In
Vietnam, teacher is not a well-paid job especially teachers at elementary or
secondary schools. Moreover, teachers who teach "unnecessary"
subjects like Geography, History or Biography might not earn extra money to
meet their needs as ones of other “important” subjects do. Specifically, they
might not take extra classes to have more money. This leads to one issue that is received
endless controversial about whether or not teachers should be allowed to teach
students outside of classes. In my opinion, extra teaching is necessary for
students to cope with enormous workloads and theories, even parts of them are
impracticable.
There
are some reasons why there are some parents who disagree with extra classes? Firstly,
with my own narrow knowledge about economy, “extra teaching” is so-called
supply for the demand of students and their parents. Some who thought that
“extra teaching” should be banned may look at my above argument in a reserve
way which like “teachers are people who demand students who supply their money
and time to show up at their classes”.
What
are the reasons lead to that perspective? Those may argue that the teachers
impose unethical influences on students to come to class. These influences
might be not conduct lectures fully in term of content, try to put too
difficult questions in exam papers, etc. with the objective of making those
poor students aware of the importance of attending extra classes. I have to
admit that some teachers has applied those unethical strategies, but not all.
Parents whose children are “victims” of those may make sweep statement that
“extra teaching” is kind of the only way for their children to get through
subjects. Moreover, there is also another part of parents who are subject to extra
teaching -another way for teachers to make their living? The point in common of
these parents is that their children are intelligent, hardworking and find no
difficult to get through all the courses. Hence, those parents do not send
their children to extra classes. So, what are the differences between students
who join extra classes and who do not? They are marks and class performance. It
sounds logical and common sense, does not it? However, it is not that simple.
The point is students who attend extra classes perform better than ones who do
not join extra classes but the reason is not rely on knowledge but in the way
the teacher makes exam paper. Attend-extra-class-students take the better
results because they are quite familiar with questions in the exam. This is
unfair for students who do not attend extra classes. Those teachers has damaged the positive side
of extra teaching.
So,
why do I support extra teaching? Actually, my mother is a teacher and she also
has students attending her extra classes. (You might think that this writing is
bias because of my mother’s extra classes). When studying at high school, I had
extra classes for four subjects which are Math, Chemistry, Physics and English.
The reason was partly for getting
through the subjects and other part was preparing for the university exams.
Many students might agree with me that without attending extra classes, high
school students might not pass the university exams. The reason is not all
about the students themselves. It is about the gap between what teachers are
able to teach and the load of knowledge the exam papers requires. Teachers cannot change the way they teach as
they are not allowed. Therefore, extra class is the best solution for both
teachers and students narrows the gap.
The government
has recently enforced the rule of banning teaching outside class with many
unacceptable reasons. However, no matter how strong it is , extra teaching is still
there because of the needs of students. The government should manipulate and decrease the workloads in each
grade to the level where students feel unnecessary to join extra class. That’s
much better than banning.
========================== Thank you for reading ===================================
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét