The timeline of Finland’s education system

There has been a flurry of news reports of late about Finland’s education process and how the country has seemingly risen from the dark ages to the upper ranks of all PISA rankings. This article explores the background of where Finland was compared to where it is now, and how it got there.

Background

Back in the 1960’s Finland began to mold their education reform. It was in 1963 when the country’s leaders decided that every child would receive a quality public education.

This was born out of a scarred history trying to maintain the country’s independence from Russia, Germany, and even Sweden. But by the 1960’s the wars had settled down and their independence was solid. But the country was struggling and knew that they needed to restore their ability to compete globally. Truth be told, the country wanted to ensure it survived and maintained its independence, thus the driver behind the desire to be competitive.

Laying the Groundwork

It was then that lawmakers decided to simply form the foundation for a comprehensive public school program. Throughout the nation, teachers contributed to the national curriculum that served only as guidelines. All students would attend public school from ages 7 to 16. Finnish and Swedish would be taught across all schools and a third language was required to be taught beginning at age 9. Upper secondary schools for grades 10 to 12 began to see an improvement because of this shift in making sure that every child was educated.

Seeing Results, Ongoing Changes

In 1979 another key change was instituted in Finland’s education system. All teachers were required to earn a master’s degree by attending a fifth year of college - at the country’s expense. Teachers were thus granted a level of respect and status that was previously afforded to only doctors and lawyers.

Additionally, in the 1980’s the former strict and structured programs which had been laid out and in place since the 1960’s was relaxed, so to speak. As far as the government was concerned the control over policies was shifted down to the town councils. The previously recorded national curriculum was dubbed as simply broad guidelines. As a stark example the nation’s math goals were reduced to a mere ten pages of guidelines for grades one through nine. Each child spends grades one to nine with the same teacher. Each teacher has a special teacher or assistant to help with special education needs or immigrant language education.

Rising to the Top

Since these latest changes have finally settled and became the new norm, Finland’s international scores on the PISA rankings have soared to the top. To be fair, the two or three decades before control was passed down to the local regions the education system in Finland was strict and structured, some would even say this is an understatement.

Putting it in Perspective

To provide a comparison, in the 1960’s Finland’s education system was certainly in the poor ranking. To move from a poor ranking to a good one, they spent 20 to 30 years with very tight controls and strict government guidelines. Only after achieving a system filled with good practices that has proven it works and provides the country with young adults ready to help take the country into the next generation, did the country release control to the local governments. This change then allowed the school system to go from good to great. And the results on the PISA tests back up this dynamics. The comparison comes when looking at the Swedish or even the American school systems which are both performing in the lackluster middle range on the PISA tests. America is currently in the relatively early or early-mid stages of their No Child Left Behind mandates. True reform is still elusive. Opponents of this legislation are pointing to Finland’s current education model as a way to turn the country’s scores around. However, that may be a short-sighted approach if you truly look at Finland’s history and how they really got from poor to great, not just from good to great.

Conclusion

Finland’s education process today is a robust and effective one. Being able to state that 93 percent of all students graduate from a vocational or academic high schools is a profound accomplishment in and of itself. This is very high and something that many countries are keeping an eye on, exploring how Finland does it. Additionally, Finland spends quite a bit less per student than, say, the United States does. They are in range with Singapore, spending approximately $11,000 per student per year for education.

However, the other pieces of the entire education system are envious as true reform in whole. Maternity leave in Finland is provided for three years. Day care is subsidized. Preschool for all 5-year-olds is offered for free. And an unheard of subsidy of 150 euros per month is provided for each child through age 17. If other countries wish to turn around their education system, looking at Finland’s entire education system is an excellent first place to start. Treating educators as the key to a country’s success is the way to ensure that success.

Different Teaching Methods in Education

Since 2007 Singapore’s Ministry of Education has espoused a teaching method commonly known as Teach Less, Learn More. The positive impact of embracing this teaching method has been profound. Currently Singapore spends an average of $11,000 annually on each student. In contrast the U.S. spends about $16,000 annually per child. In even starker contrast Kenya spends only $153 per year. Singapore’s results achieved by their method of Teach Less, Learn More is a shining example of a positive deviant from normal and previously accepted teaching methods. The economic benefits to programs such as Singapore Math, which embrace the Teach Less, Learn More education method, are certainly being realized as Singapore continues to advance as a global competitor along with many other Asian countries over the past 25 years.

Across the world there are several types of formal teaching methods and this article explores several of them along with the pros and cons.

