When the tutor is your sister

Last year was Lesley-Anne's 'A' level year and if I thought that was a stressful experience, I suspect it was just the tip of the iceberg compared to what we'll be going through this year - Andre's 'O levels. Dum dum DUM!

All those years through primary school, then secondary school, of waiting for Andre to suddenly develop maturity of thought and an academic fervour were in vain. Thank you to all the mummies who tried to encourage me by saying boys mature later, but I didn't realise "later" could mean anything from 12 to 45. Or perhaps by "mature", they meant remembering to do homework.

Maybe I exaggerate (or maybe not). Going by Andre's sec 3 results, I wouldn't say they were a disaster. In fact, as I'd posted last year, he did better than expected. However, the element of chance seems to play too prominently for my liking so this year, I'm attempting to increase the odds of him doing well by playing my trump card - engaging Lesley-Anne as tutor.

I'm counting on Lesley-Anne to transfer some of her admirable work ethic to her brother. By drilling, osmosis or qigong, I don't really care, as long as it works. I am hopeful that it will happen because Lesley-Anne is a very tough tutor. During one of the sessions, she grilled him on concepts and sternly made him repeat them ad nauseum until she was sure they wouldn't leak right back out of his head. When I timidly suggested, "Err...could I request that he doesn't lose his love for learning by the end of the year?", she instantly replied, "No! Do you want the marks or do you want him to love learning? This is the Singapore education system! You can't have both!" Keke. Future Tiger Mum.

It's a win-win-win situation for everyone. Win for us parents: Lesley-Anne is much cheaper than any other tutor out there, plus Andre can always call on her during emergencies (it helps that her room is less than 10 metres away). Win for Andre: He'd much rather learn from Lesley-Anne than any other tutor as he has intrinsic faith in his sister to help bring up his grades. Not sure why but I think he secretly believes she possesses super powers. Win for Lesley-Anne: extra income without having to leave the house. 'Nuff said.

Of course she's not able to tutor him in everything. She has long relinquished all her Science knowledge and Maths...well, you probably all know Lesley-Anne's relationship with Maths by now. Tolerated, never loved. Her responsibilities are English and Combined Humanities (Social Studies and Geography). This is quite a tall order as Andre's strength has never been in language or the humanities. But I have faith that determination and sibling solidarity will prevail.

Go, Sista!

Making the reluctant case for tuition

Lesley-Anne got back her year-end exam results last week and overall, we're pretty pleased with it.  Except for Higher Chinese where she scored a B4, she received an A grade for everything else. As we all know, it's not always the case that hard work will translate into good results but this time, it really paid off for her and we're very grateful for it.

The subject we were most pleasantly surprised by though, was maths. As I'd previously blogged, Lesley-Anne had been struggling with maths this year, earning herself a C5 in E Maths and a dubious F9 in A Maths in her mid-year exams. We got her a math tutor and even though we expected to see improvement, we weren't predicting any miracles.

The results turned out to be pretty drastic. For the CA2, barely 3 months after tuition commenced, Lesley-Anne's A Maths grade jumped from F9 to C5.  For this end of year exam, she scored an A1 for E Maths and an A2 for A Maths, just one mark shy of an A1.   

To tell you the truth, I'm pretty torn by this turn of events. On one hand, of course I'm delighted by the results. On the other hand, I'm actually feeling a little perturbed. Why?  Because the results show that contrary to what her F9 grade indicated, Lesley-Anne has the capacity to learn maths. Just not from her school teacher.

This bugs me.  In my opinion, a student should be able to learn at least the rudiments of any given subject from school with the prerequisite hard work, unless he really has zero aptitude for it. I've never been a big proponent of tuition unless the child truly needs help.  However, from this experience, I found that in just 6 months, a once-a-week, two-hour tuition session made all the difference.  I can only conclude that it's not the amount of effort or the hours spent learning maths, it's the teaching method.

I'm pretty sure that Lesley-Anne would not have gotten these results if she had continued to try and learn maths purely from school. For some reason, she can't understand the way her teacher explains concepts and maths remedial didn't help since he would repeat the topics in the same way. Maybe he thought that her poor results were because she wasn't working hard enough or wasn't paying attention.

