APIS in Malaysia- is it a good school?

See my posts where I list suggested assessment criteria.

I note it only has 18 staff - so that is a worry as school must be only 200 kids. So not financially viable yet. That is a big question with so many schools opening up.

No information on the principal just a name. Also a bad sign in my opinion.

Thanks a lot for your response

Thanks for your advice. Can you let me know where can I see your suggested criteria.

Do you have an idea about Tenby.

Tenby has changed a lot over last few years and now part of the "real" international school set. Do go and see during normal days. Just do a search!

Thanks a lot. You seem to have a lot of knowledge of the schools. Can I trouble you just once more. How is Sri KDU? I know that I am asking a lot but I am really thinking of my transition there and schools are the most important factor.

Thanks in advance, again !!!!

Btw just noticed that APIS are advertising for a new a Principal. Whether the last one did a runner was sacked or just left for a new job I haven't heard.

They have had a high turnover of staff as I have met some of their ex teachers. Who did runners (broke contracts).

Hi, does anybody have an idea about Help International School. Is it good?

Puneet Narula wrote:

Hi, does anybody have an idea about Help International School. Is it good?

Not as good as established mid-range schools such as Tenby/Taylors etc because:

- new school therefore risky, often as it takes at least 5 years for a school to settle down to having established quality in place especially for IGCSE/A level

- size of school? Very few teachers on website so they are small in number of students? Again a serious issue as quality of teaching suffers badly IMHO - teachers teaching subjects they don't really know themselves, lack of focus etc results in lower quality learning and lower grades

- pay is lower than other schools they aim to compete with (and size of school) makes a difference especially for hard to recruit subject teachers, Maths, English, Physics, Chemistry etc. The awful UK approach that someone with a Biology degree can teach IGCSE/A level Physics is just plain daft. Research shows that subject specialism is critical in Maths and the Sciences especially and worth up to two grades points (in USA very sound research shows this).

On the upside
- Principal is properly qualified (in Malaysia that is unusual)
- they do aim to hire properly qualified staff (but pay will be an issue as they expand and also retaining staff who realise they are underpaid and leave)
- nice enough facilities etc (BUT research show this has no impact on results!)


Forget all the glossy website and use of ipads. Waffle and fads do not maketh an outstanding learner

Any views on Taylor, Rafflesia, Mutiara and Sayfol. Thanks a lot in advance. Need some views urgently.

Puneet Narula wrote:

Any views on Taylor, Rafflesia, Mutiara and Sayfol. Thanks a lot in advance. Need some views urgently.

Taylors is a real third tier school. (there are often 3 tiers talked about in international school ratings)

The others are not international schools in any real sense of the word. They are below the third tier that is and are local private schools taught in English by Malaysian teachers with some unqualified Iranians or East Europeans added in the mix.

Thanks Nemodot.....how is Sri KDU. I must say that your inputs are always welcome and to the point. Thanks as always

Consider these points:

Leadership

- Principal must be from the appropriate country that the school specialises or at least is from a similar standard of country and has lots of experience (basically for a Western school US/UK/Australian Head who worked long time as Head in that country).

- Senior leaders/Head of Departments should mostly be expat qualified staff especially Maths/Science/English

Teacher quality

- All English teachers should be certified teachers from English mother language countries (US/UK/Australia/Canada) with a bias towards stated curriculum e.g. mostly British with QTS if stated British curriculum

- at least 50% expat staff NOT counting Europeans/South Africans/Iranians/Pinoys (without western teaching certs – eg if they have British QTS then count them) - even elite international schools hire Indians for Chem/Physics due to world shortage (and often are good teachers in those subjects so count up to 5% if they have suucessful exam records and focus on exam teaching) but generally only count those from USA/Canada/UK/Australia who are certified teachers from that country. Europeans/South African with no certification don't count.... lots of these are a bad sign as employed for being white and no other reason! That is an old trick used by schools best avoided.

Exam results

- exam results: though nearly all International schools adjust these including the elite ones. Ask how many in year group and a break down of how many A*/As - many schools pressure students to drop subjects. Do own percentages. Allow for entrance policies – e.g. some are very selective so should be getting very high A*/A surely? Ask average IGCSE per student. Compare these. Ask how may of year group do Maths, English First Language, English Literature and triple/double sciences. Compare these.

- If a school uses only (or a lot) English 2nd Lang IGCSE a lot RUN AWAY FAST as that means they value stats over education. Some bad schools do this despite it causing serious problems for students when applying to University.

Curriculum

- if it claims to be a "Cambridge British curriculum" then that is silly marketing (minus factor)

- Do most students do English Language and Literature IGCSE's (2 s IGCSE's) - normal British practice

- Do most students do all three science IGCSE's or double coordinated award (=2 s IGCSE's) - normal British practice. At least 2 of the 3 is second best. Only one is bad practice for the majority as limits choices later on

- uses Cambridge checkpoint then not really British curriculum and designed for unqualified (from UK) teachers so a negative factor in my opinion.

Behaviour

- behavioural policies. Are these positive? or are students expelled for wrong socks!

Quality

- How long has the school been in operation? Exam results? New schools are often weak in quality, Some established schools rest on their laurels and are actually in danger of becoming very bad schools as Principal doesn’t manage the school properly. This is hard to evaluate but ask that question. What are the quality control procedures?
- What Personal health and social curriculum does the school follow? What is form time use for?

Other
- Cross/extra-curricular activities?
- Are facilities all nice and glossy (ie not used!) are there enough labs? Divide student numbers by number of science labs and compare



On that basis . Taylors, Tenby and Sri KDU are the serious "budget" choices. Some very expensive schools fall down on some aspects like being new and untested.

Teacher quality

- All English teachers should be certified teachers from English mother language countries (US/UK/Australia/Canada) with a bias towards stated curriculum e.g. mostly British with QTS if stated British curriculum-

Nemodot, do you really think that if all the teachers are qualified from English mother language countries  as the examples provided, the students are prone to acquire better education? I personally think vice versa. There are many teachers from ESL countries who are very passionate about teaching and put in effort and they make a difference too.

Hi in my experience no not as good. Exceptions exist but rarely. I am not including those with QTS (or similar from USA Australia or Canada) who are from abroad. These count as it is not nationality but training I am talking about.

Say you want a heart surgeon. I am sure there are enthustiastic unqualified surgeons who can do a heart op on the cheap. But why risk it?  You have a problem with your breaks. You ask an amateur or a qualified car technician to repair? Same with education. Why risk it when there are enough English teachers with proper teaching qualifications. It is a no brainer!

It doesnt mean those with QTS (or similar) are all automatically better. Some are below the standards required and good schools weed them out. Often they are those that didnt undergo proper teacher training and got QTS via European rules. Even some western European standards are not as good really as UK. That is from experience. Again some overseas trained teachers can be good after retraining. But they usually stay in UK as that was their intention. I worked with some outstanding ones in UK but they are usually there for money or other reasons like being gay (as UK more liberal than some countries).

The math though is simple. Schools that hire lots of East Europeans/ South African qualified/unqualified teachers are run by cheapskate management who dont care about quality.