Curriculum

All formal education methods have some sort of curriculum. The curriculum will set the terms by which content and courses are offered at the school. A curriculum based education focuses on the topics, or syllabus, which must be understood to achieve a particular standard of education. Additionally the curriculum will have a goal of what level of knowledge must be achieved in order to receive a passing grade. There are also varying academic disciplines which define the area that may be the focal point of education for a particular school. Examples include mathematics, computer science, natural sciences, applied sciences, social sciences, or even humanities. Additionally there are many fine arts curriculums and disciplines available today.

Methods of Education

Vocational

In a vocational educational method the training will strictly focus on practical and direct training towards a specific trade, or craft. Several industries require internships or apprenticeships and a vocational education usually lends itself to providing these as a part of their overall curriculum and certification requirement. Some examples of vocational training are engineering, architecture, medicine, and even carpentry.

Autodidactism

Autodidactism is characterized as learning on your own. It is a self-directed learning method that typically falls into an informal learning category. However, some advanced classes may engage in allowing a subset of students to go through the course materials at their own pace in order to allow them to feed their thirst for knowledge and as such keep them from getting bored. This allows them to learn at their own, often much faster, pace then the rest of their classmates. Research shows that many highly intelligent students will end up being dubbed as troublemakers simply because they are bored by the class not moving at the same speed they are. Instituting autodidactism in certain environments can be very beneficial to encouraging and fostering genius.

Alternative

Non-traditional education or alternative education is a term that typically defines any and all forms of education that exist outside of traditional education methods. Frequently classes are not structured by age or level and instead courses such as math, science, and language are taught in groups that include students of varying ages together. This is an amazingly effective teaching method for ‘troubled’ students because class sizes are frequently smaller and the interaction between students is much less competitive in nature.

Special Education

Children with disabilities are sometimes not able to participate in a public education environment. Although more and more parents and educators are finding flexibility with including children that have certain disabilities in the mainstream education system. Still, some children do require a special educational method so that they can have focused, individualized instruction. Depending on the school system, special education can be greatly beneficial in helping the student learn the basics to prepare them for transitioning into the public education system. But some children may always require special education, depending on the severity of their disability.

Conclusion

Secondary public schools across the world are now, since the very early 1900’s, focusing primarily on curriculums that teach practical job skills necessary for what is considered white collar work. Math and science education, as well as anything in the technology or computer science area, are the keys to helping our students excel in an ever-changing world. To ensure that a nation can compete on a global scale, finding education methods that reinforce learning of these core skills is critical.

There are many different teaching methods, and many may say that there is no right way and no wrong way to teach. That may certainly be true for the traditional goal of simply learning a core set of skills or courses to get a passing grade. However, the Singapore method of Teach Less, Learn More as exhibited in the Singapore Math program, definitely shows this as an excellent method of achieving the goal of not just having a basic understanding of the information, but rather of building a core foundation of success as the student becomes a young adult and then a leader of a nation or of the world. 

A tale of two countries: Malaysian GE and Singapore education

Blackout!

If you log onto Facebook one day after the release of the results for the General Election in Malaysia, you may notice many of your Malaysian friends have changed their profile pictures to a square of blankness. This move, inspired by the leaders of opposition party PakatanRakyat, who lost the general election, was a display of the anger over the alleged vote manipulation by the ruling party Barisan Nasional. This election was touted was a watershed election, with a change of government at stake. However, the “Ubah” championed by Anwar never came true and the status quo remained, together with a series of discriminatory policies that caused widespread dissatisfaction among the minority groups in Malaysia.

Educational discrimination

One of the major causes of dissatisfaction lies with the discriminatory policy in education, where the Malays are given preferential consideration in admissions into institutions such as public universities. A Chinese Malaysian student has to score much higher to stand a chance to get into the same university as a Malay Malaysian student; even such a chance is not guaranteed, subject to the size of quota. Such an education policy, brought into prominence by the general election, has much implication for the future of Malaysia and its neighbor, Singapore.

An unjustified rationale

The rationale for the preferential treatment of the Malays is the need for affirmative action. Because a substantial portion of the Malays in the past did not receive good education, they lost out to other races, particularly the Chinese, in areas such as business or other professional jobs that led one to higher income and social status. To correct the wrongs of the past and to put the Malays on an equal footing with their counterparts, the government lowered the admissions standard for the Malay students, hoping that the new generations of the Malays could improve their education level and social standing collectively.

