bodyType

customContents

entityId

entityUuid

articlePageQuery

filter

article

articleBaseAdvertisingInfoArticle

articleListArticle

articleSeoArticle

helpersCheckIsPostiesArticle

hooksArticleAcknowledgementGateOverlayArticle

hooksTrackPageViewArticle

hooksContentInterestArticle

articleLinkingDataContent

articleSchemaContent

liveArticle

advertZone

sentiment

contentLock

topics

types

sections

moreOnThisArticles

urlAlias

commentCount

authorLocations

authors

paywallTypes

corrections

sponsorType

displaySlideShow

multimediaEmbed

printHeadline

seriesContainer

socialHeadline

headline

flag

firstTopic

glossary

flattenTypeIds

publishedDate

additionalInfoBoxes

images

image

relatedLinks

relatedNewsletters

__typename

createdDate

sponsor

factSheets

seriesReverseOrder

series

disableOffPlatformContent

published

updatedDate

summary

subHeadline

body

keywords

copyrighted

customTimezone

liveContents

SCMP Reporter

Smaller-class bottom line must add value for students and parents

There has been considerable discussion  about closing schools that have low student enrolment. Many propose that now is the time to introduce smaller classes which  they claim allows closer relationships between  teachers and students and cuts  pressure. But is the purpose in the interests of students and parents or to protect the jobs of teachers? If the latter is true,  small-class teaching would cut  competition  among schools and teachers and school officials could remain bureaucratic and reluctant to reform.

We should let parents have a greater say.  I believe the more resources parents invest, the more involved they will be. For poor and middle class families, tax credits and a special allowance based on family income should be set up for them to invest in their favoured options. Smaller classes are good, but should be a value-added option  for parents who are willing to pay. Parents should make the final decision.

JONATHAN MOK,

Lingnan University

Degree of maturity needed

I have been reading with interest the reports about four-year degree courses being proposed in HK. However, there have been parallel reports about Europe, where all degree courses are being standardised into three-year degrees. This begs the question: how will Hong Kong students gain entry to European degree courses if their secondary education is shortened?

Also, what is the hurry to go to university so early? Most students here don't even benefit from a gap year or living independently. Having taught in secondary schools here for several years, I find Hong Kong students are already desperately immature compared with their Western counterparts. I have friends working at different universities who also report that their 20-year-old students are comparable with 16-year-olds in North America or the UK.

I benefited immeasurably by waiting until my mid-twenties to go to university as did many of my fellow students. Isn't the government supposed to be promoting life-long learning? Please, let's not fill Hong Kong universities with secondary school students - neither will gain in the long run.

NAME & ADDRESS SUPPLIED

Comparisons are odious

The term 'assessment' is used to refer to the host of activities teachers employ to evaluate their students. When the data collected  is used to modify lesson plans/learning activities to better meet students needs, it  is termed 'formative assessment'. Alternatively, external tests or the assigning of a mark or grade  is referred to as 'summative assessment'.

Research has repeatedly shown that current  assessment practices are fraught with problems.

Assigning students a mark or grade  is overemphasised and giving helpful suggestions that promote learning is underemphasised. Furthermore, assessment procedures  often compare students with one another which lead students to believe assessment is more for competition rather than learning purposes.

Feedback which provides students with useful advice on strengths and weaknesses has been proven to improve learning. Ideally, the feedback should not include a grade. It should make students aware of specific problems they are having as well as guide them on how to improve. Students must also be given an opportunity to work on their problem areas. In addition, feedback should avoid reference to a student's ability, comparing students with one another or fostering competition.

Assessment in the form of an examination at the end of a unit or chapter is meaningless as it does not allow teacher and student to work with the results. Clearly, summative assessment for external purposes is markedly different from formative assessment where students' work is evaluated on an ongoing basis and given guidance on how to improve.

Other benefits of formative assessments include the absence of negative responses such as a pre-occupation with competition and/or a fear of failure by under-achieving students. Findings have also shown that formative assessment helps all students but is particularly beneficial to low-achieving students. Consequently, the range of achievement by students is reduced and overall standards increased.

Clear evidence indicates that formative assessment results in enhanced learning and raises standards of achievement in the classroom. With effective implementation, formative assessment can be a powerful tool in the classroom.

TINA CHOW,

Kowloon Bay



Mailbag