| You are here: Home > Directions in education > Science education in Singapore schools: fact, science or science fiction? |
Jan
13
Science education in Singapore schools: fact, science or science fiction?
Posted By: Amran on January 13, 2009 at 8:42 amSome time ago, while I was with the Educational Technology Division (ETD) of Singapore’s Ministry of Education (MOE), a colleague of mine and I was asked to accompany a visiting master teacher from the United States as she went round a few places in Singapore. We visited the Sungei Buloh Wetlands Nature Reserve.
During the course of our conversation there, the topic of acid rain came up. She regaled us of how an American senator, in his attempt to show off his green credentials while talking about acid rain, said that he would like to bring the pH level to zero! We had a good laugh then. But a few moments later while still taking about how students could study the water quality in the area to check for acid rain and its effects, I received a first-hand experience of scientific ignorance (now that’s contradiction of terms). While she was explaining how it could be done, she asked what the water quality would be like if the rain clouds had passed over industrial areas before pouring into the reserve. My colleague, who was a Science teacher, promptly answered, “It would be acidic!” He did it with a big knowing smile like a child who had provided the teacher with the correct answer in school.
On my part, I think I looked stumped by the answer. The master teacher also looked a little surprised. I am not sure if she was annoyed but we both knew that the water from the rain may not be acidic. It may be alkaline. It all depends on the kinds of pollutants in the air! The master teacher then proceeded to explain with a straight face why the rain water might not be acidic as my colleague had blurted out.
Even then, I felt that my colleague’s “answer” was a reflection of the kind of science teaching that goes on in Singapore schools. All too often what goes on is the teaching to the examinations. This implies again rote-learning and mechanical operations. Little time time is spent to teach the scientific approach which is about asking questions and testing hypothesis. Little effort is spent at making observations and inferences or deductions and classifying data and trying to understand processes. Laboratory work in schools usually only have students follow written set of instructions about what to do and is left for them to carry out the experiment and draw their conclusions from “their” experiments. Students don’t create their own experiments to answer their own questions. We in fact don’t teach them to ask questions. We don’t encourage them to be curious. This was a point raised by the American master teacher too. At Sungei Buloh Wetlands Reserve, she noticed that at the exhibits were all in the “telling” mode. Information was given about the plants and animals found there. But what about the questions? I remember her saying that it is not important to provide the answers to the questions as what we want the visitors to do is to think. This is what science education is about.
On the other hand, in Singapore, concepts are over-simplified (see what happens to the idea of acid rain) and memorized rather than understood and applied outside of the examination papers. Little knowledge transfer is attempted by teachers to make the learning meaningful. It is because of this approach to the teaching of science in Singapore schools that many false or wrong ideas are carried to adulthood. I have often come across many “educated” people who believe all fishes lay eggs. Or that all mammals give birth to their young. Simplistic ideas are taught and these tend to stick in the students’ heads till adulthood due to what is known as contiguity. Perhaps this is the reason why we are importing scientists from overseas to pad our R & D pool in Singapore. We simply don’t teach our students science. What we teach them is bordering on science fiction sometimes. I will end this post with a quote from Richard Feynman, a Nobel Prize winner in Physics and also tough critic of Science education. He said:
“…I couldn’t see how anyone could be educated by this self-propagating system in which people pass exams, and teach others to pass exams, but nobody knows anything.”
(PS My thanks to Kelvin for the quote and for inspiring me to write this piece.)
Addendum: Just for a comparison with the way Science is taught in Singapore’s , read this article.
| Filed Under: Directions in education Tagged with contiguity, education, ETD, MOE, Richard Feynman, schools, science, sekolah, Singapore |
Recommend Related Products
This reminds me of a recent observation I made. My friend was correcting some papers made by engineering students (in their 3rd or 4th year I believe). The report was about a topic related to statistical hypothesis tests.
Only one of the papers did provide a proper analysis of how good the method used was. Most did not contain any equations at all. To summarize, from what I could see the reports were shockingly bad.
