Forum Letter Replies
Schools Should Avoid Labelling
I refer to the letter “Unfair to Stream at Early Stage” (ST Forum, 28 Nov 09) by Mr Lewis Wong.
For all schools, pupils are banded at Primary 5 according to their ability for different subjects as this allows more customised teaching tailored to their needs. In addition, schools do conduct diagnostic tests at various levels before Primary 5 to identify the strengths and weaknesses of individual pupils so as to better meet their learning needs. Practices vary from school to school, depending on the profile and needs of the pupils. For example, all schools conduct tests at lower primary levels to identify pupils who are slow learners. These pupils would benefit from additional support in literacy or numeracy under the Learning Support Programmes which would help them catch up with the main body of students. Some schools may also use diagnostic tests selectively to help teachers tailor their teaching approach to better meet the specific needs of their pupils.
While these diagnostic tests are useful in helping teachers better meet the learning needs of pupils, Principals are also aware that they need to be sensitive in their implementation. They must certainly avoid any labelling and not neglect any group. MOE agrees with Mr Wong that equal opportunities must be provided to all students regardless of ability. This indeed is the reason for these diagnostic tests, to identify varying strengths and weaknesses and to help every child reach his full potential.
The Principal of Edgefield Primary School has contacted Mr Wong to clarify the reasons for these diagnostic tests and the plans for his child.
Director of Schools
Unfair to stream at early stage (Lewis Wong, ST Forum, 28/11)
DURING my daughter’s Primary 1 orientation at Edgefield Primary School about a month ago, she was made to sit through a test of English and mathematics. A week later, when the school announced the Primary 1 class allocation on its website, I discovered the school had used the test as a means to stream (or ‘band’, as the school calls it) these pupils.
According to the school, the top 62 pupils were grouped equally into two classes and will undergo an ‘accelerated programme’. The rest of the cohort were randomly divided into six other classes so each class had pupils with a range of mixed ‘academic abilities’.
My question: Is banding even necessary at this stage? I am not a parent who is overly anxious about my child’s academic results at this stage. I raise this question because I feel strongly that such a streaming strategy at this early stage cannot be fair to all pupils.
There may be children from lower-income families who have not had the fortune of receiving a kindergarten education. There may also be parents who may not have pushed their children academically at such a young age.
Therefore, the school should accord all pupils an equitable opportunity by putting every child through the same curriculum and pace of learning.
If banding does produce results, then should not the school consider banding throughout or ensure a fair distribution of abilities within each class, instead of the current policy to concentrate the best 30 per cent in the top two classes, while randomly distributing the remaining cohort among the remaining six classes?
The Primary Education Review and Implementation (PERI) committee recommended slowly easing pupils into exams only at Primary 2. If so, why should those entering Primary 1 be made to take a test or exam that determines if they will receive an ‘accelerated programme’ over their peers?
I urge the Ministry of Education to clarify its stance on the matter.