinuated that good grades in the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) can be attributed solely to the affluence of the child's family, and therefore tuition.
First, I would like to congratulate Ms Liu's daughter on her good PSLE scores. As a student who completed my PSLE a couple of years ago, and got into one of the top schools in Singapore thanks to sheer hard work and determination, I would like to give my views on Ms Liu's claims.
First of all, what is the rationale for lamenting the education scene in Singapore, when she seems to be proud oft her child's score?
These are my deductions from Ms Liu's letter: that tuition equates to good grades, and greater affluence promises better education.
Let me clarify the first deduction. Ms Liu is sorely mistaken about the purpose of tuition. In her letter, she said: 'Those who have the money to employ tuition teachers will inevitably do better than their peers with equal academic ability.' Does she have the impression that tuition teachers are magicians who can instantly enhance the student's academic abilities with a stroke of their magic pen? Tuition is only a supplement, which ensures that the student spends more time on subjects that he is weak in.
As the saying goes, 'you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink'. Parents may do their part providing educational support for their children, and tuition teachers may provide guidance, but it is up to the child to use that tool to his benefit, by putting in sheer hard work.
My parents provided me with tuition during that crucial year. I seized that opportunity to spend more time on my weak subjects, paying close attention and diligently doing assessments. Some of my peers who had tuition did not necessarily get better grades. I also have peers who do not have stay-home parents, or tuition, but have made it to some of the top schools in Singapore with good PSLE results. This only goes to show that the effort by the student and the determination of the student is responsible for his grades, not anything else. Therefore, it is unfair of Ms Liu to depict tuition as exclusively responsible for a student's good academic performance.
Ms Liu claimed that 'PSLE measures more the family's ability to find and pay for good tuition teachers'. I beg to differ. Parents who arrange tuition for their children do so because they prioritise and put their child's needs first, as my parents did, not because they have cash to spare.
Ms Liu asked what would become of bright, promising but poorer students. The Government gives numerous subsidies, such as the Edusave scholarship, and provides so much help for financially troubled students. There are numerous organisations such as Sinda and Mendaki that give subsidised tuition to financially troubled students. With so much help given to financially challenged students, I find it unreasonable to claim that deserving but financially challenged students miss out on a better education. As a student, I find that in Singapore, any student who deserves an education in a top school is not denied one because of his monetary status.
As Ms Liu said, parents fork out thousands of dollars to arrange tuition for their children. But not each and every one of them passes the PSLE with flying colours.
Nivruthi Prasad (Miss)
Labels: PSLE
PSLE can never be a level playing field
Nov 29, 2008
PSLE can never be a level playing field
THE recent arguments on whether the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) is a level playing field are not new. Like any written and structured exam, it is only a matter of time before students and teachers find legitimate ways to score ever higher marks. Whether it is enduring gruelling tuition sessions or mugging through thousands of pages of assessment exercises, only the fittest will survive and excel. This is the essence of a meritocratic society, even if it applies here to 12-year-olds.
The only way to end all argument is to scrap the PSLE and allocate secondary schools by location, as it is done in Taiwan and Japan. In these places, the first major test of students' academic ability comes only when they are 15, that is, at the high school entrance exams. Is it a level playing field for them? Of course not. In a free society, Japan or Singapore, it will never be a level playing field as there is nothing to stop people spending huge amounts of their own resources to achieve their goals, even if it is only a child's written exam.
So why do parents complain that the PSLE is not a level playing field? I can only conclude that they have finally realised that they live in Singapore, where academic achievement typically underpins individual success.
In feudal China, scholars took the imperial exams once every three years to fight for a place in the imperial court. It was common see scholars spend their whole life to achieve this sacrosanct goal of being a court official, which normally implied glory and wealth to the individual and his family.
The PSLE is probably more cruel than the imperial Chinese exam, because everyone usually has only one shot at it in his lifetime. The good news is that life does not end with a mediocre PSLE result. Nor does it mean a top PSLE student will succeed in the future. The battle may be lost but there is still a war to be won, a war of trying to live a meaningful life.
On a personal note, I detest the PSLE because it puts too much stress on parents and especially children at such a young age. However, I am not against O levels or A levels as they are still the fairest means to identify the cream of the cohort. Are O levels and A levels a level playing field? No. Exams will always be a war of resources but fear not, as historically, only those who use their limited resources wisely will win and not those who have the most resources.
Goh Jong Hou
Labels: PSLE