I totally get that it's more difficult to teach a classroom of kids than tutor one student but Lesley-Anne was not even remotely passing A Maths, which tells me she hadn't even grasped the basic concepts.

If it's true that our children sometimes don't do well in school because they can't understand the teachers, then this is troubling. How can our education system wean kids off tuition if it is more effective than school?  What about kids who can't afford tuition?  There is also the question of how many kids think they are stupid or do not have the aptitude to grasp a subject when maybe it's just the way it is taught that's not effective.

These are difficult issues that have always been a challenge - finding good teachers, equipping them with the right tools, making sure they have enough time and resources to do their job well, etc. Nevertheless, they need to be addressed if MOE wants to convince parents that "every school is a good school".

For now, I'll just have to be resigned to the fact Lesley-Anne's maths education is not from school but an external source.  It's not ideal but at least it's effective.

Steering the education mothership

Education Minister Heng Swee Keat made a speech on the upcoming changes to the education system last week and there were many things in it that made me go "YES!" You can read the full speech here, it's much more comprehensive than in the media reports.

He touched on many points but here are a few that particularly resonated with me:

1) School banding will be abolished with immediate effect (paras 55-56) - YES

For those who don't know, secondary schools used to be banded from 1 to 9 based on their O level results and these figures are published. Although banding was purely by academic results, it gave the impression to parents that the higher the band, the better the school. Following that logic, band 9 schools then must be really terrible, which isn't a fair assessment. By scrapping school banding, MOE is signalling that schools should not be assessed narrowly by academic grades.

Some people people are saying that MOE should then scrap the Cut-Off Point (COP) for each secondary school as well, if we want to eliminate this academic ranking of schools. I don't see how this is possible. P6 students need to see what see what schools they are eligible for based on their PSLE results, so the indicative COP of each school still serves a purpose.

2) School Excellence Award and other similar awards will be scrapped (paras 57-64) - YES

I think the biggest damage to the school system was done when some HR or management idiots decided that it would be a good idea to turn schools into mini factories, by implementing all sorts of accreditation schemes and their accompanying KPIs. Whoever thought you could measure how good a school was with a checklist of ticks and a best practices award should be slapped silly and made to stand in the corner.

Say it with me: education is NOT a business. We saw the effects - teachers had their focus shifted from teaching to administration, principals from running the school to chasing awards. By all means, encourage best practices. But ditch those darn awards.

3) Schools and exams should not be run based on the assumption that students have external tuition (paras 119-123) - YES YES YES

I am so tired of my kids coming home with questions on their exam papers that they haven't been taught how to do. This just creates so much anxiety among parents and exacerbates the tuition culture. Incidentally, briefly running through a method once or twice does NOT constitute teaching. Teaching means going through something extensively enough until most of the students in the class can understand and apply it.

I was so excited to read this para that I had to highlight it:

"MOE can do our part not to contribute to the need for tuition. Our schools and our examinations must not be run on the basis that students will have tuition. Some parents complain that our teachers tell the students to seek answers from their tuition teachers. If this is true, we must put a stop to it."

Why was I so thrilled? Because this is the very first time I've heard MOE acknowledge that they have a part to play in curbing the tuition culture. May not seem like much to some but for me, it's a big step forward. As I've written previously, I've always felt that when the national body for education does not speak out against certain unhealthy practices occurring in the tuition industry, this indirectly encourages the practice to flourish. It's not about legislation or regulation. It's about influencing public mindset through endorsement or rejection.

For too long, MOE has remained silent on the issue of tuition, so going for indiscriminate tuition, whether there is an actual need or not, has become de rigueur, even a badge of honour (especially going to high end tuition centres). By publicly denouncing such practices, they are reducing the positive attachments, hopefully causing parents to give pause before embarking on such a practice. Tuition centres will also think twice before taking out full page advertisements trumpeting the names of their top students.

Of course there will always be kiasu parents who will not change their ways, come hell or high water. But we have to stop rewarding their behaviour and it's about time we held up the non-kiasu parents as the ones to emulate and support.


I don't know about you but I was very heartened by this speech. Minister Heng seems to understand the depth of the challenges involved and addressed issues that would block the path on which he's trying to steer this mammoth education mothership. I like that he didn't just glibly promise changes to score brownie points with parents. In fact, he didn't mince words when asserting the rights of teachers over unreasonable parents. I'm so over politicians trying to be politically correct - let's just say it as it is.

