Singapore Best Education System Ranked 79 in Adult Literacy
-
Sex education is subject to cultural bias no doubt. But are you saying that China should forsake sex education just because of cultural bias.
No maurizio. I think u misunderstand me.
What i meant was that the chinese culture in China requires a different approach to Sex education as compared to the west. Liberal approach to sex education (which openly and unapologetically speak on the subject in lessons) as seen in the west may not yield the same result in china due to chinese conservatism. Therefore i was trying to point out that curiculum alone is not the sacred cow to the success of a education system. Social values held by the society plays a very important part too.
I have here a news article to demostrate the impact of chinese conservative views on their sex education.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-04/22/content_325337.htm
I quote
''However, there is still much resistance against such education among parents even in some developed areas.
A random survey conducted by a local newspaper in Nanjing last December revealed that only 10 of 96 parents approved of sex education in school.''
''A high school teacher in Beijing who requested anonymity admits most of her colleagues don't know or don't care about what students want on this topic. Many still feel the subject "too sensitive to handle," she says.''
That piece news was reported in 2004 in which i believe situation is better now in China with more foreign influence.
However the news article shows clearly that values hold by society must work hand in hand with the curiculum for it to work. The conservative view exist in the chinese society resulted in disapproval from the parents as while as the teachers whom cultural attitude resulted in the reluctance to discuss the topic openly therefore student got bored by their lessons.
What makes you think we are not making headways in sex education? Do you have any empirical evidence to substantiate your claim? Is this snag a result of MOE's inability to properly train it's staff for the job?
I didnt say that sex education is not making headway. I said that moral education, national education and sex education are not moving far as anticipated.
Perhaps this is where our MOE system failed because it's very rigid, it only prepares the individual to be successful without imparting moral, spiritual and cultural values.
Have u not learn anything from mother tongue classes and moral education lessons?Even in PE classes i learned the importance of teamwork and cooperation.
I believe the school and parents both have parts to play in the moral development of a child, it's not solely the responsibility of parents alone. The child spends 8-9 hours a days in school, whereas working parents will only get to spend 5-6 hours aday with the child.
No i dont believe that the parents are solely responsible for the moral upbringing of the child too but i hold that the parent and society as a whole has a bigger responsibility than the school on the topic on morality.
-
GCE is an examination and it dictates our curriculum?There is a difference between curriculum and examination?
Examination is a subset of curriculum, curriculum is not a subset of examination.
It's my mistake. After thinking about it, I fund that the curriculum can change the examination while the examination can also change the curriculum.
Is one the subset of another? I think they are separate issues while one is the course and the other is the assessment.
I am comparing MOE system to the existing British system we would have adopted if not for LKY. We were under the British system before, Hong Kong continued with the British system till 1997. If our MOE's system had been superior in form and substance, wouldn't we have out ranked Hong Kong in their British system, instead we fall behind.
But the crux of your argument lies with the post and pre indepedence.
I think u misunderstand my post, I blame the administration of the british government on their attitude to local education and not the british education system.
Not to compare with any country, i see that the promotion of education was not emphasized as much by the british administration here as compared to the post independence government. Therefore by highlighting that fact, i believe the bulk of illiterates in Singapore may belong to pre independence generation.
-
Originally posted by foxtrout8:
No maurizio. I think u misunderstand me.
What i meant was that the chinese culture in China requires a different approach to Sex education as compared to the west. Liberal approach to sex education (which openly and unapologetically speak on the subject in lessons) as seen in the west may not yield the same result in china due to chinese conservatism. Therefore i was trying to point out that curiculum alone is not the sacred cow to the success of a education system. Social values held by the society plays a very important part too.
I have here a news article to demostrate the impact of chinese conservative views on their sex education.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-04/22/content_325337.htm
I quote
''However, there is still much resistance against such education among parents even in some developed areas.
A random survey conducted by a local newspaper in Nanjing last December revealed that only 10 of 96 parents approved of sex education in school.''
''A high school teacher in Beijing who requested anonymity admits most of her colleagues don't know or don't care about what students want on this topic. Many still feel the subject "too sensitive to handle," she says.''
That piece news was reported in 2004 in which i believe situation is better now in China with more foreign influence.
