Singaporeans who have undergone the rigorous education system here should understand the 'unfair' emphasis that is placed on certain subjects over others. We have either been explicitly instructed by our teachers or discovered ourselves that it would be more profitable to invest our studies heavily in mathematics and the sciences, or what most would term 'EMS' (English, Maths, Science), rather than the arts, were we to desire to do well at our Cambridge examinations.
From the start, students are already given an extremely limited pool of subjects to choose from to take at 'O' level. Yes, we are allowed to choose our 'subject combinations', but what choices do we have? They are mainly permutations of the following few: Additional mathematics, Chemistry, Physics, Biology and 1 Humanities subject to be taken in conjunction with Social Studies (even though they are to be calculated as a single examination subject). Students and even some teachers alike scoff at subjects such as music, humanities, visual art and physical education as a waste of time. "You're gonna fail your 'O' levels if you spend too much time on these!" "These subjects are not important!”
The weight and emphasis on mathematics and sciences in local schools is 'unfair'. Apart from the fact that it is compulsory for students to take on arts/humanities subject together with several mathematics and science subjects, better grades are required for students who wish to study in the 'science stream'. Will this establish a label of prestige on science students at the expense of students who study in the 'arts stream'? I do not think this is healthy at all. Students stronger in the arts are not necessarily 'dumber' than science students.
One can't judge a mudskipper by its ability to glide into the air like a flying fish, neither can one judge a flying fish by its ability to climb trees in the mud. Nevertheless, we understand both to be very unique species of fish. Conversely, if we choose to use only one indicator at our own discretion to assess "uniqueness", we fail to fully comprehend the beauty of diversity.
Many Singaporeans,frequently complain that they do not know what to study at tertiary level or even what job/career to undertake in future. Isn't it sad that people do not know where their interests lie? There is thus a pressing need, for students starting from a young age to be exposed to a diverse range of subjects. Let the children learn about business, economics, foreign languages, fashion design or even marine science! (These are actual O-level subjects offered by Cambridge to UK students) Let them find out what they want to pursue in future and let's not penalise them for any inept in maths and science. So what if our young students (who are mainly extracted from a few 'elite' schools by the way) continue to be the top in the world for tests in maths and science? So many adults out there have long forgotten even the most basic fundementals of these subjects. I think it is certainly very peculiar that Singapore assesses students' intelligence and ability by a proficiency in maths/science. This emphasis on 'EMS' should be rethought.
As a nation which has its people as its sole resource, innovation and creativity is of utmost importance. Scientists, researchers and engineers are vital for our R&D-based economy. But what can allow a country to continue to thrive in the long run? We also need people who are able to think, to think independently, to think of solutions specific to a problem that have not been thought of before. We need people who can generate creative solutions to our problems, policies to further improve our competitive edge over our rivals.
Creativity cannot be taught directly in schools, but it can be nurtured, and definitely not in the state that the education system is in now.
This is a fascinating post, Hai Qing, and a well constructed argument. What you describes resonates with me, and probably with many of your classmates.
ReplyDeleteGiven the situation you describe, do you think there is any way for change to be implemented?