----------------------------
Education System Not Helping
----------------------------
¶9. (C) Singapore boasts a highly competitive and
well-regarded primary and secondary education system, but the
number of Singaporeans completing a tertiary education is
relatively low. Only 23 percent of Singaporean students
entering primary school complete a degree at a local
four-year university. In other knowledge-economies such as
Japan's, around 50 percent of students complete a university
degree. However, according to Cheryl Chan, Assistant
Director of the Planning Division at the Ministry of
Education (MOE), the government does not plan to encourage
more students to get a higher education. The university
enrollment rate will continue to be maintained at 20-25
percent because the Singaporean labor market does not need
everyone to get a four-year degree, she asserted.
¶10. (SBU) Singapore's education system has been criticized
for being heavy on memorization and light on critical
thinking and creativity. Based on the British model, the
system is highly test-focused and separates students (a
process referred to as "streaming") at an early age between
high, middle, and low achievers. The GOS has slowly begun to
introduce greater flexibility into the system by allowing
"streaming" in subjects (rather than based on total average
scores) and has created new magnet schools focused on
mathematics, the arts, and sports. But there are only three
such schools, and the overall education system has changed
little.
http://wikileaks.org/cable/2007/02/07SINGAPORE394.html
Which has confirmed my long time suspicion that PAP pushes people into different levels of the social pyramid so as to "maintain the balance" of society.
If you are an ITE or poly grad, or just a simple degree grad, forget about climbing beyond your social class if you work for the civil service. Sounds very much like a stupid system to me.
Originally posted by FireIce:is this a leak?
this is something 众所周知
Well, at least now we know it's cast in iron that MOE actually has such a directive. Quite regressive for a developed nation.
this is an interesting thread...
I think this policy took off in late 90s. There was a propaganda campaign at the time by PAP regime to push for people to enter poly and not JC.
They wanted to restrict the number of people that can get into university.
Flooding of Singapore with cheap foreign labour, the creation of a new class of aliens as citizens - all these are probably part of the diabolical master plan of the PAP.
Originally posted by Brain Freeze:Singapore education is å¡«é¸å¼� type.
goose liver?
Originally posted by Rock^Star:Well, at least now we know it's cast in iron that MOE actually has such a directive. Quite regressive for a developed nation.
It took you that long to figure this one out?
Its actually a textbook prescription easily found in developmental texts.
What's so regressive about this?
If you are interested in learning, the SG system, while restrictive, also gives plenty of opportunities for you to do so (within the bounds of what the govt wants you to learn).
If you don't, don't "waste" taxpayer's subsidies. They are not cheap. Don't bring in FT subsidies here though, I disagree with that also.
If you are appointed the Minister for Education, China, how would you go about solving the current problem many graduates face in the job market?
Originally posted by Darkness_hacker99:If you are appointed the Minister for Education, China, how would you go about solving the current problem many graduates face in the job market?
Is that your idea of education? Filling the job market. Your post really implied so.... The fundamental flaw of current education is to produce what the projected market needs and not fulfilling the ideal of developing minds to achieve each potential to the fullest.... Maybe the truly smart ones are those who chose to drop out of school when they realize the flaw.... School=/=education.
Originally posted by Aneslayer:
Is that your idea of education? Filling the job market. Your post really implied so.... The fundamental flaw of current education is to produce what the projected market needs and not fulfilling the ideal of developing minds to achieve each potential to the fullest.... Maybe the truly smart ones are those who chose to drop out of school when they realize the flaw.... School=/=education.
Nice to meet you. My name is Chin Seng, I am the co-founder and moderator of Homework Forum. I quited my school about 9 months ago, and put in my soul and blood into my business. I agree with your sentiments and that is why I always believe every student have the potential.
When I told my mum that I wanted to quit school, she supported my idea. I work hard and smart and proved to her that I can survive on my own and paper qualification does not mean everything.
Best regards,
Chin Seng
Ok fair enough, I see two schools of thought there. The factory mill and the development of full potential models.
In singapore, many who can qualify for poly, can qualify for JC too. The poly grads, many have to go overseas for studies or take a private degree because they do not fall into the top 20% category to qualify for the local unis.
