I AM writing to share my concern about the rising number of children receiving private tuition to supplement their education in school.

Looking through advertisements posted by tuition agencies, one cannot help but notice their promotion of 'current MOE school teachers' in their ranks.

I would like to understand the Ministry of Education's (MOE) rules on such practices by its teachers. Given their complaints of a heavy workload and all, how do they find time to moonlight?

Related link: » He spends more than half his pay on sons' tuition » Teacher-tutors command high fees » Tutors are PSLE examiners?

Moonlighting is generally unacceptable in employment contracts. Does MOE's contract with teachers forbid this practice?

In addition, there is the offence of undeclared income by teachers, which should be subject to Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore rules.

This is because current 'market rates' for MOE teachers can range from $80 to $100 an hour.

My concerns extend further to the possible impact of such arrangements:

- Teachers developing biased relationships with students to whom they give private tuition;

- Teachers burdened with extra workload and unable to perform during school hours; and

- High expenses for parents who feel the need to bridge the 'unfair' advantage their peers' children have in private tuition.

MOE should clarify its stance. Teachers who violate the code of conduct should be punished.

Lastly, the number of children who have tuition has risen, showing they do not understand their schoolwork. This means either the curriculum is too difficult or the teachers are not effective.

Why should I send my children to school and still have to coach them until 10pm every night?

Cheong Peng Tat

 

This article was first published in The Straits Times.