If you cannot separate the cream from the crop, the good from the average, the average from the mediocre, you will never be able to craft an Education System to tailor to everyone’s needs.

What is needed in this case is greater exposure to different subjects and more exposure to different forms of talent development, so that everyone can find their own niche in life and be able to subsist/live by their own means. Definitely not trying to reduce means-testing and thus depriving students of their ability to benchmark their capabilities with their peers. Also, another issue is that PSLE is primarily based on rote-learning and that must change. The Primary Syllabus must reflect how the economy has shifted from a knowledge-based economy to a creativity-based economy. As such, the PSLE will remain relevant to the economy and to society’s needs while retaining its status as an essential tool of means- testing for children of 12 years of age.

Hazel Poa suggests that the PSLE and ‘character building, creativity and entrepreneurship’ are mutually-exclusive. That is not the case, and I shouldnt go into details about all the co-curricular activities they have going on for children at primary schools.

@mon: why do you like to make generalizations? Also, the comments made by LKY on CNA is different in context to the comments made by Justin Ong in this article. LKY said the contentious statement with a pretext: IF citizens finds fault with the HDB policy. Keeping in mind the 经济适用房 vis-a-vis 商品房 situation in China, I don’t.
In contrast, Justin Ong made a sweeping generalization condemming ‘foreign talents at all levels’ to be an ‘abomination to Singapore’s education policy’. This kind of generalization is abhorrent at all levels of academia. Even more so when he is supposed to lend credibility to the newly-formed RP. Instead, xenophobia echoes throughout the entire article, and throughout this entire forum. I don’t understand what’s with this globalisation-denying mentality throughout the entire forum. From issues ranging from FT to lower birth rates to employability of Singaporeans to affordability of HDB flats. Seriously. I have done my calculations. And I don’t believe I’m wrong in my calculations on the issue of HDB flats. As long as families dont spend beyond what they can afford to, they should have in excess of $300-$800 every month after controlling for all expenses.

There are issues with Singapore. Yes the opposition did mention some solutions. But its not the way I would like to see them solved. Not with all the inherent bias and one-sided policy crafting.

Exasperated.

1. Calling for equal renumeration for foreign tenures and local tenures is equal to being oblivious to all social-economic pressures that a foreign lecturer/professor faces upon taking the chair. Every university has its own politics. Letting government having a hand in how the Faculty appoints its own Dean or even its Professors is equivalent to interfering in Academia which runs contrary to privatization of NUS in the past few years. Also, have Dr Gomez considered all the relevant stakeholders (i.e. Professors) who might want to have a say in this issue? I personally know of a few who will want to dispute his argument. Government has no place in dictating the tenures and discourses in higher education unless they themselves become a stakeholder. (i.e. become a subject of criticism/activities that threaten the social fabric)

2. Singapore’s education ‘learning-by-rote’ model was emphasized post-war independence so as to ensure that most of the population was at least minimally educated. There has indeed been changes to the needs of the economy and changes to the education system is needed at a fundamental level. In fact, I tuition part-time every weekend and there has been a major change in the Sec 2 Math Syllabus where more emphasis were placed on application and challenging questions instead of formula-memorization. Now, in Sec 2, they emphasize on spatial visualization as well as the basic stuffs that I used to learn when I was in Secondary – just that its less memory work, and more conceptual. There has been changes. Just give them more time.

3. Abolishing the PSLE is definitely not a good idea. The PSLE allows schools to cater to children with different academic abilities and potential, albeit its many criticisms and its occasional counter-productive results. The abolishment of the GEP is, to me, a great disappointment. During my time, students from the GEP would study the Sun Tze Art of War, together with other Annals and Texts and interesting out-of-the-curriculum ‘Discovery Projects’ that made learning much more fun and exciting. In my school, GEP were treated as normal students with a different curriculum. In fact, in my school, we had 4 streams. The EM2s, the Mainstream EM1s, the Supplementary Stream and the GEPs. I believe everyone from my school treated each other equally and fairly. It was disappointing when I knew that future GEPers would no longer have the opportunities to experience learning as such. Instead of abolishing the PSLE that many parents cite as a form of stress, why not implement logical testing alongside the PSLE to screen for children who might have underdeveloped potential?

They keep the MNC here to continue to pay tax to them.

That’s why what the MNC says, they agree.

Of course i do not like what I hear, chiefly because no government has the right to judge its people, as if the people owe it a living. And it is also not true that locals are stupid and lazy – if they are, then the govt is solely to blame for creating an environment that fosters such an attitude of resignation and stupor.

We do not have to always see eye to eye when sharing our points of view. I concede that many Singaporeans think along the same line as you. What I was hoping for was to present a different way of thinking, one that is outside the dictates of the government, more so the PAP and its staunch supporters.