Some issues are impossible to solve overnight and declaring instant measures would simply be irresponsible. For example, I know many people are calling for the PSLE to be abolished. I, for one, agree there's no need to subject 12-year-olds to this stressful and largely meaningless exam.

However, it's easier said than done. Suka suka abolish one meh? Off the top of my head, I can instantly think of several repercussions this might cause. What if you abolish PSLE and suddenly, 70% of the p6 kids decide they want to study at schools like RGS and RI (because they don't believe the MOE slogan "Every School a Good School")? So who gets in? Ballot ah? Unfair (not to mention chaotic). Proximity to school? Wah, watch property prices in Bukit Timah and Bishan skyrocket. What's likely to happen is popular schools will hold their own entrance exams. Tuition centres will offer prep courses. Enterprising individuals will hawk top school entrance exam papers. Cramming. Tuition. Sounds familiar? It's PSLE 2.0.

Some people say get rid of the PSLE and revert to a 10-year through train education from p1. In principle, I agree with this but this is feasible only if you're designing an education system from scratch. With current schools in place, how to execute? How do we decide which primary school should be linked to which secondary school? For example, if MOE decides that Tanjong Katong Primary School students will now move directly to Dunman High and there's a mad surge in admissions to the former, then how? The bottleneck will be shifted downwards from sec 1 to p1. As if there isn't already enough stress over p1 registration.

In short, there are no simple solutions and anyone who suggests otherwise is being naive. I'm glad MOE is taking it step by step rather than announcing big, grand schemes that have not been properly thought through. One of my biggest bugbears of gahmen policies is that they are sometimes implemented as if they exist in isolation. More often than not, one gahmen policy will impact on something else, sometimes an area not under the purview of the same Ministry *cough immigrationandhousing*.

My gut feel is that MOE is considering eliminating PSLE but they're looking at the issue from all angles to see if there is a painless way of killing this sacred cow (insert all the Mr Brown sacred cow jokes).

Disclaimer: I don't have connections with any MOE officials or hear anything from the grapevine, so don't bet on it! This is pure guesswork on my part.

At the end of the day, execution is key. What I found encouraging about the speech was the direction MOE seems to be taking, towards a more holistic, less competitive and academic-focused type of education. Some people remain critical but I don't see how constantly pouring cold water on efforts or declaring "you just watch, nothing will happen!" is helpful. Even if you're right, how is that constructive? There's a world of difference between being smart and being a smart-ass.

I know these are just baby steps but instead of saving my happiness for the improbable time when the glass is totally full, I prefer to be thankful for small victories.

We're not there yet, that much is for sure. But at least we're that bit closer.

Death by tuition

I've always maintained that our education system and over-reliance on tuition is getting out of hand but a few New Paper articles I've read lately convinced me that we've officially entered Loony Toons levels. Here they are:

Parent pays nearly $6,000 a month in tuition fees

Parents hire tutors do do kids school and tuition assignments

Kids take test to qualify for top tuition centres

From reading these articles, it would seem like yesterday's deplorable is actually mild by today's standards.

Yesterday: Kids mugging to qualify for top schools
Today: Kids mugging to qualify for top tuition centres

Yesterday: Parents hiring tutors to help their children do homework
Today: Parents hiring tutors to do their children's homework

In fact, as I write the last one, it has already become obsolete, replaced by a new normal:

Yesterday: Parents hiring tutors to do their children's homework
Today: Parents hiring tutors to do their children's tuition homework

So basically, we now need tuition to keep up with tuition? Am I the only one who thinks we have completely lost the plot?

The tuition culture has become so commonplace that even teachers have come to use it as a crutch. A friend of mine told me her son's Chinese teacher asked her to hire a tutor for kid. I've even heard an anecdote where a teacher asked the kids to get their tutors to check the homework before handing it up.

Andre's science teacher is probably an exception. She told me, "don't give him tuition! Sometimes they teach the wrong thing. I'll teach all that he needs to know." She's a lovely teacher and I obeyed. Well, sort of. Andre does have a science tutor - it's me. Does that count?

