Shaping Our Future?
1997 was a pivotal year for education. Or at least, it might have been. For those of my many readers based in a small island nation half-way between the Indian and the Pacific Oceans, it might seem an odd choice. But that was the year that an economist named Goh delivered an interesting keynote speech.
In that speech, Goh began by stating that future wealth would depend on the capacity to learn and survive an unpredictable future [paragraphs 1-6]. He then offered a global reassessment of education [7-13], citing examples from the US and Europe. He spoke of Japan, Singapore and Garry Kasparov. And then, after saying a few more things, he came to the crux of the matter.
Here are some quotes:
I'm now in the process of helping to evaluate the progress made since then. As the educational landscape has diversified, our position on the border between chaos and order has made it difficult to see many things; the nature of reality itself seems ambiguous at times. I have about 8000 words to write in the next two weeks.
Do you think anything has changed?
Do you think anything?
Do you think?
Do you?
Do.
In that speech, Goh began by stating that future wealth would depend on the capacity to learn and survive an unpredictable future [paragraphs 1-6]. He then offered a global reassessment of education [7-13], citing examples from the US and Europe. He spoke of Japan, Singapore and Garry Kasparov. And then, after saying a few more things, he came to the crux of the matter.
Here are some quotes:
- "It is the capacity to learn that will define excellence in future, not simply what our young achieve in school. Thinking Schools must be the crucibles for questioning and searching, within and outside the classroom, to forge this passion for learning among our young." [21]
- "Every school must be a model learning organisation. Teachers and principals will constantly look out for new ideas and practices, and continuously refresh their own knowledge. Teaching will itself be a learning profession, like any other knowledge-based profession of the future. We will take this into account in reviewing our school curriculum. Teachers must be given time to reflect, learn and keep up-to-date." [22]
- "Our collective tolerance for change, and willingness to invest in learning as a continuous activity will determine how we cope with an uncertain future. We must make learning a national culture." [25]
I'm now in the process of helping to evaluate the progress made since then. As the educational landscape has diversified, our position on the border between chaos and order has made it difficult to see many things; the nature of reality itself seems ambiguous at times. I have about 8000 words to write in the next two weeks.
Do you think anything has changed?
Do you think anything?
Do you think?
Do you?
Do.
etched with acid at 11:39:00 am
3 Comments:
Heh I read 'Goh' as 'God' at first.. Anyway many things have changed superficially, from the teaching of the Chinese Language to the change in the ranking system of schools.. But because we are a society focused on academic results, nothing's changed much culturally. Can't give something profound enough to write 8000 words about though.
Wouldn't exactly call what you did at the end of your post minimalist, but like it anyway! (:
To put my two cents in, I as a student feel that there exists a kind of division in my educational environment, between an "old order" and a new one. There exists a Frost-'ian' 'wall' between them. The old relentlessly pressurizes the new to conform, the new asserts itself defiantly to the stubborn apathy of the old. This applies to teachers and students alike, and if, as you have said, students are the board of their own education, it seems the problem does not lie fully with the teachers.
I have always thought, perhaps rather naively, that this is what separates us from the literary accomplishments and scientific achievements of the West. But perhaps that is too simplistic a view.
If only everyone would heed GCT's directions. But to me, at least a new order has emerged.
I'll bluntly write regardless.
I personally feel that the education style/system though seemingly morphing into more agile and flexible creatures, is all but an external cosmetic pseudo-change ("to satisfy criteria").
The fundamental passion and ideals (ideology) that run the system hasn't changed at all after 10 years.
All schools have for their bottom line is to make students produce better results and it hasn't changed at all. Whether students have been enlightenment or have been encouraged is certainly secondary or 'bolted-on' as 'value-added' enhancements just so the school can stand out from among the others.
However, I'm not advocating the abolishment of exams; there's no more effective and efficient way to gauge a person's verbal-linguistic ability (neglecting 5 other abilities).
Unfortunately, the root of the said ideology stems from meritocracy of verbal and linguistic ability (via examinations and special ability tests), and until this emphasis in the Singaporean society is shifted away to "the number of right answers rather than THE right answer", the education system will remain irrelevant to the world outside the shores of Singapore. After all, the education system is just satisfying a demand in the market.
As such, there's nothing that can be done to 'fix' the educational system within the educational system. Paradigms need to be shifted on a more macro level.
Still, this is certainly very good food for thought, something for me to ponder and blog about then time knocks.
Post a Comment
<< Home