Are we educating successful children?

Wow, it's already Week 9! How many of you out there are finally done with processing results? It's been such a term I can't believe that the September break is nearly upon us.

I happened to chance upon this article in my Facebook feed and I thought it would be interesting to share. In a nutshell, the article profiles 9 families who raised highly successful children and what it took for them to get there. Success here has not been defined as earning a 6-figure salary, but as professional success. Examples include scientists, entrepreneurs but also painters, rappers and writers.

You can read the article here so that you know what I'm talking about: Secrets of Super Siblings

Reading the article did give me some interesting ideas, especially since in Singapore, success as an adult seems joined at the limbs to educational success. If that is the case, then what can these 9 families tell us about what we are doing right and what we need to change?

1. 8 of the 9 families had educators in the family
It was written that these families had at least one member who was a teacher in some way. This does not mean that you should necessarily rush to join teaching to ensure your child's future success. However, it did mean that the families understood the importance of education for their children and also that they gave their children a stimulating childhood. These children later entered school already knowing the fundamentals of reading, writing and 'rithmetic.

I do believe that the majority of Singaporean parents recognize the importance of education, so for us, the first step has already been reached. Judging by the number of pre-primary enrichment classes doing a roaring business, I would also say that many of our middle-class children are also getting a better headstart in school. (Although the prevalence of enrichment classes does also arouse certain concerns in me, but that's a topic for another blog entry)

Other than the enrichment classes, though, we also have to make sure our children receive as much stimulation as they can in their daily lives. My view as an educator is that a weekly library trip is a basic requirement, to build up their literacy and comprehension skills. I also believe children should also be raised in an environment where reading and thinking is encouraged. That means that bringing your child to the library and sitting in a corner playing Candy Crush is not enough to encourage these skills in your child.

I also speak partly from personal experience. My father is an avid reader and I remember weekly library trips where he left me in the children's section while he went to the non-fiction books. Also, we went quite regularly, not just whenever the books happened to be due! I also remember going to book sales and being allowed to fill my basket. So growing up, I never had to study for an English exam to pass with decent grades.

Thus, it's not just that you have to become a teacher to raise successful kids. Rather, you should understand the importance of education and actively encourage this in your children by engaging them in stimulating activities and setting yourself as a role model.

2. Freedom in Childhood
Many of the children in the article were also free from helicopter parenting. They were pretty much left to their own devices to take care of themselves and explore their own interests. One of those interviewed described cycling to the store a mile away with her younger sister when she was 5!

At first read, this seemed a dangerous thing to do, but later it started to make sense. Firstly, understand that the children were all raised with expectations of good grades and behaviour. Secondly, that they were raised in stimulating environments and encouraged to be active thinkers. When you combine these with a staggering amount of freedom, the children learned to be more  independent on their own and also to pursue their curiosity as far as it would take them.

This makes me think. Are we necessarily doing our children a favour by protecting them in the way we do? If I was an American parent raising my child in a neighbourhood where guns were carried and drugs were sold on the corner, of course the answer is clear. If I was in comparatively safe Singapore, though, and I lived a block away from the school, why can't my child walk back home on his own? Or even take the bus to go home if I live a couple of bus stops away?

I thought of this because of the increasing rise of the 'strawberry generation'. You may know the usual complaints: They cannot take hardship, they want things to go their way all the time, they want a lot but are not willing to put in the hard work.

Well, maybe this 'strawberry generation' starts with our own parenting. Take a common thing like fetching them from school. We protect them along that route but do we also transmit the message that they cannot be trusted on their own and they cannot handle themselves without another adult present? I may agree that the younger lower primary should be supervised but I raise my eyebrows whenever I see a burly primary 6 student being accompanied by his grandmother, who is carrying his schoolbag for him!

Of course, there will be people who will disagree with me on this. I'm sure given enough time and sharing of this article, there will be people who will point out and even punch out their own holes in my views. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion after all, but at the very least, I do hope that the Time article makes one really think about our children and create some active discussion (ie, no unproductive trolling) about how we should raise our kids, who will be our future leaders, entrepreneurs, writers and parents themselves.

Has the System Failed Us?

