Tutors don't hold key to good results

WEDNESDAY'S letter by Ms Pamela Liu, 'It's about who can afford better tutors', dismisses the PSLE as an examination that 'divides the haves and have-nots among our 12-year- olds', saying 'students from well-to-do families will get into better secondary schools.'

I agree with Ms Liu that despite the meritocracy and transparency our education system boasts, competition for our children to enter secondary schools does not begin on a level playing field. This, however, does not compromise the mission of our education system - to provide every child with an equal opportunity to receive a good education.

The inevitability of Ms Liu's argument is what I disagree with. It is a gross misconception that children with 'good tuition teachers...will inevitably do better'. This is almost insulting to children who put in effort and produce results solely based on their diligence and intelligence.

A child from a poorer background might not have the luxury of an air- conditioned study, or being chauffeured around by a stay-home parent, but these are negligible compared with a strong determination to perform beyond one's socio- economic standing. Tuition is also a luxury that can be easily replaced by paying close attention in class and putting in the necessary hard work outside class.

Ms Liu also highlights the Direct School Admission programme as another channel which parents exploit by enrolling their children in numerous enrichment programmes and hence embellishing their testimonials. I am sure a testimonial bearing evidence of volunteer work, community projects or self-initiated science projects would light up the face of any principal. Such projects put no financial burden on one from a poorer background.