Granted the good intention of the government to ease racial inequality, the affirmative action in Malaysia is not being done in an acceptable way. In the United States where affirmative action originated, the use of quota is explicitly forbidden by law. Race is a factor taken into admissions consideration, but it is never the factor that largely determines outcomes. In Malaysia, implicit or explicit quotas exist for university admissions, leading to a wide gap between the admission cut off scores for the Chinese and the Malays, a gap that cannot be explained by affirmative action in its proper practice alone. 'Reverse discrimination' must be used to explain the situation, where by trying to help one group, the government disadvantages another group as a result. Reverse discrimination, an often unintended outcome of affirmative action, is being intentionally used by the ruling party in Malaysia because of the need to gather votes from the Malays who benefit from current policy.

The impacts on Singapore

Considering the official discrimination, it is not surprising to see many Malaysian Chinese coming to Singapore for education. Many of the students are talented, ambitious and hardworking. By driving away a significant portion of its young talents, Malaysia suffers from brain drain. The universities are not benefitting from an otherwise more vibrant and more competitive academic culture. The majority of university students, who know that their places are protected by the government, may not work hard enough in their pre-U institutions, leading to a less competitive schooling population in general. Moreover, many of the Malaysians studying overseas do not wish to go back, where discrimination in employment, particularly in civil service, is but a continuation of discrimination in education. Because of the entrenched racial discrimination and the disappointment created by the unfair election results, Malaysian students are likely to continue to flow to Singapore to study where their talents and abilities are recognized and rewarded.

The lessons for Singapore

Lastly, the education policy in Malaysia has lessons for Singapore to learn as well. We have three reasons for our confidence in educational equality in Singapore. Firstly no ethnic group is significantly disadvantaged in the past, so there is no sufficient justification for affirmative action. Secondly Singapore is a nation built on racial equity in various aspects, and the government and the general society recognize the critical importance of fairness that motivates citizens to work hard so as to unleash the potential of human resources that are considered the only “natural resources” in the tiny city-state. Lastly, the Malaysia experience in education has demonstration effect for Singapore, as it shows how divisive unfair racial policy can become. Such racial division will be amplified during the general election where people use their votes to express their dissatisfaction. Because of the three reasons above, students studying in Singapore have little to worry about educational inequality. Quite on the contrary, the Malaysian example serves as a lasting reminder to the Singapore government not to let its education go astray along a similar line. Hence, students can rest assured that they will be treated equally in a meritocratic system where race is not a factor of admission, despite living in a multi-ethnic society. 

The attraction of Singapore's education lies with its fairness. The government appeals to all segments of society for political support.  Financial assistanceand bursary are given to needy students, based on household not on race. While Singapore should not interfere with the domestic affairs of Malaysia, it should always remember the critical importance of meritocracy, which is an open secret behind the Asian Tiger’s success story. 

The educational roots of Adam Khoo, Singapore's top success coach

Adam Khoo is undisputedly one of the most successful person in Singapore under the age of 40. In fact, he is most well known for making his first million by the age of 26, which is not too long after graduation from university. No doubt, in the eyes of many, he is leading a terrific life which we can only envy. We were therefore most curious to find out what he did differently that sets him apart from the mainstream.





Unlike most of the successful people we read about, Adam Khoo’s story is one which we can better relate to. He went to a neighborhood secondary school, followed by a decent Junior college and finally a local university. It resembles the educational track of the average joe on the street. Just like most Singaporeans, he worked hard in school and scored good grades, but the difference being that he did not get a good job. He created his own job.



He was in fact engaging in many ‘extra-curricular activities’ in school when most of us were just fixated on nailing our exams. He was taking on training assignments and running his own companies while schooling full time in Singapore’s most competitive university, NUS. It is no wonder that he achieved the much-coveted million dollar dream shortly after graduation. But what got us intrigued was the psychology of this young achiever at a tender age.



At 15, he started his own business and mapped out a life plan of earning his millions. Most people at that age would probably be having fun, chasing girls and asking money from parents. Here he was, dreaming of achievements beyond what his parents has accomplished. Then again, the next question one would ask: how does he acquire the ‘adult-like’ mindset at that age ? Wouldn’t it be great if all our teenage kids think the same way too instead of seeking pleasure all the time ?



We found out that he attended a life-changing camp at the age of 13 which empowered him with the mentality and skills of a successful person. It is known as the ‘SuperTeens’ Camp.