Indeed we reap what we sow. Just that too many believe in the end product that they have harvested and hope to continue to harvest – failing to see that their harvest come with a huge price tag that we do not yet know how huge.

Look at the most recent economic news and the new direction we can expect to be set upon us. Again the government is running away with its own thinking over what’s best for the country – pinning its hope that once the country makes more money, the poeple will be happy.

When are they going to stop and ponder whether this is what Singaporeans want? I personally do not want an over-rich country where I cannot enjoy my life. Some want to be a little laid back. How do these fit in if there is only one road to take?

Again, many would lament and just accept. It is not apathy.They do care, oh yes. Just that they feel helpless.

Are they?

Thanks for your reply. I understand your point of view though I’m not entirely convinced by it. I always believe that everyone is accountable for their own behavior and should not try to blame others.

Even if they are influenced by circumstances or other people, they have only themselves to blame for being vulnerable to such influences. Well, that’s just my point of view.

I’m not being deliberately harsh in my judgment of others as this is the standard I hold for myself.

You are absolutely correct and I thank you for sharing your insights. We certainly have to be careful when we put blame on the behaviour of Singaporeans. How very often we get blamed for being kiasu, kiasi and tum chiak etc? And mind you, some of these accusations come down from right at the top of the PAP echelon.

I liken it to the stop-at-two policy. Our parents were told that having more than two would sink the country. Less than fifty years later we get the blame for not producing more. During the same period, we were also told that the land we have could hold no more than four million people; today we are stretching to beyond 5 million, maybe six.

Who often gets the blame whenever there is a wind of change? The ones responsible for introducing these policies or the ones at the receiving end? The point is clear isn’t it?

Likewise, we have been told to blame ourselves for being apathetic, forgetting that it is not apathy that we a grappling with but the acceptance of a generation of people who believed that acceptance is the best way forward.

So, my plea to the opposition is this: do not fight apathy but rather fight the attitude of blind-acceptance of all things branded PAP.

I was not able to access TOC these past few days and therefore the delay in my reply to you.

In answer to your questions:
You are suggesting that I am not acknowledging that there are flaws in our citizens. No, I am only giving an opinion on where this flaw could have come from? Neither am I suggesting that our flaws have to be unique in order that we plead guilty to them. What I am saying is that our flaws are no different to many in other parts of the world, yet we are condemning ourselves to the bone for having them instead of the ones who are primarily guilty of creating these flaws.

Read my earlier comments again and you will see that the point I was trying to bring across was; that yes, there is apathy, but what is the reason behind this attitude if not for the fact that most have come to accept everything that the PAP is, and that there is no need for opposition representation, because the PAP is able to oppose itself and renew from within? Can you deny the fact of all the underlying reasons like press control, threat of arrest and punishment without trial, the disadvantage of not being in the mainstream scheme of things, the fear of rocking the boat etc, play an integral role to how Singaporeans behave? It is a behaviour not attributed to apathy but acceptance.

The average Singaporean is well-verse in this mantra and they accept it. This surely cannot be the ‘apathy’ that many are blaming.

To ask it very simply: what made the present day Singaporeans they way they are? When you have figured out the answer to this, you too will acknowledge the root cause, and perhaps come to accept that you might be too opinionated against your fellow Singaporeans instead of the ones who created this condition in them.

The Singaporean identity is one that is not clouded and ruled by rigid doctrines but one that is free – free to chose their life-paths and pursuits.

Your husband will understand this: we don’t want to like the 6th army in Stalingrad – we don’t want our logistical lines to fritter away – as I said earlier in my other entries – setting the strategic vision is not our job. If you pay me a seven fgure salary, then I willl gladly lay out the strategic blueprint.

If there is problem; come clean (that is our sincere advice) – only then can we help. But as our leader said, “we don’t seem to have any problems, we are in Disneyland it seems, so be it….life just goes on, you will get nothing from us! Absolutely nothing!” Those are the exact words of our leader; I agree with him.

SD

Change will come. It will take time, but it come, nonetheless – as for your appeal to do something for a better Singapore – nothing will give us the keenest of pleasures, but its missing one vital ingredient, most of the custodians in power dont see anything wrong – there is no problem it seems – so why should we even contribute; let me put it politely, if you see a man swimming care free why would you even go and rescue him?

For there to be help; there must be an OPEN and SINCERE admission things are not right i.e we are in trouble, the problem is the current custodians of power have sold themselves as the gold standard of “I can do no wrong,” They have even complemented this with the highest pay in the world – so let them be. After all they are so smart, so why is there a need to appeal to nationalism and patriotism?

