Disclaimer!

This blog holds contents that contain morally unjust ideas which should only be read with an open mind. This blog does not promote the use or support of ideas posted here, which might be highly controversial, but it offers a platform for me to air certain views which I feel might not have passed through the minds of many.

Wednesday 4 September 2013

Announced changes: Singapore education system

Wow it's been a long time since I posted on this blog! I guess I really meant it when I said the blog was for me to practice my GP before A levels haha. Whatever the case, the frequency, consistency, quality and content of my posts might vary quite a bit now that I have moved on to a new phase in life: med school!

I was just reading this post on RJ confessions about how the changes made to the education system are nothing more that a realignment on emphasis on achievements, rather than a solution to the problem of students being immersed into a competitive environment since their childhood. Well written, as expected of someone who has "jumped through the hoops" of our education system and made it into the "dream school" of so many parents (YES, I TOTALLLY AGREE THAT MANY PARENTS END UP CHOOSING THEIR CHILDREN'S SCHOOLS). But here's my 5 cents worth on this matter.

So, where does the problem truly lie?

Asians, being asians (especially the ethnic chinese in the Singapore context), place a strong emphasis on achievements. Already, it has become apparent to many westerners that their "yellow-skinned counterparts" are outperforming them in the academic arena at many levels. Quite a few years back, Shanghai was known to have blown the world away in a standardised test conducted across several countries, when students there were shown to be overwhelmingly proficient (here, we mean leagues ahead of even the second in line) in tests on reading, mathematics (and possibly other subjects). Also, in east asia, recurrent stories on extra tuition, cram school or any similar institutions have been a subject for many years that have passed and even more to come. The history of scholastic achievements and the strife for it in asian societies is longer than the history of paper itself, and today, confucian values still expound "working hard to bring glory to the family name". Under this system, children have to work hard to bring fame and parents have the duty to push them in that direction. How many times have we heard parents telling their children to work hard to "become doctors and lawyers" (the 2 most dignified professions here)? This is a culture we are talking about here, one as widely accepted as filial piety (which I most definitely support). Culture takes a long time to be diluted and eventually overturned. Perhaps this nation just hasn't had enough time.

Secondly, parents all want the best for their children. Or maybe, more correctly, they all want what they believe is best for their children. What in life can guarantee that more than a good education, to get them a good job, a good payslip, and with it the comforts in life? In this globalised world, to be "skilled" is to be irreplaceable, and hence, to achieve all that was mentioned before. Naturally, parents would assume that a school with a good name provides that education which secures the rest. It's not difficult to see why when almost half of law and medical school cohort here is from one single JC. Throw in a little economics on demand and supply and you can see how grade inflation sets in every year, and how it forms this vicious cycle that stresses up many students, and perhaps more importantly, their parents.

As we can see, much of the problem comes from people in the system, not flaws in the system. The education system was created to impart knowledge to students, and tests to stream out the weaker students who need extra attention, perhaps through additional years of education, so that everyone would be on a certain similar standing by the time they all start work, albeit at different ages. However, parents often misunderstand the system. To them, having their children placed into a different banding requiring "special attention" would mean years wasted away while their peers' children zoom ahead in life. Perhaps, even more parents would find it difficult to admit that it weighs down on their pride for their children to be seen as different from others, inferior to others, just the way the news reported that special needs students are not placed in special needs schools because parents do not want themselves and their children to be seen in a different light. Except in this case, the repercussions are less obvious, or less serious.

Is the tweak in PSLE scores into wider bands, and a greater emphasis on CCAs going to change anything? 

Yes. It is going to make tuition centres close down. Is it going to make education less stressful? No, rather, it will make education more stressful. A holistic education in the eyes of achievers means more things to learn, more things to be tested on, and more possibilities for bad grades to show up. In the end, the criteria for getting into top schools will only be changed from PSLE score of 2XX to PSLE score of 2XX AND proven proficiency in a musical instrument AND proven proficiency in sports  AND anecdotal evidence of "leadership" qualities. More to work on, not less. At the tender age of maximum 12, this system is arguably the worst version of educational achievements I know of. Sure, it looks impressive. Even I would want such a kid in my school. But just think about it, those CCAs that can become achievements are all financially draining. Sports would require coaches and music would require teachers, both of which schools are only able to afford at a limited extent. In the end, it is the parents who pay for extra lessons beyond the school. This simply perpetuates the rich poor divide. In the end, this just allows schools to select parents rather than students.

And leadership? Does anyone with a rational mind actually believe that primary school students are capable of leadership? As a child, I have only seen prefects, the epitome of leadership, being selected based on how obedient they are, or how academically inclined they are. None of these have anything to do with leadership. In fact, I would argue that obedience is the lack of leadership, and primary school teachers are the worst judges on this issue. And if student leaders are selected by academic aptitude, aren't we back where we started off?

What can we do? 

Nothing really. It is just depressing to know that this is the fate of being born in Singapore, or asia, as a matter of fact. Competition is cutthroat even in our childhood and adolescence. Which, for better or for worse, feels like a reflection of life beyond school. In our lives as working adults, there will always be competition. Everyone wants the best jobs, the best pay, the most glorified positions and occupations. Not everyone can have what they want, just the way not everyone can get into the school of their dreams, unless they really are exceptional individuals. In the end, it is just the law of nature that there will be gainers and losers because everyone is so inherently different in terms of physical prowess, intellectual capability or other qualities we can use as a yardstick for "accepting" students into top schools. Systems are just rules and boundaries within which us innovative humans will compete, and as long as that competitive spirit lives in us, there will be no end.

Is there really no hope?

Well, there is. If the world around us cannot change, we can change ourselves. Rather than trying to find a school with a fancy badge, we should get parents to try to find a school that can develop children to their full potential. Allow students to take up the educational route that gets them to the proficiency of their peers, not the other way around. Rather than give them tuition to send them into brand name schools, why not send them to other schools that will make up for the need for tuition? Also, stop glorifying these coveted schools. "A school for every child's needs" should be the motto of our education system and those who dwell in it. Parents need to realise that every student should be intellectually stimulated according to their individual capacity, lest we turn them off by stretching them beyond their limits. Every school can be a good school, provided it caters to a child's needs. Throwing students of all academic aptitude into the same school would only hold back the brightest and overwhelm the weakest. The government should also be sure that allocation of teachers is done in a way that would allow the vast majority of students to learn better. Having good teachers posted to elite schools should only happen if they are the only ones who can further push the already proficient students to become exceptional, and just not to help them grasp basic concepts that they could well have learnt on their own without attending lessons.

"Be a doctor, be a lawyer!"

Finally, I would like to share my own experience. I have probably lived my life in the "Singaporean Dream", being born to parents who worked their way up the social (or in our modern world, the financial) ladder, all while raising their only 2 children to join the "Singaporean Dream Professions" of a doctor and a lawyer in our prestigious local universities. But never once in my life, or in my brother's, have we been forced into living our parents' dreams. They would speak of trying for X secondary school, but emphasise that it was not the only place to be. My mother herself believed that should there be a need to, it was for the best interest for her children to be sent to the Normal Academic stream rather than the express stream if need be, so the extra year of studies can help us reach our end goal. I am thankful that we never resorted to that, but today, what I see is the exact opposite. Do we really believe that being where we don't belong will make us better? I was from a top government secondary school and JC, and every year, I am not surprised that a good number of DSA students have to retain or do badly for their O and A-levels. I have known many RJC students who lacked any opportunity to participate in much CCA because of the stiff competition there, and I certainly do not think RJC has done their talents justice. In the end, I believe that what each student can achieve depends on where they really want to be, and not where they are at present. As my brother aptly phrased his view on students he met through a series of interviews by the Public Service Commission, it's not that some JCs produce particularly exceptional individuals, but to some, by the mere fact that they are from coveted institutions, they already have a quality imbued into them that others do not possess: confidence! So whoever you are reading this, if the facts don't say otherwise, if you know you have something to offer, always keep your head held high and your spirit strong! Once you have proven yourself, where you were from makes little or no difference anymore. If you reach here, I congratulate you on your patience, and I wish you all the best for your pursuits as students, or that of your children's as parents.