<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR>April 12, 2009
YOUR LETTERS
</TR><!-- headline one : start --><TR>Need for tuition reflects school woes
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --><TR vAlign=bottom><TD width=330>
</TD><TD width=10>
</TD><TD vAlign=bottom>
-- ST FILE PHOTO
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->I refer to last Sunday's article, 'Tuition fee subsidies for the needy'.
It seems to me that the intention of establishing the Community Tuition Fee Subsidy Scheme is to provide additional academic assistance for students outside of the formal education system.
While I applaud this effort, I wonder if this measure actually allows us to address the root cause of the situation - the quality of education in schools.
I acknowledge that in a minority of cases, the extra help from tuition lessons is necessary as some students genuinely need more time to learn.
However, the need for tutoring outside of formal education could also point to either the schools or the students themselves being inadequately equipped to fulfil their roles.
If the problem lies with the school system, a better solution would be to target the issues that teachers have been raising for years, such as reducing the student-teacher ratio from the current 40:1 to a more manageable 20:1.
Alternatively, having later school starting times to give students more time to rest could result in greater attentiveness in class, as studies have shown.
If it is the case of students being inadequately equipped, then they and their parents could consider alternatives to formal education.
For example, students could consider home schooling, or even taking 'gap years' - an extended time-out from school.
The Community Tuition Fee Subsidy Scheme should not be seen as the be-all and end-all of our education woes.
Rather, the stakeholders in education - students, parents, educators and policymakers - should be proactively exploring ways to improve, or provide alternatives to, formal education in Singapore.
This will definitely be a better way to use our financial resources in the current downturn.
Laremy Lee
YOUR LETTERS
</TR><!-- headline one : start --><TR>Need for tuition reflects school woes
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --><TR vAlign=bottom><TD width=330>
</TD><TD width=10>
-- ST FILE PHOTO
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->I refer to last Sunday's article, 'Tuition fee subsidies for the needy'.
It seems to me that the intention of establishing the Community Tuition Fee Subsidy Scheme is to provide additional academic assistance for students outside of the formal education system.
While I applaud this effort, I wonder if this measure actually allows us to address the root cause of the situation - the quality of education in schools.
I acknowledge that in a minority of cases, the extra help from tuition lessons is necessary as some students genuinely need more time to learn.
However, the need for tutoring outside of formal education could also point to either the schools or the students themselves being inadequately equipped to fulfil their roles.
If the problem lies with the school system, a better solution would be to target the issues that teachers have been raising for years, such as reducing the student-teacher ratio from the current 40:1 to a more manageable 20:1.
Alternatively, having later school starting times to give students more time to rest could result in greater attentiveness in class, as studies have shown.
If it is the case of students being inadequately equipped, then they and their parents could consider alternatives to formal education.
For example, students could consider home schooling, or even taking 'gap years' - an extended time-out from school.
The Community Tuition Fee Subsidy Scheme should not be seen as the be-all and end-all of our education woes.
Rather, the stakeholders in education - students, parents, educators and policymakers - should be proactively exploring ways to improve, or provide alternatives to, formal education in Singapore.
This will definitely be a better way to use our financial resources in the current downturn.
Laremy Lee
