Our Young best US Students, but fizzle out as Adults

last SG · 2006-01-09T12:47:31+00:00

i agwee with most of what you say. the only thing i wish to add is that perhaps pilot pens could be so well marketable here is because it already is in japan...

snow leopard SG

results. we do better on international tests. they're even adopting our text books. many of us who got into their ivy leagues do better as well. going by results, our basic education is on the whole better. but i suppose we can do with better universities, that's where we lose out.

we've been harping on education time and time again. everytime we come out short in the real world, we always go back and ask ourselves is there something wrong with our education. time and time we have tinkered with it and the results are still the same. perhaps its time we asked ourselves is it more than just education? is there something else, somewhere else that needs improvement? hey that's thinking out of the box isn't it? why do we keep thinking within the education box?

snow leopard SG

why, you couldn't out argue me last time so you resort to calling names? you have good vocabulary, but it doesn't cover up for your lack of reasoning ability.

snow leopard SG

Originally posted by BillyBong:
In GLCs, where multi-layered hierachies exists to create the facade of regular promotion, many private and lean companies operate by REMOVING inefficient management levels; Former CEO of GE Jack Welsh coined the term 'downsizing' by retrenching numerous SUPLUS 'managers' during his tenure, re-inventing the term LEAN and was famously quoted: [b]'managing less is managing more'. This ensured that both the workforce and directive remained focused and streamlined, preventing the top down message from getting warped or lost along the way.

He was also renowned for having a sharp eye and recognizing talents and efficient staff WITHOUT the need for aides to point them out.

A typically astute leader need not require assistants to sing genuine praises of certain talented and capable individuals. It is more than likely that they get noticed by such people.

The same may not be said of GLC Managers who may be overly-sheltered if they have not felt the hard and tumble of the merciless economy. [/b]

yeah it would be good for the nation if we can have more jack welshes than jack asses

pikamaster SG

snow leopard,

I think the question is: what have we been harping on in education? You practically answered that question yourself: results. There is too much focus on academic results. Academic results is the box within education that our students (me included) are placed in. Education is meant to prepare children for tehir adult life, not to train them to attain top grades in academic competitions, unless attending maths and science olympiads is going to be their furture career. Although I don't agree that schools should teach students how to suck up to superiors - for one, that's immoral; for another many students already do that pretty well without being taught how to do so - I do believe more desirable social skills such as communication skills or conflict resolution skills need to be taught in schools. "Social Skills" has somehow become limited to learning how to fine-dine and dress like Victorian (not referring to VJC or VS) courtesans. So what if students can do all that? Social skills doesn't just involve how to appear properly formal and cultured; that can be a showy pretence after all. Social skills include how to resolve arguments, deal with bullies, communciate one's intentions, opinions and ideas etc. All these are NOT covered within any part of the current curriculum.

the pikamaster (who thirsts after education reform)

ndmmxiaomayi SG

Isn't that too short-sighted? Results play a small part whether or not we will be successful in life work. You can be the better student, but if you can't apply it to the real world, it is as good as wasting your time and money to study.

The education system here can be improved, but the thing is can we accept it? ITE was a technical school which was popular with students when Singapore just gained independence because we needed a lot of technicians. As time passes by, we find technical education getting lesser and lesser important. It is still regarded to be second class education, despite reforms.

Singapore says she wants to a tech hub, science hub and financial hub. Let's just say we concentrate on science hub. Science is not just theory alone. You need to conduct experiments. We spend more than half our time memorizing facts from textbook. We don't really spend a lot of time conducting experiments. How could we produce good scientists and even establish a science hub?

ndmmxiaomayi SG

Agreed.

SilverPal SG

In USA or SOME other countries, students are encounraged to speak up during class, challenge the status quo and really "learn".

In sg, students are told to shut up in class and memorize everything the teacher teaches.

You may think that the sg system allows sg students to score well in all our exams but think again, are they being taught to "learn"? Do locals learn to "learn"? Do we question what we have and ask, "how can I make it better?"

I am studying a IT related course in a major university in sg. In year 1, most of my friends have a passion for a certain aspect of IT. Some love programming, others enjoy electronics. Many like to assemble computers or set up really good wireless networks.

