The Merciless Singapore Education System
-
Source :
“Singapore penalises you if you are too weak or too strong,” said Dr. Roland Cheo, one of the 4 speakers, at the Workers’ Party YouthQuake Forum Series. The topic was on Singapore Education, and it marked the start of the second series of forums organized by the Workers’ Party Youth Wing.
Dr. Cheo, a visiting fellow with the Department of Economics at NUS, was rejected 4 times by the National Institute of Education after he graduated from an US university with a double degree at the tender age of 19. At his 4th rejection, he was told by an insider that “it’s because you did not do your A levels”. Disillusioned, he stopped applying after that. Speaking to an attentive crowd, he argued that outliers tend to get ignored in our system. While the norm tends to perform very well, the outliers are often left behind by the system.
It is a view that Miss Kuik Shiao Yin, creative director of a collective of social enterprises including the well-known education institution School of Thought, concurred with. She also believes that another problem with the education system is how too many students are afraid of failing - a problem perpetuated by a success-driven society and demanding parents. This has bred a generation of Singaporeans too scared of taking risks. Singaporeans are very exam-smart and have fared well consistently when it comes to international rankings of math and science, but generally, not enough focus is placed on providing a creative education. Teachers are constrained from teaching creatively, in part because they are taxed too heavily already, she said.
A more personal opinion was provided by Mr Bernard Chen, secretary of the Workers’ Party Youth Wing, who has experienced both JC and polytechnic education. He thinks that the academic benchmark of university admissions is placed too high for polytechnic students - with the average GPA (Grade Point Average) of polytechnic students who have gained entry into local universities at 3.5 to 4 (out of 4). Furthermore, the system seems to be biased - for polytechnic students, 20% of their O Level results determine whether they get into a local university, which seems to be “penalising late bloomers”. JC students’ admissions, on the other hand, depend entirely on A levels. Bernard considers himself fortunate that he’s been accepted into a local university as the top 10% in his cohort - but he believes more can be done for the other 90%, a group he said would be caught in the debt cycle - if they do not receive subsidised university education.
This intellectual forum had its fair share of fun and laughter. For example, when Mr Chia Yeow Tong, a Ph.D Candidate at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, shared his research dissertation on history education in Singapore, he mentioned how there used to be a subject called Education For Living (EFL). Miss Sylvia Lim, chairman of Workers’ Party, who was sitting in the audience appeared to be nodding. Mr. Chia later added that EFL is a subject that “most of us don’t know”, which triggered Miss Lim’s witty comment: “What are you implying?” The audience broke into laughter. Later on, in a response to a question an audience member posed, Mr. Chia also argued that citizenship education in Singapore typically does not have enough focus on teaching democratic principles and individual rights, unlike in Canada.
There were other relevant questions brought up by the audience too. One of them pointed out that some students who have been rejected by local law schools have gotten into top law schools overseas, and quizzed whether that particular acceptance letter from top law schools should be used to appeal for local entrance.
Another pointed out that perhaps Singapore lacks the critical mass and resources to cater to outliers. In response to this, Miss Kuik argued that the problem is not so much that, but that Singaporeans need to champion that it is okay if “you are outstanding beyond the pack” and it “is okay to stand out (in a different area). You can be the David Gan of dog grooming and claim that niche. The question is: do you have the guts?”
Source :
-
Originally posted by UltimaOnline:
Source :
“Singapore penalises you if you are too weak or too strong,” said Dr. Roland Cheo, one of the 4 speakers, at the Workers’ Party YouthQuake Forum Series. The topic was on Singapore Education, and it marked the start of the second series of forums organized by the Workers’ Party Youth Wing.
Dr. Cheo, a visiting fellow with the Department of Economics at NUS, was rejected 4 times by the National Institute of Education after he graduated from an US university with a double degree at the tender age of 19. At his 4th rejection, he was told by an insider that “it’s because you did not do your A levels”. Disillusioned, he stopped applying after that. Speaking to an attentive crowd, he argued that outliers tend to get ignored in our system. While the norm tends to perform very well, the outliers are often left behind by the system.
It is a view that Miss Kuik Shiao Yin, creative director of a collective of social enterprises including the well-known education institution School of Thought, concurred with. She also believes that another problem with the education system is how too many students are afraid of failing - a problem perpetuated by a success-driven society and demanding parents. This has bred a generation of Singaporeans too scared of taking risks. Singaporeans are very exam-smart and have fared well consistently when it comes to international rankings of math and science, but generally, not enough focus is placed on providing a creative education. Teachers are constrained from teaching creatively, in part because they are taxed too heavily already, she said.
