Scheme not what it's cracked up to be
SEEING many schools, especially the ones that offer the Integrated
Programme, organising open houses, I decided to write this letter
to express my views as an 'insider' for the benefit of Primary 6
pupils who are considering the programme.
What is so special about the Integrated Programme that it has
attracted so much attention?
Of course, students in the programme will not need to take the O
levels, enabling them to take part in 'experiential
learning'.
However, having been in the programme for about a year, I have
noticed that 'experiential learning' just seems to mean tons of
mini-projects.
For example, during the recent September holidays, I had to do
three mini-projects - one for geography, one for history and the
last for English.
I wonder how such projects allow students to go through
'experiential learning'?
Many students, myself included, feel that these projects are just a
half-hearted answer to the promised 'experiential learning', which
can be carried out by organising more field trips that suit the
curriculum.
For example, schools could organise field trips to a hydroponics
farm when students are studying agriculture in their geography
lessons. This would allow students to have a better understanding
of the topic they are studying.
The Integrated Programme is also teaching far too many things,
making the pace too fast. The programme merely does a whirlwind
tour of each topic, then expects students to understand them
thoroughly.
For example, our physics teacher taught us the topic of electricity
in one hour!
My elder brother, who is not in the Integrated Programme, learnt
about electricity in one fortnight. And even with that, he said
that he needed one month to understand the subject fully.
I would also like to point out one major flaw of the Integrated
Programme - the 'portfolio', which is supposed to be a collection
of the student's best work.
However, how does it help the student?
The students I have spoken to about the portfolio take no pride in
it because, to us, it is a waste of time to constantly update
it.
Schools also claim that they are putting less emphasis on
examinations and more on everyday work, so as to ensure consistency
of performance.
However, this 'everyday work' refers to the tests conducted after
each topic is taught.
We students feel that great emphasis is still being placed on tests
and examinations.
I would like to conclude by saying that the Integrated Programme is
not what most schools have described it to be but rather a
half-hearted attempt to try to revolutionise the education
landscape.
TAN HAO YANG
