ICT savviness is useful but not enough (see my take on this). Teachers need to still base effective outcomes on sound pedagogical principles when they use ICT tools to bring out a learning point. Let me illustrate: Students who are asked to complete simple worksheet assignments on Tablet PCs could easily have used pen and paper. Similarly, students who are asked to use the Internet to search for information but given only 15 minutes to discuss what they have found before putting up a PowerPoint presentation. This use of ICT neither transforms nor enhances the learning experience. The most important educational value, that could have been derived from synthesizing information, presenting alternative view-points, even arguing with one another, have been subordinated to the mere technical tasks of searching for information using the Internet. In contrast, we have seen well constructed lessons where teachers require their primary level students to use simple technological tools like discussion forums to create and write stories that teachers and their classmates could critique.
- Opening Address by Dr Ng Eng Hen, Minister for Education and Second Minister for Defence, at the International Conference on Teaching and Learning with Technology (iCTLT) at the Suntec Convention Hall, on Tuesday, 5 August 2008

Back in 1999, while I was teaching in a school in Singapore, I started using Discus (free version), a threaded discussion board, to get my students to discuss their History lessons online. I remember, a well-meaning colleague and supervisor telling me to “get more serious” (which frankly I found very insulting). I also had a school principal who was more interested in acquiring a video conferencing system than what I was trying to do with my students through the discussion board. I suspect it was because a threaded discussion board doesn’t sound as glamorous and newspaper headlining as a web-conferencing system then. This tendency to think in terms of new and glamorous tools is perhaps seen again with the new FutureSchools@Singapore initiative.

The new ICT initiative, FutureSchools@Singapore was launched by the Ministry of Education (MOE) of Singapore recently. According to the MOE’s joint media release with the Infocomm Development Authority (IDA) of Singapore, the new initiative will:

focus on innovative teaching approaches that leverage fully on ICT and novel school infrastructure designs to bring about more engaged learning for their students. ICT tools such as immersive virtual environments and educational games will be used to enhance learning.

When I read this I was wondering if this new ICT initiative is really going to change the way teachers really teach in Singapore or is this another expensive ICT version of th Emperor’s New Clothes? In a newspaper report recently in the Straits Times recently, an example of the use of technology in the environment envisage by the FutureSchools@Singapore initiative was that students could use a virtual market environment to learn language. Think about it. We spend a lot of money on immersive technologies to learn how to speak in a market environment? Wouldn’t it be easier and simpler to just bring the students to the market? Wouldn’t it be better to bring them to a real market to experience the sights, sounds and smells of the market instead of an expensive virtual one?

Why don’t take a leaf from what the Minister said in his speech? It is not the hardware but how you teach. Simpler and even free technologies can do a great job in the hands of great teachers. Not the other way around. But having said that, here you see the Jekyll and Hyde nature of the MOE. On the one hand the importance of relevant and effective use yet on the other hand the MOE is so enamored by new and expensive technologies. Come on, MOE. Decide what you want.

So much money has been pumped by the MOE since the MasterPlan for IT in Education (MPITE) was announce more than a decade ago. Yet we hear of the Minister of Education even mention in another newspaper report that the new initiative among others was to address the “uneven” progress on the ICT front among Singapore teachers and schools. Countries in other parts of the world will scramble for the ICT goodies that is available in our schools but in Singapore most of it seems to be frittered away on unsound ICT-based lessons. I suspect that as long as the MOE is sticking to the “new technology is better” approach, teachers and schools in Singapore will always have ICT lessons that are ICT lessons in name only but lacking in sound pedagogical principles.

When the MPITE was first announced, the then Prime Minister, Goh Chok Tong, said:

“Computers are changing the way we work and the way we live…We will use IT to encourage pupils to learn more independently, to learn actively.”
Prime Minister, Mr Goh Chok Tong
National Day Rally,1996

Why, after more than a decade, has this still not taken place? Where is the active learning and independent learning?

According to some studies, the lack of independence and control in the curriculum among teachers, affects their self-image and therefore their level of job satisfaction (see Smithers, 1990, and Mercer and Evans, 1991). Rice and Schneider (1994), also found that the degree that school administration empowers teachers in areas like pedagogy and contribution to administrative decisions have a significant impact on job satisfaction.

In a recent study of preservice teachers in Singapore, it was found that there almost 50 per cent of them do not perceive a good career prospect in their profession and they also would prefer to move out of teaching if they have an opportunity to do so. This is in a country where the teachers are among the best paid civil servants experiencing regular pay revisions and other incentives. Since most schools in Singapore are government-owned and there are almost 30,000 teachers, the MOE has also been busy trying to create more career progression opportunities for teachers. Still it is well-known that there is a high attrition rate among teachers in Singapore. Not to mention that according to one Straits Times report a while ago, teachers form the largest group of people to visit the local institute of mental health for various ailments.

The salary of Singapore teachers ranked among the best yet there seemed to be great difficulty keeping teachers. How does this compare to international schools in the region where generally the teachers’ salary is even lower than that of Singapore teachers? In addition, in most of these schools, career prospects is perhaps worse than in Singapore because international schools in the region are privately-owned, which usually means that there is not a huge organization in the background behind these schools for good career paths for teachers to look forward to.

Perhaps international schools in Southeast Asian countries like Indonesia and Thailand should seriously look into the findings by Rice and Schneider. International schools in the region should empower teachers even more in terms of pedagogy and decision-making. These seem to give teachers greater job satisfaction because of they would experience a sense  of achievement which can more than offset the negative impact of the lack of career prospects or potential for better pay. More training in the areas of pedagogy, and even in management especially on teaching-related issues, can help teachers to feel even better in the areas that the teachers themselves perceive to be very important to them in terms of job satisfaction.