A more personal opinion was provided by Mr Bernard Chen, secretary of the Workers’ Party Youth Wing, who has experienced both JC and polytechnic education. He thinks that the academic benchmark of university admissions is placed too high for polytechnic students - with the average GPA (Grade Point Average) of polytechnic students who have gained entry into local universities at 3.5 to 4 (out of 4). Furthermore, the system seems to be biased - for polytechnic students, 20% of their O Level results determine whether they get into a local university, which seems to be “penalising late bloomers”. JC students’ admissions, on the other hand, depend entirely on A levels. Bernard considers himself fortunate that he’s been accepted into a local university as the top 10% in his cohort - but he believes more can be done for the other 90%, a group he said would be caught in the debt cycle - if they do not receive subsidised university education.
This intellectual forum had its fair share of fun and laughter. For example, when Mr Chia Yeow Tong, a Ph.D Candidate at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, shared his research dissertation on history education in Singapore, he mentioned how there used to be a subject called Education For Living (EFL). Miss Sylvia Lim, chairman of Workers’ Party, who was sitting in the audience appeared to be nodding. Mr. Chia later added that EFL is a subject that “most of us don’t know”, which triggered Miss Lim’s witty comment: “What are you implying?” The audience broke into laughter. Later on, in a response to a question an audience member posed, Mr. Chia also argued that citizenship education in Singapore typically does not have enough focus on teaching democratic principles and individual rights, unlike in Canada.
There were other relevant questions brought up by the audience too. One of them pointed out that some students who have been rejected by local law schools have gotten into top law schools overseas, and quizzed whether that particular acceptance letter from top law schools should be used to appeal for local entrance.
Another pointed out that perhaps Singapore lacks the critical mass and resources to cater to outliers. In response to this, Miss Kuik argued that the problem is not so much that, but that Singaporeans need to champion that it is okay if “you are outstanding beyond the pack” and it “is okay to stand out (in a different area). You can be the David Gan of dog grooming and claim that niche. The question is: do you have the guts?”
Source :
This is singapore for you. Everything must follow the system. Not that it is bad, but sometimes it reminds me of the retarded zero-tolerance policy in US schools.
-
To be frank. Singapore education system is one of the worst.
I'm one of the example as I totally hated primary, secondary, JC and even university. Too academic-driven and kills the fun of learning. I can confidently said that a lot of students are studying for the sake of better jobs and life, especially in Singapore.
In Singapore, no cert = no chance = no jobs even. Meagre pay, long working hours, stress are all we got if we don't study.
Talking about teachers, I can say most of them are lousy, especially secondary school ones. Simple things can teach until dun know like what but sometimes students have to take the blame also. Some students are just problematic and totally forget what is respect.
-
Originally posted by Uncertain:
To be frank. Singapore education system is one of the worst.
I'm one of the example as I totally hated primary, secondary, JC and even university. Too academic-driven and kills the fun of learning. I can confidently said that a lot of students are studying for the sake of better jobs and life, especially in Singapore.
In Singapore, no cert = no chance = no jobs even. Meagre pay, long working hours, stress are all we got if we don't study.
Talking about teachers, I can say most of them are lousy, especially secondary school ones. Simple things can teach until dun know like what but sometimes students have to take the blame also. Some students are just problematic and totally forget what is respect.
I disagree with what u said.
Study is a luxury which some people doesn't even can afford to in other countries and here you are whining about having to go to JC and university.
People often talk aboutlack of fun in learning in sg education. Fuck them. Dun take things for granted.
You should thank god that u have good parents that are able and can afford to send ur ass to schools and does not have u to go outside to face the society in an early age to help support the family.
What matters most is adopting a right mentality and be mature about it. -
Originally posted by mlmersrlosers:
I disagree with what u said.
Study is a luxury which some people doesn't even can afford to in other countries and here you are whining about having to go to JC and university.
People often talk aboutlack of fun in learning in sg education. Fuck them. Dun take things for granted.
You should thank god that u have good parents that are able and can afford to send ur ass to schools and does not have u to go outside to face the society in an early age to help support the family.
What matters most is adopting a right mentality and be mature about it.yah loh. fun is what you make of it. what could be better than learning new things everyday.
-
Originally posted by mlmersrlosers:
I disagree with what u said.
Study is a luxury which some people doesn't even can afford to in other countries and here you are whining about having to go to JC and university.
People often talk aboutlack of fun in learning in sg education. Fuck them. Dun take things for granted.
You should thank god that u have good parents that are able and can afford to send ur ass to schools and does not have u to go outside to face the society in an early age to help support the family.
What matters most is adopting a right mentality and be mature about it.Correction. It is not a luxury when education puts a stress and taxes on u mentally. A persn who studies for a system just to earn $$$ or to do well in career is as good as not studying.
