There are many differerent roles in which the education play. I feel that all the different factors will contribute to allowing people to gain employment. Therefore i agree that the main function would be to let people gain employment. However during the process, it would help a person gain knowledge, improve his character , learn life skills, and thus moulding a better future for himself.
We always say that education should be holistic. It should emphasize the importance of the whole and the interdependence of its parts. Here the "whole" is being seen as gaining employment and the "interdpendence parts" would be would help a person gain knowledge, improve his character , learn life skills, and thus moulding a better future for himself.
Gaining knowlege is the basic of life and this is what education does. It help you learn skills and facts and know more about this world. We thus apply it in our daily lives. By having knowledge, you would be able to get through tests and exams, allowing yourself to gain access to certificates. With these certificates, they would act as a "passport" to gaining employment.
To improve a person character and to learn life skills would contribute to helping people to gain employment too. How you potray yourself to the world is defined by your character. If you hacve a bad attitude in life, you would not potray yourself well. Thus it would affect your impression on others and the other people would not want to work with you. Thus if education were to help a person improve his or her character, it would definitely be of some help in gaining employement. Learning life skills like how to communicate with others is important too. Learning to speak fluently is not enough. You would have to speak with purpose and understand how to react to circumstances. Even from your body language, an employer would know who to choose. Therefore we can see that teaching life skills as part of education helps gain employment too.
In conclusion, we can see that the main function of education can be to gain employment. The other aspects in education, would all contribute to this main function. Therefore i agree to this statement.
Saturday, June 28, 2008
Education for society or education for the individual – which is more important?
For a long time, strong emphasis has been placed on education – whether it is parents taking time off from their busy working life to do hours of payless community service just to secure a place in a “branded” primary school for their child or the government holding countless debates just so as to make the education system a tad better. But what makes education so important that it is worth the sacrifices made for a good one? Education is vital because it benefits the society and more importantly, it helps to develop an individual.
Firstly, education is vital for the society. Many societal problems seek education as a solution. For example, racial harmony is maintained in Singapore by allowing young Singaporean to understand its importance as well as helping them to know about the different cultures. More recently, education is used as a preventive measure to certain problems, such as using the media to inform people about proper hygiene practice to curb the spread of the dengue fever. Hence, education is needed to heighten the people’s social awareness so as to create a better environment for the society.
Secondly, education is crucial for individual development. It plays a huge role in molding our character. For instance, education establishes the degree of discipline which in turns determines our attitude towards our tasks at hand. It also gives us the power of knowledge which helps us to make important decisions in our lives. Hence, our actions and choices are largely influenced by the education we have and thus, a good education is require for us to do the right things so as to be successful in life.
The sum of every individual makes up the society. So because our individual actions and choices are largely influenced by the education that we have received, education for the individual is more important because it provides the foundation for education for the society to be built on. If one is not well disciplined, he may not bother to do his part in practising proper hygiene standards to curb the spread of the dengue fever. Likewise, how do we expect racial harmony to be maintained when one has not even been taught basic respect to another fellow human being? Hence, it is important for the individual to be education before the education for the society to be applied.
Firstly, education is vital for the society. Many societal problems seek education as a solution. For example, racial harmony is maintained in Singapore by allowing young Singaporean to understand its importance as well as helping them to know about the different cultures. More recently, education is used as a preventive measure to certain problems, such as using the media to inform people about proper hygiene practice to curb the spread of the dengue fever. Hence, education is needed to heighten the people’s social awareness so as to create a better environment for the society.
Secondly, education is crucial for individual development. It plays a huge role in molding our character. For instance, education establishes the degree of discipline which in turns determines our attitude towards our tasks at hand. It also gives us the power of knowledge which helps us to make important decisions in our lives. Hence, our actions and choices are largely influenced by the education we have and thus, a good education is require for us to do the right things so as to be successful in life.
The sum of every individual makes up the society. So because our individual actions and choices are largely influenced by the education that we have received, education for the individual is more important because it provides the foundation for education for the society to be built on. If one is not well disciplined, he may not bother to do his part in practising proper hygiene standards to curb the spread of the dengue fever. Likewise, how do we expect racial harmony to be maintained when one has not even been taught basic respect to another fellow human being? Hence, it is important for the individual to be education before the education for the society to be applied.
