|
|
发表于 20-8-2013 21:38:53|来自：新加坡
|
显示全部楼层
刚刚看了看政府的民情联系组网站，看到了一面倒的质疑声和反对声。晚报只是报道了其中一篇比较理性的留言。
这篇留言是这样的：
Generally, I think this is a very good National Day Rally speech, especially the closing part whereby PM Lee envisioned the next 20 to 30 years plan for Singapore. I think few governments in the world have that type of confidence, and sense of responsibility, to think so far ahead. This is really the strength of the PAP government which it can put to its best advantage.
Now back to PSLE. I don't agree with PM Lee's question whether 1 point is so important. It is important because there are limited number of places in the top schools, and the incremental 1 point could be a deciding factor who gets the last place.
When I was in O Level, I took 9 subjects even though I only need the best of 6 subjects for JC enrolment. Other than English and Chinese, I have many "contingency" subjectsgchinesese I did badly in one. For example, at my time, I need to have a humanity subject, hence I studied both literature and history, so that I can use the best grade of the two subjects. Even for A levels, although I would have required only 3 "A" level subjects to enrol into local university, I took 4 subjects as "safety net".
Currently, our Primary Six students only take 4 subjects, all of which are important foundation for future education and success in life. I cannot imagine how we can adopt a PSLE system whereby we will only recognize 3 of the 4 subjects, as it will fundamentally rock our education system and affect the quality of students who graduate from this system.
Assuming that we still take into account all 4 subjects, without the points but mere banding, what will be the consequences?
For simplicity, assume there are 2 P6 Students A and B vying for the last position in Reputable Institution (RI). Regardless of what PM Lee has said tonight, the fact is there is only 1 last position in RI. Student A has 261, whereas Student B has 260. In the current scheme, Student A will qualify for the last position, and this is meritocracy as its best without any 关系 to speak of.
Now we move away from the point system, but to grading system. Both Students A and B are high achievers, and being typical high-achieving Singaporean boys, their talents are skewed towards Maths and Science, and lesser towards languages. They are able to obtain the high aggregate PSLE scores because their high Maths and Science scores make up for the less stellar English and Chinese results.
Now the side effect: Under the new scheme, it is probable that the student who secure the last spot in RI is not Student A or B, but Student C (who has a score of 255), because he is a average but consistent performer for all 4 subjects.
Who will be most successful in future? Nobody knows.
Who is more deserving? Probably Student A?
What we have done is simply to move the goal post. The new goal and our message to PSLE students is: You must be a well rounder in all 4 subjects, need not be the best in each, BUT, all 4 subject must be good. This has to be.
I was from Reputable Institution. I believed in the Singapore meritocracy system, because I was brought up in a 3 room HDB flat, and receiving good education on my own merit with no external help has helped me to break this poverty chain.
Still, I speak like our Acting Minister Mr Chan Chun Sing who is 3 years my senior, and my son probably speaks like me. During my school days, I excelled in Maths and Science, and my son is like me.
My message is: The proposed system will be unfavourable to those middle and low income family, because the children from these families can be intelligent and hardworking, but they will be at a disadvantage in the language subjects, especially since oral has a very high weightage. And their family will probably not have the luxury to send their children for tuition for all 4 subjects.
Besides, the proposed system will simply cause more stress and anxiety for parents and students. Instead of fighting hard to get every additional mark, everyone will be fighting hard to be good in all 4 subjects, which is probably tougher to achieve by itself.
Even all these talks about expanding DSA - Doesn't the MOE know that participating in numerous DSA is a very stressful exercise for both parents and students? Finally, parents and students become confused whether they should focus on DSA or PSLE, not to mention the disappointment that follows any failure.
I think MOE should have more confidence in its current system. As a consolation, it is comforting to know that the details have yet to be finalized. MOE should give some thoughts over the implementation, especially how to give due recognition to students who did extremely well in certain PSLE subject.
[In "A" level days, there are S papers. Are we trying to implement the same for PSLE?
If not, shouldn't we simply stick to the current system?]
|
|
IP卡
狗仔卡
显身卡
