A critique of the Singapore education system

Some time ago I had a heaty discussion with my colleague whether the present Education system was as adequate and self sufficient as many sources have purported it to be. I argued that the present state of education system leaves much to be desired ; since meritocracy has tipped the line and degenerated into a lurid perpetrating form of elitism, something so abhorent, aversive that I find myself increasingly disillusioned in the working mechanism of our Education System and the future of our young children.

The carefully medidated streaming process ( Many thanks to Dr Goh) has much to contribute to the success we have today. The brightest are churned, trained, and stretched to their full potential. They have the best of facilities, the best of teachers (both pedagogically and professionally), and are not least the apple of the public's eyes - studious, conscientious, assiduous students who will "make it big" as lawyers, doctors, bankers, engineers etc.

This is only one side of the coin. Flip it around and we will have a rather disconcerting picture - students from young who learn the meaning of segregation. Students who are unable to fight the tides of competition face rejection,ostracisation, outcasting and eventually viewed as the quintessential "social reject" - those who become deliquents and unable to contribute to the society in a fruitful manner.

And then there is also a place for academic mediocrity. Students who get further categorized in the later phase of their education and gets into polytechnic. These students would eventually learn the difficulty of university admission in a hard way. An optimistic projection of the percentage of polytechnic students who finally managed to squeeze their way into one of our 3 reputable universities hovers around a rather cringeworthy 15%.

Herein lies the problem.

This society has been divided - perhaps too much - by academic capabilties. The continual emphasis on examination results and academic performance has led to inevitable self flagelletion and brimming stress. Students understand too well the value of their academic results - and this often results in disproportionately less amount of attention accorded to their psychological development encompassing asthetics and sports, as well as unneccessary comparisons across every individuals, classrooms and schools. Students either cut it or lose it - something they come to know of at a tender age of 12. PSLE - the primary school leaving examination has already served to mirror the governments policy on education - that the most intelligent be channelled to, narrowed and concentrated in a few top prestigious instituitions. The rest? They are consigned to instituitions of less prestige - and often less of this also meant lower quality of teachers, classroom and facilites.

Magnify this process all the way up to pre university level, and you get an idea of the sheer enormity of this project. Those who have indeed survived the gruelling, uncompassionate streamings are indeed the creme de la creme - emerging more affirmed of their sheer competence and capabilities - whatever these terms actually mean. By what has this led to? It has to a creation of a caste system, and yes archaic as it sounds, and definitely anachronistic, but nevertheless it happens right here, in 21st century modern Singapore. Why? Because the grand astute plan has created a pervading snobbish milieu - something reminiscient of the English in the 19th century all the way up to early 20th century. While florid displays of opulence has defined such snobbery in Great Britain, in Singapore it is the unapologetic flaunting of intellectual wit. There is a growing dichotomy between the "top students" and the "bottom ones", and clearly top ones are in a league of their own - academic straight distinctions, numerous sporting accolades and international competition achievements.

The bottom ones are literally left to fend for their own, struggling in a perilous territory that doesnt really reward those who are academically flaccid and pallid. These are left to languish in the ineptness of their academic records (if they have any) and left to ponder over the mistakes they have commited for - what the irony- being bornt less intellectually inclined than some others.

In various nooks of society, it is clear and evident that we have already judged a person before even coming to know them personally -through the ubiquituous yardstick of academic achievements.In national service, the distinction is all too prevalent. The ascension of rank is contrived and calculated in favour of the scholars - those who have the indisposable paper qualifications and spent a few good years in some of the top universities. And then there are the "farmers"- a term coined to describe the weathered officers who have worked their way painstakingly purely by virtue of their long service period and perhaps experience, but nonetheless the playing field is never levelled. The less educated engage in a wild goose chase - clamouring for rank promotions that is never to be, or exceedingly difficult, while those who have spent a few more years of their life in univeristy have it the easier way.

It is however inappropriate to dismiss the system altogether, but this system has bred a class of "intellegensia" who knows only the value of paper qualifications and nothing esle. These group retreats in their ivory tower, seemingly detached from realities on the ground, and offers nothing but condescension and disdai on the less academically inclined. Why I do issue such a harsh verdict on them? Because personal anecdotes, and various trends have attested to my personal opinion that these group of supersmart scholars are too aloof in their league - lofty, supercilious and never able to be empathetic, however much they try.

Wee Shu Min case in point. It has affirmed this phenomenom that these elite class of intellgensias are getting increasingly dislodged from the general populace - patronizing in their tone, and contemptible in their actions. And whats worst, these education policies and systems have been put in place in expediency- to promote these intellegensias into high ranking civil service job which yields great power. The dismal thing is not the flippance, snobbery displayed by these group of scholars per se, but rather it is the perpetuity of the vicious cycle - when scholarship and elitism is likely to be passed down in the same family. A cursory observation would likely reveal how top civil servants have bright children in the top schools. I am not too optimistic about the state of affairs because as far as i know, many students are a chip off their own block. They pride upon being the vestige of academic excellence, being at the forefront of competitiveness, and having an almost impeccable family heritage matched head to tail by an impressive CV. So this has culminated in a sorry state of affairs when the smart thrives and revels in his brilliance while the less smart will have to make do with the fact that some people are just more equal than others. Who says one cannot have a headstart in life?


I strongly believed that education system should be fair and just. The vexing problem remains the lack of academic integration, since the smart elitist huddles together in one corner while the less smart are left to languish in one corner. These is hardly a definite bridge between the 2 : except maybe national service, but this will tend to affirm the elitists' egoticism and ignorance rather than suppress it. Such cavalier attitudes must be kept in check - and I think the first main step would be to diminish this invisible barrier between the 2 divides of the society, because the first step towards solving a problem as abject as this would be to acknowledge the problem and its root causes itself.

Though I have definitely come down hard on the system, but I will comment on the merits of the system in my next article too, so you guys can come to the conclusion youselves.