Serious Dragon King Orders RI To Take In Losers And Betas! Giving In To Oppie Populist Pressure?

[borom]

barking up the wrong tree-the real issue is all these low quality indian Nationals, Pinoys and PRC's many of whom have fake papers flooding the red dot and bringing it down.
Elite schools will always have a higher proportion of kids from elite backgrounds .If you want to reduce the overdependence on academic results (where rich kids with tuition do better), than give more points for non academic achievements esp sports in the Secondary One Posting Exercise . Points can be given based on the school ranking in the national sports competition ect2.The Direct School Admission Exercise is not good enough. For example I find its easier to get A for PSLE than to be a school player for the top three primary school teams.

 

[zhihau]

This super tutor class size is usually limit to 20. Normal school class size is 40. However, we need to remember that students attend this tuition only once a week, max 2 hours, while students go to school everyday.

Why the big difference it results? Is it class size that makes the effectiveness of teaching to be so much better from 2 hrs per week at tuition as compared to more than 10 hrs per week in school?

It is true that in school, there are bad hats that disrupt the lessons. However, I have parents from top JC asking for super tutors. Amazingly, their kids grade improved from C to A. Why?

I like hard questions asked. Gimme this weekend to ask some hard questions from my sources so I can get some answers. Sounds SM enough? :p:p:p

 

[hofmann]

What RI has become is simply symptomatic of what ails our country.

Neither fiscal nor monetary policies are going to change the imbalance in demographic makeup of the students.

I understand and agree with your assumption. Yes, we need to have "nature" first so that it is easier to "nurture". However, many rich kids are also struggling to get top grades. Their parents are the driving force behind the creation of super tutors. They hunt down the best tutors and got the results they want. Why can't the school teachers teach the same way like to achieve the same results? Is it the problem of ratio of teacher to student? Don't think so because it is conducted in groups and only 1 lesson per week.

Back to gene pool. Therefore if by chance a non elite happens to produce a smart kid today, the chance for him or her to make the grade is lesser now because of the education system. The questions is so much harder now but the teaching standard is lower. So usually ultra intelligence is needed if not then engage the service of super tutor.

All this talk of genes leaves out the most important criteria to a child's success IMO: the parents' attitude in grooming their children. On the one extreme u have the stay at home tiger Mom to the other extreme of the absentee parent.

Occasionally nature throws up the odd-ball who is motivated and disciplined despite their circumstances and will succeed against the odds. But most of the other successful children are moulded/nurtured into such.

There are many instances of children of PHD/CEO parents who don't excel academically, most likely due to abesntee parents.

In the case of the poorer familes, working shifts, OT, double jobs etc, the parents become absentee by default, not their choice. Others might be just exhausted after a hard Day's work and are present but disengaged.

Nature at best gives one a headstart, but that can be eroded easily through laziness and poor attitude towards life and studies.

So what children need are mentors who can guide and help them in their studies and other life decisions. And to that end, smaller class sizes will go a long way.

But that's not enough. The reason why super tutors exists is simply because some teachers are simply better than others. And where do the best teachers in Singapore get assigned to/hired by? The elite schools. Some fall through the cracks and end up in regular schools.

But producing automatons who memorize the periodic table isnt the answer. We need our children to be self-learning, problem solving machines. Creativity is borne out of necessity and schools must equip students with the knowledge and skills to construct their creations. Not just theoretical skills but real machine skills as well which is highly lacking in our kids. (The maker/DIY culture should be firmly entrenched in the class room... All kids should be making some "thing" every year for their entire 12 years in school as group projects)

I'm spent.. that's all for now.

 

[JohnTan]

As a rich person, I want my kids to go to the best schools, to be taught by the best teachers in the best possible environment. I do not like my kids mixing around with the low SES people, where they will teach my kids how to swear, fight, cheat, steal, take drugs and not pay attention in school. I don't want my kids to end up as road sweepers, drug addicts or ah bengs.

RI should not give in to populist pressure to take in low SES people.

 

[zhihau]

Why the big difference it results?

Got some info, I'll try to make things simple, but any simpler do no justice for what I need to share.

For Primary level, a typical teacher now specialises in 2 teaching subjects, a nice switch to match their Secondary level counterparts.

Teachers from both levels have an average of 13 hours per week of lesson, typically straddled over 4 classes of students, i.e each class gets about 3 hours of contact with each teacher per week, this is in contrast to the 2 hours the tutor spends with his/her students.

The marking load aside, the learning pace of a larger group of student varies more than that in a tuition class and the teacher has to cater to the majority. The tutor has numerical advantage as each student's pace can be matched with his/her likings and the tutor can always drop the student.