By the time they graduate, most do not want to enter the IT line because they are so sick of computers and IT! Some hate IT with a passion!

Is this the kind of passino for learning sg gives its students? Is this the quality of professionals that are being churned out by the local education system?

While I'm not slamming the local educational system as I feel a lot of effort and brilliance have gone into setting up the system, I am questioning, are the authorities serious about producing quality, highly skilled populace who can innovate (I think that might include questioning the norm) and give sg her competitive edge? Or are we happier churning out robots who can do nothing other than following orders and recite rules and regulations?

While the govt blames the peasents (the category that I fall into) for being too stupid to get a head and too reliant on the govt (expecting a nanny state), the ppl blame the govt for doing nothing even though they are paid million dollar salary...

The children of ministars are being sent overseas for education where SOME of them eventually become quitters.

If sg education is so flawless, why do ministars send their children overseas for education?

snow leopard SG

pikamaster,

yes it's true that over emphasis on grades can lead to neglect in other parts of human development. but if that were the whole truth and nothing more, then shouldn't the japanese, koreans and taiwanese who like us also place great emphasis on grades have faltered as well in producing world beating technologies and entrepreneurs? instead we find japanese firms amongst the world's best, koreans are beginning to make their presence felt and the taiwanese have aces like acer. did these countries de-emphasised grades?

i think it's more of the character of the nation. how the nation regards its engineers and scientists compared to say army scholars and politicians. of the sort of opportunities that exist for one to explore one's potentials. even if we give our students all the freedom to pursue the interests they desire, what good would that amount to if at the end of the day they step out into society only to realise that the best opportunities in this country belong to the select few and in select fields remotely connected to their passions and interests? or that the only way they can make a living is to join one of those industries our leaders have envisioned to be the hope for our future? what else except to go overseas to pursue dreams which many have done?

look at microsoft. the engineers can come to work as and when they like, dress in any fashion they desire, even stay at home when they don't feel like coming to work or challenge the boss without trepidation or repercussions and still at the end of the day produce the best results any boss would be proud of. we don't need these "how to resolve arguments", "how to communicate" crap. we need engineers with passion to lead engineers with passion. that's all.

snow leopard SG

Originally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:

Isn't that too short-sighted?

so what should we do? postphone judgement of our education until we're 40 years old? evaluate the success of our education by how successful we are at 40? bill gates's success can be attributed to the quality of education he received at elementary or even high school? never mind that the rest of his class didn't make it as far as he did, his success means their education has been good?

from the time you complete your basic education to the time you make that world astonishing discovery, you would have crossed many hurdles. each of those hurdles can make or break your career. so how much of what you've learnt when you were 15 do you attribute to your success at 45?

i think it's appropriate to judge the outcome of our education on its intended purpose. is it the purpose of our education, particularly at the primary and secondary level, to nuture the next bill gates? a bit far fetched isn't it? the way i see it, basic education is about literacy, basic values, competency in fundamental subjects and if we excel at them we should give ourselves a pat on the back.

Results play a small part whether or not we will be successful in life work. You can be the better student, but if you can't apply it to the real world, it is as good as wasting your time and money to study.

yes and no. yes in the sense that results or for that matter education in general does not determine why we aren't the next bill gates. bill gates is where he is, not because of results, neither is it because of education. he is where he is because he is basically smart. education does not change that. in addition, i would say he was at the right place at the right time in a social environment with the critical mass to adopt his innovation. there is definitely more to that and you're right, results or for that matter education is the least of those factors.

no in the sense that whoever we are, education paves the road for our attainment of our next level. in every step of the way, education can be the key to opening up doors never mind it isn't the only determining factor.

please do not think it is a waste of time, money or energy to study at the primary or secondary levels. very little of what you learn at this stage will be applicable eventually in later life but that doesn't mean what you've learnt would go to waste. basic mastery of all the cumulative discoveries and learnings of our time brings us up-to-date with civilisation. otherwise we would be no different from our forefathers a 100 years ago wouldn't we? in addition, it serves as a foundation with which to go farther.

