Cram school function as both useful and problematic

國

立 政 治 大 學

‧

N a tio na

l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y

28

might have influenced the instruction styles and the way students think without the ability to read and think critically: “too much lecturing, not enough action” Chen &

Fan (2014). “Taiwan students are among the most successful but their attitudes and levels of confidence are much lower than students’ in other areas such as Europe”

(Chen & Fan, 2014).

From 1997 to now, Taiwan has conserved a monopole in sciences, where the knowledge of students is one of the highest. Taiwanese students keep ahead having high scores in Mathematics. However, the Chen and Fan (2014) argue about a space is needed for improvement such as in reasoning, identifying issues, and utilizing evidence: “It is said that one important function of schools is to connect the children to the real world. Often, test-oriented system, instruction and materials do not allow students to link what they have learned to their environment”. Students may also suffer from physical fatigue and pressure from an intense studying lifestyle: “In High schools, students reveal learning fatigue, lack of motivation to read, and lack of stamina” (Chen & Fan, 2016). The previous discussions have given us the opportunity to understand rote learning as being an aspect of the Asian culture and of the testing-oriented education.

2.3.2 Cram school function as both useful and problematic The cram school teaching methods may largely affect the students’ learning and experience as a whole, and as Liu mentioned: “Cram school does matter in students’

learning achievement” (Liu, 2011). But it cannot be assumed that private tutoring always results in learning gains. Both Bray & Lykins (2012) said much depends on the motivation, attitudes, and teaching styles of the tutors.

Education should not be used to integrate the young into the logic of the present system but to help them change it into something that is more consistent with their existential humanity” (Debeor, 1001, P. 2). The dimension of learning for the sake of taking tests has been very much discussed and throughout our interviews, we acknowledged that some students would like to receive the class’s content and be able to link with their own experience.

‧ 國

立 政 治 大 學

‧

N a tio na

l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y

29

Also, because of cram schools’ influence in Taiwan’s society, these supplementary tutoring institutions deserve greater attention on its function and impact for instructing the next inventive generation. As Bray & Lykins (2012) argued, policy makers have neglected the role of private supplementary tutoring, which may have negative as well as positive dimensions.

In recent years, cram schools have been observed from the academic community and according to papers released, cram school does affect the adolescents and their families in a significant way. It was argued by UNESCO that tutoring helps people to stay in education systems longer and may be seen as a good investment in comparison to Western European countries (UNESCO, The nature, scale and causes of supplementary private tutoring). David Stevensen and David Baker (1992) says supplementary tutoring mimics mainstream schooling, whereas Mark Bray argues that both the mainstream schooling and tutorial centers have a more cooperative relationship (Koh, The “magic” of tutorial centers in Hong Kong: An analysis of Media marketing and pedagogy).

The research literature shows mixed feelings on the impact of private tutoring on academic achievements, and according to many scholars, cram schools have shown great evidence in indicating the efficiency of private tutoring on students’

achievements (Bray & Lykins, 2012; Tsai, 2002; Liu, 2011). In Bray and Lykins’

paper, both argued that the number of evidence which indicates as tutoring making a great difference in students’ learning achievement, even if it does not always do. Moreover, Liu argued in the same way that cram schools do help in the academic improvement of school children and may have positive influencer over students’

academic performance. Another author (Liu, 2011), stated that cram schools are a place where other than having to do their homework, children can communicate by sharing experiences.

Tsai (2002) suggested in his research that going to cram school was in fact perceived as an opportunity to access to higher education. Indeed, depending on the student’s needs, when a regular school fails to provide quality education, cram school becomes one of the most common alternatives to take back what should have been taught.

‧ 國

立 政 治 大 學

‧

N a tio na

l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y

30

Although attending cram school is often pricey, Liu (2011) depicted that students in Taiwan attend cram schools no matter how much income their families earn. Lastly, parents with the highest (master or Ph.D. degrees) are less likely to send their children to cram schools (Liu, 2011).

After looking at the positive impacts on students’ academic achievement, we have encountered some interesting elements concerning the negative impacts of cram schooling. Many other scholars have argued about cram schools having a negative impact on children’s understanding of more specific concepts such as Huang who mentioned the lack of comprehension towards mathematical concepts (Huang, 2004).

“There are claims that the pedagogy in Japanese juku leads to better exam results compared to teaching methods in conventional schools”. However, the results are shown from the Taiwan investigation of cram schools on mathematics performance only showed negligible improvement (Kuan, 2011; Koh).

The system is said to produce some of the best scores in mathematics and sciences in the world however Taiwanese schools still put too much emphasis on rote learning and not enough on creativity and independent thinking (The China Post, 2016).

Moreover, Bray and Lykins who argued about cram schooling as bringing positive impacts for students’ academic achievement, mentioned that this type of private tutoring did limit the capacity of learning by focusing on narrow domains of achievement (Bray & Lykins, 2012). Also, cram schools are great adepts of rote memorization, which is often criticized as resulting in students’ lack of creativity and ability to reflect and make insightful judgments (The International Guide on Students’

achievement, Hattie & Anderman).

Like many other education systems in Asia, the Taiwanese education system tends to hold emphasis on academic degrees and rote memorization that is said to have turned schools into test-preparation centers rather than anything else (Hwang & Chen, 2008;

Liu, 2011). Cram schooling is said as being more a mimic behavior (Chang & Yi, 2004). For Taiwanese teenagers, attending cram school has become a normal daily activity (Yi & Wu, 2004). Finally, the Taiwanese new generation’s individual preferences and strengths are generally not sufficiently appreciated and directed in

‧ 國

立 政 治 大 學

‧

N a tio na

l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y

31

productive ways (Chen & Fan, 2016). As Carmean and Haefner (2006) argued, there is a need to change the environment in order to “foster deeper student learning and engagement (…) should foster a more learner-centred environment that rich in critical thinking, student exploration, peer learning and knowledge construction, educational opportunities…”

Room for improvement

Throughout this research, we have observed a gap between the student’s knowledge gained in school and the requirements that will be waiting for them outside of school.

Svitak (2015) argued that “the school system and parents should be working together to raise educated students” also adding that “it should be a joint effort to train the next generation to be independent and prepared for what’s ahead” (Svitak, 2015). If we follow Svitak’s argument with the one of Chen & Fan (2014) giving out the vision and goals of the 12-year curriculum, we understand that the educational process of growing up is that schooling experience should firstly “facilitate the learners to fully fulfill their potentials. In order to do this, schooling should aim to inspire rather than to control. Secondly, he quoted Dewey, (1938) saying, “Learning experiences are often created through interaction. Therefore it is essential to regard schooling experiences as an interactive process referring to the ability of each individual to communicate and express oneself outside.”

‧ 國

立 政 治 大 學

‧

N a tio na

l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y

32