The government introduced streaming of students in the 1980s. It has continued to today, although the system was adjusted a few times during the following years.
The concept of streaming was to put students in the appropriate system that suits their learning ability.
The students who can learn better are placed in the express stream while those who are slower are placed in the normal stream.
This system produced stress among the students as they and their parents do not want to be stigmatized by being placed in the normal stream.
When I was in school, there was another type of streaming system which seemed to work better.
The students who did badly in the year end examination were held back by one year. They repeat the syllabus. A small number was held back but most of the rest advanced to the following year.
Few people paid any attention to the fact that they were held back.
There was nothing to be ashamed of being held back. In each year, the difference in age among the students could be up to one year, i.e. those born in December could be 11 months younger than those born in January.
If the younger child did poorly because of age, they are hold back by one year. The difference in age with the students in the following year could be just a few months.
There will be instances where the age gap is wider, but it did not really matter. There were in the same class, and followed the same syllabus.
The old system of holding back a student who did poorly in the year end examination was better than the streaming that was introduced in Singapore.
Do you agree?
The concept of streaming was to put students in the appropriate system that suits their learning ability.
The students who can learn better are placed in the express stream while those who are slower are placed in the normal stream.
This system produced stress among the students as they and their parents do not want to be stigmatized by being placed in the normal stream.
When I was in school, there was another type of streaming system which seemed to work better.
The students who did badly in the year end examination were held back by one year. They repeat the syllabus. A small number was held back but most of the rest advanced to the following year.
Few people paid any attention to the fact that they were held back.
There was nothing to be ashamed of being held back. In each year, the difference in age among the students could be up to one year, i.e. those born in December could be 11 months younger than those born in January.
If the younger child did poorly because of age, they are hold back by one year. The difference in age with the students in the following year could be just a few months.
There will be instances where the age gap is wider, but it did not really matter. There were in the same class, and followed the same syllabus.
The old system of holding back a student who did poorly in the year end examination was better than the streaming that was introduced in Singapore.
Do you agree?
No comments:
Post a Comment