Tuition: Less is More

I suppose, if a child is really failing in a subject, tuition could help to salvage the child's performance in crucial examinations. Beyond this fire-fighting assistance, is there really beneficial for a child to have extensive tuition even for subjects he can manage on his own?

Since time and resources are so precious, there are inevitable trade-offs for the benefits that tuition may offer. More tuition means less time for family bonding, for exercise, for pleasure reading, and for interacting with friends and growing in socio-emotional maturity. One may gain a little in academic performance but it seems to offer little else in the way of holistic personal development. If anything, it encourages a "crutch mentality" and excessive reliance on others' help. A child may have gained higher marks but has he really become better at learning?

I am pretty sure that entrepreneurs, pioneers in all fields, didn't get where they are because they had fantastic tuition. Rather, they probably had varied experiences, rich interaction with people, and occasions to put themselves to the tests, and yes, opportunities to fail.

Rather than trying to chase the extra point, the "plus" in the B, it may be better for the child in the long run to have the chance to become a more resourceful and resilient individual by relying on himself to improve his results.

Is tuition necessary?

Once again, there is renewed debate on whether tuition is necessary for students, and if it is, why are schools not doing what they are supposed to do? 

All things being equal, if two children possess the same amounts of ability and industry, we would expect the one receiving personalized expert teaching to perform better than the other who does not have this boost.

Yet this does not mean that the child who does not have tuition will not also excel. Surely the educational materials are not such rocket science that it takes many, many hours of revising, tutoring and drilling to master them. If the syllabuses in schools are adequately covered, and the child spends time on his own revising, is there any reason why he cannot perform his best in exams?

Tuition then, is usually used as a way for students to get an edge over others, to receive more than whatever their peers are having. If this is the goal, no matter what the school is doing, it would not be enough for one child to have an advantage over the next, and the only way is through additional instruction outside. 

For us to break the grip of tuition in our society, it is essential that some take the initiative to jump off the bandwagon. Yet because few are willing to be the first to do so, and risk losing out to the rest, everyone remains on the runaway train, reluctantly. 

Yet us not lose the purpose of education in the scramble for results. I have often felt that excessive tuition is rather like an intravenous drip - it keeps one functioning, even without much effort or will. How much long term benefit is there? Is it not better for a child to cultivate resilience and perseverance by letting him rely more on himself to solve problems?

In favour of PSLE

There are increasing calls to remove the PSLE from our national school system, because it is causing too much stress to our children (and parents).

Many complain that our education scene is no longer a level playing field for all children because rich parents can afford more resources and tuition for their children. But would removing the PSLE change that? If anything, I have always thought that the exam hall is the place where, stripped of all external help, each child gets a fair shot at doing his very best. 

If there isn't such objective yardstick anymore, we would have to rely on other measures that could require far more resources, such as cultivating niche skills, or elaborate project work (which parents won't be able to resist helping in). 

Some mentioned the possibility of a through-train system from primary to secondary school so that children do not have to take an exam so early. Wouldn't that mean even greater stress at the annual P1 registration? Imagine if one registration determines the child's experience for the next ten years! At least our present system allows children again, a fair shot, at getting into their preferred secondary school, where admission cannot be influenced by their parents' volunteer work or other such advantages. 

I come to realise that the stress does not come from external factors in the system but inherently from parents' keen desire for the best for their children. Come on, as long as resources are finite, one always wants a headstart over others and be in a position of strength. Isn't this the true source of anxiety? 

While we shouldn't be afraid to reexamine sacred cows and slay them if necessary, we cannot become trigger happy! These are features in our educational system that served us so well for so long, for good reasons. Remember that once Humpty Dumpty has a great fall, all the King's horses and all the King's men cannot put him together again. 

Social Mobility

After all that has been said about competitiveness in Singapore, I came across a real life story that shows that it is possible to recover from setbacks and mistakes in life.

