Spread brightest pupils across schools, says Ngiam
-
This article in BT is more comprehensive than the one in ST today. I copied it from Sammyboy’s coffeeshop. But the article is a bit ‘corrupted’ because the poster inserted a few comments.
___________________________________
Published September 8, 2007
Ngiam: It's dangerous to hothouse S'pore's best
He notes value of having different sets of mentors
By MATTHEW PHAN
(SINGAPORE) Singapore's best and brightest should be trained in a diversity of ways so that they are able to meet the world's challenges, Ngiam Tong Dow, a prominent former civil servant and currently chairman of Surbana Corporation, said at a dialogue yesterday.
Mr Ngiam: Effective civil servants should be doers and not just thinkers
Scholars should be allowed to work in both the public and private sectors, and the top primary school students should be sent to 10 to 15 different schools, rather than just Raffles Institution and Raffles Girls School, he said at a lunch lecture organised by the Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry.
'It is dangerous to hothouse our best. Yes, we should have meritocracy and help the best, but there should be different sets of mentors because we will face different kinds of problems,' he said.
Mr Ngiam - who became Singapore's youngest-ever permanent secretary at the age of 35 in 1972, served in various ministries, including finance, trade and industry, communications, as well as in the Prime Minister's Office - said he had discussed the talent issue with then-prime minister Lee Kuan Yew years ago.
But the latter maintained that the public sector could not afford to lose its talent, recalled Mr Ngiam.
'Intellectually, Minister Mentor could not accept my argument. I don't know why. I would have thought we should really spread the scholars out.'
Mr Ngiam also emphasised that effective civil servants should be 'doers' and not just 'thinkers'.
Comparing India to China, he said the Indians had more brainpower and were better abstract thinkers, but the Chinese are ahead because they are 'not just thinkers but also doers'.
The Chinese concept of being both a scholar and a warrior is good, said Mr Ngiam. 'If you do and don't think, it's not good; nor if you think and don't do - you have to do both.'
But 'the civil service in Singapore is also becoming more thinking than doing', he said. 'Every time there is a problem, we call in a consultant. I get fed up with that.'
=> And he forgot to add that the best paid ministers enjoy pushing away problems to wayang committees!
Mr Ngiam also said Singapore should be more inclusive of both the elite and the apparently less talented. 'What is most important to me is that every individual counts. God has given each one of us a talent. There is no such thing as a completely stupid person.'
Citizenship is only a legal concept (Then serve NS for fcuk?), and nationhood goes beyond the idea of a country, he said. Singapore should welcome former citizens who emigrated years ago to pursue their goals.
'We should not reject you, even if you are a Singaporean who has left many years ago, we should not call him a quitter,' he said. 'The terms 'stayers' and 'quitters' should be banned from the political vocabulary of Singapore. We are all Singaporeans.'
=> Wooden: Ouch! How dare you slap me, you eunuch!
He said Singapore should consider allowing dual citizenship for individuals who demonstrate the right spirit, but acknowledged 'the political leadership will have to think about this carefully because of national service'.
=> Is this not the unofficial policy already to prevent Sporns from withdrawing their CPF savings? -
Our elite civil servantsÂ’ brilliant modus operandi: every time a teething problem arises, they call a consultant.
It can't get any better than this.
Anyone still buy the idea that better pay attract the best talents to public sector? -
DUN TOK COCK!
-
Do you have a problem in this forum, or are you in the wrong forum, this is not Bar? You can go Bar and tell people about your sexual fantasy and experience but not in Speakers' Corner.Originally posted by :DUN TOK COCK! -
I respect Mr Ngiam for what he said. Seldom come across prominent figures speak like him,we need more of these people to speak for the people of Singapore.
-
I think so too. What he said makes more sense when compared the buggers' reasoning in parliament.Originally posted by qlqq9:I respect Mr Ngiam for what he said. Seldom come across prominent figures speak like him,we need more of these people to speak for the people of Singapore. -
He is bold to speak about MM calling Singaporeans quitters. As our senior leader, LKY is rather uncalled for for this.Originally posted by googoomuck:I think so too. What he said makes more sense when compared the buggers' reasoning in parliament.
Are you going to Centrepoint in black at 4 pm today? -
No....hehe....but i signed the petition.
So in a sense Khaw Boon Wan is also a quitter. -
Ngaim should be PM. i'll definitely vote for him.
-
I disagree slightly about spreading too much.
