New education reforms the right step, but is more needed?
During the National Day Rally on Sunday, PM Lee announced new education policies related to PSLE grading, Direct School Admissions and Edusave, among other areas.
These policies represent a step forward in reforming the education system.
Through these changes, the government is attempting to reduce the emphasis on exam grades and ensure that admission to top schools won’t be limited to a “closed, self-perpetuating elite”.
Most people, including myself, would agree that these are noble aims.
But what assumptions are these policy changes based on? And are these assumptions correct?
Assumption #1: Schooling = education
The new policies take it for granted that the key to making progress, both as individuals and as a society, is more schooling.
But more schooling doesn’t necessarily mean more education. In fact, many successful people have succeeded in spite of school, not because of it.
The education system hasn’t changed significantly over the past 30 years, but the world has.
30 years ago, getting a university degree almost guaranteed that you’d lead a relatively stable, comfortable life. This is no longer the case, given how globalized and competitive the world has become.
It’s precisely because of how the world has evolved that people who don’t have the “right” educational qualifications can still make significant contributions and be generously rewarded for them.
Education — the drive to be a lifelong learner, the desire to be a person of character, the accumulation of knowledge and skills to be used for the benefit of others—is society’s great equalizer, not schooling.
Today, it's not so important how many degrees or certificates you have; it's more important how much value you add to other people.
More schooling alone won't adequately equip you with the ability and desire to create value for others.
With all the learning that can be done on the Internet, the role of the school should be to encourage and empower students to take responsibility for their own education.
Teachers should no longer mainly be focused on drilling facts and information into their students’ brains.
I look forward to future policy changes that reflect an understanding of how a fast-changing world means that schools—both their role and how they’re run—need to change equally fast.
Assumption #2: National exams should be pillars of our education system
The change to the PSLE scoring system is likely to reduce the stress that Primary 6 students go through every year.
But, on the whole, there’s still an ingrained belief that we can’t do without national exams and standardized testing.
My experience working with thousands of students tells me it’s inevitable that standardized testing reduces actual learning and diminishes intellectual curiosity. Students will naturally only be concerned about knowing what’s “in the syllabus” and what will be tested in the exam.
This attitude impedes students from getting a real education, and can even make them dislike learning.
The success of the Finnish education system, where students take only one standardized test at the end of high school, indicates that national exams aren’t the only way to assess learning and monitor students’ progress.
We need to ask ourselves: What's the purpose of PSLE, and do we even need at all? Are there other ways to track the intellectual development of 12-year-olds?
Other changes we can make to the education system
Stop using multiple-choice exams
In addition to removing PSLE, I suggest that schools stop using multiple-choice exams. Multiple-choice questions are easy to grade, but they have little relevance to real life.
When was the last time you faced a real-life situation where you were given four choices and had to pick one right answer?
Have open-book tests as the norm
At the click of a mouse button or touch of a smartphone, students are able to access just about any fact or equation. I don’t deny that there’s basic information every student should memorize, but memorization shouldn’t be the focus of the curriculum.
Teachers would require more time to set an open-book test compared to a closed-book one, but this would be beneficial for students’ learning.
Give teachers more freedom to teach creatively
This will result in more interesting classroom lessons and more fun for students. Schools may be wary of giving teachers free rein, but it's a risk that would pay off.
Have more collaborative work
In the “real world”, collaboration is the norm, while individual work is the exception. Why is this reversed in schools?
Collaborative work teaches students skills that are vital to long-term success.
Moving forward in right direction
I’ve no doubt that the government has put in a huge effort to develop these new education policies.
I’m encouraged that we’re making progress, but I’m also concerned that we haven’t spent enough time questioning assumptions we’ve come to accept as foundational truths.
At the end of the day, it’s not just about progress; it’s about building a better Singapore based on principles.
It’s only when we make principles-centered choices that we’ll ensure not just that we're moving forward, but that we're moving forward in the right direction.
Daniel Wong is a learning and personal development expert, as well as a certified youth counselor. A sought-after speaker and coach, he is also the best-selling author of "The Happy Student: 5 Steps to Academic Fulfillment and Success". He offers programmes to help students attain exam excellence while also finding happiness and fulfillment, and to empower parents to motivate their unmotivated teenagers. He writes regularly at www.daniel-wong.com. Download his FREE e-books, "The Unhappiness Manifesto: Do You Make These 150 Mistakes In The Pursuit Of Happiness?" and "Singapore Scholarship Guide: The $500,000 Decision". The views expressed are his own.
