RI to refine scheme to draw lower income pupils

It could give out cash awards earlier to encourage kids to aim for a place
By Sandra Davie, The Straits Times, 4 Jun 2014

FOR the past four years, Raffles Institution (RI) has been giving cash awards to Primary 6 boys from low-income homes to encourage them to aim for a place in the school, one of the most prestigious and the oldest here.

But it is now relooking the way it reaches out to these boys - for, despite its good intentions, only one or two of them enrol in the school each year even though several do well enough in the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) to qualify for a place.

RI has awarded Junior Raffles Institution Scholarships to between 20 and 30 pupils a year for the past three years. The award comes with $1,000 in cash to pay for study or enrichment expenses.

Besides coming from low-income families, the pupils must show potential to do well enough in the PSLE to meet the entry score for top schools like RI, which is well above 250.

RI did not reveal the socio-economic make-up of its students, but there has been much debate of late on the worsening diversity in top secondary schools here. Last year, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong expressed concern about such schools becoming "closed circles" for a select crowd.

RI is now looking at giving out the awards one year earlier, in Primary 5, and getting older students to mentor the pupils. Besides giving academic coaching, the mentors will share life skills like time management and goal setting.

Mr S. Magendiran, RI's senior deputy principal (student development and alumni relations), said it will first study why so few of the recipients end up in the school.

"There are students who meet the cut-off score for RI, but then cite reasons such as distance from school for not enrolling," he said.

Though primary schools give out information on financial aid schemes, some parents are reluctant to send their children to RI, he said.

"Anecdotally, we hear there are some who worry about other costs. In some cases, the parents worry that the children will not fit in with their peers," he said, adding that RI will look at how to overcome such hurdles.

Social workers and voluntary organisations welcome schemes to encourage children from poor homes to aim for top schools. But besides providing academic support, socio-emotional aspects must be considered too, they said.

Self-help group Mendaki's director of education and research Aida Royani welcomes RI's plan to reach out to Primary 5 pupils and provide mentors. "You need to start much earlier to build up the confidence of these children and to encourage them," she said.

Care Corner service development director Woo Mei Mei said RI needs to work with parents too, as "parents are still the decision makers".

She cited fears about not fitting in: "Children are constantly comparing what they have, including their stationery, what cars their parents drive and where they go for holidays. So, the child from a poor family is bound to feel that he does not fit in."

Mr Choo Chiau Beng, chairman of RI's board of governors, said it is important for RI to be a school for all. He agreed with Nominated MP Eugene Tan who, in Parliament last week, bemoaned the worsening diversity in top schools like his alma mater, RI.

Mr Choo, the former chief of Keppel Corp, said he had a humble background but never felt out of place, as RI drew students from varied backgrounds in the 1960s.

While acknowledging it is hard for those from low-income homes to catch up with peers from better-off families, he said: "It was always the school that a labourer or hawker's son could aspire to. It is important for RI to keep that."

Scholarship 'gave further encouragement'
The Straits Times, 4 Jun 2014

ZHANG Weiyao and Edmund Ong are both 13 and recipients of the Junior Raffles Institution Scholarships who went on to enrol in the school.

Weiyao said that although he was already aiming for a place in RI, the award gave him further encouragement.

"It is recognition that you can do it," said Weiyao, whose father is a company driver and mother a housewife.

Edmund, whose father is a taxi driver and mother a housewife, said the money helped pay for expenses such as mathematics tuition. "I felt motivated to meet the expectations of my teachers who nominated me for the award," he said.

But he added that he did initially worry about fitting in.

"One of the things that I noticed was how confident and smart my schoolmates were. You can't help but notice the difference. It takes a while to adjust," he said.

RI not 'representative' enough?
By Jalelah Abu Baker, My Paper, 29 May 2014

NOMINATED MP Eugene Tan yesterday sparked a lively discussion among Rafflesians past and present by asserting that his alma mater was now less "representative" of Singapore.

He was speaking in Parliament about Raffles Institution (RI), one of Singapore's top schools.

Later, he told My Paper that his sense was that the school does not reflect the social and economic composition of Singapore.

"Is my alma mater, one that I am immensely proud of, less of a beacon of hope (in meritocratic Singapore)?" he asked in Parliament, adding that it does not seem to attract as many Malays and students from neighbourhood schools as it ought to.

"I lament how this state of affairs has come to pass," he said.

Choo Chiau Beng, chairman of RI's Board of Governors, appeared to agree with Associate Professor Tan.

"We noticed this trend in the independent schools and RI a few years ago," he told My Paper in response to Prof Tan's speech.

He acknowledged that it was not easy for students from less privileged backgrounds to catch up and compete with their peers from middle-class and upper-class backgrounds.

However, he added that it all starts with early-childhood education.

"We have to try to give every Singapore child good quality, affordable, early-childhood education and assistance all through, so that they have equal chances in life," he said.