However the news article shows clearly that values hold by society must work hand in hand with the curiculum for it to work. The conservative view exist in the chinese society resulted in disapproval from the parents as while as the teachers whom cultural attitude resulted in the reluctance to discuss the topic openly therefore student got bored by their lessons.
I didnt say that sex education is not making headway. I said that moral education, national education and sex education are not moving far as anticipated.
Have u not learn anything from mother tongue classes and moral education lessons?Even in PE classes i learned the importance of teamwork and cooperation.
No i dont believe that the parents are solely responsible for the moral upbringing of the child too but i hold that the parent and society as a whole has a bigger responsibility than the school on the topic on morality.
Can't help it if your write up is vague and subject to interpretation. What you have describe herein is a failure of implementation of the sex education syllabus, or maybe a failure of the syllabus, it's not a failure of the curriculum. Where do you think the ultimate failure lies in? The Chinese Education Ministry? Or in Singapore terms, the MOE. That's what you get when you get incompetent folks running the education machinery, they copy 100% the syllabus from other jurisdiction then implement it word for word without making adjustments.I quote from your source,
Also, "Nearly 70 per cent of them are not against premarital sexual experience, contrary to what is taught in class," the paper stated.
The 17-year-old Lin, from Beijing's Huiwen High School, finds sex education classes boring, saying the teacher "just briefs us with terminology of sexual parts of the human body and then warns us not to engage in any love affair at such a young age."
Ask this of you? Do you not think there is a problem with the way sex education is implemented in schools? If there is a problem with the implementation of sex education, where does the fault lie. With the parents, society, students or the Ministry of Education?
Parents belong to another era, a different era from their children and thus do not know about the sexual promiscuity of children these days. If you truly think that the parents were right in their views, then perhaps sex education should be scrap in China altogether. Too sensitive to handle? Then don't have sex education, no need to deal with STD, HIV, AIDS and unwanted pregnancy. If you think that the parents were wrong in their views and sex education should be implemented, then perhaps it's the implementation phase that lacks credibility, the fault of which lies with the Ministry of Education for not fostering teachers to deal with anticipated issues.
I didn't know mother tongue (language) is equivalent to social studies. Sad to disappoint you, but during my time, there was no moral education. Teamwork and cooperation are not equivalent to moral or spiritual education. Teamwork and cooperation could also be learnt from copying your classmate's homework.
But is it morally right.I believe that the school and the parents have a part in the education of a child.
An education as defined by Winch & Gingell (2004), is the preparation for adult life of future generations. The second is the different conceptions of education on offer which give substance to education in particular societies (Winch & Gingell, 2004, pp.2)
Winch, C., Gingell, J., (2004) Philosophy and Educational Policy, 1st edition,Routledge Falmer
Education is the preparation for adult life of future generations. What would it be like if the education we impart to future generations are devoid of morals and responsibilities? Something for you to ponder over.
-
""What you have describe herein is a failure of implementation of the sex education syllabus, or maybe a failure of the syllabus, it's not a failure of the curriculum.""
The curriculum is a very broad word which includes the syllabus, the teaching and learning approach expected of the teachers and the students. How can it be the failure of the syllabus and not the curriculum?
Ask this of you? Do you not think there is a problem with the way sex education is implemented in schools? If there is a problem with the implementation of sex education, where does the fault lie. With the parents, society, students or the Ministry of Education?
All of them plays apart in the teaching of sex education. As demostrated by my news article, the conservative value of the chinese society produced unsupportive parents, unmotivated teachers whom are uncomfortable in teaching the subject and students whom find the subject boring. If that social value will to change, we will see a whole new result with supportive parents at home doing the talking, eager and unapologetic teachers motivated to put up a interesting and engaging lesson and students benefiting from the attractive lessons.
Parents belong to another era, a different era from their children and thus do not know about the sexual promiscuity of children these days. If you truly think that the parents were right in their views, then perhaps sex education should be scrap in China altogether. Too sensitive to handle? Then don't have sex education, no need to deal with STD, HIV, AIDS and unwanted pregnancy. If you think that the parents were wrong in their views and sex education should be implemented, then perhaps it's the implementation phase that lacks credibility, the fault of which lies with the Ministry of Education for not fostering teachers to deal with anticipated issues.
Damm I didnt say that sex education should be scrap in China and neither did i say the parents were right. I said that social values should work hand in hand with their curicullum to tackle the problem.
See this as quoted:
""However the news article shows clearly that values hold by society must work hand in hand with the curiculum for it to work.""
In fact, im calling the society to change it's mindset and work hand in hand with the new emphasis on sex education.
I didn't know mother tongue (language) is equivalent to social studies. Sad to disappoint you, but during my time, there was no moral education. Teamwork and cooperation are not equivalent to moral or spiritual education. Teamwork and cooperation could also be learnt from copying your classmate's homework.
But is it morally right.U didnt learn values of fillial piety, respect, social responsibility in your chinese lessons? Your time has no moral education? I even have moral education examination and projects at secondary school damm.
I think we are of different time.
-
Originally posted by foxtrout8:
I think curriculum can change the examination and the examination can also change the curriculum.
Is one the subset of another? I think they are seperate issues while one is the course and the other is the assessment.
I think u misunderstand my post, I blame the administration of the british government on their attitude to local education and not the british education system.
Not to compare with any country, i see that the promotion of education was not emphasized as much by the british administration here as compared to the post independence government. Therefore by highlighting that fact, i believe the bulk of illiterates in Singapore may belong to pre independence generation.
You have misunderstood the meaning of "curriculum" in the educational context.According to Winch & Gingell, the main aim of education and therefore of schooling will be cultural transmission. And the main vehicle for the delivery of such cultural values will be that set of planned and prescribed activities which deliberately seek to foster the knowledge, skills and attitudes associated with such values. This is what we call the ‘curriculum’, which consists of what should go on in schools (Winch & Gingell, 2004, pp. 18).
Curriculum determines what goes into the syllabus, not examination so thought by you. Changes in examination criteria brings about changes to the syllabus, not the curriculum.
You blame the British administration on their attitude to local education? I don't know how this pan out, but do explain. As we know, the P4P government had a say in the educational process for the past 50 years. What has the British administration got to do with this?
Do you have empirical evidence to claim that the British administration did not promote education in Singapore? You claim that the illiterates all belong to pre-independence generation. I already explain to you that both Singapore and Hong Kong adopted a British system, then Singapore under the guidance of MOE ended up with a lower adult literacy ratio than Hong Kong.
Isn't this similar to 2 Porsches initially running on Shell V-Power, one Porsche decided to stick on to Shell V-Power, while another switch to Caltex Techron. The Porsche still running on V-Power ended up travelling faster and further, whereas the Porsche running on Techron ended up slower and shorter. What can you tell from this analogy? The V-Power is a superior fuel compared to Techron. Similarly, the British system is superior to the MOE system.
-
Can't help it if your write up is vague and subject to interpretation.In my quote :
""For example, the liberal approach in the sex education curriculum seen in the west may not yield the same result if put in place in China. The curriculum may be shaped for the best interest of educating the society but the approach may not fit into the culture of the society. The conservative society of china may too apprehensive to accept that approach in teaching.""
Ur reply:
""Sex education is subject to cultural bias no doubt. But are you saying that China should forsake sex education just because of cultural bias.""
I didnt say anything about forsaking sex education due to whatever reasons. I am not even blaming you for ur misinterpretation but just highlighting that there is a misunderstanding.
-
You have misunderstood the meaning of "curriculum" in the educational context.Curriculum determines what goes into the syllabus, not examination so thought by you. Changes in examination criteria brings about changes to the syllabus, not the curriculum.
Taken from wiki:
- In formal education or schooling (cf. education), a curriculum is the set of courses, course work, and content offered at a school or university.
Taken from yourdictionary:
- A fixed series of studies required, as in a college, for graduation, qualification in a major field of study, etc.
Taken from wiki the defination of syllabus:
- A syllabus is an outline and summary of topics to be covered in a course.
As u can see, the syllabus is part of the curriculum. How can the exam criteria change the syllabus and not the curriculum?
You blame the British administration on their attitude to local education? I don't know how this pan out, but do explain. As we know, the P4P government had a say in the educational process for the past 50 years. What has the British administration got to do with this?
I believe the british administration got to do with the poor education level of our pre independence generation because of they didnt help much in educating the population.
Do you have empirical evidence to claim that the British administration did not promote education in Singapore? You claim that the illiterates all belong to pre-independence generation. I already explain to you that both Singapore and Hong Kong adopted a British system, then Singapore under the guidance of MOE ended up with a lower adult literacy ratio than Hong Kong.
