Thread: Educational options for children in Thailand

Originally Posted by Blake7

What about the American School of Bangkok behind Sametivej?

Complete wank.

Good post with a lot to consider in tnd034. How do we best prepare our kids for what they will need in 20 to 60 years time? => their working life. Not by only giving them what WE needed, that's for sure. I think that minimum bilingual, trilingual better still is the way to go, pathom in bi/tri lingual and matayom in international school (grade 7 up) is a very good option

Not writing this to create conflict but IMO, only international school is only a decent choice for those who plan to go home to their home country and stay there. Diversity opens up doors now and not having it will close doors in 20 to 60 years time. Opportunity lost.

Was it NIST or ISB?
I could swear that it was NIST on Sukh soi 15 (not ISB) that my friend sent his kids to in the late 90s, I followed his kid for 2 years 1999 and 2000 probably and I was surprised how much about native American indians and dead presidents and stuff like that he read, so much that I considered it to be at the expense of internationally more useful stuff. Don't get me wrong, I don't dislike America and Americans, I work for an American multi-national in Bangkok since 97 (came to Thailand in 91), but the world is big! Has NIST changed or are they still more American than truly international?

Originally Posted by MikeyIdea

Has NIST changed or are they still more American than truly international?

Lived near there for several years and knew parents and kids attending. NIST was quite America centered. Doubt it has changed much over last few years.

ISO does a much better job in presenting a more worldly curriculum.

Originally Posted by sabang

There are a handful of International schools that might provide an 'average' educational standard here,

Sorry but I don't think you know what you are talking about. The handful of "average" schools people are talking about here are achieving very high grades at IB level. All the teachers are very well qualified from all around the world. They are certainly better than the vast majority of standard boarding schools in Australia.

Thanks skywalker.........I will keep looking around to see what else is available in my neck of the woods. KK is a bit far and I wish you luck. Keep us posted on the progress.

Originally Posted by MikeyIdea

I recommend not to worry about the knowledge head-start thing at all, research shows that advantage in knowledge at that age gives no long-term benefit. Advantage in Development and EQ - SQ really does though, it's initiative, creativity, self control, the beginnings of concentration, self confidence, imagination, spirit, passion, pride in learning, things like that that matters at the age of 3 It is not important for a 3-year-old to learn numbers, it's what I write above that you and the school should concentrate on

A lot to disagree with here...

As far as 3 year olds learning stuff, including numbers, of course they can. And they do... & English numbers are simple to learn at that age, it gives them confidence in numbers, they enjoy the learning and problem solving...

You've said several times now about not needing 'knowledge'. It seems that your idea of what 'knowledge' means and mine, must be different. Every experience is knowledge, and of course they need to learn more and mnore and more knowledge. They need to develop thinking skills, problem solving skills, critical thinking skills. Actually, they are all working already, so you just have to nurture them.

As for your EQ and SA and 'spirit', 'imagination', 'passion', 'pride in learning', being important for 3 year olds... ahem, I think not. But, I suspect it's your terminology rather than your ideas, which is strange. Of course, all their development needs to be nurtured. I agree with Marmite; the K1, K2, K3 learning is very poor here...

Originally Posted by Bettyboo

Originally Posted by MikeyIdea

I recommend not to worry about the knowledge head-start thing at all, research shows that advantage in knowledge at that age gives no long-term benefit. Advantage in Development and EQ - SQ really does though, it's initiative, creativity, self control, the beginnings of concentration, self confidence, imagination, spirit, passion, pride in learning, things like that that matters at the age of 3 It is not important for a 3-year-old to learn numbers, it's what I write above that you and the school should concentrate on

A lot to disagree with here...

As far as 3 year olds learning stuff, including numbers, of course they can. And they do... & English numbers are simple to learn at that age, it gives them confidence in numbers, they enjoy the learning and problem solving...

You've said several times now about not needing 'knowledge'. It seems that your idea of what 'knowledge' means and mine, must be different. Every experience is knowledge, and of course they need to learn more and mnore and more knowledge. They need to develop thinking skills, problem solving skills, critical thinking skills. Actually, they are all working already, so you just have to nurture them.

As for your EQ and SA and 'spirit', 'imagination', 'passion', 'pride in learning', being important for 3 year olds... ahem, I think not. But, I suspect it's your terminology rather than your ideas, which is strange. Of course, all their development needs to be nurtured. I agree with Marmite; the K1, K2, K3 learning is very poor here...

Disagreement is not bad, it’s discussion

There is information written by child psychiatrists to be found on the internet, what I read is in German, English and Swedish. I’d be careful to filter out what is not written by child psychiatrists, there is so much information on the internet, not all is good.

So what is knowledge? The ability to use the brain to take decisions and to problem solve is not knowledge, thinking skills is not knowledge. Knowledge is to have been taught to remember the shapes of the digits zero to nine, but it is not knowledge that makes the hand of a 3 year old grab a pencil and draw them. Child psychiatrists separate “knowledge” from other types of development depending on how it was learnt and how the brain is using it. It is not a clear cut line. Perhaps we think the same but are using different terms.