After a long break, we received a phone call from P. He had been released from jail after a minor misdemeanor. Despite not completing even his 0-level, or other professional courses, he had quite a few job offers. While these are not office jobs, they pay him a decent wage for an honest day's work. His employers are willing to provide training for him, and I trust that when he picks up the technical skills, even he can build a career in his own way. 

Parents are terrified that their children would miss a crucial chance in their education, and want to ensure that they do not take a single wrong step. But maybe it is easier and healthier to think that there are possible u-turns and alternative routes even in our society. Even if a child does not take the fastest and easiest route to success, he still has opportunities to reach a reasonably comfortable place in life. 

I think bouncing back from errors is more important than avoiding errors.  No matter how hard we try, we cannot completely remove setbacks and disappointments. But resilience can see us through all that happens.

Am reflecting on my own recent experience actually...but don't feel ready to share about it now. Another day, perhaps. 

School Week 3

How fast it is! Before you know it, week 3 of school is over...and the assignments are piling up :(

There is so much to read, so much to write! Though all the lessons are in the evening, there isn't the luxury of sleeping in at all. I feed the animals in the morning, then feed myself, and immediately start typing or annotating my readings. Lunch is usually a simple affair of bread or leftovers. Then I prepare to go to school. Oh boy, this is turning out to be much more demanding than I expected.

The happy thing is, I've started driving myself to school. As school is in an industrial area, the traffic is made up mostly of gigantic vehicles. It is quite an experience being on the roads in my little car squeezed between Autobots.

Ok, update is done. The small and smaller animals have been fed, petted and put to bed. Time to start writing my reflections on Language Acquisition.

Fairness

What can we do to alleviate the annual furore over over Primary 1 registration?

No matter how the rules have been amended after public feedback, many still feel that they are getting a raw deal. While students are not allowed to donate to get into coveted schools, people still begrudge those who volunteer at schools to get an edge. No one should be allowed to volunteer. It is unfair to those who can't do so.

Still others are angry that alumni get priority for their children. No one should be allowed to benefit as alumni. It is unfair to those who aren't alumni.

What if we streamline the categories further then, and perhaps...allocate purely by proximity to the school? After all, this is an important consideration. People want their children to go to school conveniently. But this would mean that house prices around the preferred schools would increase. It is unfair to those who can't afford to move near the best schools.

As a thought experiment, I tried imagining what the fairest system would look like. It has to be one in which no one has a natural or social advantage, right? Supposing...we just close our eyes and allocate the children according to their surnames, by alphabetical order. All the As and Bs go to A school... regardless of where they live etc. It could mean being sent to a school far away, but at least, it isn't because you have been unfairly treated.

Alternatively, how allocating purely by balloting? Everyone lines up and ballots at his First choice. If he fails, he then ballots at his Second choice, and so on. Eventually he would end up getting a place somewhere, even if it neither near nor desired. But at least, he has had a fair chance, and you can't blame your luck on anyone else.

Since we can't have equal satisfaction, shall we settle for equal misery?

This entry isn't meant to trivialise the anxiety parents go through. Despite racking my brains, I just can't dream up a system which everyone feels is fair, and if anyone can, please share with us so that we can resolve this problem once and for all.

A New Beginning - Monday Morning

It feels so strange to leave cubicle life and go back to school as a full time student.

As most of my classmates are part time students, all the lessons are held in the evenings, so life gets rather topsy-turvy for me.

I woke up as early as I've always did, because I haven't learnt to sleep in. Then I fed the animals, and wondered what to do with myself after that. Walking home from the supermarket, I feel like moving in the wrong direction, since everyone else is streaming towards the town centre except me!

There is a stack of readings already...it's hard to gather the energy to look through them, annotate and highlight, and then, think about my assignments.

Tuition: Being head and shoulders above the rest.

In a concert hall, if everyone is sitting and one person is standing, he would get the best view. If everyone stands up, then this advantage is lost, and we would all go home with aching feet. Yet, how nice it would be to be the only one standing above the rest.

