Going with the Stream

The word “streaming” often elicits a negative knee-jerk reaction and triggers, in some adults, traumatic memories of being labelled and pigeon-holed. I believe that this bad rep is due to the prevalent social narrative resulting from misconceptions about its intention and implementation.

In recent years, class streaming has been replaced with subject-based banding, but I’d argue that this might just be putting lipstick on a pig. This article discusses the implications of streaming and subject-based banding and hopefully clarifies how and why it is done.

Foundation

Being in the Foundation stream will not set the rest of a child’s life in stone. Our robust education system allows for late bloomers to excel at different points of their academic lives. However, do note that the lack of depth in Foundation Maths isn’t enough to meet the criteria for entry into the Polytechnics and Junior Colleges.

While students who fail all subjects with scores that are close to the “U” grade are at risk of being streamed into the Foundation stream, the truth is that grades themselves are not the major deciding factor. It’s not a cold and mechanical system where students who fail to meet certain stipulated cut-off scores are automatically streamed.

Potential Foundation stream students are shortlisted, and then long hours are spent in conference rooms with the school leaders, debating if the stream or subject banding is ultimately beneficial to the child. The teachers and school leaders have to consider trend data, for example, attendance, academic records and conduct over the years, and family background and support. Hence, any recommendation from the school is a professional and well-founded opinion on what is most beneficial for the child.

Not One Size Fits All

The intention of subject-based banding is to allow for more flexibility to group students of similar abilities for each subject. For example, students who have high ability in Maths would study Maths together under one teacher, even if they are from different classes. We have actually already been doing something similar for years by banding students across different classes in a level according to their mother tongue.

However, two observations make me think if subject-based banding is effective across all ability groups, especially for the students who are academically challenged:

1. A child’s academic performance often has less to do with intelligence, than other factors like attitude, motivation and family backgrounds. Thus, particularly for students who perform badly academically, banding according to ability might be barking up the wrong tree.

2. Students with these factors tend to perform badly academically across all subjects. As a result, subject-based banding often results in class banding and the integrity of the classes are maintained.

Therefore, from the perspective of helping our children who are struggling academically, I question if subject-based banding really caters to their different learning needs. More accurately, I question if their real needs are to do with learning, or rather, are more socio-economic in nature.

Let’s not be naïve to think that our current education system has arrived at the point that no child gets left behind. However, this is the best we have at the moment and benefits most of our students; and I have faith that MOE is constantly evolving and improving its best practices.

Why Subject-based Banding

I used to be an advocate for mixed ability groups, believing that higher ability students would support their academically struggling peers and inspire them to work harder. I’ve found that, at the Primary School level, the converse is more likely to happen.

Also, for teachers, mixed ability classes are incredibly difficult, if not impossible, to manage effectively. Some students need to be pushed and some dragged along. Others only need the teacher to point them in the right direction and they will take flight on their own. Differentiated instruction can be done, but is impossible to do well within the confines of space and time.

It’s trying to catch two, or rather, three rabbits – Stretching the higher ability students to achieve their full potentials while pushing the middle ability students to new heights and providing enough scaffolding for failing students to catch up with the rest. It is unrealistic to expect teachers to fulfil this impossible task within curriculum hours and is just setting them up to fail. Ultimately, it is short-changing our children and robbing them of the appropriate and timely intervention at their respective stages.

Subject-based banding allows the teacher to take a focused approach to effectively assess and meet the needs of a class of a congruent level of ability and motivation. It’s like a conductor leading an orchestra. It may be a huge group, but everybody is pretty much “on the same page”.

Teachers who understand the power of peer influence and are able to capitalise on this class dynamic can motivate the class to support and strengthen each other, and collectively challenge their own perceived limitations to move forward together. This kind of mutual pushing and friendly competition, when done right, builds camaraderie and is the type of positive peer pressure that our children can benefit from subject-based banding.

We will always have some form of streaming, albeit cloaked in the guise of some neutral and politically correct euphemism. Instead of fearing it, we should understand its uses and shortcomings, and more importantly, trust that our education system is constantly evolving to cater to the diverse needs of our children, academic or otherwise; and trust that the system, and all the teachers who toil tirelessly in it, always work for the benefit of our children.

Looking for tuition for your child? Let us know how Mister Meister can help by filling up this form.