i am in agreement with
<scorn>.
This is such a chicken and egg argument. Maths and science tend to be rote-learning typed subjects (not always, but it cannot be argued that there is a certain amount of memorisation involved). So yes, it stands to reason that countries who do well in these areas have a system that is geared towards this type of teaching and learning.
the key comment being 'not always'. it is not mere memorisation(we wish).
offhand, even something like strong visual spatial ability helps.
the deductive and logic reasoning that often comes in gifted enrichment programmes (my kids were pulled out after being tested as 'gifted' by the local education system) .... i also see in these Asian kids who do well abroad.
to my surprise, when my kids accepted the schools' invite to attend these 'challenge programmes' - i found the attendancees at these programmes overwhelming Asian.
i say "to my surprise" bec this is a Western country I live in. dominated by Caucasians.
i am not talking about a speciific public school either. i saw this scenario repeated in three different public schools, in the West.
and this is what i hear from a friend whose daughter was interviewed and selected to be pulled out to a very elitist programme here ( i say elitist bec places are very limited, and invites to go are very hush hush so as not to inculcate the feeling of biased elitism).
out of the 20 spots that were offered for that pullout-enrichment ... 14 of those were Asians and 4 of those Asians were --->
Singaporeans![/]!
(SG kids who had already gone through primary school in the local SG system, or had completed up to Sec 1 or 2 ... and migrated here with their families for whatever easons.).
so they migrate to the West, and are foudn when tested at these random school testing (these are standards Weschler-type IQ tests) to be "gifted".
this is but a small sample, granted..
but in part i also see it as a positive testimony to how 'educationally nurtured in Singapore' kids are ranking globally.
But since when is school or education just about being really good at maths and science? What about the myriad of other things that a child needs to learn and become proficient at?
these tests are hardly about academics.
rather they are about logic, deduction, reasoning, general knowledge - all of which also exhibit strong reading comprehension, how well read one is and deductive-inference ability.
in fact some reports have shown these tests are actually disadvantageous untrue reflections of Asian abilities because often they're culturally biased and written for a certain market and culture.
so hey, double kudos if Asians can do well in these culturally-skewed standardised tests. ie (in sports jargon) - they still played extremely well, OUT of comfort zone and homeground.
so to say the SG/ Asian system only has end-products strong in Math and Science - that is not entirely true either.
My wife is a Singaporean. When she was at school, she learned four subjects: English, maths, science, mother tongue. That's it.
this is primary school you're talking about. you have up to 8-10 subjects once you hit (public) secondary school in Singapore.
compare apples and apples.
my kids in elementary PUBLIC school also learnt English (language arts) Math, Science (sometimes not even Sc - social studies and Science is combined into some generic mess).
Nothing else. Add PE and Art, some random Music sometimes.
No sewing or technical anything ... which is what was taught during my education in SG -= perhaps no neccessity with all the gadgets and gizmos these days ... but still.
Science is not any structure. From experience, mine were exposed to diluted componensts of Bio, Physcis and Chem ... albeit in a structure called General Science.
At elementary schools here ... kids don't even get General Science - they get some strange salad mixture of geography, history (Native Indian mostly- not world history) which also incorporates some Science.
in Singapore (even as far back as primary school level) - we had specific teachers who specialised in specific topics.
we did NOT have a generic homeroom teacher (often a general Arts graduate) trying to teach French, Science and Math.
a couple of friends in UK chose the private school route eventually and is paying top $$ for what they deem is our equivalent of the Singapore public school education we received (ie the parents generation) for near-free.
ie private school education abroad is = to top-tier local SG public school education and expectation. the difference being, we paid less than $20 for our education, and it's $20K a yr for private schooling per child.
When she left school, there were options to carry on to a Junior College (more maths and science etc) or polytech (where there are subjects for those who are less academic - like social sciences) and lowest on the list are the technical colleges where people learn trades (which are not regarded highly here - a student at technical college would not have made his parents very proud at all)... When I first learned about these rankings, it made me extremely sad.
Now I'd agree with you here.
This is the SAD DRAWBACK of the rigorous Singapore system. NOT every child develops at the same pace, or can be clearly pegged into certain holes.
The system is hard on early underachievers who may actually for eg, be the daydreaming gifted who cannot be bothered with any tedious rote learning, and who may actually excel later (but are never given then chance bec they stream them so early).
These folks are stigmatised even before they're been given a chance to bud. ditto special needs learners or anyone with learning disabilities).
That is the reason they have lost so brilliant local students many to universities abroad. Perhaps they're not academic all-rounders, yes but they may be excellent at their specialities, IF they had been given a chance.