I didnt say that the british administration did not promote education in Singapore, i said that they didnt emphasized as much importance as the post independence government. Just look at the amount of government aid schools at that time as compared to MOE's time for empirical evidence.
I didnt say that the illiterates all belong to the pre independence generation. I said that they may consist of the bulk of the illiterates.
And for goodness sake, the administration is different in hong kong as compared to Singapore. We are on equal terms by name onli because the governor is different and their policies are different. The policy on education by the colonial masters in Singapore may be different from the masters in Hong kong. I have no details on hongkong's education policy during colonial time but by understanding that there is a difference in administration shows that there is no equal ground to compare.
-
my friend, a link to MOE's primary and secondary civic and moral education syllabus.
-
Originally posted by maurizio13:
I didn't know mother tongue (language) is equivalent to social studies. Sad to disappoint you, but during my time, there was no moral education. Teamwork and cooperation are not equivalent to moral or spiritual education. Teamwork and cooperation could also be learnt from copying your classmate's homework. But is it morally right.
quote from Dr Aline Wong Senior Minister of State for Education in 2000.""The learning of moral and cultural values is infused into the teaching of the mother tongue, as well as strengthened in civic and moral education which is a compulsory, though non-examinable, subject from primary to secondary schools.""
-
U see any problems with the education here ? Frankly speaking I felt it is fine and people can get accepted in overseas university easily with the qualification u get from the studies here. If u talk about other form of education like taking care of yourself, I don't find singaporean stupid and cannot do tat. I think th problem is the longevity of singaporean is high, older generation r not literate and tat explains the figure. Otherwise u have to name me someone who is below 30 and cannot read and write. Personally, I don't know anyone who cannot read or write and is below 30
-
Otherwise u have to name me someone who is below 30 and cannot read and write. Personally, I don't know anyone who cannot read or write and is below 30
Stupid - or smart?
One view from Taiwan: They're good collectively, but individually they're lost. By Seah Chiang Nee.
Apr 23, 2006SINGAPOREANS are affluent, educated, but are they really survival smart?
In a world of harsher living, this question that never dies has again grabbed the public focus here with a general election less than two weeks away.At the core of the debate: Without natural resources, the Singaporean increasingly has to depend on his own guile, not only a good education, to survive; has he got it?
It’s not a new debate. In the past decade, the Education Ministry has changed the education system to teach independent thinking and entrepreneurship to correct some fundamental defects in the average worker.
The average Singaporean is good at academic studies and works hard, but falls short on individual initiative and streetwise qualities, relying too much on the government for help.
Revisiting the debate is controversial Taiwan lawmaker Li Ao, who recently ranked Singaporeans rather lower in natural intelligence to the people in Taiwan and Hong Kong.
“Taiwanese are scoundrels, but lovable, Hong Kong people are craftier, (Chinese mainlanders are unfathomable) and Singaporeans are stupider,” he said, adding that it is partially due to genetics.
The original migrants who came here from China were of “poor stock”.
Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew once told Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping that the ethnic Chinese in Singapore were descendants of illiterate coolies and farmers from southern Fujian.
This had made them less able than the people of Hong Kong or Taiwan, whose ancestors were mainly businessman or technocrats.
Singaporeans could function well only as a group, not as individuals, Li told a Chinese newspaper. They would never be non-conformist or stand out above the crowd.
“If you ask me, other than Lee Kuan Yew, his son Hsien Loong, politicians aside, I can only think of a cute girl, (pop star) Stephanie Sun, there aren’t many other outstanding people. The impression that I get (of normal Singaporeans) is stupid”.
Singapore’s system, Li said, stemmed from the ancient Chinese political philosophy of legalism, which emphasised on the rule of law.
“Singaporeans do not break rules, but they also do not stand out,” he said in Mandarin.
He said Lee Kuan Yew had wanted to build a British-style democracy but because the people were not up to scratch, they only knew how to toe the line.
His report card on Singapore has shaken up the people at a time when election fever is rising, indirectly touching on a campaign issue – government control on society.
Predictably, Singaporeans have reacted angrily to the terms “stupid” and “poor genes”, dismissing them as a popularity stunt that takes no account of their successful, modern achievements.