The strange thing is that when these students graduated from JC they were years ahead of equally aged students in other parts of the world. Or were they? Clearly they were not able to use their immense knowledge independently. What is their education then worth?
I suspect that this is not uniquely a problem in Singapore, but in all of Asia. And this is why the West is still able to compete with Asia, despite the fact that Asians work twice as much for half the pay…
Thanks, Eddie the Eagle. From a professional educator’s point of view, what many of these students have is a lot of disparate information which has not come to the level of knowledge. All that information has no meaning to these students except to be used for the examinations. Teachers in Singapore have in general not taught students to make what they learn meaningful by ensuring that students have deep understanding of concepts. What is often taught in Singapore is often banal and superficial. But then, we do well in examinations and TIMSS! That is all that matters to MOE
Another way of putting it, what is taught in schools is not taught for transfer, meaning, teachers do not make that extra effort to make what has been taught in class meaningful and relevant to the other aspects of the students’ lives. The connection is not made for the students.
I would like to know what chemicals in smoke from factories cause alkaline rain.
Thank you.
Thanks for the question but I do believe you can find some answers on the Net.
Most factories spew out smoke with sulphur in it. The heat of combustion causes sulphur and oxygen to react to form sulphur dioxide. This is carried in the air and dissolved in rain, forming sulphurous acid. That’s why there’s acid rain when the air is heavily polluted by factory smoke.
I am not sure what you mean by alkaline rain in the context of pollution causing it.
In fact, your colleague is right about the acid rain answer and you and the US master teacher, presumably, need not have second guessed him or our educational system.
Do check your facts before you bash the system.
If the typical Singaporean teacher is like you, I can understand why you claim that the Science teaching is more like Science fiction.
Check your facts please.
Thank you for your comment. I stand corrected about the alkaline rain.
But what are your comments about the other things that I have written? Aren’t they true? You are right also that it is not science fiction. It is actually akin to the general teaching of any other subject in Singapore with the excessive reliance on textbooks, the lack of the encouragement of inquiry (which is basic to science) and the other skills that you would expect a science student to be imbibed with. Is science supposed to be taught this way? I know teaching “science” for the exams can be taught in this way! There is no doubt about that.
By the way, perhaps you would care to read this Masters thesis (http://faculty.ed.uiuc.edu/m-osbor/osborne/secsciedsingapore.pdf) about how Singapore science is taught. Maybe you like to add your comments about it too?
Again I would like to tell you I am not “bashing” (see your other comment under the pseudonym “Anon” and my comment too at http://educononline.com/2009/03/08/nclb-and-singapore-education-serving-the-rags/#comments). I do not see a need to praise Singapore’s “education” system as it has often been praised already and if you have read my posts, you would know I have never tried to hide the praise that has been given. I have only given an alternative view. You want to call it “bashing”, well it is your prerogative but it sounds almost like George Bush’s insidious “you’re either with us, or against us” kind of approach to things. If I don’t agree then I am seen to be “bashing”, a sure way to try an fix a label to censor an opinion. Should we describe you as “pandering to MOE?” I am sure you wouldn’t like it.
Maybe you should watch these videos. They are about “groupthink”:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYpbStMyz_I&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-IpHXRIBy7k&feature=related
You may also want to look up the Abilene Paradox on Google or Wikipedia. You may want to watch a trailer of it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_iGdiYO7gI
Again thanks for your feedback as it gives me a chance to learn more and do some self-check, and also clarify some of my ideas.
Jumping to conclusion and making assumptions are common bad ‘habits’. In my opinion, both are correct. There is a possibility that the rain, even in highly industrialized area, can be alkaline. The high PH level would most likely be caused by alkaline soil dust in that region.
A wider view of thought is required to see the true picture.
I found this post which I think is worth reading for anyone involved in Science education. See: http://www.edutopia.org/blog/how-to-teach-students-to-think-like-scientists