I can't help thinking that this is the dilemma reflected in the current debate and angst over tuition. At the heart of this anxiety is the fear that someone else, or everyone else, is having an advantage that your own child does not, and you wish to give your child the same advantage. Some even try to prevent other children from benefitting from their advantage. Because everyone wants to stand and not be overshadowed, we end up equally tired and upset with everyone else.

And the solution? Is that all of us should sit down and enjoy a more comfortable performance together. But this won't happen, because everyone secretly wants to be the only one standing above the rest.

All that glitters is not gold

I'm very concerned whenever I see young children playing with iPads, iPhones and other electronic gadgets. Of course we all know that these toys make fantastic baby-sitters - the flashing colours and ease of use make them irresistable to any kid. And there are calls to introduce them to pre-school, because nowadays kids cannot sit still. Please...

In this era of space-age technology, I have an old complaint against technology. Isn't anyone worried about deteriorating eye-sight in our population? On a trip to Nepal, one Nepalese once remarked to me, "Singaporeans are very clever. You all wear spectacles."

Isn't it obvious that most things are beneficial only in moderation? A good thing given at a wrong time may cause more harm than good. I have already decided my future children will grow up helping me to take care of the rabbits, because spoilt rabbits are cuter than spoilt kids.

Bemused about tuition centres

As I have mentioned in an earlier entry, our keen desire for academic excellence has spread to private tuition centres. The most popular of these have the luxury of imposing entrance tests on their students, and accepting only students who do well. The common reason cited is that such streaming ensures more targetted help, and this increases the effectiveness of their teaching.

Few parents, however, accept this reason, and instead, many decry these tests as a cynical tactic to improve the centres' results. Many protested that it is the weak students who need support, and these tuition centres are depriving them of the help they need when they reject them. They shouldn't be allowed to impose entrance tests!

Please don't have any illusions about it. Private tuition centres are set up specifically to make profits - they have a bottomline to meet, overheads to cover, and would like to maximise their profit if they could.

Maybe over the years, both private and public educational organisations have come to use similar jargon, phrases such as "holistic development", "fulfiling the potential of every child" are freely found in all communication materials. At the same time, there are social welfare bodies such as CDAC and Mendaki which are set up to help weaker students, especially those from poorer families. It is perhaps forgivable for parents to confuse the aims of all these education-related organisations, and expect every of them to be equally altruistic.

But don't forget the commercial nature of private tuition centres. Yes, they are probably making use of their high-flying customers' exam results for their own publicity. Yes, they then probably charge an arm and a leg because of this manipulated track record. Therefore, those who do not wish to be part of this behaviour should simply vote with their feet and walk away. Those who need help and yet have been rejected by these centres should bring their patronage to less snooty tuition centres. I am sure there are plenty out there.

In the world of private education, excepting criminal activity, it is a free market. Unless we intend to impose regulation upon such private interests (and turn them into publicly-funded centres), they have the right to function as they wish - just like any other business enterprise. If they lose money because of their selective admission, it serves them right. They might even close down and no one will be sorry. But don't pillory them because they thrive despite snubbing your business.

No more hot-housing please!

It is time to restore some sanity to our society’s widespread anxiety towards education. How much more can parents do to give their children a head start? How much more head start do children need to do well in life? No, I have got the second question wrong, as perhaps some parents have. I should ask, how much more head start do children need to do well in their academic career? And how much do they need to achieve academically to do well in life?


Every year we witness parents’ epic efforts to get their children admitted into the top primary schools. This desperation has spread, perhaps inevitably, to the enrichment and tuition industry, with the more coveted agencies enjoying the luxury of being able to screen their customers and charge exorbitant fees. This is all because parents want to give their children a boost and help them get ahead of their peers.

Has anyone actually looked long and hard at how much advantage is enjoyed by children who are thus rigorously nurtured? I suppose, if one has been coached repeatedly in Mathematical sums or scientific facts, he can hardly help getting higher scores in tests and examinations, just as a shot of steroids is bound to improve one’s sporting performance. The short term benefit may not reflect greater cognitive development or learning ability. And does nothing, of course, for the child’s growth in character.

