Our Young best US Students, but fizzle out as Adults
-
I can't help but agree with what you said. However, I am glad that Republic Polytechnic is set up. The learning there is really something that I want, challenge the status quo of teachers. If we don't really agree, we will argue it out. Perhaps, we have misunderstood some points and the teachers will correct us. But if we are correct, the teachers will say that another point is brought up and we should consider this point.Originally posted by SilverPal:In USA or SOME other countries, students are encounraged to speak up during class, challenge the status quo and really "learn".
In sg, students are told to shut up in class and memorize everything the teacher teaches.
You may think that the sg system allows sg students to score well in all our exams but think again, are they being taught to "learn"? Do locals learn to "learn"? Do we question what we have and ask, "how can I make it better?"
I am studying a IT related course in a major university in sg. In year 1, most of my friends have a passion for a certain aspect of IT. Some love programming, others enjoy electronics. Many like to assemble computers or set up really good wireless networks.
By the time they graduate, most do not want to enter the IT line because they are so sick of computers and IT! Some hate IT with a passion!
Is this the kind of passino for learning sg gives its students? Is this the quality of professionals that are being churned out by the local education system?
While I'm not slamming the local educational system as I feel a lot of effort and brilliance have gone into setting up the system, I am questioning, are the authorities serious about producing quality, highly skilled populace who can innovate (I think that might include questioning the norm) and give sg her competitive edge? Or are we happier churning out robots who can do nothing other than following orders and recite rules and regulations?
While the govt blames the peasents (the category that I fall into) for being too stupid to get a head and too reliant on the govt (expecting a nanny state), the ppl blame the govt for doing nothing even though they are paid million dollar salary...
The children of ministars are being sent overseas for education where SOME of them eventually become quitters.
If sg education is so flawless, why do ministars send their children overseas for education?
My passion of IT is still there, because of this learning style. -
I don't mean that. I mean it will be too short-sighted of us to just say that one is successful because of results.Originally by snow leopard:so what should we do? postphone judgement of our education until we're 40 years old? evaluate the success of our education by how successful we are at 40? bill gates's success can be attributed to the quality of education he received at elementary or even high school? never mind that the rest of his class didn't make it as far as he did, his success means their education has been good?
from the time you complete your basic education to the time you make that world astonishing discovery, you would have crossed many hurdles. each of those hurdles can make or break your career. so how much of what you've learnt when you were 15 do you attribute to your success at 45?
i think it's appropriate to judge the outcome of our education on its intended purpose. is it the purpose of our education, particularly at the primary and secondary level, to nuture the next bill gates? a bit far fetched isn't it? the way i see it, basic education is about literacy, basic values, competency in fundamental subjects and if we excel at them we should give ourselves a pat on the back. -
Basically, it all depends on what job you get. Most of what we study in primary and secondary will be applicable to jobs like salesmen. For specific fields like IT, engineering and biomedical science, you will be applying what you learn from tertiary educational institutes onwards. Primary and secondary school education is just paving the way for you.Originally by snow leopard:yes and no. yes in the sense that results or for that matter education in general does not determine why we aren't the next bill gates. bill gates is where he is, not because of results, neither is it because of education. he is where he is because he is basically smart. education does not change that. in addition, i would say he was at the right place at the right time in a social environment with the critical mass to adopt his innovation. there is definitely more to that and you're right, results or for that matter education is the least of those factors.
no in the sense that whoever we are, education paves the road for our attainment of our next level. in every step of the way, education can be the key to opening up doors never mind it isn't the only determining factor.
please do not think it is a waste of time, money or energy to study at the primary or secondary levels. very little of what you learn at this stage will be applicable eventually in later life but that doesn't mean what you've learnt would go to waste. basic mastery of all the cumulative discoveries and learnings of our time brings us up-to-date with civilisation. otherwise we would be no different from our forefathers a 100 years ago wouldn't we? in addition, it serves as a foundation with which to go farther. -
I didn't mean myself. Anyway, I didn't learn it this way as my secondary school teachers didn't support it. We spend quite a lot of time in the labs. But it is opposite for my sister. I hardly hear her talk about doing experiments, and everyday she is memorizing the textbook.Originally by snow leopard:if you're spending half your time memorising facts from textbooks you're learning the wrong way. you need to understand the theories and concepts. only when they make sense to you do they become second nature to you. only then would learning be an inspiration as opposed to an exasperation.
you're right in the sense that some people must see the results for themselves to appreciate what is being taught. that is ok. otherwise, you can try and reason it out and it should make equal sense. einstein understood many things simply by thinking about them and through thought experiments. he left the actual experiments to other scientists. -
depends on what you're refering to. if you've gotten excellent results i don't see why you can't say you've been successful in your studies. you can't as yet say you're successful in life of course but i don't see why you can't say you've achieved success in whatever you did?Originally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:I don't mean that. I mean it will be too short-sighted of us to just say that one is successful because of results.
