On making “Every School a Good School”

Each year in Singapore, hordes of anxious parents apply to a handful of established “brand name” primary schools to register their children as students.  It is a stressful time for these parents, as there is fierce competition to enter into the few brand name schools available in Singapore.

Many parents believe that brand name schools provide their children with better education, better academic grades and better opportunities in life, compared to the unbranded neighbourhood schools.  Few parents want their children to start their education at “unbranded” neighbourhood schools, which are often perceived as inferior, and as a result, the primary school registration exercise often leaves many of the neighbourhood schools nearly vacant, while the brand name schools are oversubscribed.  At the recent exercise in 2013, Hong Kah Primary School had only 23 pupil registered, Qiaonan Primary School had 30 pupils, and Bedok West Primary School had 35 pupils.

The parents’ belief that brand name schools are superior is pervasive, even though the primary schools in Singapore do not hold entrance exams for registration, and the new students are not tested for and sorted according to the academic ability.  There is no evidence to show that the new students in a brand name school are superior to those in an unbranded neighbourhood school, merely by virtue of their being registered in the brand name primary school.  All things being equal, it is arguable that the academic potential of the new students in each primary school is comparable.

This problem of selective primary school registration is so acute that Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong took pains at the recent National Day Rally to assert that “every school is a good school”.  It is doubtful however, that the Prime Minister’s assertion, and his government’s proposed minor tweaks to the primary school system, would do anything to change most parents’ mindset that only the brand name schools are good.

So here’s a radical proposal on how we can make every school a “good school”:  how about encouraging the brand name schools to acquire the neighbourhood schools?  For example, the Anglo-Chinese School (“ACS”) – which is considered a “brand name” school – can acquire Hong Kah Primary, and rename it as “ACS (Hong Kah campus)”.  The Nanyang Primary School – another popular brand name school – can acquire Qiaonan Primary, and rename it as “Nanyang Primary (Qiaonan campus)”.  These brand name schools may then introduce their branding, education methodologies and even teachers to these branch campuses, and conceivably raise the prestige and education standard of these neighbourhood schools.  This would also allow the brand name schools to reach out to a far greater number of students than before.

The concept of multi-campus schools is not altogether unknown – a few schools, such as ACS and CHIJ, already have successful multiple campuses.  But why limit branch campuses to only these few?  Let’s allow and encourage all the brand name schools to acquire the neighbourhood schools.  Neighbourhood schools may be eventually phased out, and rebranded and madeover as brand name schools.  Kiasu parents may then be assured that their children have at least attended a “brand name” primary school.  All the present stress and frenzy of registering for limited places in brand name schools (including parents’ attempts to manipulate the school registration system for preferential treatment, such as by volunteering at schools, or moving closer to the schools etc.) – all that can be eliminated at a single stroke simply by changing the name of a school, since every school would then be a “good school”.

What do you think?  Would a rose by any other name smell as sweet?

On PSLE math and the child

The Primary School Leaving Examination (“PSLE”) is a major examination taken by all schoolchildren (aged about 12 years) at the end of their sixth year in primary school. It is widely regarded as an important examination because a child’s PSLE grades determine whether he or she would qualify to enter a desired secondary school of choice.

The PSLE comprises 4 subjects (English, mother tongue, math and science), and this year, many schoolchildren experienced difficulty with the math paper. In particular with this question:

“Jim bought some chocolates and gave half of it to Ken. Ken bought some sweets and gave half of it to Jim. Jim ate 12 sweets and Ken ate 18 chocolates. The ratio of Jim's sweets to chocolates became 1:7 and the ratio of Ken's sweets to chocolates became 1:4. How many sweets did Ken buy?”

Now, any good paper should contain at least one or two difficult questions so that we may distinguish the more able candidates. But difficult questions should be fair, and the issue is: is this a fair question that schoolchildren can reasonably solve within their ability? Put in another way, are the schoolchildren sitting for the paper equipped with the skills to solve this math question?

It is this author’s understanding that primary school teachers teach their students to solve such math questions using a model diagram and units method. However, a number of teachers privately admit that the model diagram and units method is difficult to comprehend and cumbersome to utilise, and that most schoolchildren are unable to master it.

Is this the only method to solve the math question? No. The math question is easily, commonly and elegantly solved using algebra and simultaneous equations. These are taught when a child enters secondary school education. They are not taught at the primary school level because algebra is perceived to be of a higher level math and most primary schoolchildren are not ready for it.

But it appears that the schools will generally only allow students to solve such math questions using the model diagram and units method. Any other solution (including algebraic solutions) will be penalised or discouraged.

Nonetheless, a good education system should be flexible, and a good educator should allow students to use any valid method to solve a question, not just one method. Schools ought not insist on a particular method to solve a question (especially if the method is cumbersome, will (in this author’s opinion) have little real world application, and confuses schoolchildren).

The crux is this: if primary schoolchildren are largely confused by the model diagram and units method and hence unable to cope with such math questions, they are evidently not equipped with the necessary skills to solve such questions and it would not be fair to expect them to do so. Why not focus instead on establishing a solid grounding in other more appropriate math topics within their level, and only test them on such math questions at a later stage when they are ready to handle them?

By the way, the answer to the math question (as worked out by this author using algebra and simultaneous equations), is 68. Did you get it right?