Education - Broadbased vs Creative learning
-
Many people, including those high flyers in MOE thought that we need "Creative Learning" or Creative Teaching" for schools inorder to cultivate "innovative minds".
I have done a little bit of research on Finland's education system, which is regarded as a country far more advance in cultivating the Innovative Economy.
Surprisingly, they are not talking about "Creative Learning" or "Teach Less Learn More" thing. Their emphasis is on Broadbase learning.
This is the extension from an understanding of how the Innovative Economy evolves. There are two spectrum of innovations; social innovations as well as technological innovations. What we have been told is that R&D in technology is important, high tech is important, but the fact is, high tech without social innovative evolution, you couldn't possibly create anything valuable to sell in the world market.
There are bi-directional influences of both social and technological innovations. Starbuck or bubble tea is a form of social innovations, which may or may not need technological innovations. A new technological innovation must be integrated into social innovation to make sense and be marketable.
Thus, they conclude that only through broadbase learning, they could cultivate the awareness on both sides, the social and technological needs for innovations to take place.
Are we heading in the wrong direction by stressing in some "Creative Learning" by putting up funny exam questions?
Goh Meng Seng -
I think you should provide references regarding Finland's broadbased education and Singapore's creative learning education for reading to review and make meaningful discussion.
On the surface, the two are not mutually exclusive. -
GMS does make sense here. US in fact has a rather broad base education as well. Many of my friends returning from US told me about the system there which is quite unlike ours. The problem with education here is it is tied in with economic needs. Hence students can't learn what they truly want to learn and instead have to ascribe to a curriculum that seems disparate to education ideals.
As for creative thinking, my stand on this is student first must have a good grounding before giving them such questions. It is silly to give creative but totally incorrect answers to a question that requires in-depth understanding in order to elicit a proper answer. We can view this as wanting to create a new class of elites to serve the government machinery.
Actually I do pity the teachers on the ground.... many of them have tried voicing their concerns and possible upcoming problems to MOE HQ... but they are usually cramp down by those in the ivory tower...saying that they know better.....
Life is such....
-
Try this link:
http://www.mol.fi/english/information-society2.html
I quote:
4.1. Standard Education As Basis For Professional Knowledge
"The society is responsible for supplying standard education, a function that cannot be transferred to enterprises. Standard education must convey new generations the cultural inheritance which serves as a basis for nations to build their future on. The vast quantity of information available and the continuous increase in new information accentuate, on the one hand, the importance of subjects that help analyze information and, on the other hand, learning to acquire necessary information by oneself. Instead of giving answers and demanding memorization, it is important to encourage curiosity and teach pupils and students to find information at their own initiative. These objectives already make it necessary to offer broad-based standard education, but it is important also for the reason that when working life is quickly changing, people must have the aptitude to change professions and to utilize lifelong learning. Narrow and specialized basic education will lead to problems, because the changes in working life will crumble the value of this kind of education fast."
Goh Meng Seng -
whats the use of telling us now when most of us have already wasted much of our lives under a restricted, uncreative system. think, how many possible people with potential to succeed end up being branded as "stupid" because they can't memorise textbooks. lesson learnt, my kids aren't going to be schooled here.
-
Creative learning is about method of learning. Broadbased education is about scope of study material.
You need to show us what creative learning approach is used in Singapore and how it may be in conflict with broadbased education.Originally posted by goh meng seng:Try this link:
http://www.mol.fi/english/information-society2.html
Goh Meng Seng -
You are right. But our "Creative Learning" is about "cutting syllabus", "studying less learning more".
Broadbase learning will require an increase in the syllabus.
I am going to refrain from answering questions for any concepts dealing with "Innovative Economy" from now on. My apologies to all if I did not answer your queries from now on.
Goh Meng SengOriginally posted by sarek_home:Creative learning is about method of learning. Broadbased education is about scope of study material.
You need to show us what creative learning approach is used in Singapore and how it may be in conflict with broadbased education. -
Dear Vito_Corleone,
Not everybody is as lucky as you that could send their kids to be schooled elsewhere. The job of a political activist (I will not consider myself politician just yet before I have gone through the baptism of electoral fire) is to look for ways that will provide a better options for our people, the masses that could not afford such mobility as you have.