in any case what i was saying is that our basic education has on the whole been more successful than those in the US because we have on the whole achieved better results. -
you're coming from a polytechnic angle where application and practice reins supreme. wait till you experience one of our universities. it'll be back to concepts and theories again ...Originally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:Basically, it all depends on what job you get. Most of what we study in primary and secondary will be applicable to jobs like salesmen. For specific fields like IT, engineering and biomedical science, you will be applying what you learn from tertiary educational institutes onwards. Primary and secondary school education is just paving the way for you. -
You are right on this. I am still a poly student, so whatever I say will be from a polytechnic's angle.Originally posted by snow leopard:you're coming from a polytechnic angle where application and practice reins supreme. wait till you experience one of our universities. it'll be back to concepts and theories again ... -
I do not agree. At this point, I can tell you how the bits travel from one part of the computer to another but I cannot configure a router or troubleshoot a network connection. And I'm supposed to be in a premier course in a major uni.Originally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:... For specific fields like IT, engineering and biomedical science, you will be applying what you learn from tertiary educational institutes onwards...
When I go out to work, I'll be starting from scratch with zero knowledge in IT... other than abstract digital and electronics knowledge that has no practical uses. -
snow leopard,Originally posted by snow leopard:pikamaster,
yes it's true that over emphasis on grades can lead to neglect in other parts of human development. but if that were the whole truth and nothing more, then shouldn't the japanese, koreans and taiwanese who like us also place great emphasis on grades have faltered as well in producing world beating technologies and entrepreneurs? instead we find japanese firms amongst the world's best, koreans are beginning to make their presence felt and the taiwanese have aces like acer. did these countries de-emphasised grades?
i think it's more of the character of the nation. how the nation regards its engineers and scientists compared to say army scholars and politicians. of the sort of opportunities that exist for one to explore one's potentials. even if we give our students all the freedom to pursue the interests they desire, what good would that amount to if at the end of the day they step out into society only to realise that the best opportunities in this country belong to the select few and in select fields remotely connected to their passions and interests? or that the only way they can make a living is to join one of those industries our leaders have envisioned to be the hope for our future? what else except to go overseas to pursue dreams which many have done?
look at microsoft. the engineers can come to work as and when they like, dress in any fashion they desire, even stay at home when they don't feel like coming to work or challenge the boss without trepidation or repercussions and still at the end of the day produce the best results any boss would be proud of. we don't need these "how to resolve arguments", "how to communicate" crap. we need engineers with passion to lead engineers with passion. that's all.
I appreciate your opinion.
1) I see your point, but I believe that these existing technopreneurs come from the pre-cram-school era. Cram-schools only arrived after WWII. Entrpreneurs like the founder of Mitsubishi were not educated in such schools.
2) Education comprises many elements, and some of these elements are what moulds the character of a national generation. Some sociologists regard thsi as the "covert curriculum". If we guide them - not teach them but guide them - to regard engineers and scientists more highly, then the future will contain Singaporeans who regard such professions more highly. But interestingly, the arts are regarded much more lowly than the sciences in most locals' eyes. And that is why local culture ahs turned static.
3) U talking about Microsoft USA or Microsoft Singapore?
Geographical context makes a difference.
the pikamaster (who still longs for educational reform) -
Are you from National University of Singapore,School of Computing?Originally posted by SilverPal:I do not agree. At this point, I can tell you how the bits travel from one part of the computer to another but I cannot configure a router or troubleshoot a network connection. And I'm supposed to be in a premier course in a major uni.
When I go out to work, I'll be starting from scratch with zero knowledge in IT... other than abstract digital and electronics knowledge that has no practical uses. -
what can i say ... after so many years they still teach crap ... dun worry, you'd learn on the job. try and decide early what you'd like to specialise in, then get yourself certified in that area. there're a lot of govt schemes that reimburse you for taking short IT courses. all is not lost ... you're finally getting your degree!Originally posted by SilverPal:I do not agree. At this point, I can tell you how the bits travel from one part of the computer to another but I cannot configure a router or troubleshoot a network connection. And I'm supposed to be in a premier course in a major uni.
When I go out to work, I'll be starting from scratch with zero knowledge in IT... other than abstract digital and electronics knowledge that has no practical uses. -
Originally posted by pikamaster:
snow leopard,
I appreciate your opinion.
thanks man, appreciate that. before i say anything i'd like to say that i'm not particularly adamant about the superiority of our basic education. who gives a damn if our kindergartens fair better than those in the states? chances are the kids there are happily watching birds in the trees or playing snowball fights on the streets. here? our kids are pressed so hard of course they must do better lah, if not something must be really wrong with them.