This “genetic weakness” doesn’t aptly describe today’s diverse, more mature and worldly-wise generation.
But some critics say there is some truth in what Li said, but insist that the fault lies not in genes, but in years of political and social conditioning by a top-down government.
One writer however, said: “A better word to describe the Singaporean is naïve, which comes about because of a paternalistic and rather efficient government.
"Everything is so structured and laid-out that the people do not need to fight for a living, blunting their ability to compete. They’re lulled into thinking the outside world also behave like Singapore.”
Businessmen from Taiwan and Hong Kong are more alert to opportunities, as well as cheats, compared to even the capable Singaporeans, whose preoccupation is getting a high salary.
They know where to take the short cuts when faced with a problem; Singaporeans will just sit and wait for better days.
Under the Lee Kuan Yew leadership, the collective good comes before the individual, so the republic’s success is a “collective creation”, Li added.
The individual is often lost on his own. It has led some critics to ask whether the Singaporean has an original viewpoint of his own beyond what the government says.
“I won’t say we are stupid. We are just not daring and street-smart,” commented a Singaporean studying abroad.
In his university, other Asian students would walk up to the microphone and talk about some cause, not the Singaporeans, he said.
Li Ao is not alone in his views. Singaporean columnist Wong Lung Hsiang said it reflected what he heard in China that “Taiwanese are shameless, Hong Kongers are heartless, Singaporeans are ignorant”.
In Greater China, law-abiding Singaporeans have long been seen as gullible.
In a commentary in November last year, Wong advised Singaporeans to treasure their own system at home, “but when you are away, you should know how to adapt to others”.
What Chinese Singaporeans have inherited from their grandparents is peasant culture, explained “peasant judge” online.
“Peasants don’t care for much else except a bowl of rice on the table, a roof over their heads, and the chance to go out to the rice fields to do the daily back-breaking chores day in day out.”
Politics, too, is affected. Almost everyone goes to the polls with his rice-bowl in mind.
It occupies the citizen’s mind a lot more than his counterparts in other countries, who are more passionate about issues like justice and equality.
“Just imagine, well-informed Singaporeans advocating a one-party rule, saying it is good for the future. If this is not stupidity, what is?’ asked redbean.
This could be a recipe for future trouble should a foreign predator one day use this character weakness to take over the country.
All he needs to do to retain the people’s compliance is by keeping their stomach full and their mind empty.
-
Well, singapore is probably the only country tat include the independent thinking into its curriculum while the other countries just concentrate on teaching maths and science. Independent thinking has always been something u pick up by yourself, not by the education system.
Talking about a foreign predator using tis weak character to take over the country... isn't the same can be said about... religion ?
-
Originally posted by eagle:
Heh... I was at the main commencement ceremony today...
Commence your CPF monthly payments.
Now.
-
Originally posted by maurizio13:
Does Singapore have a good educational system?
According to United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Singapore has an adult literacy rate of 92.5% and is ranked 79th in the world. So Singapore has 7.5% of the population who are illiterate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_literacy_rate
Looking at some folks hanging around these forums, you already have the answer, don't you? ;)Moreover, if you had an even higher literacy rate where folks are capable of engaging in critical and rational reasoning, this regime's survival would certainly come under grave threat. Hence, how can you expect the regime to shoot themselves in the foot?
-
Originally posted by maurizio13:
I heard from my parents that during colonial days, education was free, you don't have to pay for schools fees, all you have to do is get yourself to school.
In the UK, education is still free in public schools up to the tertiary level. Even for tertiary level, things only changed under the Blair administration a couple of years ago (source : http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/3434329.stm).So much for the benefits of independence (with the aid of a press ranked 141st for press freedom)...
-
Our best education system has produced many wee shu mins who feel they are of higher breed or pedigree deserving to sit high on the pedestal and ministers who say they must be paid the world's highest pays to prevent corruption while workers should not as they will cause inflation.
-
Originally posted by robertteh:
Our best education system has produced many wee shu mins who feel they are of higher breed or pedigree deserving to sit high on the pedestal and ministers who say they must be paid the world's highest pays to prevent corruption while workers should not as they will cause inflation.