Where do we factor in holistic development in the torrent of instruction our children are swamped in? A child typically spends most of the day in the classroom before being whisked off to enrichment and tuition centres. The remaining few hours of the day are spent completing homework, with mummy supervising by the side. After a long and tiring day, I usually like to crash unto my sofa and watch mindless TV, preferably reruns. I wonder how differently children cope with stress. Yet we expect them to benefit from this incessant intravenous drip of teaching.

What if, after all, less is more? One cannot make a plant grow faster by watering it more often. Give the child time to observe, to explore, to invent, and most of all, to rest. It is natural to want one’s child to be the best of the lot, but some things are just beyond our control and influence. This leads me back to the question at the end of my first paragraph: And how much do children need to achieve academically to do well in life? Surely there is more than one pathway to success and personal fulfilment, and this can be discovered by our children...unless they are too tired to look. Don’t let them be.

In those days...

I had a teacher who yelled at me ‘you numbskull’ because I misplaced her worksheets. Another teacher, with peculiar imagination, made us ‘hold our tongues’, literally, whenever we got too noisy. It was a slippery and wet experience. And we are none the worse for all such punishments, no lasting trauma left its mark upon me.

Now I am not condoning the behavior of the teachers mentioned in the newspapers lately. Parents complained that some teachers shouted ‘shut up’ or called students names, and wanted these teachers to maintain discipline in the classroom in more polite ways. I suppose, we can agree that a teacher should never resort to abusive ways to control the class.

What I want to caution against though, is an over-protective culture in which our children are sheltered from every knock and shock in life. A parent was upset that her child burst into tears after being yelled at. What if I suggest that after this experience, she might develop more resilience to unpleasantness in life? 

At any rate, I’m sure that people don’t grow up stronger being swaddled in cotton wool, hand-held and spoon-fed in their developmental years. 

Incidentally, I thought there is an obvious way to keep the children from being scolded in class. If respect for the teacher is ingrained in them, and there is little defiance in the classroom, I don't see why they should be in trouble for anything. Is it really so hard to get there? 

Forgiveness

Is it a sign, a warning, or mere coincidence?

Been bumping into my former students everywhere. Either Singapore is really tiny, or many kids passed through my classroom.

It is hard to know how to respond, since most of the time, I have forgotten their names, though how clearly I remember my experiences with each of them. Some had been delightful to teach, some were bright but distant, and a few left a dreadful taste in the mouth long after they are gone. About the last group, one is too many.

There were students who were ungratefully demanding, and students who made remarks as if teachers had no feelings. We used to joke wryly that students think teachers go into cold storage after school, to be activated only in the next morning. Frankly, I think this kind of hurt is the reason teachers burn out and give up. Hard work may break one’s back, but discouragement kills one’s spirit.

It occurred to me that whether I return to the classroom, I have to forgive these students who made teaching such an uncomfortable profession to be in. There is no excuse for their behaviour, but I would be foolish to carry this baggage any longer. They have moved on and so should I.

I suppose people see parents and teachers in the same light – they are expected to give unstintingly without complaint, and to lay down their lives for the next generation. That is why beyond a job, teaching is considered a calling.

Educational disorders

If I were a child in this age of psychological analysis, I might very well have been diagnosed as autistic. I hardly played with other children, but it wasn’t because I didn’t like them. They just never registered on my consciousness. Then again, I could also have been identified as dyslexic, because I couldn’t remember which way ‘C’ faces, and had similar problems with ‘5’, 'S' and a few other words. 

Luckily for me, my parents were too preoccupied with their large brood of 5 kids to bother with phantom ailments, and I was allowed to outgrow the developmental pains on my own. Of course, I’m somewhat misanthropic and am still reclusive, but that didn’t stop me from having a reasonably healthy and happy life. As for normality, is there anyone who doesn’t struggle with weaknesses or insecurities of some sort?