Kids who ventured to tutors have the learning mode turned on whilst kids in school may still be in play or sleep mode. Somehow the motivational level is just different. Behavioral issues can affect learning environment very easily, friendship issues and whatever rubbish further disrupts learning in schools.

A major factor raised is this: those kids with tuition have their parents monitoring their progress a lot more fervently compared to those kids without, i.e. parental engagement is a lot stronger for kids engaged in tuition.

ps: Jojo and her theory of sex in tight spaces doesn't cut well with tantric sex!

 

[eatshitndie]

must have teacheresses like these in order to attract attention of students.

 

[Seee3]

Got some info, I'll try to make things simple, but any simpler do no justice for what I need to share.

For Primary level, a typical teacher now specialises in 2 teaching subjects, a nice switch to match their Secondary level counterparts.

Teachers from both levels have an average of 13 hours per week of lesson, typically straddled over 4 classes of students, i.e each class gets about 3 hours of contact with each teacher per week, this is in contrast to the 2 hours the tutor spends with his/her students.

The marking load aside, the learning pace of a larger group of student varies more than that in a tuition class and the teacher has to cater to the majority. The tutor has numerical advantage as each student's pace can be matched with his/her likings and the tutor can always drop the student.

Kids who ventured to tutors have the learning mode turned on whilst kids in school may still be in play or sleep mode. Somehow the motivational level is just different. Behavioral issues can affect learning environment very easily, friendship issues and whatever rubbish further disrupts learning in schools.

A major factor raised is this: those kids with tuition have their parents monitoring their progress a lot more fervently compared to those kids without, i.e. parental engagement is a lot stronger for kids engaged in tuition.

ps: Jojo and her theory of sex in tight spaces doesn't cut well with tantric sex!

Agreed with most points. However, the most important factor is missing. It is the way teaching materials are organized and the method of instruction. I know a pri math tutir teaching p4 kids simultaneous equation. The kids understood and applied it. School said too difficult don't overload the kid. These tutor does not teach top grade kids but ordinary neighborhood children.

 

[JohnTan]

Got some info, I'll try to make things simple, but any simpler do no justice for what I need to share.

For Primary level, a typical teacher now specialises in 2 teaching subjects, a nice switch to match their Secondary level counterparts.

Teachers from both levels have an average of 13 hours per week of lesson, typically straddled over 4 classes of students, i.e each class gets about 3 hours of contact with each teacher per week, this is in contrast to the 2 hours the tutor spends with his/her students.

The marking load aside, the learning pace of a larger group of student varies more than that in a tuition class and the teacher has to cater to the majority. The tutor has numerical advantage as each student's pace can be matched with his/her likings and the tutor can always drop the student.

Kids who ventured to tutors have the learning mode turned on whilst kids in school may still be in play or sleep mode. Somehow the motivational level is just different. Behavioral issues can affect learning environment very easily, friendship issues and whatever rubbish further disrupts learning in schools.

A major factor raised is this: those kids with tuition have their parents monitoring their progress a lot more fervently compared to those kids without, i.e. parental engagement is a lot stronger for kids engaged in tuition.

ps: Jojo and her theory of sex in tight spaces doesn't cut well with tantric sex!

From my network of parents with younger kids, our observation is that if the kid is placed in an environment where most of his or her peers are well behaved and hardworking, the kid will very likely be well behaved and hardworking.

Why else do you think I sent my kids to the best elite schools?

It is to ensure that my kids are in a conducive environment for study and play, with minimal exposure to low SES children who are unmotivated and poorly behaved.

 

[zhihau]

However, the most important factor is missing. It is the way teaching materials are organized and the method of instruction.

Just for you, bro. I'll go into that tight situation again. Just for you.

 

[zhihau]

It is to ensure that my kids are in a conducive environment for study and play, with minimal exposure to low SES children who are unmotivated and poorly behaved.

Salient point: conventional wisdom says 近朱者赤，近墨者黑。

 

[Wunderfool]

Salient point: conventional wisdom says 近朱者赤，近墨者黑。

Why do you stereotype those kids from low income family are bad kids and those from high SES family are naturally good kids?

 

[zhihau]

Why do you stereotype those kids from low income family are bad kids and those from high SES family are naturally good kids?

No I don't. I've seen rotten kids from so called high SES families. You've missed my point altogether.

 

[Wunderfool]

No I don't. I've seen rotten kids from so called high SES families. You've missed my point altogether.

That what JohnTan the howlian father of his RI kid is saying.Low ses kids cheat, fight, take drugs and not pay attention in class. They are a bad influence to the high ses kids in RI. They should not be allowed into RI. You add on with your conventional wisdom.
If a low income family kid can get to enter into RI, he must have possessed qualities in him despite his natural disadvantages to succeed in school and even life . We should give the kid a leg up and not a push down. He is not a bad kid because he is poor.

