The Straits Times today reported that Singapore’s Education Minister Heng Swee Keat, claimed that “nobody has suggested abolishing examinations” when he announced that the Ministry of Education (MOE) is finally undertaking a review of its high stakes examinations policy. That is very strange indeed. Readers of this blog know that I have been calling for the removal of high stakes examinations for quite some time (click this as just one example). A quick search on Google, using the search terms, “high stakes examinations in Singapore” will find at least two of my postings in the first page of the search result page. Do any variation of these terms on Google and you may even find up to three of my postings that criticize the use of high stakes examinations in Singapore. I am not highlighting this just to show how good my SEO ratings are. I am just merely pointing out that on the internet, you will find many complaints about the Singapore school high stakes examinations system and also calls for its removal. It is simply amazing that these are not seen by Singapore’s Minister of Education.

You may now wonder if the Minister of Education actually uses the Internet or even read, much less, consider views aired on the internet. This is the minister of the MOE that has been globally recognized and lauded for its massive MasterPlan for IT in Education (MPITE). This is also the same MOE that has been pushing for 21st century learning.

Minister for Education Heng Swee Keat was responding to a query from a Member of Parliament (MP) about the the need for a review of the Primary School Leaving Examinations (PSLE) as it is known to be a major factor in the high stress levels in Singapore’s schooling system. The MP also said that the high stakes examinations also adds “to the coffers of the tuition industry” which I have also posted about.

In response, the Minister said that the review should not be rushed. He also said:

“Examinations well done serve an important purpose… allowing teachers and parents to gauge the extent of (students’) learning.”

I think the key phrase here is “well done”? What is meant by “well done”? If the examinations only reflect only the kind of assessment of learning that high stakes (largely written) do, is it well done? If these examinations do well in allocating students to their “proper” places in the economy, can it be said to be “well done”?

He went on to say that Singapore has a rigorous system. I agree it does but “rigorous” at doing what? Testing shallow rote-learning and mechanical operations?

Minister for Education Heng Swee Keat also went on to justify the need for caution in the review by citing the failure of a curriculum reduction to reduce student stress levels in Japan. According to the Straits Times report he claimed that education standards fell significantly! I begin to wonder if he knows what he is talking about.

Is curriculum reduction the same as reviewing the need for high stakes examinations? The MOE in Singapore has been doing curriculum reduction for years. Ask any teacher in Singapore. It can be argued that despite that the stress levels has gone up over the years. Again ask any teacher in Singapore. Ask the students and parents too.

And what “education standards” was it that fell in Japan? How did they measure that? Vague pronouncements like this do not help but confuse the issue.

He also cited that the sudden changes in the Japanese education system had led to Japanese teachers and principals complaining that the text books are thicker than before. So therefore, sudden change leads to more stress. My response to this is that the changes are sudden because education ministries are historically slow to make changes. Can we really do this review slowly as we have already wasted so much time?

The MOE is no different. Despite policy proclamations to show it is being adaptive to changes, the MOE is a very conservative organization run and advised by many who themselves were the successful product of the old system. It is hard for leopards to change their spots. The Minister of Education not told of the need to review high stakes examinations by his own officials is evidence of their unchanging nature. This organizational inertia seems to be postponing necessary changes until it is very (too?) late. It may become necessary, therefore, to call for drastic sudden changes to keep abreast of developments in the world. So if there are drastic changes to be made, it is due to this organizational inertia and perhaps the cultural ethos in MOE where speaking up to criticize policy, is to put it mildly, “not encouraged”.

The Minister of Education was then reported to have asserted that “we have a high-quality, strong system”. Do we? Strong and high quality in what sense? I know we are good at management and getting students to mug and ace examinations.

But what does this all mean for our foreign observers who have been praising and even been trying to imitate our examinations system? I wrote some time ago about President Obama calling for America to emulate Singapore. America has now introduced high stakes examinations system. So who is following who now?

What does it mean also for countries in Southeast Asia like in Indonesia, Vietnam and even in mainland China and who has been rushing to get their students to sit for Singapore’s iPSLE, the international version of the PSLE? Aren’t they going to look silly?

For today’s post, I thought that I would just pose a few questions for us, especially those in Singapore, and perhaps, for those planning to follow the Singapore model.

How do you get students to become collaborative workers when all they do in school is compete with one another to be in the top schools, classes, university places, and for scholarships?

How do you get students to become life-long learners when in school, learning is done to pass high stakes examinations?

How do you get students to be independent learners when students, teachers, principals and parents expect that they be fed with lots of notes in order for them to do well in the high stakes examinations? In addition how do you do that when you have an army of private tutors trying to do the same thing?

How do you produce daring, creative and entrepreneurial (in memory of Steve Jobs?) adults when all they do in school is engage in rote-learning and mechanical operations? How do you get them to problem-solve when the only problems they face in school are the problems in their school worksheets?

How do you teach them to be critical adult thinkers when the education system does not encourage critical inquiry?