Then I wonder, why penalise those able students who chose the poly experience and then give a place to really mediocre students from JC? Then answer all lies in pushing people into the economic pyramid as the easy way out. Very highly structured thinking system and hence the pool of candidates for the development of full potential becomes lesser.
I have met quite a number of insurance and property agents in my life and it seems that many of those successful entreprenuerial ones came from a poly background. Would these people have made it big had they gone into civil service? No way because paper matters.
Then begs the question, why are the govt limiting their pool of talents according to different levels? The degree holders one path and the poly dip holders (with private degree) another rung lower?
Originally posted by Rock^Star:I have met quite a number of insurance and property agents in my life and it seems that many of those successful entreprenuerial ones came from a poly background. Would these people have made it big had they gone into civil service? No way because paper matters.
Then begs the question, why are the govt limiting their pool of talents according to different levels? The degree holders one path and the poly dip holders (with private degree) another rung lower?
ehh Rocky...
1st para cannot like tat compare... Insurance and property are sales jobs, entreprenueres are business related... which u seldom see in civil service... if compare must use like (ehhh) accountant, finance, HR, PR etc etc...
as for the discussion between DH and anes, both are the reason why I say this is an interesting topic...
Do note the below, I use "Most" and do take note I did not include FTs in my point.
1) Gov limiting potential to fill job markets... Most of everyone gets job, most jobs are filled, most of everyone happy... However most of everyone isn't fully developed (which I think is stupid, I'll explain why later)
2) Gov not limiting potential... 80% degree holders, 20% others... Job market would be slightly chaotic, most degree holders will have problem finding jobs and will likely not take on jobs like call centre etc etc... then those jobs will have problem finding ppl to fill them (though by bringing FTs, they can resolve this problem but piority will have to go to singaporean first)... Most of everyone will be unhappy but potentially smarter... [we shldn't limit mankind ability just becoz of jobs market, we shldn't accomadate the job market but shld be the job market accomodate to mankind (which mankind created the job market)]
From both the points above, most ppl will be happy in (1) and unhappy in (2)... So it's a choice of choosing doing popular thing or the right (IMO) thing... Besides, in this era/age of information and technologies, it's very hard to limit ppl's ability/potential...
What I am puzzled about is, why is the government doing (1) but bringing FTs, which is usually a solution for (2)... It's like slapping their own face, which is a totally stupid course of action...
Still the farmer vs scholar debate ........ :x
Originally posted by SBS2601D:Its actually a textbook prescription easily found in developmental texts.
What's so regressive about this?
A lot of those development texts are also full of shit. For example in 60s, 70s, they said that Singapore was overpopulated and the population must be reduced, so the PAP came up with the idiotic "stop at 2" campaign.
Originally posted by ^Acid^ aka s|aO^eH~:
What I am puzzled about is, why is the government doing (1) but bringing FTs, which is usually a solution for (2)... It's like slapping their own face, which is a totally stupid course of action...
me: " so wad makes u decide to come here"
PRC: " i didnt"
me: " wa, ur parents force u here or ur bf is here"
PRC: "neither, ur SG gahment invited us here"
me: " huh, wad do u mean"
they offer us, ALL Expenses paid for our fees in NTU, including lodging and we even get pocket money
on top of that, they have send me the INVITATION letter to apply for PR after we grad"
- PRC on PAP MOE.
However, according to Cheryl Chan, Assistant Director of the Planning Division at the Ministry of Education (MOE), the government does not plan to encourage more students to get a higher education.
The university enrollment rate will continue to be maintained at 20-25 percent because the Singaporean labor market does not need everyone to get a four-year degree, she asserted.
they offer us, ALL Expenses paid for our fees in NTU, including lodging and we even get pocket money
on top of that, they have send me the INVITATION letter to apply for PR after we grad"
- PRC on PAP MOE.
Originally posted by eagle:Still the farmer vs scholar debate ........ :x
or the poly grad and u grade debate? or the FT vs locals debate? people are running out of idea...
Sg education system not helping.....helping who?
the government to increase the pool of talents? the not so talented in getting a place in the local university? helping the unfortunate to move up social class? helping to reduce the number of FT needed in Singapore?.....
are you a product of the Singapore education system? if you are, what has the system deprived you of? kindness, social conscienceness, fair-mind thinking, compassion for the unfortunate, respect for fellow human being.....if the school didn't teach you, did you parents teach you?
if you think you are not creative, then I don't think you can be creative in any kind of education system, because I don't think creativity can be taught.