1) I see your point, but I believe that these existing technopreneurs come from the pre-cram-school era. Cram-schools only arrived after WWII. Entrpreneurs like the founder of Mitsubishi were not educated in such schools.
in all honesty i don't like cram schools either. but hey take it this way, the better you learn your stuff now, the easier it would be for you later on ... provided you don't decide to learn something else altogether different later on.
i guess more important than anything is to start asking yourself what you really wanna do for the rest of your life? you may think you have passion for a certain discipline or profession. but the thing is, you never really know until you do it.
engineers and IT professionals are becoming commodity workers. accountants seem to fare a bit better although they start off as virtual slaves. seems like if you're not a doctor, dentist, pilot or scholar of the scholar (these days there are so many scholars, you throw a stone you hit one), chances are life's gonna be tough for you.
anyway back to arguing for the sake of arguing, the glory period of the japs were the roaring 80s when practically every VCR was made by Matsushita and every walkman is a Sony. now let's say a top executive then was 50 years old. that would make him 15 years old when the war ended wouldn't it?
2) Education comprises many elements, and some of these elements are what moulds the character of a national generation. Some sociologists regard thsi as the "covert curriculum". If we guide them - not teach them but guide them - to regard engineers and scientists more highly, then the future will contain Singaporeans who regard such professions more highly. But interestingly, the arts are regarded much more lowly than the sciences in most locals' eyes. And that is why local culture ahs turned static.
i guess the arts people have it worse ... but hey what can i do, i'm in not fairing any better either ...
3) U talking about Microsoft USA or Microsoft Singapore? Geographical context makes a difference.
microsoft USA. microsoft singapore doesn't do any challenging work. i think they go around helping people who have trouble installing windows, office ... -
That's why they have specializations in IT fields. Abstract digital and electronics knowledge may have no use now, but you will find it of use someday.Originally posted by SilverPal:I do not agree. At this point, I can tell you how the bits travel from one part of the computer to another but I cannot configure a router or troubleshoot a network connection. And I'm supposed to be in a premier course in a major uni.
When I go out to work, I'll be starting from scratch with zero knowledge in IT... other than abstract digital and electronics knowledge that has no practical uses.
By the way, where you study? Studying IT in Singapore universities doesn't really appeal to me. I feel that the specializations that Singapore universities offer for IT is really not that good. The reason is because of India and China. They can do the same thing for a lower cost. Even polytechnic's specializations are better. They have networking, security, multimedia. What the universities offer are more towards software side, which I think benefit India and China more. -
But I would prefer that they let us specialize when we are in universities, not going through short courses leading to certification. Certification is not cheap in the IT field. And most of these certifications need you to be experienced. If we have to take short networking courses, then work as network administrator, then take a network certification course, it is very long and waste a lot of money as well. The short courses aren't cheap either.Originally posted by snow leopard:what can i say ... after so many years they still teach crap ... dun worry, you'd learn on the job. try and decide early what you'd like to specialise in, then get yourself certified in that area. there're a lot of govt schemes that reimburse you for taking short IT courses. all is not lost ... you're finally getting your degree! -
Nayang Technological University, Computer Engineering.Originally posted by liuzg150181:Are you from National University of Singapore,School of Computing? -
I'm studying Computer Engineering in NTU. They cram a tremendous amount of subject matter into all the subjects... so much so that they have done away with the specialisation. You can specialise if you want, but it might be too difficult for the students, so you can just graduate without a specialisation.Originally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:That's why they have specializations in IT fields. Abstract digital and electronics knowledge may have no use now, but you will find it of use someday.
By the way, where you study? Studying IT in Singapore universities doesn't really appeal to me. I feel that the specializations that Singapore universities offer for IT is really not that good. The reason is because of India and China. They can do the same thing for a lower cost. Even polytechnic's specializations are better. They have networking, security, multimedia. What the universities offer are more towards software side, which I think benefit India and China more.
I took night classes to specialise in computer networking. -
I see.Originally posted by SilverPal:I'm studying Computer Engineering in NTU. They cram a tremendous amount of subject matter into all the subjects... so much so that they have done away with the specialisation. You can specialise if you want, but it might be too difficult for the students, so you can just graduate without a specialisation.
I took night classes to specialise in computer networking.
What I think is that Singapore's IT market for the software is no longer as lucrative. What we need is to go into specialization, like what is done in US, UK and Australia. They also cram some subjects into one subject so the student will be well-rounded, but the student will know a particular IT field well. Not just generally. -
Snow Leopard,
1) My focus is on primary schools, Secondary schools and JCs, and especially on the latter two. I don't really care much about kindergartens; in fact, I believe that overly-academic kindergartens are harmful to any society. having our kids "pressed so hard" is not really healthy for tehir emotional and physical development, I should think.
2) But that's too far an extreme. Your statement merely evades the issue. (No offence to you, of course)
3) I agree.
4) Ditto.
