Singapore kids streets ahead on maths

For the better or for the worst? Singapore 2nd but quality of life?

Singapore kids streets ahead on maths
• JUSTINE FERRARI
• THE AUSTRALIAN
• APRIL 01, 2014 12:00AM
•

Ellenbrook Independent Primary School teacher Stacey-Anne Barile with Year 3 students yesterday. Picture: Will Russell Source: News Corp Australia

KEY maths concepts such as multiplication, division and simplifying fractions are taught to students in Singapore at least one year earlier than in Australia, with Singapore schools spending more time on solving non-routine problems.
In their first year of school, Singapore students are taught multiplication and division, including multiplying numbers within 40 and dividing numbers within 20. The concept of multiplication is not introduced in the Australian curriculum until Year 2, the third year of school.
Simplifying fractions to their lowest common denominator is taught to Singapore students in Year 3 and to Australian students in Year 4, while in Year 4 Singapore students are multiplying fractions that Australian students are not tackling until the end of primary school.
A report comparing the Singapore and Australian curriculums, commissioned by the Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority, found Singapore schools spent about twice as much time on basic operations and geometry in the first few years of school and had a greater focus on problem solving.
The report says there is considerable overlap of the two courses, but a “significant difference in the intensity of coverage and breadth of cognitive demand’’. Singapore spends more time in the early years mastering basic operations and geometric concepts, while Australia introduces more topics earlier such as probability, technology and “general capabilities and processes”.
The difference was brought home starkly to primary school principal Neil MacNeill when facing the concerns of a Singaporean family whose daughter started at Ellenbrook Independent Primary School in Perth.
The mother came into the office and desperately said: ‘My child finds your maths too easy and she should be advanced a year’,” Dr MacNeill said. “I thought she was a tiger mother and explained that we are using the Australian curriculum at the right level and the social aspects of learning are equally valued here.
“The father then came to school and pointed out: ‘This is what my daughter was doing in Singapore and this is what you expect her to do here.
“There’s a mile of difference. When my daughter goes back to Singapore, they’ll place her in the remedial maths class after two years in your school’.”
The exchange prompted Dr MacNeill to look at the Singapore maths course, which raised his concern that the Australian curriculum was not challenging students enough.
“The Singaporeans introduce some maths concepts earlier but they really push problem solving, which is an example of double loop learning,’’ he said.
“Australia competes in a global market for jobs and business and there is no reason why we should not be competitive in international testing. If we were to change our standards and goalposts, our teachers and students could effect these changes, and achieve comparability.”
Singapore schools start at Year 1 and do not have a prep year, unlike Australia, but their students are among the world’s best at maths.
In the most recent international test of 15-year-olds conducted by the OECD group of industrialised nations, in 2012, Singapore ranked second in the world in maths, with Australian students about 70 points behind in 19th place.
Emeritus professor of mathematics education at the University of Melbourne Kaye Stacey said the perception of Singapore was that it concentrated on rote learning without properly understanding the concepts.
Professor Stacey, who chaired the international maths expert group for the 2012 OECD tests and was involved in setting the questions, said Singapore students did very well in questions that required them to apply their maths.
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority chief executive Rob Randall said the national curriculum had raised expectations in mathematics across the country and as implementation proceeds ACARA would continue to check the expectations against other countries.

I cannot understand why someone would migrate to Australia and then make comparisons to Singapore.

(31-03-2014, 10:44 PM)greengiraffe Wrote: For the better or for the worst? Singapore 2nd but quality of life?

Singapore kids streets ahead on maths
• JUSTINE FERRARI
• THE AUSTRALIAN
• APRIL 01, 2014 12:00AM
•

Ellenbrook Independent Primary School teacher Stacey-Anne Barile with Year 3 students yesterday. Picture: Will Russell Source: News Corp Australia

