When the results of TIMSS was announced recently, again there was this outpouring of pride in MOE about the performance of students from Singapore. But is TIMSS really a good yardstick for comparison across countries? We all know that when we compare something there must be a basis for comparison. That basis of comparison must be valid for everyone or everything tested otherwise the tests will be rendered meaningless.

So how does TIMSS fare in this regard? Read this article by Gerald R. Bracey and draw your own conclusions. It does seems that while TIMSS tells the truth, it does not tell the complete truth. One wonders also if the Ministry of Education (MOE) of Singapore is aware of this.

“…I was struck by the brief section on curriculum, where the authors discuss Singapore’s ““Teach Less, Learn More” (TLLM) philosophy, which focuses on why, what, and how everything is taught. We’ve all lamented the depth versus breadth approach, but it’s important to understand that in Singapore, TLLM implies a conscious decision to reduce the pressure on teachers and students related to teaching and learning facts that do not connect with other content and increase the emphasis on higher level thinking and complex understanding which are integrated within the content areas. The curriculum focuses on inquiry-based learning, marked by real-world problems and connections to students’ lives. The report notes that, “In moving toward greater flexibility in the classroom, the MOE (ministry of Education) aims to help students develop the capacity for independent thinking.”

- Beyond TIMSS by Anne Wujcik on B2E News Alert

The quote above is another example how foreign observers who view Singapore’s education system from afar don’t seem to have an idea of what really is going on in our education system. This remarks were made in the context of Singapore’s TIMSS performance.

I wonder how many of you out there who have experienced Singapore’s education system as either students, teachers or parents can actually identify with what is quoted above with the real Singapore school experience? How many of us can say in all honesty that, even if the description above of how teaching and learning is done in Singapore occurs, it is the norm rather than the exception in Singapore schools?

Again this is another foreign observer who has been given a rose-tinted view of Singapore’s education system through international seminars where most of the time they don’t really see what actually happens in the schools in Singapore but read policy statements of Singapore’s Ministry of Education (MOE). Or they would read papers by other foreign observers who had read the policy papers and had quoted them without deeper investigation. Even worse, our MOE officials will begin to believe the views of these misled foreign observers who themselves were misled in the first place by the official MOE position. It is becoming like a dog chasing its own tail. Woof!

In my last post I mentioned that the Ministry of Education (MOE) of Singapore has set up a mock classroom at Raffles Place as part of its recruitment drive to get more people to join the teaching profession. I also said that the layout of the mock classroom with its neat rows of tables and chairs indicates the kind of activities that take place in the classroom. Any serious educator will know that such classrooms represents a certain paradigm that the owner of such a classroom has about what schooling ought to be. Thousands of Singaporeans have gone through such an environment, myself included. We all know that such a classroom layout typify a schooling environment in Singapore where the teacher does most of the talking while the students are expected to sit quietly and give their attention to what is said by the teachers.

While the MOE is lauding itself with the latest TIMSS release, the reality is that the Singapore education system, the Singapore school and the Singapore school principals and teachers have only one thing in mind; the examinations. Schooling in Singapore is, even after acknowledging the diverse views about what is education, not about education. It is about or examination or test preparation.

The static layout of the Raffles Place classroom suggest a uni-directional approach to teaching. Very old-fashioned and certainly mostly irrelevant in this day and age. It is irrelevant on many counts. John Dewey and Marshall McLuhan (click on the book cover on the left if you want to learn more about McLuhan’s ideas) has already argued that what students are allowed to do, that is what they will learned. If all they get to do most of the times is to try and sit quietly and intently, then all they learn is to sit quietly and intently, and also total obedience and deference to authority.

The neat rows with each chair and desk separated by a space also implies that little team work or co-operative learning is done in the Singapore classroom. This is again easily proven if you ask any Singapore student of today or yesteryear about what goes on in the classroom. How do we expect to produce team workers or even a harmonious society if everyone sits in his little island?

Instead, what we will produce are people who will just await instructions about what they ought to do and how they ought to do it. Forget about cultivating the spirit of inquiry. Even in Science they do not teach scientific inquiry, they teach FACTS! Forget about independent learning too. It does not take place. The only form of independent learning valued is the mugging that one does on your own to ace the examinations. We will produce great muggers willing to work very late. This parallel is seen at the work place where workers in Singapore stay up till very late but showing little in the way of productivity. The Raffles Place classroom will produce people with little initiative. They will expect to be told of the only way of doing things, just as there is one way to answer the questions in the examinations in school.

Worse, as I have quoted from Schmoker in my last post, the continuation of this paradigm of schooling as promoted by the MOE at Raffles Place, will hinder quality teaching and learning from taking place. Teachers and schools will see no need to change their paradigm to fit the present world. The methods of yore still works fine because our students still are among the best in the world based on their performance in international examination scores and wonderful international surveys like TIMSS. We have come to believe our own delusions.