It really irks me how some of these tuition centres blatantly boast about the top scores of their students, when they do screening tests to take in only the top students in the first place. I might as well put birds in a cage and then claim that I taught them how to fly.

But what concerns me more is the type of values that are emerging from this tuition culture. What was once supposed to be a source of help to aid those who have learning difficulties, has evolved into a monster entitled mentality. Basically, if you have the money, you can hire someone to do anything for you, including doing the homework. (And apparently there is no shortage of tutors willing to do this). Why not hire someone to take your child's exam for you, while you're at it?

At JCs, I've heard it's increasingly common for parents to hire professionals to complete project work for their kids, some of which form part of the final grade. I find it difficult to believe that the teachers don't know or even suspect that this is going on. I guess it's easier to turn a blind eye, since the students' grades affect teachers' KPIs. There's a huge difference between not knowing and not wanting to know.

I find it ironic that the MOE claims to want to place an emphasis on values but do nothing to curb these unethical practices. The tuition industry is morphing out of control and yet MOE continues to remain mum. It frustrates me to no end.

I know MOE feels that they cannot regulate the tuition industry but I've told Sim Ann previously that by not speaking up and making a stand, MOE is actually condoning such practices - it's ok to coach your child into the GEP, it's ok to have your tutor do your homework for you. It's like telling your child stealing is bad and then doing nothing when rampant thefts take place.

The tuition industry did not just happen by accident. It is a direct result of an education system that obsesses over scores and systematically sieves children using this measure until only a few get the prize. Inevitably, there is a huge stampede for the prize. If you create a system that consistently rewards and hence, reinforces such behaviour, you cannot say you are not accountable for the backlash. I picture the MOE officials rolling their eyes and exclaiming, "All these kiasu parents!" and then washing their hands.

Newsflash: Pilate was culpable too.

I'm not saying the tuition industry should be regulated (I'm not sure you can, anyway). All I'm saying is MOE should make a stand openly that they frown on such practices because it is against their education philosophy, and hold any wrong-doers accountable. Then perhaps, parents and tuition centres will not flaunt these practices so openly.

According to reports, Singaporeans now spend about $820 million a year on tuition. Education has become a commercial enterprise and the problem with this, is that it only benefits those with resources. Want to close the rising income gap? Start with the tuition industry.

To me, the PSLE is the biggest contributor to this escalating insanity, but I'll probably address that another time.

"Data is not information, information is not knowledge, knowledge is not understanding, understanding is not wisdom." - Clifford Stoll

Are we tuitioning the life out of our kids?

I did it. Finally, I signed Andre up for English tuition. If you are one of the early (pioneer!) readers of my blog, you would remember that I had tried to send him for English tuition when he was in p2. In fact, the bad experience at one centre was what prompted me to start this blog.

After two failed attempts, I shelved the idea and decided to teach him English myself. Afterall, I'm a writer! It shouldn't be too much of a problem, right? Wrong. I found that while I was able to guide Andre through his maths and with slightly more difficulty, science, I was getting nowhere with English. Compo was the worst - when I could muster up enough energy to set him a composition, which was almost never, nothing was accomplished anyway because I never knew how to help him improve. The inevitable outcome was always scoldings, red marks across the paper but nothing constructive that he could use.

I long hold the belief that just because you're good at something, doesn't mean you can teach it. (As I write this, I have a flashback to all the PhDs who mumbled and rambled their way through my lectures in NUS.) True enough, Andre's grades in English started to slide. For the SA2 last year, his English score was the lowest among his four subjects, even lower than Chinese!

You gotta know when it's time to admit defeat and I did. If at first you don't succeed, outsource. He started his first session this week and I'm hoping it will be effective. At any rate, it can't be any worse than what I was doing!

Which brings me to the real focus of this post - tuition. The traditional role of tuition is give a kid some help in his or her area of weakness. Eg, both my kids have only had Chinese tuition and this is because we don't speak Mandarin at home and they would otherwise struggle just to maintain the required standard in school.

However, I find that more and more parents are treating tuition as an extension of school, ie school isn't enough to teach you all you need to know, that's the role of tuition. What happens then is what I call indiscriminate tuition - parents send their kids for tuition in every single examinable subject, whether or not they actually need it.