Former RI student Koh Luwen, now an undergraduate at the National University of Singapore, echoed Mr Choo's views.

"When parents can afford to give their children more time and attention, they may be able to instil a positive attitude towards learning," said the 23-year-old.

And that positive attitude is what leads to a good education, he explained.

He said parents who can afford a maid could spend the time they save on housework with their child instead - a luxury for lower-income families.

Another former RI student, who wanted to be known only as Ms Lim, said that she personally disagrees with Prof Tan's views.

She was from another top secondary school and felt that the lack of diversity was more apparent there.

"My friends from RI would go to Roti Prata House, but those from my secondary school would only go to fancy restaurants," said the 18-year-old, who recently graduated from junior college.

Another former RI student, Gan Wei Kang, 21, said that the impression that the school is elitist has been created because of a select few who are indeed that way. His friends from the school came from a "mix" of backgrounds, he said.

Although RI was unable to reply to a My Paper request for comment in time, its admissions page states: "Admission to Raffles Institution is based on merit, regardless of race, creed, social or financial background."

Levelling down not the way to help needy students
By Rachel Au-Yong, The Sunday Times, 8 Jun 2014

Fewer lavish school buildings, fewer exotic and expensive overseas field trips.

These are just some suggestions that the Government is offering on how to better shape school culture, so as to improve the mixing of students from various income backgrounds.

However, when Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said this in his speech in Parliament last month, I baulked.

Swanky facilities and week-long trips to Tokyo aren't necessities of a good education, but they can enrich.

So I wondered if this is merely spot treatment: levelling down in order to treat the symptoms of the wealth divide, without addressing the root cause.

In emphasising restraint in school spending, Mr Lee argues that students from poorer homes should not be put off studying in top schools because they feel out of place.

There is an undeniable gulf between socio-economic classes in our schools.

More than half the students in brand-name schools have graduate fathers, compared with 10 per cent in neighbourhood schools, former prime minister Lee Kuan Yew said in 2011.

Meanwhile, 2012 figures showed that only four in 10 pupils in popular primary schools live in Housing Board flats. The national average is eight in 10.

These statistics paint a picture of an increasingly homogeneous demographic in top schools, and run the danger of creating what PM Lee called "closed circles".

The lack of interaction is dangerous because if the well-to-do remain oblivious to the poor, they are more likely to make generalisations about them or lack empathy for them. It could create an elitist society, which would in turn result in more cracks between groups.

To be fair, the Government acknowledges that fewer students from humble backgrounds are going to top schools and has taken steps to mitigate that.

Starting this year, every primary school is required to reserve at least 40 places for pupils with no prior links to the school.

Raffles Institution is also reconsidering how to encourage primary school pupils from low-income homes to enrol, after a cash award scheme failed to attract as many students as it could have.

These are good measures because they give those who need help an extra push up the ladder, instead of bringing down those already at the top.

On the other hand, curbing fund-raising efforts and overseas trips does not tackle head-on the social discomfort between socio-economic classes.

Granted, the removal of these frills could ease some of the pressure that lower-income students might feel when they are required to raise funds excessively.

But the reality is that wealth disparities are most often accentuated in day-to-day interactions: when students talk about a family's upcoming trip to Disney World, or when someone shows up with a new, branded schoolbag doomed to fall out of favour in just a few months.

No one is suggesting that these luxuries be taken away from the children of wealthier families (although some schools do ban branded accessories). Rather, we must get to the root of what causes poor social interaction between socio-economic classes: the feeling that these differences are irreconcilable.

One solution is to provide targeted help so that students from poorer backgrounds don't feel left out, rather than pretend that the wealth gap is not there.

There is no point sheltering children from wealth differences temporarily, only to have them emerge from their cocoons some years later into a world that flaunts its wealth, as some societies do.

A top-performing student from a neighbourhood school could experience severe culture shock when he goes to a premier one. He could find himself lagging behind, or doing average at best. He could need extra help but might not be able to afford tuition.

There ought to be dedicated teachers on-site taking charge of such students, to help them cope with the new workload, as well as psychological stresses arising from the academic and demographic changes.

From my own experience in school, and conversations with my colleagues in the education beat, such support appears to be ad hoc and dependent on the teacher.

A bit of envy could be a good motivator. But there must always be hope that the climb up the socio-economic ladder is not out of reach.

In short, saying no to buildings and field trips levels down the educational experiences of top students without addressing social discomfort between classes.

If schools feel that buildings and field trips give students a fulfilling education, then we should not begrudge them that.

Rather, we should work on helping those at the bottom level move their way up, whether through better support networks or increased funding to non-brand-name schools.

It might be idealistic, but wouldn't it be something if all students could some day look forward to school facilities they are proud to call a second home, and have the chance to see the world?



Related
Don't punish achievers