 

[Seee3]

Just for you, bro. I'll go into that tight situation again. Just for you.

Thanks. This girl who is working now, used to barely pass her math in p4. The parents engaged that tutor and she got A* in math at p5. I was curious and noted the tutor used a mixture of algebra and simultaneous equation method in a different way from sec sch.

Now come the interesting part. At p6, her grade dropped back to C. The stupid lady teacher scolded her for not using "model" and being a timid kid, she was at a lost. The teacher even threatened that if model is not used for psle, no mark will be given. The parents intervened, telling the teacher to leave their kid alone. Finally she got back her A* at psle.

A more important lesson I learnt from this episode was that her p5 teacher embraces all solving method because he understand what she was doing and even use her method to explain to the class. She felt proud and confident. The p6 teacher knows nothing about math besides the answer script she got from the school which used model. So she was not sure if the method is correct and chose to threaten instead. There are many such teachers around because good teachers leave early.

 

[zhihau]

We should give the kid a leg up and not a push down.

My reply to JohnTan was exactly that! 近朱者赤，近墨者黑！

If you followed my line of thought earlier, I've already mentioned I don't believe in eugenics. In short, there are gems in neighborhood schools and there are thrash in elite schools.

 

[zhihau]

There are many such teachers around because good teachers leave early.

You're not trying to prolong my session later, are you?

For you, 送佛送到西。

 

[zhihau]

There are many such teachers around because good teachers leave early.

For you, 送佛送到西。

Long post ahead. I think I opened a can of worms earlier and the session was bad! horribly bad! Anyways, here goes.

The education landscape seemed to be no different to the corporate world when it comes to office politics. A thousand and one types of people being attracted to the teaching profession and there is a whole continuum of teachers with varying capabilities in the teaching fraternity, i.e from the very good to the very lousy. Some can't wait to break their bonds and some struggling to stay sane.

I'm not sure how the selection process is like at the HR side, I personally believe the academic qualifications of the teachers must have a high premium. From what I've gleaned from my sources, the key aspect seemed to be this: the student wouldn't learn till they know how much their teacher cared for them. In retrospect, this quality is also the hardest to suss out from the candidates during the interview.

The teaching practice and practicum do offer a small window to observe how the potential candidate performs in a classroom, the candidate's innate responses may vary to different lot of students down the road, i.e various experiences can shape how this teacher behaves in future, burn-outs notwithstanding.

caring for over 160 kids all at once, in terms of their individual learning needs and how each individual respond to varying subjects and/or sub-topics, can be very challenging. For a tutor, it's a different ball game.

In terms of the syllabus, I've also took some time to look at the SEAB website, loads of lofty jargons akin to those motherhood statements we've heard over the years, e.g thinking schools, learning nation. Or teach less, learn more. You get my drift? As much as the scope and/or depth of the content is somewhat spelt out, the execution of the lesson varies due to the changing needs of the student profiles.

In schools, the teachers are bound by the syllabus and most teachers try to stick to it, or sometimes try to complete it. Administrative tasks aside, most teachers end up dealing with difficult parents (sic: ACS BR mobile phone case is just tip of the iceberg) Tutors on the other hand are not bound by the syllabus, and can tweak teaching strategies to first help student understand the concept first before working out the rote method.

The notion of 1-to-1 care is more evident in a tuition setting whilst the 1-to-many simply diverts the teacher's attention to the delivery of the lesson. I'll leave the work review to another episode but it sort of drives "good and capable" teachers to become tutors. In most exit interviews, a lot of teacher-turned-tutors failed to register their displeasure at the system.

What else can I add? I'm spent, for now...

 

[frenchbriefs]

Why do you stereotype those kids from low income family are bad kids and those from high SES family are naturally good kids?

Have u ever spend significant time before in a class of special stream or gifted stream students or "good" students psle scores 250 and above and below average express streams or normal acad students?i wouldn't say there's a difference in characteristics between the good classes and the poor schools,good classes are just as equally wild and playful and mischievous,all children are everywhere.....but when it comes to attitudes and mentality towards school,studying and learning,actual work time,the difference is like night and day.....obviously the good students are highly motivated,driven and obviously more intelligent,at the rate they grasp things and move on to the more advanced stuff.....yes some of the students in the good achools might be struggling and require tuition but u must understand,the academic requirements,rigors and workload and expectations of a elite special and gifted class is a vast vast difference from some neighborhood trash school.not to mention the competition with ur peers....neighbourhood schools are different,they are competing to see who can go to the bottom the fastest.
Now I dunno what is wrong with neighbourhood school students,perhaps it's from years upon years of laziness,self defeat and sense of Doom trained into them,perhaps their slowness and inability to cope with the material lead to their deep lack of motivation and disinterest,during the summer u can feel the laziness oozing out of every pore of their bodies like sweat from the fat slug in star wars in the hot summer light in the classroom,the laziness in the air so thick u can nearly feel the tension like water surface,the absence of energy and interest in the academics and bodies slumped over so still it's almost like a blackhole.....the eyes gazing blankly cause the mind has checked out long ago,the look of defeat u have seen a hundred times before,them kids are just waiting for a reprisal from this hell....u know inside they are desperate for success but when they try to summon up the will and the energy,there's nothing inside.just put a gun in my mouth and pull the trigger.

