Dear Editor,
I am writing to air my opinion on the latest controversy in the education sector – whether small-class teaching or class reduction should be adopted to tackle the dwindling number of local students. There are different views in society discussing the two possible remedies in terms of financial and employment factors. As a secondary school student, I would like to explain why small-class teaching is more favourable than the class reduction proposal, as well as how to achieve this goal.
I believe most teachers and students would love the reduction in class size rather than the number of classes. This is a win-win solution in which teachers need not fear to be laid off and students can study in a better learning environment. Here comes the dispute. Government supporters keep saying that no evidence so far can show the effectiveness of small-class teaching in secondary schools, and therefore the scheme should not be introduced to secondary education. A science-stream student will understand how absurd it is to draw a conclusion without carrying out an experiment. It seems that the Education Bureau totally relies on the Western authorities and it will follow the current system as long as there is no new research done by the West to show something different. But the fact is that small-class teaching in local primary schools has been proven effective and the modes of education in the West and East are nothing alike. With these in mind, I wonder why the government is so reluctant to take a step forward to testify its hypothesis.
Smaller class size means a smaller student-to-teacher ratio. This is a concrete fact so government advocates need not argue on it. In primary schools, we have seen how the learning environment can be optimized under an interactive mode of teaching. If the focus of secondary schools switches from rote learning to an interactive one, it is likely that the same benefits apply. Students will definitely receive more attention from teachers and individual needs can be addressed more easily. Small classes also facilitate group work. Through frequent in-class discussions, group projects and presentations, pupils will develop a stronger sense of belonging to the class which in turn promotes the morale and learning atmosphere of the class. Small-class teaching allows high flexibility and efficiency in learning because teachers can adjust the teaching speed and content according to the students’ needs. This is almost impractical in a large class of size of thirty to forty.
Apart from academic benefits, small-class teaching helps nurture teenagers’ personality too. Primary kids need attention from teachers, so do the secondary youngsters. Many teenagers nowadays feel they are ignored and rejected, and as a result they may develop low self-esteem or even anti-social thoughts. Teachers have to build close relationships with students in order to sense and help them tackle their problems. It is unavoidable that in a big class, teachers might not be able to spot out the students in need because it is no easy task to understand all forty students in a class. By adopting a small-class scheme, the teachers’ burden will be alleviated while students will gain more support from teachers.
As a student, I believe small-class teaching makes sense in secondary education in the way that both teachers and students will gain irreplaceable advantages. The only prerequisite for the success of small-class teaching in secondary schools is a change in the mode of education. In fact, the recent education reform highly favours the implementation of the scheme. Under the NSS curriculum, students are required and expected to develop strong communication skills. This can be achieved most effectively in a small class setting. In order to maximize the learning outcomes, teachers should employ an interactive approach in teaching. Unidirectional teaching is already obsolete and should be superseded. This is a dominant trend and why should we wait for the proof from other countries?
Education is a lot more than importing knowledge to students. It is about developing and shaping students’ body and soul as a whole. I could not see any reason why financial or administrative concerns should be placed over better education. Even if the introduction of small-class scheme could be costly, it is still meaningful to do so. I believe many citizens hold the same view as local secondary students do. It is high time the government rethought the meaning of education, which has after all nothing to deal with a rise or fall in student numbers. I hope the government officials will put themselves into students’ shoes to understand the situation from the perspective of students more.
Yours faithfully,
Chris Wong
Chris Wong