I feel it's a direct outcome of a school system that emphasises scores above all else and uses these scores to dictate the child's educational path at a very early age. It's not enough just to be adept in a subject, you've got to score better than your peers to get ahead. By sending their kids for tuition in everything, parents are trying to get one up on the competition. This of course, sends panic waves among other parents who start thinking that they need to do the same. Tuition becomes a crutch - even if the kids are doing well on their own, parents fear the consequences of doing without it. The beneficiaries are the tuition centres and tutors who prey on parents' insecurities. Such is the capitalist society. If someone will buy, someone will sell.

What I'm concerned about is the backlash of such a mentality. Lesley-Anne's class is an SBGE (School-Based Gifted Education) one. Her classmates were either from the GEP in primary school or top scorers in the PSLE. No one can dispute that these kids are bright. So I was startled when she told me that most of her classmates have tuition in 3 or 4 subjects.

"Where on earth do they find the time?" I asked incredulously. Secondary school hours are notoriously long. When she has CCA, which is three times a week, Lesley-Anne sometimes doesn't get home till 7.30pm.

"Oh, they go after school, sometimes at 6.30pm."

Then the more horrifying truth emerged. Some of these kids, after a long full day in school, go for tuition before heading home late at night. They then proceed to do their homework before turning in as late as 2am in the morning. And their day starts again at 6 or 6.30am. According to Lesley-Anne, some of her friends struggle to keep awake in class. One even falls asleep right under the geography teacher's nose. Unfortunately for her, this teacher doesn't bother to wake her up which ironically affected her grades.

Lesley-Anne is one of the few in her class who has only Chinese tuition. She also goes to bed by 10pm on school nights. Her schedule is already pretty full and that's because she has lots of other activities like piano and ballet. She has time to watch tv, read, swim, even play computer games on occasion.

She does well in the non-examinable subjects like dance, art, gym, music and home econs because we have allowed her to cultivate a wide range of interests (well, except for PE. Would take a miracle to help that one). But for the record, we know she will never be top of her class, and that's not our goal for her. Those spots are taken by the ones who have placed their sole objective in life as performing academically. Some of these kids squeal at the sight of a flame, cannot coordinate their limbs on the dance floor or are unable to thread a needle.

I say this without contempt, rather with concern. It's not their fault they can't do any of these things, they have never been taught that these are important parts of life (these are non-examinable subjects afterall!) We each only have 24 hours in a day - if their parents have given academics such a high priority that they'd let the child sacrifice something as basic as sleep, it's no surprise the kids have no time allocated to other non-academic activities.

I think that's completely missing the forest for the trees. These kids are our future leaders. I wonder how our country will function if we continue to assess people and design systems primarily around academics. In grooming our children to be excellent exam-takers, have we missed out on educating them about life?

I know it's hard for us parents to go against the grain. When everyone else around us is rushing to book places in popular tuition centres, it's natural to feel a tinge of doubt as to whether we're doing the right thing by not jumping on the bandwagon.

But don't we teach our kids never to follow the crowd blindly? I think it's time to heed our own advice. We need to ask ourselves the hard questions - do our kids really "need" tuition in that subject? What is the trade-off? The idealistic part of me wants to believe that it's still possible in Singapore to raise intelligent, balanced children grounded in values. All I can say is, look long term and have faith in your own instincts (not your impulses). Ultimately, it's not the school or the tuition centre who has your child's best interests at heart - it's you.

"It is possible to store the mind with a million facts and still be entirely uneducated." - Alec Bourne

Work timetable for the holidays

Usually during the major school holidays, I want the kids to do schedule some work either to revise past topics or learn a little of new ones. You may say, "What? Do work during the holidays?" but like most parents, I know that if I leave my kids to go wild and play throughout the month-long vacation, the few brain cells that have been dedicated to academic work would have perished from disuse by the time school re-opens (overpowered by the brain cells in charge of computer games).

We all know that getting kids to do work during the holidays can be a real chore (I can envision the moans and groans even before they happen). But after a few years, I've found a solution that has worked for me and minimised the pain.

What I do is let the kids come up with a holiday time-table. I will impose what I think is a reasonable workload, like for this vacation, I've asked my kids to include one heavy and one light activity every weekday. An example of a heavy activity would be a maths assessment paper or a tuition session and a light one would be reading or practising the piano. Weekends are exclusively for finishing work doled out by the Chinese tutor.

