The Singapore education system is held up as a successful model internationally. Topping global rankings related to high levels of academic achievements particularly in the STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) subjects is old hat. We are taught that the education system we have is an excellent one which equips our children with the necessary skills for the future. The system is said to also be a social leveller. A meritocratic approach ensures that everyone who works hard in school will be able to find success in life.
However, the system is not without its critics. Other than the stellar achievement levels of Singapore’s schoolchildren, another hallmark is the high levels of stress and pressure faced by those same children. There is also an unhealthy sense of competition among Singapore’s students whether it is for spaces in top primary and secondary schools, undergraduate scholarships and undergraduate places in local universities.
This competitive aspect of the education system is not unique to Singapore. In some other East Asian countries, the intensity of the competition for higher education places and the resultant stress is arguably far worse than in Singapore. But in other countries such as Finland, standardised testing has largely been removed and the focus is on cooperation rather than competition.
The Ministry of Education (MOE) has made moves to reduce the emphasis on examinations, most recently doing away with mid-year examinations for all primary school levels. Prior to that, examinations had been removed for primary one and two students. MOE has also introduced subject-based banding, which will be fully implemented in the next two years at the secondary school level. I am hopeful that this will be the start of a process that focuses on imparting relevant skills with an inherent adaptability so that every child can develop in their own way instead of being assessed based on a standardised scale.
But I am, at best, cautiously optimistic about these moves. I recall a time when MOE announced a tilt towards developing “creativity” and “entrepreneurialism”. Project work was supposed to play a larger role in assessment. More diverse ways of learning and teaching would be explored. There would be more focus on holistic assessments rather than just examinations.
Yet, after around five years of having one child (and later two children) in primary school in Singapore, I am amazed to find that, as I understand it, my daughters’ holistic assessments do not count for much in their report books. What will matter more is the weighted percentages for each term’s set of tests, culminating in the end of year exams, which carry the heaviest weightage. At seven and 10 years old respectively, I believe they should be allowed to explore, stay curious, and fail. Most of all, I wish for them to learn to pick themselves up and to work together with their peers to achieve mutual goals.
Anyone who has worked for a fairly long period of time will tell you that there are rarely any singular events that can determine how your worth as an employee is assessed. It is a continuous process of working and achieving. It is a marathon, not an occasional sprint. Focusing school examinations on the end of year sprint is not useful.
Factory or innovation centre
If Singapore is to thrive in the future, we need to acknowledge and give up the factory production line model once and for all. The future ready workforce needs to undergo an education system that is more like an innovation centre, where learning is not driven by regular examinations and assessments but where new possibilities are continually being explored.
More importantly, we must recognise the deleterious effects the factory model has had on our society, and change course before they become too widespread and spiral out of control. If we are to advance as a society, economy and country, then we must move away from an assessment-focused education system, address the inequities that have become intrinsic, and appreciate learning not just as an economic factor, but focus on imparting skills that will enable our workforce to respond to the ever changing demands of the 21st century economy. This will be a meaningful pursuit in and of itself.
Be First to Comment