We then set out to explore the marvels of this program by signing out for their preview workshop. We had the pleasure of seeing in person the mentor of young Adam khoo, Dr Ernest Wong who gave the presentation that day. He shared the syllabus of his 5days 4 nights landmark SuperTeens program which includes imparting kids with exams skills, personal skills as well as social skills.



Listening further, we were astonished to find out that ‘goal setting’ and ‘finding your dream’ was also covered in the curriculum. Those are actually stuff we learn in a self-development seminar or book typically engaged in by an adult. It is therefore amazing to learn that young people are being taught all these life skills which will be most beneficial throughout their entire life. What is most unbelievable was how they deliver this information in a way that is understandable by teenage kids, or even making it interesting for those kids to want to listen to it is a remarkable feat. Many of the young graduates of this program are even now coaches and trainers with the company and were present during the session itself. Dr Ernest also went on to share that the graduates continue to do well in their careers.




It seems that such a program does complement our formal education system by making up for what is not being directly taught in school. Perhaps this is the direction that our education system should move towards. Fruit for thought.

Education system and the Death Valley

A TED Speech on Education


Sir Ken Robinson, the educational legend on TED, made a popular speech named The Educational Death Valley. In his humorous speech, he spelled out three conditions under which humans, and more specifically children, can flourish. Firstly, humans must be allowed to develop in diversity, not conformity. Secondly, humans learn the best when they are curious. Thirdly, humans are inherently creative and are capable of individual expressions. Then he went on to explain why the current American education system is not conducive for the three conditions to exist. Too much focus on standardized test 'standardizes' children, teaching without inciting curiosity is not educating, and the overall schooling atmosphere also does not encourage creativity from children. Borrowing example from Finland, he advocated individualized teaching and decentralization of curriculum designing.


His speech has much to offer for the Singapore education system as well. Though our education system may not be as problematic as that of America that suffers from insufficient funding and high dropout rate, we definitely have a long way to go before we satisfy our parents who have voiced out a series of concerns in education forums in Singapore. The way to move forward can be guided by Robinson three conditions for human development.


Diversity, not conformity


First, we need to recognize that students are diverse and different. As Robinson argues, not even children from the same family are alike, not to mention children from families across the nation. If students are different, we need to provide opportunities for them to develop differently and let their differences be seen and be appreciated. The Singapore education system certainly provides such channels. The Humanities Programs that enable students to develop differently from the more popular science stream. The Direct School Admissions scheme recognizes students based on their non-academic talents. However, the problem is that those channels do not reach out to sufficiently large number of students. Various schemes, such as the ones mentioned above, are (highly) exclusive, allowing only students who are cream of the crop in certain areas to benefit. We do not wish to make them into so-called 'gifted programs' for special students. We want them to appeal to common students who are different not because they are experts in certain talents, but because they have different interests, hobbies or 'ways of spending their time'. Hence, the present system needs to focus more on diversity than prestige. When one day alternative programs become the norm, our education system is truly diverse.




Curiosity, our natural ability

Second, we need to recognize that children are innately curious. They like to ask questions and they want to know why. Our system does not do a particularly good job in maintaining, not to mention arousing, the curiosity of students. One major reason is heavy emphasis on standardized test as early as in primary schools. The imminence of the PSLE is constantly at the back of students' mind. Hence each lesson may become preparation for exams. Students may be satisfied with having standard answers from tutors. That can be seen from students furiously copying answers written by tutors on the boards without asking a single question. Memorization-regurgitation approach is even adopted in learning sciences, where logical thinking is essential. With such an educational environment, it is not surprising to see students losing their curiosity as they grow in knowledge. However, how can one create new knowledge without a sense of wonder and an intuitive understanding that is a fertile ground for so many university research projects or private R&D effort? If Singapore wants to develop its original talents in various areas, it must maintain the curiosity of students.


Let creative juices flow

Lastly, we need to recognize that students are inherently creative. The small size of our nation is not an excuse for lack of creative people. In fact, many small countries in Europe are actually powerhouses of creativity, contributing an amazing array of artistic output. The problem with Singapore's arts scene is multi-prone. First, Singapore's education has a heavier emphasis on sciences. Chemistry and math are much more popular programs than humanities. In fact, some schools have closed down their English literature course due to low intake. Second, we certainly have arts programs, but they are more of enrichment than of serious pursuit. For many Asian parents, studying engineering or business is still the safest way to earn a living, while arts can be pursued as a personal hobby. Many students give in to such parental wishes at the juncture of applying for university. Third, the general population is also not enthusiastic about arts, as seen from the under-utilization of museums that are more like tourist spots. This leads to a small market for professional artists. Hence, to improve the arts scene, the government needs to provide more funding to arts programs, more scholarship to talented students and create more arts related jobs to expand the market. General education of arts, such as arts festivals, can also be conducted at the community level, so that the works of our artists can be brought closer to Singaporeans.