By channeling everyone early into their respective paths - Singapore has lost these people.
Be it a strict 2nd language criteria, or damaging self-esteem early because they try to channel them into specific schools. directions, or programmes .... etc etc
eg A brilliant scientist or engineer (later in life) may not necessarily be equipped at getting passable grades in his/her mother tongue but because a 2nd language pass is absolutely necessary for entrance into many programmes ... this limits the opportunities already for such a student in Singapore.
A tradesman (like a painter, a mechanic, a chef or an engineer are all perfectly respectable careers in many countries!)
So you'd think - depends on what circles you hang out with (this is common above board, be it the Caucasian or Asian circles)..
I beg to differ on your comments.
The professionals and academics still place certain biasedness to certain professions. Unless of course ... dad is a famous hockey player commanding 5 million yearly, or Brad Pitt.
[/quote]As another example: PE is not usually a school subject, but students have compulsory sports/activities - the goal is always to win and achieve awards (as these will help you on your next school application), not to enjoy the sport or to lead a balanced lifestyle.
Believe me, this is nothing too different abroad either.
I have many friends with kids in the top private schools here in the West.
And sports is really important for the sake of the school's overall individual reputation, and yes to look good for the next school application - be it university or high school.
As a school with reputation - ould you rather get keener geek David with 9As or semi-keener all round Brad with some Bs among the As but is the past school's top ice hockey fan, football and basketball scorer.
Depends on what marketing image you want to project for the next future parent willing to pay your school fees.
Balanced lifestyle? Perhaps 30-40 years ago. Not so, these days - everything has a hidden agenda. Blame it on a generation of Baby Mozart in utero moms.
[/quote[So yes, Singaporean students who go overseas are excellent in maths and science and probably do very well at their PhD's etc in these subjects. [/quote[
Err no think again. Check out the Fine and Performing Arts departments overseas. You may be surprised if you recognise some of the last names there among the top brilliant ones - and cross referenbce to where their country of origin is.
Even for subjects like dance, and music - creativity is one thing yes.
But if drilling - ie basic technique is loosey-goosey ad-hoc and never drilled/practised in properly .... all the creativtivity and freedom of expression in the world will not save a performer from being critiqued from what is fundamentally weak.
Drilling, in part (I would use the analogical liberty of likening it to -> stamina - in a runner.
It breeds endurance and determination too, on top of instilling strong basic knowledge.
The local system can be excellent for some students (and there is change coming, as I've said) but to say that it is automatically better is ridiculous. It is completely different: different approach, different goals, different expectations, different methods.
I agree it is NOT custom built for every kid.
Those bright and in the mainstream to fit their requirement gain. Singapore as a whole, gains from nurturing this crowd.
But yes ... there will be many who slip through the cracks. (see my above comments on the strngent requirements and their rigid streaming policies).
Sadly, Singapore as a whole also loses sometimes these home-nurtured low-achieving late talents. Often because once they leave SG to study (bec they have no other choices in their own homeland) - they may also grow up elsewhere, establish permanent ties and networking there and not return.
In contract, my kids are at an international school. Here they take TEN subjects: English, Maths, Science, Social Studies, Art, Music, PE, Computer technology, Mandarin, Drama. This is completely normal in many international schools, and in many Western countries.
As I have said - compared apples with apples.
Compare public schools with public schools. SG international schools have to justify their fees. So do private schools in the West. They also have more fees (money) to engage better teachers.
If you compared Western state public schools with local SG public schools ... the difference is apparent.
NO - my kids do NOT do 10 subjects in public (Western) schools. Nor do those kids of friends abroad I know, who are in their countries' public system.
My kids are lucky already if the existing programmes-subjects (other than core Math, Sc, Engliish) are NOT cut due to lack of funding (often).
Electives are limited - again bec of lack of funding. This differs from school to school.
*mis-management most times of dwindling or misappropriated funds and resrouces - not being able to count properly contributes too perhaps
At the end of the day, choose what works for your family, and be grateful that you can choose. Many Singaporean families cannot.
Note:
While I am (yes) thankful I was privileged enough to have a choice/opportunity to go abroad to further my education, and subsequently, stay on to let my kids experience a Western education .... this means also had the choice to compare/observe a few systems outside of Singapore during my own journey.
I also meet and talk to many different types of immigrants in the nature of my work...
Those from systems where they place high emphasis on education ---- they also find the West wanting.
Main complaints often are about how little accountability (no tests, no h/w, no exams === often self feeding endorsement by teachers unions) ... or how ad hoc teaching styles-syllabus structure-expectations guidelines can be, or how little discipline these is sometimes in the classroom (kids are free to wander and 'explore' and talk) etc.