So people consult me about their children’s lack of concentration, I am perturbed. Firstly, I had no 'technique', no magic trick to help a child concentrate. Secondly, isn’t inattentiveness natural if the subject isn’t interesting? Which healthy active child prefers to sit still and pore over homework, when he could be gamboling around and making noise? Do you think inattentiveness is a disorder?

Of course, parents’ anxiety over their children’s results is understandable. But don’t problematize the natural inclinations of youth, and worse, seek treatment for them. As if tuition concentration camps (pun fully intended) are not bad enough, we are now resorting to fringe practices. Instead of hypnotherapy or other New Age psycho analysis, how about trying a little old fashioned discipline, aka self control, failing which, the stick?

Incidentally, the reason for the inattentiveness could simply be the lack of rest. Bomb the mind with stimulation without a break, and still expect it to function constantly in tip-top condition?

Expert teaching

For all the learned theories of language acquisition we have read in the university, I still find it a mystery. Parents (and early childhood teachers), don't imagine for a moment that we are the ones who get them to understand language. Most of the time when we teach a child words, we focus on nouns - 'cat', 'dog', 'apple'. Sometimes, but rarely, we move on to adjectives - 'happy', 'hungry'. Then, in the gap between our teaching and full speech, the child somehow puts in 'is', 'on', 'to', and other functional words that have no real content. Most mysteriously of all, he develops a sense of personhood and differentiates between 'baby' (in the third person), and 'I', between 'mummy' and 'you'.

How does it happen?

The biggest social hazard of being a language teacher is that parents are always anxious to get tips and tricks from me, as if I have some secret manual that we teachers possess and guard jealously. I declare that there isn't, and everything I know, I am not afraid to reveal in class. Sadly, they are invariably disappointed by my response.

What is the parent to do? I feel that language learning is far more holistic than we dare to admit. We would like to think that if we could force a child to read more and write more, he would improve. But we forget that for every hour he spends reading and writing in Standard English, many more are spent listening and interacting. If a family's lingua franca is Singlish, which is likely to have more influence on him? Basically, if parents want their child to speak well, they have to model good language practices for him. I remember that when I was young, mummy explained to me the logical relationships implied by 'but' and 'because'. And my father taught us 三字经 and 唐诗. Nowadays he still corrects the wrong characters in my Chinese smses. In retrospect, they have probably helped me tremendously in my academic pursuits.

I understand that parents are anxious to give their children a headstart in English, our language of instruction. But I think parents who are less proficient in English are better off speaking to the child in Mandarin instead. Besides, then they can save on Chinese tuition. To my horror, someone once told me that he isn't good in either language. Then...what language does he think in? But that is a cosmic question I can't deal with today.

Running

In the dark ages of my school years, we serfs had no human rights, and our PE teachers were the stuff legends were made of. I still remember clearly a cruel but effective tactic used to make us run faster: The whole group had to run a lap within a given time, and if one person failed, the entire group ran an extra round. If two were slow, we ran two more rounds...so on and so forth. You see, eventually, we did all we could to make the timing, even if we killed ourselves doing so. My heart pounded so furiously that if I were any older than 18, I think I would have dropped dead. but no, miraculously, I always survived. I guess, I was tougher than I thought, haha. In fact, these PE teachers pushed me from a Nil to a Gold in two years, so...*shrug*

Now that I've started jogging again, I'm slowly finding that it can actually be rather enjoyable, if there isn't a whip cracking after you. There is no one to make me run until I am collapsing, and I can listen to exciting music that pushes me on. Well...of course, there would be less obvious results, but never mind. I'm thinking about the long run. A sport has to be reasonably tolerable if I'm going to keep at it.

*** ***
I saw this new product launched by OTO, that promises that 5 mins a day is all you need to lose weight, as you do crunches, pushups and stretches on it. For just a moment, I was all ready to take out my credit card. Then a sudden thought occurred to me. Why don't I just do the crunches, pushups and stretches everyday...sans the machine? Why would I need to use a device to do something that I can do on my pilates mat? And I can do more variations on the mat too! Hm...