This is Andre's timetable for this holiday period:


There are some "off" days like when the kids have playdates or when there's a party. Of course no work is assigned on Christmas and they're let off the last few days before school reopens (I'm not an ogre!)

I think it's reasonable - most of the work in a day can be completed within 1½ hours, which isn't a lot to ask. The rest of the time, Lesley-Anne and Andre can do whatever they like - watch tv or play computer games, within a sensible time limit.

I've found that having a timetable is very useful, for several reasons:

1) When you don't have a timetable, it's much harder to assign work. From your kids' perspective, you will be seen as trying to "eat into" their holiday time and this inevitably causes resentment. When I tried this with Lesley-Anne in the early years, I often had to cajole or nag and the work, if done, would be done reluctantly. Whereas with a timetable, since the work has already been assigned and negotiated, it's more readily accepted.

2) When coming up with the timetable, I give my kids a certain level of leeway, eg. they can choose which day to do maths or english. If Lesley-Anne wants specific days to be free, she can opt to load up on another day instead - it's a tradeoff. Since my kids have a say in how the timetable is drawn up, they take ownership of it and also take more responsibility in ensuring the work is completed.

3) A timetable also creates structure and certainty which is sorely needed in this family of procrastinators! Eg. by noting how many sessions of maths I have with each child, I can plan beforehand what I want to cover by the end of the holidays because I don't need to negotiate for extra sessions when needed. On the part of the kids, they prefer this because they know exactly what needs to be done and won't have the dread of not knowing whether mummy will spring another test paper on them at the last minute. In fact, Lesley-Anne often looks at the schedule for the next day and asks me for the set work the night before, so that she can complete it in the morning and get it out of the way.

I normally use construction paper to draw up the timetable and let the kids use stickers or markers to dress it up. The objective is to make it look as unintimidating and as fun as possible. Afterall, it is the holiday season!

Andre's very short stint at Morris Allen

In my very first post, I wrote about how we sent Andre for English tuition at Morris Allen in the hope that he can improve his writing and comprehension skills.

Let's just say that we're glad Morris Allen offers a one-month trial period because that's all Andre went for. I know one month seems like too short a time to determine the effectiveness of any tuition centre, but even after just four lessons, it felt like we were throwing money down the drain.

It all looked promising enough. Andre was given this folder, which had an introductory letter to parents on what the centre was trying to achieve, a detailed curriculum and how each item taught relates to the MOE syllabus. Each week, any written work he did would be put into the folder so we can view his progress. Among other things, here's what the letter contained:

"Please understand that we base our teaching on positive reinforcement. We commend the achievements and do not usually highlight every mistake."

"As a parent, please do not expect perfection from your child's first attempt. Writing is an ongoing process and can always be improved, expanded and developed."

"Please remember that a lot of oral and interactive group work goes on in each lesson, and the written items you are seeing only represent a small part of our communicative approach."

It all sounds very nice, doesn't it? I think this sort of motivational style is very much in line with the western educational system, something Morris Allen follows since it's run and taught exclusively by expats.

So we were quite hopeful - maybe this is the answer to Andre's English woes. He went for a 1½ hour lesson on Sundays, and after each lesson, he got to bring home 3 books from the class library. He's supposed to read them and choose one to tell the teacher about the following week.

To my surprise, this was one of the books he brought home:






This is the inside of the book:

I mean, really? This is for the p2 class? This is the type of book Andre was reading when he was in kindergarten! I thought maybe they had a range of books in case some kids were reading at slower paces. But even though Andre brought home some more difficult books, many of them were pegged at a very elementary level. Often, he would complete all three books within half an hour.

I thought ok, maybe that's just the reading portion. Maybe the teaching process is their selling point. In the folder, I found this piece of written work. It's a character web of the story of Prince Cinders:

In a character web, the child is supposed to write a word that described a quality of the chosen character and what example in the story demonstrates that quality. It helps the child develop story lines and supporting sentences for composition.

I thought Andre's looked quite good and was quite pleased that he could come up with something so logical and coherent. Until he told me that the teacher wrote most of it on the board and all the kids just copied it down!! Each week, it was something like that. One week, probably out of some loyalty to his teacher, Andre said, "no lah, she doesn't always write down on the board. Sometimes she just tells us the answer."

