System may let down the weaker students

I REFER to the letter, “Baffled by plan to abolish elite classes” (The Star, Dec 18) by Thomas Kok. I taught English both at secondary schools and at university level for over 30 years and I can understand the problems and difficulties teachers face when dealing with a large number of students with mixed ability in the same class.

Most classes in secondary schools have over 40 students but, as pointed out by Kok, the ideal number of persons per class for students of mixed ability should be around 20. This is because the teacher needs to be alert on what is going on in each group when peer group teaching, cooperative and self-assessment learning methods are used.

I see nothing wrong with the current method of streaming students according to merit in their respective classes. Kok has pointed out the many advantages of doing so. However, my fear is that teachers may neglect students in the weaker classes.

I now teach at a home for underprivileged secondary students and am quite shocked at the number of students who have undergone primary education but are still unable to read or write properly. They appear to have been totally neglected at primary school level.

The Government has attempted to address this problem by instructing schools not to announce the number of As attained in each school. This is a commendable move that, hopefully, would remove the unhealthy competition in schools to attain the highest number of As.

Teachers now can pay equal attention to the students in weaker classes as they do in the good classes. The role of the headmaster is important here in ensuring that equal attention or, hopefully, more attention is paid to the weaker students.

Another way to prevent unhealthy competition for As and to remove stress of both students and their parents is to ensure that only deserving students who cannot afford university education are given scholarships and that, too, to only local universities.

Just achieving straight As in all subjects should not be the only criterion. What is the point of giving scholarships to students whose parents can well afford to pay for their education?

Sending government-sponsored students overseas is also an unnecessary waste of public funds, plus an insult to our local universities.

I agree with Kok that serious consideration has to be undertaken before any decision is made to do away with streaming of students according to merit. DR PETER J. PEREIRA Subang Indah, Selangor