I have been the victim of the education experiments (or, I call it, social engineering) all my schooling life. It is basically because of my own unhappy experience, education system is always my priority topic in political discourse, beside economics.
You choose to give your kids a better education by going elsewhere, I choose to give all Singapore kids, the future, a better option than we are having right now. The motive is the same, just the spectrum is different.
Goh Meng SengOriginally posted by vito_corleone:whats the use of telling us now when most of us have already wasted much of our lives under a restricted, uncreative system. think, how many possible people with potential to succeed end up being branded as "stupid" because they can't memorise textbooks. lesson learnt, my kids aren't going to be schooled here. -
Then you have to compare the syllabus between Singapore and Finland to see if tt is too braod in the first place.
I would rather a "Creative Learning" environment which will arouse children to pursue their interests and give them room to seek a broad-based education in the areas they choose.Originally posted by goh meng seng:You are right. But our "Creative Learning" is about "cutting syllabus", "studying less learning more".
Broadbase learning will require an increase in the syllabus.
I am going to refrain from answering questions for any concepts dealing with "Innovative Economy" from now on. My apologies to all if I did not answer your queries from now on.
Goh Meng Seng -
If I could, I would have gone to Finland for a fact finding mission on various areas, including their social welfare system.
Goh Meng SengOriginally posted by sarek_home:Then you have to compare the syllabus between Singapore and Finland to see if tt is too braod in the first place.
I would rather a "Creative Learning" environment which will arouse children to pursue their interests and give them room to seek a broad-based education in the areas they choose. -
Finland education - free up to the time when they do their first degree. I have a finnish friend who was on exchange telling us about their system there. His first degree is finished by the time he is 27 years old. They go through pre school at 6, basic ed at 7 . By 15 - they enter upper secondary school (general and vocation streams) - both takes 3 years and both are used to enter the tertiary system - at 18 they go to polytechnic (to us that their polytechnic education is a sort of university bachelors system) which can last from 3.5 to 4.5 . Assuming the kid takes 3.5 years...he/she enters the finnish university at 22 years old - 3 years to get a bachelor - 5 years a master. Most would do the masters level which means they cannot stop in between bachelor and masters. That makes them 27 years old.Originally posted by goh meng seng:If I could, I would have gone to Finland for a fact finding mission on various areas, including their social welfare system.
Goh Meng Seng
Our job market cannot handle that with NS looming over the males. It would in fact make them 29 years old when they come out into the job markets. And one thing about the finns . they can speak swedish , finnish and english which is no joke and singaporeans are already complaining about having to study english and the second language. The finnish guy I know speaks and writes 4 languages - finnish , swedish , russian and english.
Scandinavian education system differs alot from ours. Theirs is a very high pressure system , worse than singapore's . If we study their system and implement it in Singapore- most probably we will see more people complaining about not getting into university. -
finnish system
http://www.minedu.fi/minedu/education/education_system.html -
Dear GMS, i have no kids. i have not even completed my studies and NS, let alone having kidsOriginally posted by goh meng seng:Dear Vito_Corleone,
Not everybody is as lucky as you that could send their kids to be schooled elsewhere. The job of a political activist (I will not consider myself politician just yet before I have gone through the baptism of electoral fire) is to look for ways that will provide a better options for our people, the masses that could not afford such mobility as you have.
I have been the victim of the education experiments (or, I call it, social engineering) all my schooling life. It is basically because of my own unhappy experience, education system is always my priority topic in political discourse, beside economics.
You choose to give your kids a better education by going elsewhere, I choose to give all Singapore kids, the future, a better option than we are having right now. The motive is the same, just the spectrum is different.
Goh Meng Seng
-
Creative Learning is not just limited to "cutting syllabus" it also includes increased emphasis on crictical thinking and ability to think out of the box. Perhaps it is this kind of education the government needs to have an Innovative economy.Originally posted by goh meng seng:You are right. But our "Creative Learning" is about "cutting syllabus", "studying less learning more".