The Calm Before The Storm: Is the Singapore Education System In Crisis?

If Singapore is likened to a well-oiled economic machinery, churning out manufactured goods and services to meet global demand; then her education system functions like a factory, producing and moulding bolts and cogs – the students – to fit into the system. Teaching-learning processes are coldly perceived as mere means to an end; while individuals in the respective institutions blindly pursue perfect grades and polished résumés for that coveted degree to land that dream job. Such a system and approach has worked in tandem with our socio-economic and political goals, producing professionals in the form of doctors, lawyers, public administrators; and workers in the form of managers, engineers et cetera. In essence, students emerge as productive units of labour – through our rigid and antiquated system – to feed the assortment of national needs.

But this is a different world. The dynamism of the global community – galvanised by the advent of globalisation and modernisation – not only means that Singaporeans are inundated with a greater plethora of expectations and challenges, but also reflects the fact that blind adherence to our pedantic education curriculum and pedagogies would prove to be largely detrimental. Graduates would continue to emerge as empty shells: over-achievers in academic or scholastic performances, but overwhelmingly defective in their innovative capabilities, and deficient in life-skills with misdirected moral compasses.

How Examinations Are Killing Our Children

The value of examinations lies largely in their standardisation; basically, the implementation of an individual test or assessment in a certain domain would give teachers and students a gauge of the latter’s comprehension of that subject-matter. However, our attitudes towards examinations, and the desires of parents and teachers to place disproportionate emphasis on the end-results have sadly reduced many students to mere information-blabbering, knowledge-regurgitating, result- and achievement- oriented book smarts. To them, the ten to twelve years of foundation education is seen as a protracted preparation or application process for their universities.

Teachers are subtle victims of these expectations. The repeated concerns over superficial test-based preparations pressure them to rush through the prescribed syllabus, often without genuine care over the contents and subjects. After all, why bother about the significance of individual topics when stakeholders are asking for rote-learning, imparting of examination techniques and test practice to obtain the ideal grades?

Besides grossly betraying the spirit of education, our insistence is also hurting and disadvantaging students who might not be academically-inclined. The truth is that the inflexibility of the subject combinations and platforms for true learning is stifling the creative minds of many of our young people. There are insufficient avenues for them to showcase their true talents, and conservative mindsets prevent them from exploring extra-curricular fields they might be more accustomed to. Unfortunately, their inaptitude is conveniently dismissed as laziness and stupidity, without accounting for their strengths.

An Education Dead-End?

If we cannot completely eliminate examinations and its associated ramifications, the Ministry of Education (MOE) should continue its endeavours to reduce the number of these assessments. Introducing the Integrated Programme (IP), doing away with year-end examinations for various primary one and two students in select institutions: these are commendable efforts, yet the administration has relished in its conservatism and staunchly refused to take greater steps. Having been the part of the pioneer batch that experienced IP in its entirety – despite the eventual fluster for the GCE ‘A’ Level Examinations – the absence of a major examination and the adoption of holistic and year-based assessment allowed for greater liberty in exploration of fields of interest.

To segregate content based on their subject demarcations closes many doors for the student, as the mentality is geared to examination preparation and questions. It neglects inter-disciplinary integrity and strays away from a broad-based curriculum. Geography and Science share many common perceptions towards global warming, helping individuals form more wholesome understandings in terms of the issue; yet many stray away from such partnerships for fear of overlaps and unjustified conflicts.

MOE needs to work more closely with educators to devise methodologies to reinforce to students the purpose of teaching-learning and the respective subjects. Instead of shoving information and facts crudely down the throats of students, give them the space to contemplate the significance of what they are studying in. Besides the obvious importance of mastering linguistics – and the obvious decline in bilingualism – students should weigh for themselves why the humanities are essential, why the sciences are vital. As this independence is accompanied by moderation from the teachers, parents and students would be able to make more informed decisions about what they should study, and how much emphasis they should place.

An International Phenomenon?

Sir Ken Robinson, an international advisor on education, contended in 2006 during his Technology Entertainment and Design (TED) presentation on the state of schools that institutions were increasingly educating students out of their creative faculties. He subsequently made reference to the Pablo Picasso quote that “Every child is an artist. The problem is how to remain an artist once we grow up”. Sir Robinson acknowledges multiple types of intelligences, and is calling for a much-needed rethink of the global education system; and how we teach our kids.

Rather than allowing it to be an excuse for us to continue our ways, it should serve as an impetus for us to keep ahead of the competition. We do not need book smarts sorely lacking in emotional and adversity quotients; worse still, supposed “scholars” who selfishly care for their personal well-being, stubbornly rejecting all forms of information that serve no fruitful purpose. Neither should we stigmatise individuals who might excel in other areas. It is not only high time to bring creativity back to the classroom, but also return to back-to-basics education; a system that teaches us how to think, not what to think.


- Kwan Jin Yao