For Robinson, no matter how stifled an education system is, the potential of students is always there. Even if the system is like the Death Valley, life can still emerge and flourish once appropriate amount of rain falls on it. The Singapore education system is by no means like the Death Valley, and our criticism of the system is more for improving it for perfection instead of salvaging it from hopeless ruin. Singapore has been consistently ranked one of the top destinations for education, and we need to live up to the reputation. While so many countries are trying to upgrade or reform their education systems, we should not sit on our laureate. Robinson’s speech is a timely reminder of what we are falling short of.







Check out the Tedtalk below!

National University of Singapore's increased rankings

In the future, when Singaporeans are introducing their nation to tourists, they may have one more place to recommend as a must-visit: it is the National University of Singapore (NUS). The tertiary education provider has been rapidly climbing the global education ladder, with the most recent evaluation done by the Times Higher Education (THE) placing it at the 29^th in global university ranking. The recent releasing of Asian University Ranking, much to the pride of the nation, places NUS at the second position, after Tokyo University in Japan. It is definitely something Singapore should celebrate, as it is an indication that the nation has done well in education sector and is well under its way in making the tiny country a hub for education in the region. However, at the end of the day, cool-headed analysis of the implications of the global ranking may serve the university and the nation better than mere words of praises.

First, it is without doubt that the consistently high ranking of NUS in the global education scene is a strong testimonial of the strength of the institution. The rapid development of the university can even be seen from casual observation without the in-depth evaluation by THE. In terms of research, the NUS medical school has forged alliance with the Duke Medical School, one of the best in the United States. The joint program encourages collaboration in research as well as student exchange.

 In terms of student development, the University Scholars Program and the U-town residential system have added much diversity into students’ academic life, ushering in western education style in a liberal arts environment. Therefore, it is not surprising to see the ranking of NUS rise fast, along with its reputation in Singapore and the world, a reputation that is critical to attract the best students and professors, whose influx contributes to a virtuous cycle of the institution’s development.

However, there are potential downsides to the obsession with ranking by university and the general society as a whole. The present methodology in evaluating university is far from perfect and often open to criticism. Weight given to different areas, no matter how carefully considered, is essentially arbitrary. One big area of controversy lies with the balance between research and teaching. A professor has to devote time in teaching undergraduates and doing research for publications. The former is taken as the primary aim of building a university while the latter is often taken as a stronger criterion when evaluating the standing of a university.

If too much focus is on how many quality papers a university has published in the first-tier international journals, for example, such an evaluation bias will be translated into pressure for professors to publish. Some universities, like Hong Kong University, have even placed a minimum quota on the number of papers to be published everything. Even in the absence of an explicit quota, as in the case of NUS, implicit pressure of linking publication to tenure review is enough to nail the idea of “publish or perish” in the heads of academicians. The cost of putting more time in research is usually less time or attention spent on undergraduate teaching. This is often observed in lack of enthusiasm from lecturers or low availability of tutors who seem always busy. At the end of the day, what does society stand to gain if higher university ranking mainly reflects higher quality research that is largely irrelevant to students?

Moreover, some important aspects of higher education may be underrepresented in evaluation of universities. Despite the high ranking of NUS, one issue remains unresolved by the institution: academic freedom or autonomy. University as a concept represents freedom of thinking and expression that are engine of intellectual progress of society. However, NUS and many other Asian universities embarrassingly do not get high credit for that aspect. In fact, NUS president, Professor Tan Chorh Chuan said after the release of ranking that NUS continued progress is a result of consistent support from the Singapore government. 

This is already an indication of the close tie between NUS and the government. In fact, most of the university funding comes from the government. The compromise in academic autonomy is best seen in the political science department of NUS that has come under scrutiny for its apparent lack of critical voices. The department has been described as “docile”, unwilling to assert itself as an independent voice in the political discussion. In contrast, majority of the reputable universities overseas are private and they enjoy much greater freedom of intellectual inquiry that ultimately benefits the whole society. In fact, the establishment of Yale-NUS Liberal Arts College a few years back caused much dissatisfaction over the move from the Yale community that considers the Singapore political environment as not conducive for liberal arts education. It is suffice to say that besides improving university ranking, the institution also needs to fulfill its social expectation by finding a fine line between receiving government funding and remaining politically neutral.