Singapore says she wants to a tech hub, science hub and financial hub. Let's just say we concentrate on science hub. Science is not just theory alone. You need to conduct experiments. We spend more than half our time memorizing facts from textbook. We don't really spend a lot of time conducting experiments. How could we produce good scientists and even establish a science hub?

if you're spending half your time memorising facts from textbooks you're learning the wrong way. you need to understand the theories and concepts. only when they make sense to you do they become second nature to you. only then would learning be an inspiration as opposed to an exasperation.

you're right in the sense that some people must see the results for themselves to appreciate what is being taught. that is ok. otherwise, you can try and reason it out and it should make equal sense. einstein understood many things simply by thinking about them and through thought experiments. he left the actual experiments to other scientists.

snow leopard SG

i can understand your frustrations with our university education. i went through it and fully appreciate its futility.

i accept that we need to learn basic theories and concepts at primary or secondary levels but by the time we reach university, when we're preparing for the workforce, the least we're interested in are theories. number 1 we need skills that would make us marketable, that would give us jobs. number 2 we want to play around with things a bit more, tinker with more sophisticated toys or work on meaningful projects that can bring out our ingenuity. perhaps this is where we lag behind ...

as for speaking up, it depends on context. imprecise subjects like humanities, business or economics yes there's a lot of room for debate and exchange but for scientific concepts or engineering principles there isn't a lot to argue over. yes we can have discussions to probe deeper into the subject matter but there isn't as much room for judgement.

ndmmxiaomayi SG

I can't help but agree with what you said. However, I am glad that Republic Polytechnic is set up. The learning there is really something that I want, challenge the status quo of teachers. If we don't really agree, we will argue it out. Perhaps, we have misunderstood some points and the teachers will correct us. But if we are correct, the teachers will say that another point is brought up and we should consider this point.

My passion of IT is still there, because of this learning style.

ndmmxiaomayi SG

I don't mean that. I mean it will be too short-sighted of us to just say that one is successful because of results.

ndmmxiaomayi SG

Basically, it all depends on what job you get. Most of what we study in primary and secondary will be applicable to jobs like salesmen. For specific fields like IT, engineering and biomedical science, you will be applying what you learn from tertiary educational institutes onwards. Primary and secondary school education is just paving the way for you.

ndmmxiaomayi SG

I didn't mean myself. Anyway, I didn't learn it this way as my secondary school teachers didn't support it. We spend quite a lot of time in the labs. But it is opposite for my sister. I hardly hear her talk about doing experiments, and everyday she is memorizing the textbook.

snow leopard SG

depends on what you're refering to. if you've gotten excellent results i don't see why you can't say you've been successful in your studies. you can't as yet say you're successful in life of course but i don't see why you can't say you've achieved success in whatever you did?

in any case what i was saying is that our basic education has on the whole been more successful than those in the US because we have on the whole achieved better results.

snow leopard SG

you're coming from a polytechnic angle where application and practice reins supreme. wait till you experience one of our universities. it'll be back to concepts and theories again ...

ndmmxiaomayi SG

You are right on this. I am still a poly student, so whatever I say will be from a polytechnic's angle.

SilverPal SG

I do not agree. At this point, I can tell you how the bits travel from one part of the computer to another but I cannot configure a router or troubleshoot a network connection. And I'm supposed to be in a premier course in a major uni.

When I go out to work, I'll be starting from scratch with zero knowledge in IT... other than abstract digital and electronics knowledge that has no practical uses.

pikamaster SG

snow leopard,

I appreciate your opinion.

1) I see your point, but I believe that these existing technopreneurs come from the pre-cram-school era. Cram-schools only arrived after WWII. Entrpreneurs like the founder of Mitsubishi were not educated in such schools.

2) Education comprises many elements, and some of these elements are what moulds the character of a national generation. Some sociologists regard thsi as the "covert curriculum". If we guide them - not teach them but guide them - to regard engineers and scientists more highly, then the future will contain Singaporeans who regard such professions more highly. But interestingly, the arts are regarded much more lowly than the sciences in most locals' eyes. And that is why local culture ahs turned static.

3) U talking about Microsoft USA or Microsoft Singapore? Question Geographical context makes a difference.

the pikamaster (who still longs for educational reform)

liuzg150181 SG

Are you from National University of Singapore,School of Computing?

« Previous Page Next Page »