BTW I have just received the latest com-sat from the brotherhood – the rubberband brigade WILL NOT RETURN without FIRST a formal apology from Philip Yeo et al. Its final. Endorsed directly even by Darkness himself – you see, we are living in a very different world Hazel – it is a world of implications and rammifications – if you do have the time, do read this:

http://dotseng.wordpress.com/2010/01/31/why-china-fucked-itself-big-time-with-google/

I believe it this essay puts everything in the perfect perspective. We can ONLY start discussion abt king and country after Philip Yeo and Company has worked through the issue, but as it is, even I will no longer dare to bring out this issue out – surely even you can understand, my country is never as important as the need to cover my own arse – I am sure even your husband will agree with me?

SD

Just my view. Definitely every individual is accountable for his/her own upbringing & purpose to society – unfortunately culture, norms & policies definitely have strong influence. But how can someone realise such influences, especially if say the media is pro-policies, etc.? Look at Japan – one generation can be psycho into having an apathetic view of their nation’s role in WW2 (as they are pissed about being A-bombed). Is this really the fault of each individual Japanese? Or just a bok-chap attitude?

What I observed is that our current generation is definitely different from the previous one – we may attributed it to growing affluence, changing technologies, dependence on maids, whatever. But the basic courtesy and discern of past seem to have vaporize within one generation of self-rule. Is this more due to individual or policies? I’m not looking for a clear Yes/No, just thinking out loud.

I likened it to Nazi Germany. How could a nation of 45 millions(?) be turned into a Jew-hating mob within a decade (the 1930s)? Are we to say it is the fault of each individual German or that of an overall apparatus? We have history to tell us that it is due to Nationalism/Nazism; are we similiarly under influence something called kiasuism? Who or what introduced that to our society in the past 40+ years? The foreigners? Media? Evolution? Deliberate policies? Is our low birth rate really due to individual choice or no choice?

Anyway, while we are in a dog-eat-dog mentality, you-blame-me-I blame-you vicious circle, we will never be a nation.

Apology if this somehow divert from topic of education(?).

“La Convivencia is not a concept invented by the gaming world.”

I never said it was. As an idea it has nothing to do with even the 20th century – but you have to understand a word can go BEYOND its dictionary meaning, just as the word “gay” once referred to certain state of mind; these days it may still refer to a certain state of mind, but its has lost its original contextual meaning, very much like La Convivencia – So since you do not seem to be a very perceptive reader; may I caution you that if one day you happen to strike 1st prize in 4D, never walk into a pub and shout out, “Drinks on me! I am very gay tonite.” If you do that, you find the numeral “0″ to have an organic meaning beyond its 1,2,3 etc.

Fortunately I do NOT need to waste my time explaining to most of the other readers here, as they would have registered that I referred to “La Convivencia” in the context of a PARLANCE (kindly refer to the second paragraph in entry @ 3.06) that is regularly used by the brotherhood and NOT as a HISTORICAL term.

I spent 15 min of my valuable time responding to Mrs Pao – I would appreciate if you dont waste my time in future with stupid comments.

Thank you so much for your understanding, do have a painless evening.

Singaporedaddy (The Internet Officer of the Brotherhood – sponsored by the Interspacing Mercantile Guild

I like Scolaris’ comment on this. To add, if someone excels in carpentry and make beautiful furniture, is s/he not considered capable because its carpentry and not Medicine or Law? Aren’t all hands-on housewives capable? They have to manage the household as well as nurture the children.

This “scholar” system is downright stupid and outdated. It should be buried 6 ft under.

I once asked a child who scored exceedinly well in Maths if he knows the logic in the method he used to solve Algebra equations. His answer was stupidly “Maths is like this”. This potnetial scholar child knows the method well and can apply it, but he does not know the logic or reason (like a computer). Another child who does not practice enough did not score so well but this other child could explain the logic. He said that in an equation, the left must always equal to the right, what you do to the left to get rid of the constant, you do the same to the right.

This is partly why the World’s top Universities interview students to decide their intakes. The other major part are things like character and personality. What it takes to be a genius is a whole package, besides mental ability.

As long as the stupid scholar system continues, Spore is going nowhere. I once read in an overseas medium “Singapore is all dressed but nowhere to go”.

“…and so the rest of us, you and me, continue to wait for the day when more citizens are brave enough…”

You , me, smallyfly, and everyone in Alternative Nation knows for SURE that this day will come as it must come for Life is Finite. As simple as that. And they know that. No surprizes about the inflow.

For a small pool of people to be apathetic is normal in any country. But the Apathy is such a great extent that it spells trouble in the long run. To many, their world does not exist the word Politics. How uneducated can that be?

Meanwhile we continue to wait for the Hidden Tigers to step forward in the year of the Tiger.