Equal chances for all
-
IN HIS letter last Thursday, 'Elitist danger in Singapore education', Mr Muhammad Faruoq Osman is wrong that only the elite minority from wealthier households is more likely to 'receive value-added education at the expense of vast amounts of public funds' in our education system.
The Ministry of Education provides adequate resources to all schools and institutions of higher learning to enable every Singaporean child to achieve his full potential. For each level, we spend what is needed to achieve a high-quality education for all. For example, we spend annually about $11,300 for each student in junior college and about $10,300 for each student in the Institute of Technical Education (ITE). All students can develop themselves in music, sports or the arts through school-based co-curricular programmes.
Students, regardless of their family background, have done well in this system. The top 5 per cent of students in the 2007 Primary School Leaving Examination did not come only from a few schools with rich parents. In fact, they came from 98 per cent of primary schools - from all socio-economic groups.
Mr Osman noted that about half of Public Service Commission (PSC) scholarship recipients lived in private property. But to conclude from this narrow and single observation that our education system is therefore less meritocratic is neither sensible nor fair. It is true that in all societies, successful parents tend to produce successful children and Singapore is not unique here. However, thousands of students who graduate from ITE, polytechnics and our universities every year do not feel less of themselves or their achievements because they have not received a PSC scholarship. All of them have succeeded by their own efforts and no eligible student is deprived from entering our top schools, institutions or gifted programmes just because his family is poor. Admission is strictly based on merit and we have a wide range of bursaries and financial assistance schemes to assist students in need./;=
Our education system should motivate and provide opportunities for all students to go as far as each can. We have targeted programmes to assist those from poorer families and many are moving up. One of every eight undergraduates in our public universities comes from households who live in one- to three-room flats. We should celebrate when any student excels, regardless of his background. When that student comes from a lower-income household, we applaud his efforts because he has succeeded despite difficult circumstances. But we should not cavil or be envious when students from higher income households do well in our education system. Both have earned rewards based on personal effort and merit. And we hope both will feel a duty to contribute back to society to maintain our system that provides opportunities for all.
Jennifer Chan (Ms)
Director, Corporate Communications Division
Ministry of EducationWhile Singapore has better infrastrature and system than most countries, i disagree this translate to equal chances for all students. Singapore's highly comptitive education system today is heavily reliant on private tuition.Today, the number of students getting As have increased. Consequently the grades to get into schools or university have also been raised. As such, any advantage in the education system is magnified in a highly competitive education system.
For example,If instruction in the school is poor due to trainee teachers, incompetent teachers or disruptive classes, parents with financial resources have the option of private coaching or even switching to a private school. In some of these top schools dominated by richer families, the student from the poorer family may be disadavantaged by the lack resources for private tuition.
-
if you need tuition you can ask your teacher..
the world is unfair. however everyone has a chance. it does not matter that you are at a disadvantage to your opponent, you still can achieve what your opponent canot
-
Originally posted by elementalangel:
if you need tuition you can ask your teacher..
the world is unfair. however everyone has a chance. it does not matter that you are at a disadvantage to your opponent, you still can achieve what your opponent canot
Well i didnt need tuition, and neither did most of my peers during my time but the landscape for education has changed tremendously. I am just amazed by the truckloads of straight As students and how much harder it is to get into the same course in university. While there is no point trying to achieve complete equality, the state had a duty to address increasing inequality.
Finland for example has very competent teachers with masters and their system is less reliant on private tuition. Therefore Finland system can be said to be more meritocratic than Singapore despite their egalitarian attitudes.
-
if the world is fair, no more world already. In life it is not about equal chances, it about opportunity and the ability to grab and excel in it.
-
what to do, when teachers nowadays are overworked by MOE, and school children being rather spoilt in schools.
The toll on teachers is so large that it is extremely hard to imagine sensible and proper teaching from the teachers.
In Singapore, teachers are given near 40 students per class. Finland? This blog claims no more than 20 students per class. The attention and care of the teacher is being divided much more! Add that to the fact that students are mostly immature before uni studies, and have a higher tendency to misbehave in class, further adding stress to teachers.
To further compound the problem, the recent grading system makes it compulsory that a certain percentage of the teachers in the schools must be graded D. Another man-eat-man situation, sort of what we have been experiencing all along as students. Result of this policy by MOE? Office politics within the teaching community stepped up, with more backstabbing and unwillingness to share materials for fear of other teachers doing better than you (with your materials).
Office politics can be so jialat that a teacher can be criticised and marked badly for bad teaching because of comments from senior teachers, even though the students improved extremely well in the exams.
As a teacher, you are expected to handle many admin and extra curricular things. You are to teach, to attend meetings, to do duty for O/A levels, etc. After all these extra things (which end about 4 plus pm), you can go home. But bear in mind, there's still marking to be done, lessons to be prepared, and various other admin stuff; you are working when no one can see, when everyone is supposed to resting...
How are you ever going to attract quality teachers for the long term with the above?
-
All I know is that you will never hear a student from a neighbourhood school tell you to get out of her elite uncaring face in her blog.
-
merit system is unfair, good grades doesnt mean better thinking individuals, u have heard stories of people who have not much education rising up to top business man and entrepreueners. At the same time u hear stories of MBA and PHD holders being dishonest and involved in dishonest activities.
Thinking individuals matter, not high scorer.