KEY maths concepts such as multiplication, division and simplifying fractions are taught to students in Singapore at least one year earlier than in Australia, with Singapore schools spending more time on solving non-routine problems.
In their first year of school, Singapore students are taught multiplication and division, including multiplying numbers within 40 and dividing numbers within 20. The concept of multiplication is not introduced in the Australian curriculum until Year 2, the third year of school.
Simplifying fractions to their lowest common denominator is taught to Singapore students in Year 3 and to Australian students in Year 4, while in Year 4 Singapore students are multiplying fractions that Australian students are not tackling until the end of primary school.
A report comparing the Singapore and Australian curriculums, commissioned by the Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority, found Singapore schools spent about twice as much time on basic operations and geometry in the first few years of school and had a greater focus on problem solving.
The report says there is considerable overlap of the two courses, but a “significant difference in the intensity of coverage and breadth of cognitive demand’’. Singapore spends more time in the early years mastering basic operations and geometric concepts, while Australia introduces more topics earlier such as probability, technology and “general capabilities and processes”.
The difference was brought home starkly to primary school principal Neil MacNeill when facing the concerns of a Singaporean family whose daughter started at Ellenbrook Independent Primary School in Perth.
The mother came into the office and desperately said: ‘My child finds your maths too easy and she should be advanced a year’,” Dr MacNeill said. “I thought she was a tiger mother and explained that we are using the Australian curriculum at the right level and the social aspects of learning are equally valued here.
“The father then came to school and pointed out: ‘This is what my daughter was doing in Singapore and this is what you expect her to do here.
“There’s a mile of difference. When my daughter goes back to Singapore, they’ll place her in the remedial maths class after two years in your school’.”
The exchange prompted Dr MacNeill to look at the Singapore maths course, which raised his concern that the Australian curriculum was not challenging students enough.
“The Singaporeans introduce some maths concepts earlier but they really push problem solving, which is an example of double loop learning,’’ he said.
“Australia competes in a global market for jobs and business and there is no reason why we should not be competitive in international testing. If we were to change our standards and goalposts, our teachers and students could effect these changes, and achieve comparability.”
Singapore schools start at Year 1 and do not have a prep year, unlike Australia, but their students are among the world’s best at maths.
In the most recent international test of 15-year-olds conducted by the OECD group of industrialised nations, in 2012, Singapore ranked second in the world in maths, with Australian students about 70 points behind in 19th place.
Emeritus professor of mathematics education at the University of Melbourne Kaye Stacey said the perception of Singapore was that it concentrated on rote learning without properly understanding the concepts.
Professor Stacey, who chaired the international maths expert group for the 2012 OECD tests and was involved in setting the questions, said Singapore students did very well in questions that required them to apply their maths.
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority chief executive Rob Randall said the national curriculum had raised expectations in mathematics across the country and as implementation proceeds ACARA would continue to check the expectations against other countries.

Where in the article does it say they migrated?

The father (or mother) was probably posted there for a work assignment for a couple of years.

(01-04-2014, 11:38 AM)mossie Wrote: I cannot understand why someone would migrate to Australia and then make comparisons to Singapore.

Migrate to Aussie, but there is a chance to return Spore as PR/FT.

(31-03-2014, 10:44 PM)greengiraffe Wrote: Emeritus professor of mathematics education at the University of Melbourne Kaye Stacey said the perception of Singapore was that it concentrated on rote learning without properly understanding the concepts...

Sometimes some professors speak nonsense.

How is = - multiplication division a type of rote learning?

Occasionally, the brain may not be ready/ developed enough to understand the concepts and rote learning should be applied temporarily

nothing new here. US discovered Singapore's mathematics syllabus 10 yrs ago. Now they are playing catch up after they realise that their math syllabus are not as rigorous as the Asian ones.. not only Singapore's. Only reason why Singapore was taken for comparison is because ours are in English, while the rest are Chinese, Japanese, Korean.

http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/des...ays-pm-lee

Despite criticisms, education system delivers, says PM Lee
Despite criticisms, education system delivers, says PM Lee
PM Lee Hsien Loong with a student from Chong Boon Secondary School during the school’s 20th anniversary celebrations yesterday. Photo: Don Wong
BY
JOY FANG
PUBLISHED: APRIL 11, 4:13 AM(PAGE 1 OF 1) - PAGINATE
SINGAPORE — Although the education system here has often been criticised, it is essentially a good system that has delivered good results, said Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong yesterday.

“We often see and read or hear criticisms of Singapore’s education system — it’s too structured, it’s too pressured, it’s too competitive, it’s too much hard work, (it’s) so stiff,” he said.

While he acknowledged the pressures faced by parents and students, Mr Lee said the Government had taken steps to address the issue and reduce unhealthy competition, such as ending the practice of publishing the names of top Primary School Leaving Examination performers and using a banding system, instead of grades, to assess students’ performance in co-curricular programmes.

“I think it has helped to reduce some of this pressure-cooking sentiment, that you must get it exactly right, the last one-quarter of a mark,” said Mr Lee, who was the guest of honour at Chong Boon Secondary School’s 20th Anniversary Dinner in his Teck Ghee ward.

However, while the Government tries to improve the education system, he added: “Don’t forget this is a good system and it delivers good results for us”.

Mr Lee said there is no youth unemployment problem here, unlike in many other countries. Graduates from Singapore’s schools, such as universities, polytechnics and the Institute of Technical Education, are highly sought after by employers and manage to get good jobs.

Singapore students have also performed well in international competitions and comparison studies, such as the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study and the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), Mr Lee said.

He cited the recently-published results from a new PISA test, which had assessed 15-year-old students around the world for problem-solving skills.

“It’s a new test, no 10-year-series, no studying for the test. You need common sense, you need to be able to think, you need to have creativity and judgment,” he pointed out.