How do you teach them to be curious and be involve in serious scientific inquiry when all that is supposed to be science in our schools is largely rote-learning and mechanical operations?

How do you get students to move out of a silo mentality when in schools, learning is done in an environment where subjects are clearly demarcated and jealously guarded from crossing boundaries?

These are just some thoughts of mine about schooling in Singapore. Perhaps some of you out there would like to share your thoughts here?

Recently, John Seely Brown or often referred to simply as “JSB”, a visiting scholar at USC and the independent co-chairman of the Deloitte Center for the Edge, breezed into Singapore and delivered a lecture entitled, “A New Culture of Learning: Cultivating the Imagination for a World of Constant Change” at the Singapore Civil Service College (click on the book on the left if you want to know more). JSB gave his insights on how learning is taking place in today’s connected world.

He started his lecture by highlighting a group of surfers known as The Grommets. This group of surfers is based in Maui, Hawaii. The Grommets have become the leading proponents of a new water sport called aerial surfing. If you look at them in action, you will see a lot of similarities with skateboarding. According to JSB this group of surfers became excellent because of the way they learn to improve themselves at the sport. According to JSB, The Grommets underwent these stages in their pursuit of excellence:

a) Deep collaborative learning with/from each other;
b) A passion to achieve extreme performance and a willingness to fail, fail, fail on the way;
c) Accessing and learning frame by frame the best surfers around the world via videos of the pros;
d) Use of video tools to capture and analyze each of their own improvisations;
e) Pulling the best of ideas from adjacencies: wind surfing, skate boarding, mountain biking, motor-cross and others;
f) Accessing spikes of capabilities around the world – leveraging networks of practice around the world; and
g) Attracting others to help them around the world

What JSB found most interesting was that the group came together and began to “critique each other on-the-fly almost all the time and to compete like mad with each other the rest of the time.” And they do so passionately. They will try out new ideas and fail continuously and end messed up on the quite unforgiving waves. But as JSB pointed out, they would do it again and again.

The Grommets also learn  by watching the DVDs of other great surfers. They would actually do a frame-by-frame viewing of the moves done by these surfers. Then they would ride the surfs again to try out what they had seen and try out their own new moves which they would also video and review. It is a constant process of learning, trying, and reviewing aided by a willingness to fail and fueled by passion.

One of the ideas that he highlighted was the idea of adjacencies. As JSB puts it:

“How do you start to pull ideas, moves, recoveries from adjacencies to hard core surfing. Obviously skateboarding would be one. And yes, Dusty is a darn good skateboarder too. And so he goes out and studies these skateboard moves. And so you say how do you appropriate this skateboard move over here and do what I am doing over there? But it doesn’t stop with skateboarding. Let’s look at mountain biking and motocross. One of the things that he does is to let the board get way out in front of him. It is a move that he appropriated from extreme performance in motorcross where you see these guys with their motorcycles out in front of them flying over an edge. There is an incessant ethic of how can I appropriate what I see into my own skill set?”
~ “The Cook Report on Internet Protocol, 2010″

The other two aspects of The Grommets learning that interested JSB was their understanding of local ecosystems or “spikes”. According to JSB, The Grommets “travel all over the world going to every kind of local talented place observing surfers and looking for new moves.” They use Skype to remain connected. JSB also found it interesting to see how they’ve figured out where there are local hotspots of incredible talent to visit and build relationships in those “spikes of incredible capability”.

The second aspect that JSB finds most interesting is that the learning is often reciprocal, in the sense that others would also come to them to share their skills. So as JSB puts it, he is interested in“how do they productively interact with folks so that people will begin to come to them to show them things with the result that they don’t have to go out as much.”

Learning about learning from JSB, I wonder about the kind of learning  takes place in schools and  most tertiary institutions. Schools are meant to be places that prepare students for the real world but when I compare the real world learning experiences of The Grommets and what takes place in schools, I cannot help feeling a wide disparity between the two.

I would just like to highlight a few differences. The differences, I believe are in the following areas:

a) the passion in the pursuit of learning;

b) the great depth of learning in a niche area yet open to learning from other niches;

c) the personalised yet collaborative nature of the learning (the building of an ecosystem of learning); and

d) the culture and willingness to fail repeatedly to achieve excellence.

By the way, if you think I had been at the lecture by JSB, I was actually not there. My wife was at the lecture and summarized it for me. It piqued my interest (and jealousy), and I went to the Net to find out more about the things JSB had said at the lecture. I have just highlighted one part of what I believe he had delivered at the Singapore Civil Service College. I believe, however, based on the additional work that I have done through the connectedness of the world today and important points noted by my wife, I have presented a fairly accurate picture of a portion JSB’s message. In my own way, I am already doing some of the things that JSB discussed about learning. Do you think this way of learning is interesting and useful? Share your thoughts.

(Addendum: By the way, if you want to view the same lecture done elsewhere, click here. If you want to download the video, click here. And if you want the slides of the lecture, they are here. And of course you can email JSB here).