How is everyone doing? This should be exam-marking time for most of you. If you are neck-deep in papers to be marked and panicking over the worksheets to be returned, hang in there! It will all be over in 2 weeks!

The following comic came up in my Facebook feed today which made me think of our exam system, I wonder if any of you have seen this:

If you switch the tree with the PSLE exam, I suppose that makes the monkey the middle progress (MP) student, the bird the higher progress (HP) and the rest lower progress (LP). It might even put the seal and the penguin in the Learning Support Programme (LSP) and the elephant in the School-based Dyslexia Remediation programme (SDR).

I know there will be some people who will protest that I'm making a mockery out of the LSP and SDR programmes and the students enrolled in these programmes really do benefit from them. However, that is not the point. Yes, there are weak readers and dyslexic students who really need the LSP and SDR programmes. They do improve with the additional guidance and it can make a difference in their academic performance.

This is the point I'm trying to make: That we have these programmes to help them succeed in OUR SYSTEM, not necessarily always to help them find their own.

Consider this, that ever since the PSLE system was first formed, it has continued to assess in the same medium, that of a written paper. It is fully impartial, like that of blind Justice. It sets out a set of standards and expectations, and it weighs its candidates according to those.

This is one of its strengths, but it also leads to its weaknesses.

It does not, for example, acknowledge PROGRESS. It does not see that a student may have strenuously struggled with the Chinese language for 6 years and finally passed for the first time in the exam. It only sees a C.

It does not acknowledge SOCIALIZATION SKILLS. It does not acknowledge what we know as the 'people skills'. This may include the ability to lead, to motivate a team to a common goal, the ability to work in a team etc. Ironically, these traits may even be stronger factors of a person's success in the corporate world than their PSLE or O level grades.

It does not acknowledge CREATIVITY, from the wide-ranging vision of a CEO who may scout out new directions for a company right down to the practising artist who thinks of new ways of creating art.

I write this because I have seen the system fail some of my past students in these ways. I saw kids who couldn't read a word in Primary 1 finally write out 80 words in a (somewhat) coherent composition in Primary 2, who would fail because the composition had too many grammatical mistakes to make the passing grade. I also saw kids who would work hard every night on their own with minimal parental supervision have their efforts rewarded with a barely-passing mark above 50. Of course, I also saw kids who were masters of leadership, who did badly in their exams and yet could plot and instigate other kids to do their bidding. (For the sake of the country, I hope they used their leadership powers for good in the end.)

Whenever some of the above situations occur, the system impartially puts a failing grade on them. And for all the changes in the PSLE system since the very first paper, it remains the same. That is, of a written paper which tests reading, writing, listening and analytical skills (in the case of Math and Science). If the system cannot assess, monitor or reward our kids in the 3 areas I mentioned above, then instead of having it fail our kids, we should say IT HAS FAILED us.

As of now, I cannot decide where the blame lies. Do we blame the system, for only rewarding the A students who were lucky enough to be born with brains and those born with the money to go for tuition and enrichment? Do we blame society, for catering to the system and demanding higher levels of accountability? For letting the system stay in place without higher demands for change at a more profound level?

*Sigh* Such big questions just because I've been marking some English papers. I'm not sure anyone can answer them easily in my lifetime but maybe, if some people read this, think about it and start changing mindsets, I'd be satisfied enough. For now, enough with the big questions, away from the keyboard and back to the red pen...

What do you think? Do you agree about the system or not? Why do you do so? Please leave your thoughts in the comments! (Trolls will be sent out of class)

It's been a while...

One day, I logged into Blogger remembering a dusty old blog that I used to keep. I wrote a bit about the education industry in Singapore, about the tuition industry and some little ideas about teaching. 

Then one day, I stopped. Or rather, I did not suddenly stop one day, but work caught up, the marking went up, the workload went up and then the blog was laid one side. Every now and then, a thought occurred to me about something and I would think about blogging about it but then other work intruded and the thought flew away. 

Nothing spectacular, just what happens to a lot of people, I guess. 

The funny thing is, while I was neglecting my blog, the Internet certainly wasn't. I would receive an email once in a while telling me someone had commented on something I blogged years back. I thought it was strange and then during the Dec holiday I decided to log into Blogger and see what was going on. 

