Topic 2: Dear Editor,
I am writing in regards to the imminent drop in school enrolment, and the course of action that should be taken.
Over the past few years, there has been a heated debate over what to do with the dwindling number of school enrolments due to shrinking population. On one hand, educators and political commentators alike believe that reducing the student-teacher ratio, i.e., small-class teaching, should be the way out, the government insists that the best solution is to cut the number of S.1 classes by one in each school. I, as a secondary school student, am in favour of small class teaching.
Firstly, I fail to see the government’s so called financial reasoning for opposing small-class teaching. Education minister, Michael Suen Ming-yeung, said that across-the-board small-class teaching would double annual expenditure for the secondary sector to HK$40 billion. Indeed, the number of students drops and so the education cost per student will surely rise if small-class teaching is implemented, but as there are roughly the same number of schools and teachers, the total cost remain unchanged. According to the Professional Teachers’ Union, there had been only a 1.7 percent rise in expenditure after classes were shrunk in primary schools in 2009. How on earth did the government get this outrageous estimation?
One apparent advantage of small-class teaching is preserving current teachers and preventing schools from being axed. Teachers are usually highly educated themselves to be able to educate others. Abandoning small-class teaching will lead to not only a sharp rise in unemployment rate, but in fact a sharp rise in unemployment of one of the most well-taught groups in our society as well. If even the knowledgeable people suffer in society, how can the government achieve its proclaimed goal of ‘building a knowledge-based society’?
Because of its obvious benefits to schools and teachers, some not in favour of small-class teaching have decried it as some sort of nefarious scheme of self-presentation, and accused educators of exploiting students. Others oppose it claiming that the financial burden is too huge. But what about the students? Have they ever considered the main participants in this scheme?
Speaking from my own experience, small-class teaching is definitely better than its alternative. When I was in the lower forms, with classes as large as 40 students, I remained a shy little girl and hardly ever answered questions or called for any attention at all. Not from the fear of teachers, I was perfectly at ease when having one-on-one conversations with the teachers, or during CTP lessons when the class is divided into half. The teachers also paid more attention to the more boisterous students or even favoured them, whilst neglecting the quiet ones like me. To this day, even with reduced number of classmates, I still feel uncomfortable speaking in front of the class, I think the bad experience with a large class has imprinted in me a fear of public speaking, despite how much I wish to change that.
Small-class teaching, no doubt, allows teachers more time for each student, as well as provides more space for an all-rounded development and instills a greater sense of belonging. Though studies have shown that its effectiveness decreases as students get older, it does not mean that secondary students cannot benefit from the scheme, nor that they do not deserve a better learning environment.
I hope the government can seize this opportunity to implement small-class teaching. If not me, at least the future students should receive a better education.
Yours faithfully,
Selena Chau
Selena Chau