Robertteh, i believe the aim of paying our civil servant their high pay is so that the civil service is attractive enough to pull in a higher number of prospective civil servant and from this pool of candidates, they will choose the top talent. How it can actually prevent corruption is just perhaps a by catch of the main aim.True, our education system has produced antagonist such as wee shu mins but our education system has also produced people like gopalan, chee soon juan whom stand differently. Dont forget that our education system has produced particularly almost everyone of us here in Sgforums and education has a play on our thoughts, beliefs and aspiration.
We may beg to differ on wee shu min ivory idea but we are the child of the same education system.
-
Originally posted by foxtrout8:""What you have describe herein is a failure of implementation of the sex education syllabus, or maybe a failure of the syllabus, it's not a failure of the curriculum.""
The curriculum is a very broad word which includes the syllabus, the teaching and learning approach expected of the teachers and the students. How can it be the failure of the syllabus and not the curriculum?
All of them plays apart in the teaching of sex education. As demostrated by my news article, the conservative value of the chinese society produced unsupportive parents, unmotivated teachers whom are uncomfortable in teaching the subject and students whom find the subject boring. If that social value will to change, we will see a whole new result with supportive parents at home doing the talking, eager and unapologetic teachers motivated to put up a interesting and engaging lesson and students benefiting from the attractive lessons.
Damm I didnt say that sex education should be scrap in China and neither did i say the parents were right. I said that social values should work hand in hand with their curicullum to tackle the problem.
See this as quoted:
""However the news article shows clearly that values hold by society must work hand in hand with the curiculum for it to work.""
In fact, im calling the society to change it's mindset and work hand in hand with the new emphasis on sex education.
U didnt learn values of fillial piety, respect, social responsibility in your chinese lessons? Your time has no moral education? I even have moral education examination and projects at secondary school damm.
I think we are of different time.
Suggest you read and understand what is the difference between a curriculum and syllabus before you make any more comments.The schools have a stronger role to play in imparting sex education to the students. You say the student's parents are unsupportive of sex education, the teachers unmotivated, how else would students know about sex education. You can't change the attitude of the parents, but you can change the mindset of the teachers, because they are under the control of the Ministry of Education.
Well, from the way you are presenting your case, parents unsupportive, teachers unmotivated, how else do you intend to carry on the sex education drive.
Social values take time to change, paradigms are not shifted overnight. Therefore a more likely course is to change the mindset of the teachers to teach sex education to students.
You are "calling the society to change their mindset". Alright, put in the the news and the Chinese will change their mindset overnight.
Even if the moral education was implemented, it does not mean 100% effective; way you have a course teaching Calculus, does it mean 100% will acquire the necessary skills.
-
Originally posted by foxtrout8:
In my quote :
""For example, the liberal approach in the sex education curriculum seen in the west may not yield the same result if put in place in China. The curriculum may be shaped for the best interest of educating the society but the approach may not fit into the culture of the society. The conservative society of china may too apprehensive to accept that approach in teaching.""
Ur reply:
""Sex education is subject to cultural bias no doubt. But are you saying that China should forsake sex education just because of cultural bias.""
I didnt say anything about forsaking sex education due to whatever reasons. I am not even blaming you for ur misinterpretation but just highlighting that there is a misunderstanding.
You mistook sarcasm for misunderstanding, obviously you didn't learn that in school or the real world. -
Originally posted by foxtrout8:
Taken from wiki:
- In formal education or schooling (cf. education), a curriculum is the set of courses, course work, and content offered at a school or university.
Taken from yourdictionary:
- A fixed series of studies required, as in a college, for graduation, qualification in a major field of study, etc.
Taken from wiki the defination of syllabus:
- A syllabus is an outline and summary of topics to be covered in a course.
As u can see, the syllabus is part of the curriculum. How can the exam criteria change the syllabus and not the curriculum?
I believe the british administration got to do with the poor education level of our pre independence generation because of they didnt help much in educating the population.
I didnt say that the british administration did not promote education in Singapore, i said that they didnt emphasized as much importance as the post independence government. Just look at the amount of government aid schools at that time as compared to MOE's time for empirical evidence.
I didnt say that the illiterates all belong to the pre independence generation. I said that they may consist of the bulk of the illiterates.
And for goodness sake, the administration is different in hong kong as compared to Singapore. We are on equal terms by name onli because the governor is different and their policies are different. The policy on education by the colonial masters in Singapore may be different from the masters in Hong kong. I have no details on hongkong's education policy during colonial time but by understanding that there is a difference in administration shows that there is no equal ground to compare.
