Xavier Hernandez
7 min read - Jan 5, 2025
.png-1736030007040&w=1920&q=75)
As a 5th-grade teacher at an elementary school, I had the privilege—and frustration—of witnessing my school adopt a new math curriculum in the hopes of drastically improving test scores. Our strategy? Look to the countries with the highest math performance and emulate their methods.
Singapore stood out. Its students consistently ranked among the top in international math assessments. Naturally, we reviewed their curriculum and decided it was the silver bullet we needed.
We were excited. Armed with a program that worked wonders overseas, we believed we were on the cusp of a transformation. We taught it with enthusiasm, preparing our students to conquer our state tests.
Then the results came in.
To our dismay, nothing had changed. In fact, our scores dipped slightly. Some of us rationalized that it would take a few years for students to adapt. But deep down, we knew the truth: the curriculum wasn’t much different from what we were already using. It was aligned with common core standards and showed multiple ways of solving the same problems with models and manipulatives that came included with the programs.
So, what went wrong?
Adopting Singapore’s curriculum was akin to buying the same basketball shoes as LeBron James and expecting to dunk like him. It wasn’t the shoes—or the curriculum—that made the difference. This ignores the years and thousands of hours LeBron has put into developing his skills and his genetically given gifts.
Singapore’s academic success stems from cultural and societal factors that go far beyond what happens in the classroom.
Here is a story that plays out far too often: A six-year-old girl sat eagerly on the front steps of her dad’s house, her small hands fidgeting with the hem of her dress. Today was a special day—it was her mom’s turn for custody. Every car that passed made her heart leap with hope. Was it her? Finally?
Her grandmother eventually stepped outside, her expression soft but tired. She knelt down beside the girl, brushing a strand of hair out of her face.
“Sweetheart, maybe your mom got held up at work,” her grandmother said gently, though she knew full well that work wasn’t the reason. She was just trying to soften the blow. The girl’s shoulders slumped. The weight of disappointment settled in her chest. She didn’t cry—she’d learned not to—but the sting of being let down left a mark. In her young mind, the thought began to take root: adults can’t always be trusted. Even my own mom.
Children of divorced parents often carry a unique burden—one that can shape how they see authority, relationships, and the world around them.
When parents speak poorly of each other in front of their kids, whether intentionally or not, they teach a painful lesson: adults are flawed, and those flaws can hurt you. Over time, children may internalize this, leading to feelings of distrust, insecurity, and resentment.
As a teacher, I have seen hundreds of students enter and leave my classroom. I have a knack at knowing which students have parents who are divorced simply based on the behavior and attitudes of the student (I don't have 100% accuracy, but if i'd take my bets to Vegas, I'd be a rich man). These students often struggle with authority, not because they’re inherently rebellious, but because their early experiences have taught them that authority figures—parents, teachers, or anyone in charge—can’t always be relied upon.
This is a stark contrast to parent who remain married and work as a unit to raise their children. Even though they may not trust all adults, they will a high respect for most adults if their parents model strong leadership and are consistent in their rules and expectations.
Personally, I was about 14 years old when I realized my parents were just people who were also just figuring life out. Not surprisingly, this was also the time I started to question authority in small ways (this, however, is more psychological appropriate age to do this and is expected). But I still did not want to disappoint my parents.
Here is the divorce rate between Singapore and the U.S.
This leaves teacher's with students that are more defiant and likely to question their authority. This defiance is not always an obvious display although it can be. Quietly not doing your work, whispering to peers during lessons, or simply not caring about what your teacher says will drastically affect student performance.
Disclaimer: I understand these are generalizations. There are cases where a child of divorce continues to have respect for both their parents and authority figures. Some people can just work together to co-parent the hell out of a kid. That's great and I applaud that. However, that is the exception, not the rule.
In the United States, there is no denying that we live in a child-centered society. On the surface, this sounds noble—our children are the future, after all. But the reality is more complicated and, frankly, troubling. This child-centric mindset has shifted from nurturing and supporting children to shielding them from accountability at all costs. It’s evident in the classroom, where teachers are often left powerless to enforce discipline. Students can throw chairs, destroy property, or even physically attack their peers and teachers without facing significant consequences. Meanwhile, educators are walking on eggshells, terrified of crossing legal boundaries.
During a recent professional development session, I learned something that left me both angry and bewildered. If two students are fighting, I am not legally allowed to intervene physically. I painted a vivid picture for the facilitator: "What if one student is on top of another, pounding their face, breaking their nose and jaw? Am I supposed to just stand there and watch?"