-
Frankly there is nothing much in terms of knowledge to learn in SG education system other than facts, figures and coughing them out during exams. It is a rote learning system. U end up learning the facts and figures rather than how to apply them or relate them to the real world. In short we call it the "paper system"
-
Our ex president ONG TENG Cheong was a fine example on how one applies his knowledge in the real world.
He was a degree grad from Adelaide Uni and did not study in SG. He was a fine man who related to the world and did some fine things compared to the brain dead local grads. His committment, mannerism and intelligence was seen by others as a positive attribute that not many have in this country.
a) Vision - Mr Ong's firm belief in the MRT system clearly demonstrated his vision in that the system would be a new dimension in urban mobility. It has to be noted that there have been tough resistance to the MRT system due to the large capital involved. And the existing cheaper mode of transport (via the bus system) was strongly proposed as an alternative to the MRT system.
b) Conviction - Despite facing opposition from his Cabinet colleagues, Mr Ong, as Communications Minister persevered and sought to convince his colleagues of the advantages of having a MRT system. Mr Ong was indeed a man of conviction with his beliefs held firmly
c) Courage - In light of the ruling party's drop in their percentage of votes won in the 1991 election, then-DPM Ong said that one of the groups who had voted against the PAP comprised of those 'Chinese-educated who feel that they have been neglected by the Government... They had kept their grievances to themselves and had become the neglected silent majority'. DPM Ong chose to address this problem openly which showed his courage in tackling the problem in a transparent manner. After he had highlighted this concern, the Government emphasized on the need to refocus on this group of 'silent majority'.
In his pre-election speech, he said, " Some people still ask whether my long previous association with the PAP will stop me from acting independently. The answer is no. My loyalty is first and foremost, to the people of Singapore. It has always been so, and will always remain so". Mr Ong indeed fulfilled this electoral promise of being pro-Singapore as can be seen in these examples:
a) In 1994, Mr Ong, as President, had disagreed with the Government's interpretation of the Constitution, regarding the powers of the Presidential Office. Mr Ong referred the issue to a special High Court tribunal, which was chaired by the Chief Justice. When the final decision was ruled in favour of the government, Mr Ong graciously accepted it.
b) On 16 July 1999, at a press conference to indicate that he would not be contesting a second term, President Ong mentioned some problems he had faced during his term as President. His points drew a swift response from the government but it was evident that President had been accountable to Singaporeans while performing his duties as President.
President Ong had tested several issues during his 6-year term, and it was noteworthy that he had pushed for the publication of the 'White Paper on the Determination and Safeguarding of the Protection of the reserves of the government'. -
In Sg education system, one will never realise his/her true potential, it is shallow, stuff u up with unnecessary bloat ( and of course added stress) and most significantly a lack of creativity and out of the box thinking.
Of cos the reason being is to attract foreign MNC to set up workforce here.
-
Originally posted by mlmersrlosers:
I disagree with what u said.
Study is a luxury which some people doesn't even can afford to in other countries and here you are whining about having to go to JC and university.
People often talk aboutlack of fun in learning in sg education. Fuck them. Dun take things for granted.
You should thank god that u have good parents that are able and can afford to send ur ass to schools and does not have u to go outside to face the society in an early age to help support the family.
What matters most is adopting a right mentality and be mature about it.
What is your damn education level? If teritary education is so important, Mr Bill Gate and Warren Buffett will be beggars.If education is meant to breed exam machines, then there is no point of education. Education should teach how people apply the knowledge to real life situation and not everything must be exams.
I am complaining about how education is structured and not how not important is it.
-
Originally posted by Uncertain:
What is your damn education level? If teritary education is so important, Mr Bill Gate and Warren Buffett will be beggars.If education is meant to breed exam machines, then there is no point of education. Education should teach how people apply the knowledge to real life situation and not everything must be exams.
I am complaining about how education is structured and not how not important is it.
Bill gates is HARVARD drop out. That means he was smart enought to go there, but opt not to finish his degree.
You are free to not go to school of any kind to further your studies. things like being a technician, being a baker, being a software writer ALL can be learned on your own. But people will want to go get their cert on it any way.
Of course, not all cert is important. having a degree in history and being a banker is no link. but at least the guy is smart enough to finish tertiary education.
In civil service, education is important. So you can join private industry, where you are judged more on the quality of your work, if you think studying is not important. You just need to convince your boss that you are as qualified, and everything will be ok.
-
Bill gates received the honorary doctorate from Harvard uni and many other unis.
-
Hi,
All of us have a role to play to make our education system more meaningful and less merciless. Thanks!
Cheers,
Wen Shih -
I posted this at CNA forum, and the admin removed it