I think your dictionary definitions are right, but they are not complete. You only covered the learning areas (subjects) but not the values (morals & ethics). Changes in the inclusion or exclusion of topics in subject areas only changes the content, the learning area still remains (English, The Arts, Health and Physical Education, Mathematics, Science, etc).
National Curriculum for New Zealand
Ok. Then what makes you think that the British "didn't emphasized as much importance" of education? I do not have the statistics for the number of schools per population for the British period and MOE period, perhaps you could be so kind as to provide me with this information which you have obtained. The growth in schools now as compared to the past was a result of population growth, more population therefore more schools.
Well, your guesstimate of the pre-independence generation making up the bulk of illiterates is wrong. Singapore Statistics has provided figures for the components of the highest educational attainment with age group. The post-independence generation illiterates (ages 35-44) makes up about 9.7% of the total population of Singapore in the year 2000. While those (post-independence generation) with primary school qualification make up 27.1% of the total population in the year 2000.
http://www.singstat.gov.sg/pubn/papers/people/higheredu.html
Yes the British administration is different from the MOE's style; therefore doesn't this prove that the British Education system is far superior to MOE education system. Both Hong Kong and Singapore are quite similar, Singapore adopted MOE system whereas Hong Kong stayed they course with the British system till 1997. Hong Kong ended up with higher adult literacy rate than Singapore.
-
Originally posted by foxtrout8:
my friend, a link to MOE's primary and secondary civic and moral education syllabus.
Obviously the syllabus is flawed, because we have comments from forumers about kids these days scolding their parents, beating their maid and ignoring their grandparents. -
Originally posted by foxtrout8:
quote from Dr Aline Wong Senior Minister of State for Education in 2000.""The learning of moral and cultural values is infused into the teaching of the mother tongue, as well as strengthened in civic and moral education which is a compulsory, though non-examinable, subject from primary to secondary schools.""
Judging from the behaviour of children these days, the implementation must be flawed. -
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
U see any problems with the education here ? Frankly speaking I felt it is fine and people can get accepted in overseas university easily with the qualification u get from the studies here. If u talk about other form of education like taking care of yourself, I don't find singaporean stupid and cannot do tat. I think th problem is the longevity of singaporean is high, older generation r not literate and tat explains the figure. Otherwise u have to name me someone who is below 30 and cannot read and write. Personally, I don't know anyone who cannot read or write and is below 30
Whether you know of anyone not being able to read or write is of little consequence to factual evidence from statistics. You only see a small portion of the 4.5 million population of Singapore, therefore your observation is not a true representation of the 4.5 million population. It's only a bias observation, because your social group is limited to your set of subjective criteria. Enclosed is the statistics of illiterates post-independence (ages 35-44 y.o.) for the year 2000, it shows that 9.7% of the total population in Singapore has No Qualification and 27.1% of the total population with Primary School Qualification.http://www.singstat.gov.sg/pubn/papers/people/higheredu.html
-
Originally posted by walesa:
Looking at some folks hanging around these forums, you already have the answer, don't you? ;)Moreover, if you had an even higher literacy rate where folks are capable of engaging in critical and rational reasoning, this regime's survival would certainly come under grave threat. Hence, how can you expect the regime to shoot themselves in the foot?
Their inability to participate in critical and rational reasoning is prima facie that our education system if flawed. I guess this handicap works in the favour of the ruling P4P government, they should promote such handicap to ensure their continued dominance. -
Originally posted by maurizio13:
Obviously the syllabus is flawed, because we have comments from forumers about kids these days scolding their parents, beating their maid and ignoring their grandparents.
It clearly shows that the curiculum alone cant do much impact without strengtening social values. In my opinion moral education is running up a steep slope in Singapore due to the erosion of social values.And if our syllabus is flawed due to the occurence of kids scolding their parents, then the british civic education system that u pointed out must be flawed too, they have their own share of problems which sure include petty things like ignoring their grandparents.
just a link to demostrate the above point
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/759276.stm
I like to ask which society doesnt have it's fair share of maid beating, rape, lack of filial piety and even treason? So i think it's wrong for u to conveniently label the syllabus just because we have some of the unfortunate occurence.