It is common opinion among child psychiatrists that there is no long term advantage in pushing knowledge in 3 year olds. It’s teach the child to use his brain and give the child a good personality that is important, not filling it with knowledge. Of course 3 year old kids can and will learn the numbers zero to nine if we teach them, there is just no benefit in doing it at 3 instead of at 5

Personality is shaped from a very early stage. It can both be altered and improved later in life but it will never really be as natural as if it was there already when a kid started school. I just sat and graded the staff in the department with my boss (15 people), we looked at the list after we had finished it and it was striking that the result was actually more a grading of personality than of knowledge, it was a fun exercise and an eye-opener for what is important to help our children with the most

at the age of 3 what is important is to learn how to socialy interact

Originally Posted by MikeyIdea

Disagreement is not bad, it’s discussion There is information written by child psychiatrists to be found on the internet, what I read is in German, English and Swedish. I’d be careful to filter out what is not written by child psychiatrists, there is so much information on the internet, not all is good. So what is knowledge? The ability to use the brain to take decisions and to problem solve is not knowledge, thinking skills is not knowledge. Knowledge is to have been taught to remember the shapes of the digits zero to nine, but it is not knowledge that makes the hand of a 3 year old grab a pencil and draw them. Child psychiatrists separate “knowledge” from other types of development depending on how it was learnt and how the brain is using it. It is not a clear cut line. Perhaps we think the same but are using different terms. It is common opinion among child psychiatrists that there is no long term advantage in pushing knowledge in 3 year olds. It’s teach the child to use his brain and give the child a good personality that is important, not filling it with knowledge. Of course 3 year old kids can and will learn the numbers zero to nine if we teach them, there is just no benefit in doing it at 3 instead of at 5 Personality is shaped from a very early stage. It can both be altered and improved later in life but it will never really be as natural as if it was there already when a kid started school. I just sat and graded the staff in the department with my boss (15 people), we looked at the list after we had finished it and it was striking that the result was actually more a grading of personality than of knowledge, it was a fun exercise and an eye-opener for what is important to help our children with the most

Too much child psychology for my liking...

I'm considering a cognitive linguistic and psycho-linguistic perspective along with language learning. For me, it's more practical and has equal, if not stronger, scientific base too.

Originally Posted by MikeyIdea

So what is knowledge? The ability to use the brain to take decisions and to problem solve is not knowledge, thinking skills is not knowledge. Knowledge is to have been taught to remember the shapes of the digits zero to nine, but it is not knowledge that makes the hand of a 3 year old grab a pencil and draw them.

Again, I disagree here. From the latest cognitive linguistic research, language and knowledge are embodied. Any connection with the outside world is both learnt knowledge and a process of embodiment. Drawing is an emdoied process, for example, which draws upon learnt 'knowledge'. When you dram about drawing, the motor-neurons that control your hand to draw are firing. Thus teaching a child to draw is giving them knowledge, as is teaching a child numbers. Prepositions (up, down) and binaries are obviously embodied processes, but still is everything else... Your view of knowledge, if you don't mind me saying so, is more than a little objectivist, which is pretty much proven as a dead rubber by recent cognitive research.

Originally Posted by MikeyIdea

It is common opinion among child psychiatrists that there is no long term advantage in pushing knowledge in 3 year olds.

Once you accept that language and 'knowledge' are embodied then this viewpoint disappears...

Originally Posted by MikeyIdea

It’s teach the child to use his brain and give the child a good personality that is important,

To be honest, this statement has no meaning; 'give a child a good personality' is not something that can be done... It also sounds horribly moral...

Originally Posted by MikeyIdea

Personality is shaped from a very early stage. It can both be altered and improved later in life but it will never really be as natural as if it was there already when a kid started school.

Again, this comes across as horribly moral... Maybe it's a language barrier thing. But, trying to shape and 'improve' a child's personality is not something a school should be doing... If at all, then it's the parents responsibility.

It looks to me as though you have strong opinions from a certain perspective. Child psychologists are not people I particularly respect, and yes, I have been around them...

Lastly, I would say that 'knowledge' is very important for little learners, even the age of 3; especially the age of 3, to pick up at school. Of course, the teaching must be fun and imaginative, encouraging the students to develop in a breadth of areas - knowledge being one of the most important. I fully encourage the teaching of numbers at the age of 3 or 4, along with a balance of other kiddy skills and knowledge.

Originally Posted by good2bhappy

at the age of 3 what is important is to learn how to socialy interact

Total nonsense.

I was probably 2 years ahead of my peers when I was 4 years old and now look at me. I sit in front of a PC all day and conduct friendships via 2 strands of twisted copper wire.

Hmmmm....

Originally Posted by Blake7

I heard that the well-respected head of NIST moved to Bangkok Prep which has recently opened near Thonglor. Have you heard much about that place? Seems like it will be quite good.

My kids have been going there for years.....the addition of said Headmaster was very good news, he's a good guy and well respected. He has since recruited well respected teachers from other schools.

We are very happy with the place and I'd rather have them there than in NIST (some insider stories that were not so positive) ISB and Patana (too big)