The statistics told me: People were still reading parts of the blog, even after I had neglected it! The Internet and the spiders at Google were still surfacing parts of my blog and most touchingly, people were still interested in reading parts of it. Thank you very much if you were doing so. :) 

This year, I'm going to make another attempt at keeping this blog dust-free. There have been changes to the industry since my last blog post. There are big ideas I want people to think about. There are teaching practices that I want to share. I've found great resources and websites that have helped me in my teaching. I think there are things tuition teachers can use as well, so that they can be a great support to their students' learning, even if they have not been trained by NIE. There are things happening in local education that I want to voice an opinion about. 

And I know there are others out there who are interested too.

Thank you for keeping this alive and I will do my best not to disappoint. 

Signs that You Should Not Become A Teacher

Every year, a new advertisement on teachers and the nobility of teaching surfaces on TV. These advertisements are meant to recruit a new group of teachers to MOE. There could be some use to them, judging by the size and popularity of the MOE booth at the Career Fair year after year!

However, at the same time, there is a sizeable group of people who leave the teaching service. These are people who thought they could 'make a difference' but only found out that they could not handle the job when they entered the service itself. I feel sorry for some of these people sometimes, because they enter with all their hopes and aspirations. But they become overwhelmed by the children, by the work and end up counting the days to the end of their bond, leaving disillusioned.

So, before you sign on that dotted line, check and do reflections whether you are really cut out for the job. Ask relatives and friends who are in the service and ask them for their experiences in the service. Have a clear and realistic picture of the workload and expectations before you actually sign anything. Never forget that once you sign the dotted line, you will be looking at a bond period of 3-5 years. It seems like a short time, but if you are unhappy at the job, it can seem like a lifetime.

Meanwhile, in a tongue-in-cheek way, here are some ways you can assess yourself for the suitability of the teaching profession:

1. You hate kids.

I think this needs no explanation. You are going to face 30-40 children under 12 everyday. If you hate kids, no amount of pay will ever justify the job.

2. You love kids. Too much.

And yet, if you are the kind of person that thinks all children are cute, adorable, innocent and perfectly behaved, you are probably not prepared for the job either. You have to realise that, like adults, children come in many forms. You do get children who are cute, adorable, innocent and perfectly behaved, but you also get children who are mischievous, spoiled and attention-seeking. Not to mention children with intellectual, social and physical disabilities. You must realise that there are children who will not be perfect angels and be ready for them.

3. You never wake up before 12.

Assembly starts at 0710 to 0720 and most schools require their teachers to be in before that. Not to mention that in a number of years, all schools will eventually become single-session, ie in the morning. You really should be an early-riser for this job.

4. You do not like the colour red.

Nobody marks with pink or purple pens. This is an industry standard.

5. You think you can go home everyday at 12 when the school bell rings

There are only a select few I know who do this, and they are all adjunct teachers. (Teachers working on something similar to a contract basis and who are paid hourly) The full-time teachers are usually staying back for CCA, remedials, meetings and if there are none of those, they are involved in some kind of committee meetings. Nobody goes home on the stroke of the bell! The truth is that each teacher can spend something like 11 hours in school, considering how early you have to reach work in order to start lessons. Do not have illusions of laziness if you enter teaching.

That said, sometimes you never really know how you feel about a job until you do it for real. If you are considering teaching, my recommendation is to approach the schools in your surrounding areas and ask them about becoming a contract teacher. You could become a relief teacher as well, but you'd have to be ready for any school that calls you at 630am to come in that very day. A contract teacher is better because you can take on work that is similar to what a real teacher does, but you do not have the bond to keep you in the job. Thus, if you feel you are really not cut out for teaching, you can leave.

Some people may feel I am 'pouring cold water' by writing this post and discouraging people from becoming teachers. I prefer to encourage people to enter the profession realistically. It does the school no good when new teachers enter, become disillusioned, and lose all interest in the job. Rather, I would like to see more people who are clearly aware of the downfalls of the job and yet are willing to take it on nonetheless. These people will stay on and benefit us all.