They say teachers in neighborhood school are bad I vehemently disagree,there's nothing wrong with them at all,they know the material just as well as anyone,it's only sec school material,u are insulting their intelligence.....but there's something vastly different in them than from elite school students,u would think 10 or 20 years teaching in a neighborhood school would have destroyed any human being......but I have never seen such passionate,and genuinely kind hearted and caring teachers before,they genuinely cared for you like they would for their own kids,even their successful ones,and not the slightest bit judgemental only concern.not to mention their near unlimited patience after spending ten twenty years trying to teach and motivate these imbeciles....u can see they truly wanted the losers and underdogs to succeed,no matter how loser or underdog.if these teachers taught at elite schools,they will weep with joy at how easy it is....this is something twachers from elite schools will never understand....long and dark is the way from out of hell leadth to the light.

ITE students is a whole different nightmare altogether,but that's another story, I'm all spent now.

 

[Seee3]

Long post ahead. I think I opened a can of worms earlier and the session was bad! horribly bad! Anyways, here goes.

The education landscape seemed to be no different to the corporate world when it comes to office politics. A thousand and one types of people being attracted to the teaching profession and there is a whole continuum of teachers with varying capabilities in the teaching fraternity, i.e from the very good to the very lousy. Some can't wait to break their bonds and some struggling to stay sane.

I'm not sure how the selection process is like at the HR side, I personally believe the academic qualifications of the teachers must have a high premium. From what I've gleaned from my sources, the key aspect seemed to be this: the student wouldn't learn till they know how much their teacher cared for them. In retrospect, this quality is also the hardest to suss out from the candidates during the interview.

The teaching practice and practicum do offer a small window to observe how the potential candidate performs in a classroom, the candidate's innate responses may vary to different lot of students down the road, i.e various experiences can shape how this teacher behaves in future, burn-outs notwithstanding.

caring for over 160 kids all at once, in terms of their individual learning needs and how each individual respond to varying subjects and/or sub-topics, can be very challenging. For a tutor, it's a different ball game.

In terms of the syllabus, I've also took some time to look at the SEAB website, loads of lofty jargons akin to those motherhood statements we've heard over the years, e.g thinking schools, learning nation. Or teach less, learn more. You get my drift? As much as the scope and/or depth of the content is somewhat spelt out, the execution of the lesson varies due to the changing needs of the student profiles.

In schools, the teachers are bound by the syllabus and most teachers try to stick to it, or sometimes try to complete it. Administrative tasks aside, most teachers end up dealing with difficult parents (sic: ACS BR mobile phone case is just tip of the iceberg) Tutors on the other hand are not bound by the syllabus, and can tweak teaching strategies to first help student understand the concept first before working out the rote method.

The notion of 1-to-1 care is more evident in a tuition setting whilst the 1-to-many simply diverts the teacher's attention to the delivery of the lesson. I'll leave the work review to another episode but it sort of drives "good and capable" teachers to become tutors. In most exit interviews, a lot of teacher-turned-tutors failed to register their displeasure at the system.

What else can I add? I'm spent, for now...

Thanks for your effort. However, the focus of your source doesn't seems right.

The real problem is those in MOE who set the direction. Just some examples :

1. Wrong method
30 over years ago, I was first introduced to "model" for solving math problem. It is a joke to me. They even tried to bs it as superior and introduced to other countries. It is one of the worse thing they have done, depriving earlier start to learning algebra. Btw "model" is not an acceptable method in sec sch and no marks will be given.

2 Flip-flop in requirements
Chinese language is the main victim. Exam requirement changes like changing underwear.

3. Building bad attitude in project works
There is this crap project work where students work in team. As usual there will be bastard who does no work but would shine during presentation and sucking up to teacher in charge. This is the start of teaching the kids don't work hard but be smart.

These were a fraction of my experiences when my kids were in school. They are married now but the same shits are still happening.

 

[zhihau]

The real problem is those in MOE who set the direction.

scholars, they are the ones responsible for implementation of policies and not having the need to clean up the mess.