Yes we do have scholarship, president scholars...all those
bright students and future leaders. But we also not not neglect the
other group of children (average children). They can become a
future leaders too.
They should review that not only brightest kids get scholarship,
they should also give the opportunities to the average
children.
I have a friend, now already 50 yr old, retired. Dont need to
work. Suspect saving over $6 mil. He only has psle cert.
I strongly suspected that Singapore only nurtured the early
prodigies but not the late bloomers . And late bloomers tend to
have very good ideas.
It is a failing across the education system. From an early age,
we were streamed according to potential (I remember primary 3 for
gifted programs), then at 12 , we are screened again to make sure
that it is confirmed that we are 'smart' academically. At 16/17,
screening once again to determine if we are meant to go out as
workers (ITE/Poly) or go on to universities as
professionals (Poly/A levels).
The biggest laughable matter was that they tried to teach
creativity. The second laughable matter is that in Poly old days
(about 10-15 years ago) , you can't go against the text book even
if the journals or experts says otherwise. I also hear current poly
grads and A level grads bemoaning how tough overseas
university can be - damn straight because they are not allowed to
copy out of the textbook .
Rigidity in the system is a problem. The system
is rote-based learning. You are not encouraged to question or
oppose the view OR promote a new idea ,except maybe if you
come from the 'elites'.
The environment is not at all conducive for any form of
creativity, new ideas or opposing views against the main dominant
ones. Singaporeans have not been trained to be 'thinkers' for a
long time. Everything is directed as it should be and followed in
the most inflexible pathway.
