Singaporean Education is like British Education - Horrible!

pikamaster SG

The Guardian

Excerpt from Education Secretary Ruth kelly's Speech to Parliament and Think-tank

30 Mar 2005...

...While Labour understands the damage that subsidising the education of a privileged few will do - the Tories do not....

...

In the 60s this meant rejecting the flawed science and injustice of the 11-plus and it meant radical surgery for a system in which children's futures were, in large part, decided on one day when they were 11.

...

Schools tended to take on a single model, with little scope for developing distinctive character or mission. The creation of "good" middle-class and "bad" working-class comprehensive schools was not predicted. And parents and pupils were not at the heart of reform.

This does not mean we should return to selection, nor will we. Comprehensive schools have raised standards and done well for many, but they do not seem to have been the universal engine of social mobility and equality that Crosland hoped they would be. They played a vital role in overcoming the institutionalised two-tierism that was inherent in selection, but for too many people they have not delivered what today we call social justice.

The facts on social mobility are depressing. As the middle classes expanded after the war, there was considerable movement. But since the early 60s academic surveys tell us that mobility has declined. Studies show that for people in their 30s, the social class of their parents matters more than it did in the past.

...

Differences between schools shape children's life chances, but different experiences within schools are just as vital. This is why my vision is of a learning experience which recognises that when children excel they should be stretched and that when they need extra help, they should get it. Sometimes this can occur within a classroom, but I want government to support schools and the teaching profession to develop further the role of tuition in smaller groups.

...

As more schools become specialists, as we encourage greater innovation, diversity and experimentation, the system as a whole will become more varied. Teenagers should be able to study at a school, a sixth-form, a college and a workplace. But only when teachers, lecturers, teaching assistants and employers collaborate will they get the best from the system.

So let's not forget that education is not just about schools. Children learn from the moment they are born. And education and learning cannot just be allowed to stop at 16. We want to effectively make the old school leaving age a thing of the past.

We should be careful not to confuse means and ends. If improved life chances and greater equality of opportunity is our goal, we should be willing to adapt the comprehensive ideal. By drawing on the best of comprehensive schools, but by making our education system work for all, we have a real opportunity, in a third term, to fundamentally change life chances and be a historic force for social justice.

....

a few amendments for the Singapore Context- in para:

1: "labour" -> "Sim Wong Hoo"

2: "11" -> "10"

3: "comprehensive" -> "neighbourhood"
insert "SAP and independent" after "middle-class"

4: "the war" -> "independence"

"60s" -> "late 80s"

5: (none)

6: "sixth-form" -> "secondary schools and Junior Colleges"

7: "16" -> "18"

8: delete "comprehensive"

Thanks

the pikamaster (who belives our education system needs re-vamping)

crazy monkey SG

USA system is better. Can bring guns to sckool. KILL those ppl you dun like Twisted Evil

pikamaster SG

ermmm... tt was not what I was implying...

robertteh SG

Hi Pikamaster,

Excerpt from Education Secretary Ruth kelly's Speech to Parliament has clearly identified the ills with British education system. It stated that in the 60s, it meant learning of flawed science and injustice of the 11-plus and it meant radical surgery for a system in which children's futures were, in large part, decided on one day when they were 11.

The report stated that Schools tended to take on a single model, with little scope for developing distinctive character or mission. The creation of "good" middle-class and "bad" working-class comprehensive schools was not predicted. And parents and pupils were not at the heart of reform.

I fully agree with this report's main criticisms of past British education apporach. In Singapore which follows the British model, it was all study for study sake or rote learning. Students cannot relate what they learned and therefore when they grow up they are bookish and do not know how to start using their repertoir of knowledge.

Knowledge in this world is very wide and complex. It is overwhelming. It is expected that students will try to study knowledge without internalising knowledge to applications in real life.

Problem is : people usually want to study and pass examinations as set by academicians. Not all the academics understand the critical importance of application learning. Yet without application, with knowledge assembled in packages for designing and utilizations in real-life situation, students will not be fired or inspired to take knowledge further.

Without using knowledge in real applications students in schools and colleges will not be well prepared to become future entrepreneurs who are essentially people who know how to turn knowledge into products, works and services of value to the outside world.

To change the learning mindset, simple examples of how knowledge can be applied can be taught in schools. Examinations questions should be more open - say up to 50 percents to free choices related to practical works or services engaged by people in the real world.

Because Singapore schools still teach academically the engineers do not learn many engineering practices and applications well. I have previously tried to get our local engineers to advise me on solving practical problems on site but found them lacking and not up to the tasks whereas non-qualified engineers doing actual works who are keen in applying knowledge were found more knowledgeable.

More students have been trained to be future book-worms without any keen interest to use knowledge learned. They are only exposed to book learning that is why. They try to outsmart the examinations rather than apply knowledge.

The existing educationists are full of conservatives. They were trained under the original conceptual approach to education emphasising on basic theories not simple applications.

If the training has been on simple applications, many students will be motivated and inspired and their learning become alive.

Singapore will need more and more application technicians, engineers and special technologists, and from these new generation of application-based students there will be more Sim Wong Hoos nurtured. The present generation of academic educationists are lnot changing their mindset.

How to make application of knowledge the real classroom culture ? Efforts must be made to allow students more time to apply simpler knowledge of value to practical works and living from the ground up. Over time students will grasp how to apply knowledge through seeing some forms of success e.g. making of art pieces for market tests or exhibitions and earning points out of such efforts towards final examination results.

With broad-based and application-oriented learning there will naturally be greater social mobility. There will be stronger concepts and fundamentals learned through interactions with the outside world.

I fully endorse your view or vision on practical application in learning as was also posted by me to FU since the beginning. MOE must take the new direction and not just give lip service. I agree that if the children should be stretched and need extra help, they should get it. Sometimes this can occur within a classroom. The government is the first to change its past conservatism and to give true support to schools. It is only when teaching profession itself is changed that it is able to develop further in the new way of learning.

I hope there will be more views of others too to support practical educations called application education to impart the real values of education - not to pass examination alone. I too will endorse that certain schools should become specialists,

I fully agree that Teenagers will learn the true education when teachers, lecturers, teaching assistants and employers collaborate in applying knowledge to get the best from the system.

So finally it is essential to convince the whole generations of conservatives in our society educated in earlier period from the 1950s and 1960s. To change to application and entrepreneurial education, it is critical for students themselves to speak up and give feedbacks to the conservatives.

Educationist should make Children learn from the moment they are born. They should not just be concerned with short-term gains like number of students passing and grades. They should keep watch of results of applications, creativity, entrepreneurship development and not trying to defend past system - the so called general mobility or social adaptability from general academic education approach.

Minister of Education appeared to have made some change by de-emphasising on EM1, EM2 and EM3 streaming to preparing everyone to excel in his or her own way and to his or her best abilities.

Unfortunately apart from scratching the surface, the whole education system is still largely emphasising on rote learning not live learning. This is the sad fact about our education system just like the British has lately found out.

If leaders don't change their mindset nothing will ever change. Laughing