It is true that it is the school's environment that builds up a person's character. But when you spread people out too much, some values like the movtivation to compete against the best is lost. What challenge is there to a top student in a school of people with lower calibre? Will he/she still be motivated in such a school? Will he/she be influenced by the some black sheeps? Will he/she be feeling unfair that so and so went to this so and so school while he/she with the same grade go to this and this school? -
I feel that Ngiam does not agree with elite theory. Too much attention paid to study-smart students , neglecting the other students. Late bloomers are not given proper nurture, so were the baby boomers.Originally posted by eagle:I disagree slightly about spreading too much.
It is true that it is the school's environment that builds up a person's character. But when you spread people out too much, some values like the movtivation to compete against the best is lost. What challenge is there to a top student in a school of people with lower calibre? Will he/she still be motivated in such a school? Will he/she be influenced by the some black sheeps? Will he/she be feeling unfair that so and so went to this so and so school while he/she with the same grade go to this and this school?
The stop-at-two policy was necessary because of the baby boomers and unemployment was high. But when unemployment was solved, no attention was given to the baby bloomers who had limited education because of poverty back then.
Now the problem is many of them are stuck with structural unemployment today.
Btw, SingaporeÂ’s 10-15 best schools is not that bad as you think. -
If your grades can make it, yet you are not allocated the first choice that you wanted when your friend got it, would you be happy? Would you be motivated enough to excel in a school that you are not happy to be in?Originally posted by googoomuck:I feel that Ngiam does not agree with elite theory. Too much attention paid to study-smart students , neglecting the other students. Late bloomers are not given proper nurture, so were the baby boomers.
The stop-at-two policy was necessary because of the baby boomers and unemployment was high. But when unemployment was solved, no attention was given to the baby bloomers who had limited education because of poverty back then.
Now the problem is many of them are stuck with structural unemployment today.
Btw, SingaporeÂ’s 10-15 best schools is not that bad as you think. -
It's easier said than done. Even if the students don't mind, what about their parents?
-
IÂ’m not against what you say but this is my opinion.Originally posted by eagle:If your grades can make it, yet you are not allocated the first choice that you wanted when your friend got it, would you be happy? Would you be motivated enough to excel in a school that you are not happy to be in?
Elitism has not produce any excellent individuals in Singapore. On the contrary, some of SingaporeÂ’s well known entrepreneurs are not elites, e.g. the two Sims, Wong Hoo and Ron.
I think it is the same in other countries of the world. Egalitarianism has produced more world renowned individuals in various fields of endeavor.
IÂ’m not afraid that my children will not make it in future because they are not from elite schools. Nurture them yes but not push them to their limits. -
Absolutely horrible idea. This is nothing more than sheer egalitarianism. The smartest of course will want to study together. Parents would want their kids to study with the best. Who would want to study with less than the best? This proposal is nothing less than a revolt against human nature!
Speaking from first-hand experience, the quality of RI and RJC education is already declining sharply thanks to the Ministry of Education putting incompetent teachers and headmaster (Bob Koh in RI) there. The best schools do not need a further influx of mediocrity. -
Headmaster part I do not wish to comment.Originally posted by mitzzkai:Absolutely horrible idea. This is nothing more than sheer egalitarianism. The smartest of course will want to study together. Parents would want their kids to study with the best. Who would want to study with less than the best? This proposal is nothing less than a revolt against human nature!
Speaking from first-hand experience, the quality of RI and RJC education is already declining sharply thanks to the Ministry of Education putting incompetent teachers and headmaster (Bob Koh in RI) there. The best schools do not need a further influx of mediocrity.
As for teachers in RI, quality aside. Some classes have a change of as many as 3 different teachers for major subjects like Sciences and Languages.
And if i am not wrong, this problem also occurs in many other schools. -
The govt's elitism stance remains unchanged.Originally posted by mitzzkai:Absolutely horrible idea. This is nothing more than sheer egalitarianism. The smartest of course will want to study together. Parents would want their kids to study with the best. Who would want to study with less than the best? This proposal is nothing less than a revolt against human nature!
Speaking from first-hand experience, the quality of RI and RJC education is already declining sharply thanks to the Ministry of Education putting incompetent teachers and headmaster (Bob Koh in RI) there. The best schools do not need a further influx of mediocrity.
So if RI is best of the best, surely the school's head and it's teaching staff must be among the best. If they are incompetent, who else can take their place?
Must be some other factors involved. -
It is all about discriminating. When will that old man stop this nuisance?Originally posted by googoomuck:The govt's elitism stance remains unchanged.
So if RI is best of the best, surely the school's head and it's teaching staff must be among the best. If they are incompetent, who else can take their place?
Must be some other factors involved.