About 1,400 Singapore students were randomly selected by the PISA team for the test.

Every secondary school had students who participated and they formed a representative sample of Singapore’s student population.

Singapore students came up tops among the territories and countries that had participated, outperforming students in developed countries such as in Europe and the United States, as well as Asian economies that have high-pressure education systems, such as Japan, South Korea and Hong Kong.

“I think the test shows that we are not doing badly. We are not near the bottom, we are not even at the middle. We are well above many countries in the world,” Mr Lee said.

However, he added, Singapore must continue to learn and improve, as well as raise the quality of all institutions, whether they are neighbourhood schools, schools for those with special needs or special talents, or institutes of higher learning.

“We have to teach skills like critical and creative thinking; we have to help our students to climb higher, especially those from the less-advantaged homes,” Mr Lee said.

'SCHOOLS in Australia will be able to teach maths Singapore-style with the release next month of primary textbooks that set out the teaching methods responsible for taking Singaporean students to the top of international tests.'

Kids get Asian lesson in maths

JUSTINE FERRARI THE AUSTRALIAN APRIL 12, 2014 12:00AM

By Year 6 Singapore students are studying in maths what Australian schools generally do not teach until the first years of high school. Source: TheAustralian

SCHOOLS in Australia will be able to teach maths Singapore-style with the release next month of primary textbooks that set out the teaching methods responsible for taking Singaporean students to the top of international tests.

The books for Years 1 to 6, published by Scholastic Australia, have the official endorsement of the Singapore Ministry of Education, which has to approve textbooks used in classrooms, and have been linked to the Australian Curriculum.

The education manager at Scholastic Australia, Christine Vale, said that unlike Australian textbooks, the Singapore books outlined teaching strategies. As reported last week in The Australian, key concepts are taught to Singapore students at least a year earlier than in Australian schools. The books, called Prime Mathematics, cover the same topics as the Australian curriculum but move through the content faster and in greater depth.

Ms Vale, a former primary school teacher with a masters degree in maths, said the Singapore approach involved teaching a whole topic in depth in the same unit, rather than the scattergun approach of the Australian curriculum, which spread the same topic out across different years.

One example is fractions. The unit talks about the numerator and denominator and uses that understanding to teach equivalent or lowest-common-denom­inator fractions, then uses that knowledge to add fractions, and then to add fractions with different denominators.

“In our curriculum, that goes from Year 3 to 6 but in Singapore they do it in Year 3 in just one year in one topic, in small steps so it makes absolute logical sense,’’ she said.

“They don’t have Foundation (prep year), so kids are little older when they start school in Singapore but even in Year 1 they do in one year what we would do in Foundation, Year 1 and Year 2.”

By Year 6 Singapore students are studying in maths what Australian schools generally do not teach until the first years of high school.

“I think what we have done in Australia is tried to make it easier for the kids by delaying some things. Whereas we would have taught adding fractions with different denominators in lower years of school previously, we’ve moved it up to higher year levels because the perception is it’s too hard for students,” she said.

Ms Vale said the Singapore approach taught students different strategies for solving problems, and made problem-solving a central part of the teaching.

After a new concept is taught students practise it, teachers ­assess how well they have grasped it and students are asked to use the knowledge to solve a real-world problem.

The national executive of the Australian Primary Principals Association was impressed after a briefing on the textbooks. President Norm Hart said the system would enable kids to gain a much deeper and better understanding of mathematical content and ways of working.

The 'Singapore math' is only well-known overseas. Its reputation back home is not good at all. Most teachers teaching at the secondary and tertiary level think that the Singapore math is poorly organized and disjointed, not in sync with each other and not building strong foundation.

In primary school math, the math is built around the model method, a pictorial way of solving problems.

From secondary school onwards, the math is build around algebra. The presentation of working is also expected to follow an algebraic algorithm, rather than a lassize faire way of presentation of working.

In primary school, many students are taught to write math like this:
1 + 1 --> 2, instead of 1 + 1 = 2.

After primary 6 PSLE, students don't get much chance to use their vaunted model method anymore. Secondary schools and JC and poly switch to algebra.

I have a number of friends who are teachers in various schools, and they all say it is a headache to get their students to unlearn bad, ingrained habits from primary school math and to relearn secondary school math.

Other than the basic arithematic, there is a "re-boot" in the learning of math from Sec 1, which is the foundation of math that is used from sec 1 all the way till tertiary education in the university and beyond.

I don't think the Australians or other foreigners are aware of this huge deficiency in our national math curriculum.

When I was in JC year 1, my PRC classmate said they have already completed the syllabus 2 years back. So are we really that advanced? One thing these big countries conveniently forget, what is their percentage of students that goes to university and makes an impact to society? For Singapore almost every student counts and to keep our GDP sustained at such a high level we need much higher proportion of students going to university. So isn't that justifiable for the more effective system?