Do you think that there is any need for change in the educational system in your country? (Cam 1990)
Yes, I think that there is a need to change the educational system in Singapore. Although one of the aims of the education system set by the Ministry of Education Singapore is to develop individuals as an all-rounded individual with high intellect so as to prepare them for the workforce, this is most often perceived to be the only reason why Singaporean students are studying- to get a good job in the future. This has resulted in an increasingly competitive academic society in Singapore.
In the past, it was merely enough to have an A level or even O level certificate to get a decent job to provide food on the table. However, today, nothing short of a university degree will do. Moreover, nowadays there are more and more university graduates who even have difficulty finding jobs. This proves that now, even higher levels of education are required to provide you with job opportunities. Students now face an endless amount of pressure from their parents as well as teachers in having to constantly perform above par or face being relegated to the rubbish heap of failures. This has proved fatal as it has caused an escalating number of students committing suicide as they were unable to handle the mounting pressure on them.
In addition, this meritocracy in the education system where only the best survive has resulted in self-centred and inconsiderate teenagers, contrary to the Ministry of Education’s aim to shape morally upright and responsible young adults. Students compete among themselves to be the best in everything- studies, CCAs as well as other activities. As such, to ensure that they themselves are the best, all students care about are themselves and themselves only.
However, having said that, competition does have its pros. Competition helps to bring out the potential on students. That is, if everyone regardless of their intellectual abilities are of equal standard and will receive the same treatment, there will be no incentive to work hard. This will result in a stagnant country where everyone lazes around and no progress is made. It is also thanks to meritocracy that Singapore has progressed into such a developed and advanced state in such a short period of time.
Therefore, I feel that there is a need to change the educational system in Singapore. However, this change should be done subtly so as not to diminish the incentive to work hard and hence progress to the country.
In the past, it was merely enough to have an A level or even O level certificate to get a decent job to provide food on the table. However, today, nothing short of a university degree will do. Moreover, nowadays there are more and more university graduates who even have difficulty finding jobs. This proves that now, even higher levels of education are required to provide you with job opportunities. Students now face an endless amount of pressure from their parents as well as teachers in having to constantly perform above par or face being relegated to the rubbish heap of failures. This has proved fatal as it has caused an escalating number of students committing suicide as they were unable to handle the mounting pressure on them.
In addition, this meritocracy in the education system where only the best survive has resulted in self-centred and inconsiderate teenagers, contrary to the Ministry of Education’s aim to shape morally upright and responsible young adults. Students compete among themselves to be the best in everything- studies, CCAs as well as other activities. As such, to ensure that they themselves are the best, all students care about are themselves and themselves only.
However, having said that, competition does have its pros. Competition helps to bring out the potential on students. That is, if everyone regardless of their intellectual abilities are of equal standard and will receive the same treatment, there will be no incentive to work hard. This will result in a stagnant country where everyone lazes around and no progress is made. It is also thanks to meritocracy that Singapore has progressed into such a developed and advanced state in such a short period of time.
Therefore, I feel that there is a need to change the educational system in Singapore. However, this change should be done subtly so as not to diminish the incentive to work hard and hence progress to the country.
Monday, June 9, 2008
Is Formal Education Over Valued?
Yes, formal education is over valued in the Asian countries but not in the Western.
According to http://www.sil.org/lingualinks/literacy/referencematerials/glossaryofliteracyterms/WhatIsFormalEducation.htm, formal education is the process of training and developing people in knowledge, skills, mind, and character in a structured and certified program.
As such, we can see that the content delivered through teaching is restricted and everyone experiences and learns the same thing. However, the stituation is slightly different now because governments like that of Singapore, are starting to realise the importance of indivdual education. In my opinion, different education systems support different eras. Formal education has produced dependable people for predictable times. Referring to a quote by Tharman Shanmugaratnam in the 26 April 2002 issue of TIMEasia, "now it needs to produce a new breed of leaders who have a certain ruggedness, an ability to repond quickly to situations", we can see that formal education now is not as over valued as compared in the past.