You have so gotta be kidding me. If I thought Andre's English could improve with reading simple books and being given answers to exercises, I can do that myself. I don't need to pay someone $40 a session for that. (I can use the money to take Andre to a nice pasta place, and we can both sit down to a yummy dinner while he reads a book).

Morris Allen claims that all their students have 100% passes in PSLE English. Well, I'm sure that's true but I'm also positive that a pass is not the lofty target that parents set for their kids. While I agree that grades are not everything and learning to love the language is more important, I don't believe that should be the excuse for pitching the teaching at such a low level.

I want to stress that Andre only went for 4 lessons in one class led by one particular teacher, so I wouldn't presume to write off Morris Allen based on our limited experience. For all I know, the centre has helped other kids improve their English standards. But I know for us, we won't be forking out more money to find out.

Tuition Centre teachers... and one arrogant ang moh

So my 7-year-old son, Andre has been having some difficulty with English composition for a while. Since he was in P1 last year, I had been coaching him, but as most mothers probably know, we are hardly the best teachers for our own kids (I have no idea how parents home-school their kids without killing them). Basically, Andre's idea of a good composition is a long one. He comes home and tells me he wrote 243 words. Even if it was mostly rubbish and incoherent.

So after he came home with a 6/10 for his latest CA2 composition exam, I thought it was time to seek some professional help. Being the ever practical mum, I checked out the ones nearest my home first. This one was called I Can Read. It's an Aussie franchise and they mostly teach reading to pre-schoolers, but I had read that they also had a writing/exams module for primary school kids, so I thought I'd explore that. I was told I could bring Andre in for a free assessment so I did. This horizontally-challenged ang moh called Ken brought us into a room without so much as a hello, and sat us down. After the preliminary name-taking, etc, he asked Andre to read a list of words. Andre did ok until the last word - "obnoxious". He didn't know it so he said "ambitious". Ken immediately looked at me accusingly and said "that's a P1 word". Now, I'm pretty sure Andre has never seen that word before. I'm also very sure there are many P1 kids who don't know the word. But hey, give the guy a chance, right? So I didn't say anything.

Next, Ken asked him: "what's a noun?" Andre didn't have a clue. Now, at his school, they don't teach the names of word types at P2. I don't know about other schools in Singapore but I'm pretty sure it's not the only one. Ken proceeded to give a list of examples of nouns, then asked "what's a verb?" followed by "what's an adjective?" By then, Andre was looking completely bewildered, so I told Ken he didn't learn these names in school. Now, to my astonishment, he went on a verbal barrage (with a sneer on his face that I was so longing to slap), telling me how he has designed the school syllabus for MOE, how teachers are supposed to teach it but many don't, why he therefore doesn't send his kids to Singapore schools but to schools in the US instead, how his kids knew these things by age 5, blah blah blah.

Now, I don't know how other Singaporean parents would react to this, but if there's anything that really gets my goat, it's b****y patronising, arrogant expats who come here, live here, earn a good living here, and yet see fit to criticise everything about Singapore. So I retorted that every education system was different, that I had absolutely no interest in his kids and I didn't know why he was telling me about them. I think he was annoyed that I didn't act like the meek Asian mum and asked whether I would like to wait outside. I stood up, took Andre and said "Actually, I think we're done. I have no wish to sit here and listen to someone who thinks he's so much better than anyone else."

At this point, he started blustering and protesting. By then, I was fuming and told him "well, then you're not very good at communicating because that's exactly the message I got. For someone who's supposed to be teaching communication, you sure suck at it." I didn't plan to say it, it sort of just came out. I know it was rude but I have to admit I took satisfaction in walking out on him sitting there, looking dumbfounded.

I'm pretty sure he just dismissed me as an ignorant, over-protective mum. But I was perturbed to know that there are such judgmental jerks here who parents entrust their kids' education with. Because many parents are desperate for their kids to have better grades, we think the professionals would know better. But attitude is everything (almost) and what kind of self-esteem would our kids have if they learn under a teacher who tells them that they know less than they should? So avoid this centre like the plague - I Can Read.

Anyway, I walked over to Morris Allen two doors away and signed Andre up there. Ironically, another expat centre. Let's see how that goes.