As can see things, there are many more challenges for NUS to surmount in the future. The great institution of Singapore definitely should not rest on its laureate. But rather, it should rely on more criteria besides the global ranking in assessing its performance. Probably before it makes THE happy , it should please Singapore students, social observers and educators first,  who are the true stakeholders of the education of the nation.

Different Types of Tuition in Singapore

It seems that tuition is becoming more prevalent in Singapore. Recent research indicates that over 95% of Singaporean students have some sort of tuition throughout a typical school year. Tuition can not only help a student who is struggling to get over the hump and finally learn a subject that has challenged them, but it can also help with other aspects of learning such as the testing process. Some students may know the material, but just do not test well. Tuition by a proper tutor can help improve overall test scores as well as curriculum knowledge.

There are three main type of tuitions: One on One (or Individual), Group, and Consultation. Here are some specific details about each of these along with the pros and cons of them. 

One on One - Individual

This is arguably the most effective form of tuition. It is also the most expensive since it is usually based on an hourly rate. The rate will differ depending on if you select a part-time tutor, a full-time tutor, a teacher tutor, or a student tutor. Part-time tutors are typically professionals who may have other jobs that they do for their full-time income. Thus they may only be available for tutoring on nights or weekends. A full-time tutor chooses to tutor as their full-time employment, therefore they will likely have more flexibility in the days and hours they are available. A teacher tutor is a wonderful option as they are already experienced in teaching and likely know the curriculum and material very well. But since they are full-time teachers, they may also only be available during limited hours for tutoring. Student tutors may not be professionals, however if they are headed towards a career in education they may be very well versed already in the effective art of tutoring. Additionally they will be closer in age to the student and thus will be able to share in rapport and understanding of what the student may be feeling related to the whole learning process. Any option is a good one, as long as they are a good fit for your student and they are successful in helping them learn the material. 

One on one tuition will only be effective if either the student is participatory, meaning they ask questions and engage in dialogue to enhance their learning; or if the tutor themselves is an expert in tutoring and has an established skill-set that is capable of reaching the struggling student and get them to participate in the learning process. One on One tuition usually occurs in the student’s home. It is especially helpful for a student who feels completely lost in school, or those who have trouble learning in social environments. One negative aspect, besides the high price tag, is that while the student is actually working on their homework or lessons the tutor is sitting idly, costing the parents more in terms of hourly pay for the tutor. There are arguments amongst some students on whether or not individual tuition is beneficial, but research shows that test scores go up exponentially when a student is really struggling in a particular subject and gets one on one tuition.

Group

Group tuition is typically done in learning centres. Several students are grouped together by subject, level, and stream. Class size can range from 8 all the way up to 60. Be aware of the questions to ask a learning centre before entering into a tuition agreement. Ask about class size, how students will be grouped, and their success rate and any guarantees.

Some parents may fear that a group setting won’t give the student enough support in their tutoring. However, if the student is not completely lost in the subject, and just needs some help to better understand the material, a group setting is an ideal way to motivate the student by providing competition amongst peers. It is important to know your child and determine what setting is best for them to excel in. If the tutor in the group setting is a dynamic, inspiring presenter then the student will likely greatly benefit from the experience. If the tutor is lackluster, then the student may feel like they are once again failing at even tutoring and it can create a downward spiral that is not at all related to the student’s abilities to perform. Choose a group setting or learning centre carefully by checking references and testimonials.

Individual Consultation

Consultation tuition occurs in the tutor’s home. The group size is usually less than five students. The tutor will give each student one on one coaching while the others work on their homework or tutoring exercises. One benefit is that the student only spends time working on specific classwork that they need assistance with and the lecture scene typically found in group sessions is not present. Another benefit is that the student will have time to work on their coursework and have to think through the problems before they will have their time with the tutor to ask questions. This may help them solve problems on their own. However, if the student won’t ask questions or is so completely lost in the course then they may need the help of a one on one tutor.

Tuition has been shown to help students improve up to 3 grades in a period of 3-6 months. If you find that this is not the case then you have likely chosen the wrong format for your child’s specific needs. Looking into one of the other tuition methods listed above can help remedy the situation and both you and your student will feel the relief of things starting to come together. If you are exploring a tutor for your student, ask friends or use a tuition agency. Typically the cost of engaging a tuition agency is taken from the tutor’s first month’s tuition fee, thereby not costing you anything to find a suitable tutor program.