Their response?
"Legally, yes. You must wait for authorized personnel to handle it. If you physically intervene, you could be sued."
Let that sink in. Full-grown adults, standing helplessly while a child is being seriously injured, waiting for someone with the right "authority" to arrive. As a parent, the thought of my child being brutally attacked while adults are legally obligated to stand by is infuriating.
Children at a very young age understand this power. In my classroom, I typically hear students say 'I'll sue you' to their peers sarcastically. They say it jokingly but they do know that it is an option and even ask if some of the things I do are suable (I've been asked if they can sue me for giving too much homework. It was a joke we all laughed). Again, this is in jest, but they understand that in actual situations, the legal system is on their side.
In Singapore, corporal punishment is alive and well. Now, I'm not advocating for this in U.S. schools, but it would definitely change the culture and drastically improve behavior. My parents, of Mexican descent, tell me about their time in school when they would still hit students.
"Yes, they would hit us if we misbehaved. The thing was that they really didn't do it much. The threat of it made us all behave. It was rare for someone to be physically hit in the classroom. But it did happen, " my father would say.
This also means that parents gave implicit consent for other adults to physically discipline their children. These parents respected the teacher's role and supported them. In contrast, U.S. schools often have parents arguing with teachers about failing grades. Parents, too, often take the side of their children and support attacking the methodologies and decisions of the teacher, further undermining their authority.
Another key cultural difference that may explain why children in Singapore often outperform their American counterparts in academics is the emphasis on collectivism. In Singapore, family and community are prioritized over individualism, creating a robust support network for children as they grow. This cultural foundation not only fosters a sense of belonging but also reduces psychological stress, enabling children to thrive both emotionally and academically.
In many Singaporean households, children are not raised solely by one overburdened parent but are often cared for by an extended family. It is common for grandparents, aunts, and uncles to play active roles in a child’s upbringing. This shared responsibility ensures that children grow up surrounded by adults who genuinely care for their well-being. This may alleviate some of the negative consequences of divorce. Not all divorce is created equal.
Contrast this with the American model, where single-parent households or nuclear families often dominate. Here, the pressure on a single parent—often juggling work and caregiving—can inadvertently lead to emotional strain for the child. The Singaporean emphasis on collectivism mitigates these challenges, offering children a nurturing environment that allows them to focus on learning and development rather than coping with emotional neglect or instability.
Another aspect of Singaporean culture that supports children’s academic success is the deeply ingrained respect for elders. In Singapore, it is not uncommon for grandparents to live with their families rather than moving to a nursing home. This arrangement strengthens intergenerational bonds and instills in children a profound respect for authority figures, starting within the family unit.
This respect naturally extends to the classroom. Teachers in Singapore are often viewed with a level of reverence that enhances their ability to maintain discipline and engage students. By contrast, in the U.S., where individualism is more celebrated, children may be less inclined to view authority figures in the same light. This cultural difference can manifest in the classroom, where respect for teachers significantly impacts the learning environment.
It is obvious now that the Singapore math curriculum is was not the reason why they consistently scored best on international assessments. Singapore consistently ranks #1 in math, science, reading and spelling among all other countries (reference). It is not that they know which curriculum to use. It is a culture that is producing obedient, high-achieving students.
The U.S. has consistently fallen in rankings in all academic area. Out of 38 countries, we are 28th in math, 12th in science, and 6th in reading (reference). We need to look at our own cultural norms and reflect on why our students under performing. Below are some ideas to consider. This is far from an exhaustive remedy.
1. Strengthen Family Support Systems
2. Rebuild Respect for Authority
3. Reform the Legal Framework
4. Regain the Trust of the Parents
Curricular development is a crucial part of the educational system and resources should continue to be used to consistently analyze and improve our teacher methods and content. This article in not arguing that curriculum doesn't matter, it most definitely does. The problem is the strong focus on a curriculum to fix low test scores and fill in achievement gaps. A school needs compassion teachers, data-driven curriculum, and a culture of education that exists on campus and extends to the home as parents support teachers and the learning process.
As educators, we must continue striving for excellence within our classrooms. But as a society, we must recognize that true progress requires more than just adopting a new curriculum. It demands a cultural shift that values education, discipline, and respect for those who dedicate their lives to teaching.
0/1000
.png-1737521621694&w=640&q=75)