5) Ya, tt's true; but the importance is that he didn't suffer the cram-school system. Early post-war Japan during its Reconstruction was much different from Later Post-War Japan.
6) Nonetheless, it is a fact that arts people earn less than sciences people.
7) haha
Well, In USA, the society is quite different and so is the education system that produces the mindset. UK and S'pore (we're not tt original) follow a rigidly-structured curriculum; even SMU is pretty rigid if you look at their course offerings online. USA follows the liberal arts paradigm, most clearly seen in unis in community colleges, but also in elementary and high school. The liberal arts paradigm is more than just dumping students with choice the way MOE does; it also involves cultivating the mindset that everything, even government policy, can be challenged. Of course, it includes permitting student protests as well....
the (liberalist) pikamaster -
when was the last time? have you returned as a clone?Originally posted by snow leopard:why, you couldn't out argue me last time so you resort to calling names? you have good vocabulary, but it doesn't cover up for your lack of reasoning ability.
-
since you said there's more to life than education..then what is the basis on which to judge which system is better? since education does not really matter.the better system theory is not viable in this context isn't it?Originally posted by snow leopard:results. we do better on international tests. they're even adopting our text books. many of us who got into their ivy leagues do better as well. going by results, our basic education is on the whole better. but i suppose we can do with better universities, that's where we lose out.
we've been harping on education time and time again. everytime we come out short in the real world, we always go back and ask ourselves is there something wrong with our education. time and time we have tinkered with it and the results are still the same. perhaps its time we asked ourselves is it more than just education? is there something else, somewhere else that needs improvement? hey that's thinking out of the box isn't it? why do we keep thinking within the education box? -
Originally posted by pikamaster:
Snow Leopard,
1) My focus is on primary schools, Secondary schools and JCs, and especially on the latter two. I don't really care much about kindergartens; in fact, I believe that overly-academic kindergartens are harmful to any society. having our kids "pressed so hard" is not really healthy for tehir emotional and physical development, I should think.
i was using kindergartens to show how ridiculously early our rat races begin these days. and yes i too feel that having such shortened childhood is indeed not right. but i meant it to refer to our basic education too, particularly primary and secondary schools. we have done better but it comes at a price - we have to work harder too. no such thing as a free meal. but at the end of the day, it is not basic but rather higher education that determines our progress that should be the focus of our attention. beyond that, it is even more important to have talent hungry industries that provide avenues for the fruits of our higher learning to be translated into economic success.
2) But that's too far an extreme. Your statement merely evades the issue. (No offence to you, of course)
nothing extreme about it, just simple Ah Q spirit. what you can't help about, you make the best of and think on the bright side. not evading any issues either. i went through the same basic education and on the whole i'd say it's fine so i've nothing to take issue to.
5) Ya, tt's true; but the importance is that he didn't suffer the cram-school system. Early post-war Japan during its Reconstruction was much different from Later Post-War Japan.
ok, but the engineers who created the japanese boom of the 80s must have been in their twenties then? which means they should've gone through university say in the late 70s? late enough? even as of now, japan is still a technology powerhouse that few can match.
and what about the koreans? their recent ascent is a result of their recent de-cramming?
7) haha Well, In USA, the society is quite different and so is the education system that produces the mindset. UK and S'pore (we're not tt original) follow a rigidly-structured curriculum; even SMU is pretty rigid if you look at their course offerings online. USA follows the liberal arts paradigm, most clearly seen in unis in community colleges, but also in elementary and high school. The liberal arts paradigm is more than just dumping students with choice the way MOE does; it also involves cultivating the mindset that everything, even government policy, can be challenged. Of course, it includes permitting student protests as well....
i understand what you're saying. but if you really love a subject, if you're really passionate about something, what is stopping you from picking it up on your own and pursuing it beyond your curriculum?
yes it's a culture thing, good ideas have often been squashed by the authority, not just in the schools. but would bill gates have said "because my professor didn't think my windows idea will work so i've decided to give it up"? -
the bus issue. or are you returning as the clown?Originally posted by vito_corleone:when was the last time? have you returned as a clone? -
would you kindly refresh my memory, mr smart-aleck?Originally posted by snow leopard:the bus issue. or are you returning as the clown? -
must i repeat myself? read for yourself next time ...Originally posted by vito_corleone:since you said there's more to life than education..then what is the basis on which to judge which system is better? since education does not really matter.the better system theory is not viable in this context isn't it?
"i think it's appropriate to judge the outcome of our education on its intended purpose. is it the purpose of our education, particularly at the primary and secondary level, to nuture the next bill gates? a bit far fetched isn't it? the way i see it, basic education is about literacy, basic values, competency in fundamental subjects and if we excel at them we should give ourselves a pat on the back." -
your memory that bad? why don't you go change your memory chips instead? smart assOriginally posted by vito_corleone:would you kindly refresh my memory, mr smart-aleck?