However, comparing Asia's education system to Western's, they are worlds apart. Switzerland is one good example of producing quality and skilled workers through their decentralised education system. They offer apprenticeship which lasts 2-4 years. Apprenticeships include all kinds of professions, from handicraft (mechanician, carpenter, baker, hairdresser etc.) to office worker (secretary, bookkeeper, IT specialist etc.). Apprentice will get trained at a company or organization, but also attend school for one or two days a week. Therefore students get to choose to take up their subjects of interests and receive lots of hands-on training. Such little empahsis on formal education sparks the interests and curiosity of the students and make learning a more cohesive one.
For all I know, Singapore has not yet gotten over its indulgence in formal education as can be seen in the latest alteration to the criteria for entering Junior colleges(JC). Co-curricular Activity (CCA) points are not considered for deduction of the O level raw score compared to the preceding years. Hence all JCs' intake of students will soley depend on their academic result. How justifiable is that!
I personally do not resent the score-materialistic assessment system of indivdual's knowledge. However I think that the weightage of marks can be distributed more evenly throughout the year instead of just focusing on the four main examinations which are CA1, SA1, CA2 and SA2 respectively. This is because the performance of an individual, I believe, can be affected by many other factors such as stress and sickness. Another alternative is to empahsize weightage on applicational projects such as research and apprenticeship.
The above paragraph serves as solutions to not "over value" formal education system. To resurrect the apprehensive minds of these suggestions, according to 26 April 2002 issue of TIMEasia, recent math and science test scores has shown that U.S students are gaining ground on their counterparts in Asia. Hence less emphasis on formal education might not necessarily be detrimental.
Therefore, over valuing formal education is true, but restricted only to Asian countries.
Yes, formal education is over valued in the Asian countries but not in the Western.
According to http://www.sil.org/lingualinks/literacy/referencematerials/glossaryofliteracyterms/WhatIsFormalEducation.htm, formal education is the process of training and developing people in knowledge, skills, mind, and character in a structured and certified program.
As such, we can see that the content delivered through teaching is restricted and everyone experiences and learns the same thing. However, the stituation is slightly different now because governments like that of Singapore, are starting to realise the importance of indivdual education. In my opinion, different education systems support different eras. Formal education has produced dependable people for predictable times. Referring to a quote by Tharman Shanmugaratnam in the 26 April 2002 issue of TIMEasia, "now it needs to produce a new breed of leaders who have a certain ruggedness, an ability to repond quickly to situations", we can see that formal education now is not as over valued as compared in the past.
However, comparing Asia's education system to Western's, they are worlds apart. Switzerland is one good example of producing quality and skilled workers through their decentralised education system. They offer apprenticeship which lasts 2-4 years. Apprenticeships include all kinds of professions, from handicraft (mechanician, carpenter, baker, hairdresser etc.) to office worker (secretary, bookkeeper, IT specialist etc.). Apprentice will get trained at a company or organization, but also attend school for one or two days a week. Therefore students get to choose to take up their subjects of interests and receive lots of hands-on training. Such little empahsis on formal education sparks the interests and curiosity of the students and make learning a more cohesive one.
For all I know, Singapore has not yet gotten over its indulgence in formal education as can be seen in the latest alteration to the criteria for entering Junior colleges(JC). Co-curricular Activity (CCA) points are not considered for deduction of the O level raw score compared to the preceding years. Hence all JCs' intake of students will soley depend on their academic result. How justifiable is that!
I personally do not resent the score-materialistic assessment system of indivdual's knowledge. However I think that the weightage of marks can be distributed more evenly throughout the year instead of just focusing on the four main examinations which are CA1, SA1, CA2 and SA2 respectively. This is because the performance of an individual, I believe, can be affected by many other factors such as stress and sickness. Another alternative is to empahsize weightage on applicational projects such as research and apprenticeship.
The above paragraph serves as solutions to not "over value" formal education system. To resurrect the apprehensive minds of these suggestions, according to 26 April 2002 issue of TIMEasia, recent math and science test scores has shown that U.S students are gaining ground on their counterparts in Asia. Hence less emphasis on formal education might not necessarily be detrimental.
Therefore, over valuing formal education is true, but restricted only to Asian countries.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)