Originally posted by ^Acid^ aka s|aO^eH~:
ehh Rocky...1st para cannot like tat compare... Insurance and property are sales jobs, entreprenueres are business related... which u seldom see in civil service... if compare must use like (ehhh) accountant, finance, HR, PR etc etc...
as for the discussion between DH and anes, both are the reason why I say this is an interesting topic...
Do note the below, I use "Most" and do take note I did not include FTs in my point.
1) Gov limiting potential to fill job markets... Most of everyone gets job, most jobs are filled, most of everyone happy... However most of everyone isn't fully developed (which I think is stupid, I'll explain why later)
2) Gov not limiting potential... 80% degree holders, 20% others... Job market would be slightly chaotic, most degree holders will have problem finding jobs and will likely not take on jobs like call centre etc etc... then those jobs will have problem finding ppl to fill them (though by bringing FTs, they can resolve this problem but piority will have to go to singaporean first)... Most of everyone will be unhappy but potentially smarter... [we shldn't limit mankind ability just becoz of jobs market, we shldn't accomadate the job market but shld be the job market accomodate to mankind (which mankind created the job market)]
From both the points above, most ppl will be happy in (1) and unhappy in (2)... So it's a choice of choosing doing popular thing or the right (IMO) thing... Besides, in this era/age of information and technologies, it's very hard to limit ppl's ability/potential...
What I am puzzled about is, why is the government doing (1) but bringing FTs, which is usually a solution for (2)... It's like slapping their own face, which is a totally stupid course of action...
Somehow the market will iron itself out even if there are hordes of degree holders. Jobs will still be filled and pay will still go according to market forces. Rather than the govt intervening to make an artificial society....
Originally posted by Dalforce 25:me: " so wad makes u decide to come here"
PRC: " i didnt"
me: " wa, ur parents force u here or ur bf is here"
PRC: "neither, ur SG gahment invited us here"
me: " huh, wad do u mean"they offer us, ALL Expenses paid for our fees in NTU, including lodging and we even get pocket money
on top of that, they have send me the INVITATION letter to apply for PR after we grad"
- PRC on PAP MOE.
http://www.mycarforum.com/index.php?showtopic=2663008
However, according to Cheryl Chan, Assistant Director of the Planning Division at the Ministry of Education (MOE), the government does not plan to encourage more students to get a higher education.
The university enrollment rate will continue to be maintained at 20-25 percent because the Singaporean labor market does not need everyone to get a four-year degree, she asserted.
they offer us, ALL Expenses paid for our fees in NTU, including lodging and we even get pocket money
on top of that, they have send me the INVITATION letter to apply for PR after we grad"
- PRC on PAP MOE.
Yes, the economic pyramid, no matter who fills it.
Do people stop discussing about something just because it has already been raised earlier? Then live for what? lol. Some issues are evergreen and they never go away because it is still relevant.
LKY is actually indeed a visionary man. I wasn't really a supporter of LKY, but this policy is made me know him better.
If I may argue, his 25% policy entry to Local University and to allow influx foreigner to study local university is thought to be
1) Avoid over-saturation of local degree holders (our market do not need so much)
It's true, our local economy do not need so many degree holders. It is also true that as an educator, it is our mission to help student reached their full potential. If Singapore is over-saturated with degree holders (like China), it will create a whole new sets of problems for us.
2) This supports that the rule and a report on hight turnover of foreigner & only retained talented
Many students after serving their bond will go back to their country. This is done at our cost, we are the taxpayer, and we seek foreign students to come here to study and offer scholarship for them. However, we only retained extreme talented foreigners with good package.
3) Foreginer came to Singapore and study, and go back to their country.
The result of this - not to over-saturate the local market. Most foreigner will want to quickly finish the study, serve out their bond, and go back to their country. Most will not have the intention of getting citizenship in singapore.
Results:
We have a buffer system in place where by local degree holder are just 25% rate from PSLE - Bachelor. and a huge buffer in place. Buffer is good because it allows the govt to control/plan the economy well.
---
We can do it another way round. Grant higher percentage of local student to university. Encourage our citizen to be global citizen.